Dehejia Early Activity at Amaravati

8/11/2019 Dehejia Early Activity at Amaravati

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/dehejia-early-activity-at-amaravati 1/15

Early Activity at AmaravatiAuthor(s): Vidya Dehejia

Reviewed work(s):Source: Archives of Asian Art, Vol. 23 (1969/1970), pp. 41-54Published by: University of Hawai'i Press for the Asia Society

Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20111012 .

Accessed: 05/03/2013 16:26

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

University of Hawai'i Press and Asia Society are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend

access to Archives of Asian Art.

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=uhp

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=asiasoc

http://www.jstor.org/stable/20111012?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


http://www.jstor.org/stable/20111012?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=asiasoc

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=uhp



Early Activity

at

Amaravati

Vidya

Dehejia

History

Department,

University

of

Sydney,

Australia

The

discoveries

in

recent

years

at

Amaravati

of

various

sculptured

and

inscribed

frag

ments executed in a

rudimentary style

seem to make it

imperative

to

recognize

the

existence

of

an

early

stage

of

activity,

prior

to

the

First

Period

or

Early

Phase

of

scholars.

The

evidence

leads

us

to

postulate

the

existence

of

a

small

stupa

during

this

period

to

which

we

would attach

the

term

Post-Asokan.

The

terms

Early

Phase

or

First

Period

would

be

unsuitable

in

this

context.

These

terms

refer

to

the main

stupa

at

Amaravati,

and

describe the

period

of the

early

simple

uprights

carved

on one

side

only

and

simple

cross-bars

with

one

face

plain,

topped

by

a

coping

stone

carved

with animals-and-herdsmen

or

the

dwarf-and-roll

theme.

Apart

from

work

on

this

railing,

the

Early

Phase

also

included work

on

the

casing

of

the

drum:

the

quadrant

slabs

were

carved with

pilasters

and crowned with

a

frieze,

while

the

?yaka-plztiorm

slabs

included

sculptured

scenes

between

the

pilasters.

There

has

been

a

general

tendency

to

include

in

this

First

Period

certain

pieces

which

to

us

represent a much earlier stage of activity and which we would place in a Post-Asokan

period.

The

term

Post-Asokan,

which

not

many years

ago

would

have

been

somewhat

irrelevant

as

applied

to

Amaravati,

is

today

an

appropriate

one.

Recently

a

sandstone

slab,

with

traces

of

an

original

polish

and

the

fragmentary

remains

of

an

inscription,

was

recov

ered

at

Amaravati.

D. C.

Sircar

points

out

that

the

language

of

the

inscriptions

is

quite

similar

to

that

of

the

Girnar

version

of Asoka's

edicts,1

and

it

seems

likely

that

the

inscrip

tion

is

part

of

an

Asokan

edict.

In view

of

the

difference

of

opinion

regarding

the

date of

the

earliest

sculptures

and

inscriptions

at

Amaravati,

we

shall

first

treat

these

on

an

entirely

relative

scheme.

The

resulting

sequence

should

be

mostly acceptable

to

all

scholars,

whether

they

place

the earliest

carvings

and

in

scriptions

around

200

B.C.

(Srinivasan,

Lalit

Kal?),

in

the first

century

B.C.

(Sivaramamurti,

"Andhra",

Encyclopaedia

of

World

Art,

p.

412;

Srinivasan,

Lalit

Kal?),

in

the earlier

half

of

the

first

century

A.D.

(A.

H.

Dani,

Indian

Palae

ography,

Oxford

1963,

p.

72),

or

around

80

A.D.

(Barrett, B.M.Q.,

p.

47).

We shall

later

give

our

own

opinion

on

the absolute

dates

to

be

attached

to

this

early

stage

of

activity.

POST-ASOKAN

STAGE

A

The

Post-Asokan

period

comprises

several

in

scribed

fragments

of

plain pillars,

cross-bars

and

copings,

and

a

few

sculptured

pieces,

and

may

be

subdivided

into

two

stages

on

the

basis

of

palaeog

raphy

(Fig.

13).

Stage

A

consists

of

over

fifty

inscribed

fragments,

unsculptured

save

for

one

piece.

It includes Chanda

1

and

3-20;

and

some

thirty

or so

inscribed

fragments

recovered

re

cently

in

the

course

of

excavations

at

Amaravati.

These

inscriptions

display

a

ha

in

which

the

hori

zontal

and

vertical

are

of

equal

length.

There

is

no

attempt

at

the

equalization

of

the verticals of

any

of

the

letters,

and

the

forms of

ga

and

ta

reveal

a

distinct

angularity.

Early

forms of

bha

are

to

be found side

by

side with

some

later

ones,

and

similarly, angular

flat-based forms

of

ma

may

be

found

beside

some

of

an

earlier

variety.

The

Chanda

group

is

carved

on

plain

unsculp

tured

pillars

and

cross-bars,

and

Sivaramamurti

suggests

that

as

these

pillars

appear

to

be

much

smaller

than

those

comprising

the

railing

of

the

main

st?pa,

they belonged

either

to

an

older

and

more

simple

rail,

or to

the harmik? o?

the

main

st?pa.

He

favours

the idea of the

harmik?

and

other

scholars

have

since

followed

him

on

this

point.

In view

of the

growing

amount

of

evi

dence

of

extensive

activity

during

a

Post-Asokan

period,

we

feel

there

is

little doubt

that these

pieces

formed

part

of

a

smaller

early

st?pa

at

Amaravati.

A

large

number of

fragments

of

cross-bars

and

pillars

were

recovered

in

recent

excavations

and

41

This content downloaded on Tue, 5 Mar 2013 16:26:22 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions






some

of these

have been noticed

in

the

Annual

Report

on

Indian

Epigraphy

1959/60,

although

the list

given

there does

not

appear

to

be

com

plete.

The

inscriptions

on

these

pieces

are

very

similar

to

those

of

the

Chanda

group

and

ob

viously

belonged

to

the

same

stage.

We

may

note

that

these

records include

two

donations from

the

P?k?takas,

who

are

the donors also

in

Chanda

8 :Chanda suggests that these are the people who

later

came

to

be

known

as

the V?k?takas.

In

scriptions

of

this

stage

include the record

of

a

senagopa

Mudukutala

(Sivaramamurti,

No.

18)

and

a

fragmentary

record,

of

which there is

a

plate

only

in

Burgess

(PI.

LVI,

7)

and which

we

have otherwise

been

unable

to

identify

or

locate.

A

coping

piece

with

an

inscription

recording

a

donation from the attendants

of

Princess

Sam

mali has been noticed

by

P. R.

Srinivasan

in

his

note

on some

of

the

early

inscriptions

in

Lalit

Kal?,

10.

The

coping

is

about

21

inches

high,

and while

some

three

to

six

inches smaller

than

the

general

size

of

the

coping

of

the

main

st?pa,

it

is

not

so

small

as

to

be

assigned

to

the

harmik?

and

surely

proves

the

existence of

an

early

rail.

Included

among

the

pieces recently

uncovered

is

a

cross-bar with

a

roughly

incised

st?pa

and

a

tree

within

a

railing,

with

an

equally roughly

engraved inscription

below

(Fig. 1).

It

may

be

noted

that the

perspective

shown

in

the

depiction

of the

railing

around

the

tree

seems

to

indicate

an

advance

on

the

depictions

at

Bh?rh?t.

Stage

A

includes

also

the

inscriptions

on

three

enormous

pillars

lying

on

the

site

itself. The

records

on two

of

these

are

contained

in

the Annual

Report

on

Indian

Epigraphy

1959/60,

where

one

(No.

25

of the

Report)

is

assigned

to

the

2nd

or

3rd

century

B.C.,

and the

other

(No.

61

of

the

Report)

to

the

1st

century

B.C.

It

appears

to

us

that

all

three

records

belong together

and that

it

would be

stretching

the

point

to

separate

them

thus

in date.

The

pillars

are

of

varying

widths

but

are

all massive?one

measures

37

inches

across,

the other

38

inches,

and the

third

52

inches?and

certainly

prove

the

existence

of

an

early

railing

of

some

sort.

Belonging

also

to

Post-Asokan

Stage

A

are

the

donatory inscriptions on two slender octagonal

pillars

in

the

Amaravati Museum. The

two

rec

ords,

so

far

unpublished,

are

identical and read

as

follows:

Acinakaputa(t?})naUtarasaGul?tasa

ca

thabho

(Fig.

2),

or

"the

pillar

of

Utara and

Gul?ta,

sons

of Acinaka".

One

of

the

columns

rises

out

of

a

rather

clumsy

ghat

a

(water-vessel)

base

(Fig. 3).

Two

pillar

capitals placed

above

an

inverted

ghata

with

part

of the

octagonal

column

intact

may

also be

seen

at

the

museum.

The

size

of

the

inscribed

base columns

and

of

the

capital-topped

columns

is

identical,

and

it

is

tempting

to

associate

the inscribed columns

with

these

capitals.

The

capitals

depict

addorsed

winged

animals,

the

palmette

and

rosette

motifs,

and are of shallow carving (Fig. 4). If indeed

they belong

to

the inscribed

columns,

they

are

among

the earliest

sculptures

at

Amaravati.

A

consideration of the

capitals

of

the

Bh?rh?t

torana

reveals

a

similar

shallow

carving

of

the

addorsed

animals,

as

well

as

the

palmette

and

rosette

motifs.

The

Amaravati Museum

pillars

may

be

compared

also

to

the

pillar

at

Madras,

but

the

Madras

elephant-and-rider capital,

by

con

trast,

is

differently

conceived,

more

deeply

cut

and

the

carving

is

highly

advanced

(Fig.

5).

On

the basis

of

sculptural style

there is

little

doubt

that

the

Madras

column

is

a

later advanced

ver

sion

of these

two

pillars.

POST-ASOKAN

STAGE

B

Stage

B

of the Post-Asokan

period

consists

of

records that

display

a

rounded later

form

of

ta,

and

a

distinct

tendency

towards

the

equalization

of the

verticals of

pa.

The vertical

and

horizontal

of

ka

are

still of

the

same

size.

This

stage

includes

Chanda

2;

Chanda

37, 38,

43;

two

sculptured

and inscribed

pillars;

and

the

records

on

a

set

of

flat

rectangular pillars

at

present

in

the

court

yard

of the

Amaravati

Museum. Chanda

2

has

long

been

attributed

wrongly

to

Amaravati.

Douglas

Barrett

points

out

that

it

is

to

be

found

instead

on

a

sculptured

fragment

from

Jaggay

yapeta

(Burgess,

PI.

LIV,

4).2

This

inscription

indicates that

the

Jaggayyapeta

st?pa

belonged

to

the

Post-Asokan

period,

and

raises

certain

questions

which

we

shall consider

later

along

with

those

regarding

the

cutting

of

the

drum slabs

of

the

main

st?pa

at

Amaravati. Chanda

37,

38,

43

are

all

inscribed

on

a

single

slab

with

carvings

on

both

sides,

now

in

the

Madras

Museum.

One

face

of

the slab

includes

a

depiction

of

the

War

of the Relics

(Fig. 6).

One

panel

depicts

three

elephants with relic caskets on their heads and a

rider and

attendant. Another

panel

shows

a

man

with

drawn bow

and

arrow,

while

a

panel

above

shows

men

with

arrows.

A

glance

at

the

S?nchi

gateway

(torana)

depictions

of

the

scene

re

veals

that

here

we

have

an

earlier

style.

The

relief

is

so

shallow

that

it

may

be

described

as

42







Fig.

1.

Cross-bar

from

Post-Asokan

st?pa,

Amaravati.

(Archaeological

Survey

of

India,

Government

of

India.)

Fig.

2.

Inscriptions

on

tivo

octagonal

pillars,

Post-Asokan

st?pa,

Amaravati.

(Archaeological

Survey

of

India,

Government

of

India.

)

Fig.

3.

Base

of

inscribed

octagonal

column,

Post-Asokan

st?pa,

Amaravati.

Fig.

4.

Addorsed animal

capital,

Post-Asokan

st?pa,

Amaravati.

Fig.

5.

Madras

Museum

pillar,

Main

st?pa,

Amaravati.

43







Fig.

6.

Slab

carved

on

both

sides,

Post-Asokan

st?pa,

Amaravati.

Fig.

7.

Vais?li

panel

of sculptured pillar,

Post-Asokan

st?pa,

Amaravati.

(Archaeological

Survey

of

India,

Govern

in

en

t

of

India.)

Fig.

8.

Finial

of

?yaka

pillar

of

the main

st?pa,

Amaravati.

WWI^nP^EigBWWBWii^BWBBWWMUaTWCTWWIIl.l

IIIIIWWWW?ww

F/?.

9.

N

er

an

jar

a

pillar,

Post-Asokan

st?pa,

Amaravati.

(By

courtesy

of

the India

Office

Library,

London.)

44







incised

or

engraved.

Both faces of

the slab

in

clude

representations

of

very

simple

chaitya

arches,

and both sides

are

framed

with

a

border

of

the bead-and-reel

motif.

Belonging

to

Stage

B

of

the

Post-Asokan

period

are

the

labelling

inscriptions

on

the

three

sides of

the

important sculptured

pillar

published

recently inAncient India 20/21. It is interesting

to

compare

the

Jetavana

scene

engraved

on

one

face of the

pillar

with

the

depictions

of

that

story

at

Bh?rh?t,

BodhGay?

and

Sanch?.

At

Bh?rh?t

the

details

of

the

story

are

vividly

depicted,

with

the

ox-cart

in

the

foreground,

men

covering

the

ground

with

the

square

coins,

the

onlookers

on

one

side and

the

merchant

An?thapindaka

in

the

centre.

At

BodhGay?

the

story

has

been abbre

viated?the

merchant

himself

is

absent,

as

is

the

ox-cart

and the

onlookers.

However,

men

may

be

seen

covering

the

ground

with

coins,

and

a

labourer

carries

a

container of coins

on

his shoul

der. In the panel on the Sanch? tor anas the scene

is

barely

recognizable

except

for

two

layers

of

square

coins

along

the

front

left

of

the

panel.

At

Amaravati,

as at

Bh?rh?t,

the

colourful

de

tails of the

episode

are

depicted.

The

stone

is

much

damaged

and

many

further

details

must

have

disappeared.

The

unyoked

ox

and

the

laden

cart

are

clearly

visible

in

the

foreground.

The

entire

ground

of

the

relief

seems

to

have

been

covered

with

the

coins and

to

the

right

men can

be

seen

squatting

on

the

ground,

laying

out

the

coins. The

scene

depicts,

however,

a

technical

advance

on

Bh?rh?t

in

the

easy

manipulation

of

the laden cart, the casual resting ox, and the

domed

building

to

the left of

the

relief.

The

skilful

depiction

of the stairs

to

the

lower left

of

the

Jetavana

scene

may

be

noticed. It

is

of

in

terest

to note

that the

depiction

of the

chaitya

arch

and

doorway

is

almost

exactly

similar

to

that

at

Bh?rh?t.

The

outward

slope

of the door

jambs

is

clearly

visible

in

the

representation

of

the

shrine

in

the

Vais?li

panel

on

the

same

pillar

(Fig.

7),

as

it is

also

in

the medallions

at

Bh?rh?t.

The

arch itself is

filled

in

with

the

criss-crossing

seen at

Bh?rh?t.

This

is

characteristic of

a

phase

prior

to

that

on

the Sanch?

foranas

where the

chaitya

arches

are

represented

with

the tie-rod

clearly distinguished.

The

painstaking

care

with

which the tie-rod

is

depicted

at

Sanch? would

seem

to

indicate that

it

was a

very

recent

innova

tion

and the

fact that

one

solitary panel

depicts

a

chaitya

arch

without

a

tie-rod

is

further

proof

of

this.3 The

invention

of the

tie-rod removed

the need

for

slanting

door-jambs

in

the

wooden

construction

of

the

time

as

the

tie-rod

now

took

the

weight

and

supported

the roof.

This

little

architectural detail

supports

the

sculptural style

in

assigning

the

pillar

to

a

phase

prior

to

that of

the Sanch?

foranas?prior

at

any

rate,

to

the

gen

eral

use

of the tie-rod

in

wooden

construction

in

the

Amaravati

area.

It

may

be noted that the

tie-rod is

clearly depicted

in the

chaitya

arches

on

the

octagonal

blocks that

formed the

finial

of

the

?yaka pillars

of

the

main

st?pa

at

Amaravati

(Fig. 8).

The

sculptured

pillar

reveals

the

bead

and-reel

motif

framing

the

panels

and

we

have

seen

that this motif

is

present

also

on

the

slab

in

the Madras

Museum with shallow incised

carv

ings

on

both sides.

It

may

be noted

that

a

similar

framing

by

this

motif

occurs on

an

early

Bud

dhap?da

piece

(Stern

and

B?nisti,

PI.

VII

b).

The shallow

carving

of

the

worshippers

on

either

side

is

quite

similar

to

the

treatment

on

the

sculp

tured

pillar

just

considered,

and it

appears

possi

ble that the Buddhap?da fragment belongs to

Post-Asokan

Stage

B.

It

seems

likely

that the

inscriptions

on

the

much

damaged

pillar,

found

by

Burgess

in

the

vicinity

of the

east

gate,

belongs

to

this

stage

(Fig. 9).

The

inscriptions

neranjara

and

gama

nam

are

certainly

labels

to

sculptured

scenes.

The

word

gamanam

carved

above the horse

and

below

the

torana

refers

undoubtedly

to

the

Great

De

parture,

and

the

groom

in

front

of

the horse

carries

an

umbrella

in

his

hand.

To the lower

right

of

this

episode

is

another

scene

of

which

the identification is not quite certain. Sivara

mamurti

feels

that

it

answers

best

to

the

Tempta

tion

of the bodhisattva

by

M?ra

and

his

daughters

?an

event

that took

place

in

the

Neranjara

region.

The

fact

that

the words

neranjara

are

inscribed

above the

scene

are

to

Sivaramamurti

a

definite indication

of

this

episode,

and

so

far

this

is

the

most

satisfactory

identification.

Towards

the left

of

the

pillar

is

another

scene

identified

as

the

archery

contest

in

which

Siddh?rtha

dis

plays

his skill and

dexterity.

The

trees

in

the

foreground

of the

scene are

depicted

in

a manner

very

similar

to

that

on

the

sculptured pillar

previously

considered. The

Vais?li

panel,

for

example,

reveals

a

depiction

of

foliage

in

this

same manner.

The

attitude of the

figures

also

suggests

a

similar

style

in

general,

and

we

would

have little hesitation

in

assigning

the

two

pillars

to

the

same

stage.

The

scene

of the

gamanam

may

be

compared

with

the

Great

Departure

scene

45







Fig.

10.

Pradakshina

pat

ha

slab

from Kesanapalli.

(Depart

ment

of Archaeology,

Government

of

Andhra

Pradesh.)

Fig.

11.

Slab

from

Kesanapalli. (Department

of

Archaeol

ogy,

Government

of

Andhra

Pradesh.)

Fig.

12.

Inscription of

Stage

II

on

Early

Phase

pillar.

The

British

Museum,

London.

?a

loose

fragment?from

the

early

Buddhist

caves

at

Pitalkhor?.

The

carving

there is

some

what

more

precise,

but the

horse is

depicted

in

a

very

similar

attitude,

and the

torana,

while it has

three

architraves,

is

similar

to

that

in

the

gama

nam

scene

and

in

the

paintings

in

chaitya

X

at

Ajant?.

Inscribed

labels

to

sculptured

scenes

appear

elsewhere

only

at

Bh?rh?t,

and it

has

generally

been

agreed

that the

reason

for

this

is

that,

by

the

time

of the

BodhGay?

and

Sanch?

torana

sculp

tures,

the stories

from the

various lives

of

the

Buddha

were

well

enough

known

for

the

in

formative labels

to

be omitted.

The fact that

such

labels

appear

at

Amaravati

on

these

sculp

tures

belonging

to

Post-Asokan

Stage

B,

adds

perhaps

to

the

argument

based

on

palaeography

and

sculptural

style,

that

these

two

sculptured

pillars

belong

to a

date

following

soon

after

Bh?rh?t.

However,

while the

argument

based

on

inscribed labels may be considered after all other

evidence,

it

does

not

appear

that

one

is

justified

in

basing

a

chronology

on

it.

Douglas

Barrett

has

pointed

out

that

P.

R.

Srinivasan's

reversal

of

Chanda's

sequence?dedicatory inscriptions

being

placed

in

the

first

century

B.C.,

and

labels

being

taken

back

to

the

second

century

B.C.?does

not

appear

valid.4

Palaeographic

evidence

too

does

not

permit

such

a

reversal of

the

sequence:

we

have

seen

that

the

inscriptions

on

the Sammali

coping

and

the

Mudukutala

pillar,

as

well

as

other

donatory

records

such

as

Chanda

3-20,

be

long

to

Stage

A

of the Post-Asokan

period,

while

the

labelling inscriptions

are

to

be

assigned

to

Stage

B.

It

appears

too

that

an

inscribed

label

does

not

invariably

and

without

exception

indi

cate

the

early

date

of

a

sculpture.

The

yaksha

Candamukha

inscription,

which

we

shall

consider

later

at

length,

is

apparently

a

label

providing

us

with

the

name

of

the

figure

carved

below,

but

it

appears

to

belong

to a

date

somewhat

in

ad

vance

of the

Post-Asokan

period.

Having

defined

the

Post-Asokan

period

at

Amaravati

and divided

it into

stages

A

and

B,

we

must

now

consider

the

probable

absolute

dates

of

these

records.

The

only comparison possible

is

with the records on the st?pas at Bh?rh?t and

Sanch?,

and

with

the

inscriptions

in

the

caves

of

the

western

Deccan.

The

records of Post-Asokan

Stage

A

reveal

a

style distinctly

earlier

than

in

scriptions

on

the foranas

of

st?pa

I

at

Sanch?,

and

somewhat earlier

than the

record

on

the

Bh?rh?t

torana

(Fig.

13).

Later

characteristics of

the

Bh?rh?t record

include

a

rounded

ga

and

a

defi

46







nite

tendency

towards the

equalization

of the

verticals

of

pa. Stage

A

records

appear

to

be

slightly

earlier than those

at

N?n?gh?t,

where

too

a

tendency

is

to

be

seen

towards

the

equalization

of

the verticals

of

pa.

The

contents

of

the

Bh?rh?t

torana

inscription give

us a

definite

in

dication of the

absolute date of the

record.

The

inscription

informs

us

that

the

torana

and

some

further stone-work were carved during the reign

of the

Sungas,

and

we

would

place

the

record

towards the

end of

Sunga

rule?around

80

B.C.

It

may

not

be

placed

at

a

much earlier date

since

it

reveals

palaeographic

features

somewhat

in

advance

of the

Besnagar

Heliodorus

record that

is

securely

dated

to

c.

120-100

B.C.5 The

Stage

A

records from

Amaravati

display

features earlier

than

the

Bh?rh?t

torana

record,

and akin

to

the

inscriptions

on

the

railings

of

st?pa

I

and

st?pa

II

at

Sanch?

and

with

the

railing

inscriptions

at

Bh?rh?t.

On

this

basis

we

would

suggest

a

date

of

approximately

90-60

B.C.

to

cover

these

rec

ords.

The

script

of

Post-Asokan

Stage

B is

similar

in

many ways

to

the

inscriptions

at

N?n?

gh?t.

Both reveal

a

tendency

towards

the

equal

ization of

the

verticals

of

pa.

At

N?n?gh?t

the

beginnings

of

the

tendency

towards

such

equal

ization

may

be

seen

in

the

case

of

sa,

ha and la

also.

In

this

Amaravati

group

it

may

be

seen

in

the

case

of

ha

and

la.

It

would

seem

that

on

this

basis

we

must

place

Stage

B

as

belonging

some

where

within

the

period

of

c.

60-25

B.C.

These

inscriptions

of

the Post-Asokan

period

and

the

sculpture

on

associated

fragments

indi

cate

the existence of

a

st?pa,

of

some

nature,

on

or

beside

the

site

of

the

main

st?pa

at

Amaravati,

but

at a

considerably

earlier

date. This

Post

Asokan

st?pa

seems

to

have been surrounded

by

a

largely

unsculptured railing

and

perhaps

a

small

harmik?,

and

to

these

must

have

belonged

the

various

inscribed

pillar

fragments, coping

stones

and

cross-bars. The

two

sculptured

pillars

seem

to

indicate that

columns with

scenes

carved

on

them

were

perhaps

set

up

at

the

entrance

gate

way.

The

position

in

this

scheme

of

pieces,

such

as

the slab

with

shallow

carvings

on

both

sides,

of

the

flat

rectangular pillars

with

Stage

B in

scriptions on them, and of the slender octagonal

columns

apparently

topped

with

addorsed animal

capitals,

remains

uncertain. In

this

context

we

may

note

that

while

large

numbers

of

sculptured

slabs from

Amaravati

have been

destroyed,

sev

eral

more

may

still

be

waiting

to

be

uncovered.

This

is

particularly

to

be

borne

in

mind

in

view

of

the fact

that

over

half

the

fragments

enabling

us

to

define

a

Post-Asokan

period

have

been

un

covered

as

recently

as

during

the last

ten to

fifteen

years.

The

Post-Asokan

inscriptions

con

tain

references

to a

general,

a

royal

scribe

and

a

princess,

and

indicate

that

this small

early

st?pa

arose

under the

patronage

of

some

unknown

local

dynasty. According

to

our

chronology,

on

the

evidence of both sculpture and palaeography, this

st?pa

was

commenced

around

80

B.C.,

soon

after

the

erection

of the

railings

of

the

Bh?rh?t

st?pa,

and the

railings

of

s

?

pas

I

and

II

at

Sanch?,

and

fairly

soon

after

the

cutting

of

some

of the

earliest

caves

in

western

India,

such

as

the

Kon

divte

chaitya

and

the

Bh?j?

chaitya.

The evidence from

various

other

sites in

the

lower Krishna

basin

indicates that

there

was a

considerable

amount

of

activity

in

the

area

dur

ing

the

Post-Asokan

period,

and

that

the

con

struction of

the

early

Amaravati

st?pa

was

by

no

means

an

isolated

phenomenon.

At

the

nearby

site

of

Guntupalli

a

small

rock-cut

chaitya

and

a

few

vih?ras

appear

to

have

been

cut

prior

to 80

B.C.,

and

were

presumably

in

occupation

when

the

Post-Asokan

Amaravati

st?pa

was

construct

ed.

Few

scholars

would

dispute

the

analysis

that

the

Guntupalli

chaitya displays

features

reminis

cent

of

the

Bar?bar

chaityas

and

distinctively

prior

to

the

typical

early

western

chaitya

such

as

Bh?j?,

and

we

would

assign

the

cave

to a

date

prior

to

100

B.C.

West

of

Amaravati,

at

the

village

of Kesana

palli?which

together

with Amaravati

and

Jag

gayyapeta forms the three points of a roughly

equilateral triangle?Waheed

Khan

recently

un

covered evidence

of

activity

at

an

early

date.6

A

small

st?pa,

roughly

twelve

feet

in

diameter,

was

surrounded

by

a

pradakshin?

patha,

and

situated

on

a

raised brick

platform,

and

beside this

were

the remains

of

at

least

one

rectangular

structure.

The

pradakshin?

patha

was

paved

with

limestone

slabs,

several of

which

have

donatory

inscriptions

engraved

on

them,

and

shallow

carvings

of

pendant

lotuses and

the

conventional full

lotus

(Fig.

10).

Waheed

Khan

suggests

that

an un

usual

sculptured

slab with

a

semicircular end

depicts

a

pool

with

lotuses, judging from the

presence

of

the

fishes

carved

at

the

right

(Fig.

11).

The

inscriptions,

some

fifteen

in

number,

are

all

donatory

and

belong

to

Post-Asokan

Stage

B.

Features

indicating

this

include

the

ka

with

horizontal

and

vertical

of

equal

size,

the

pa

in

which

there

is

a

tendency

towards

the

equaliza

tion

of

the

verticals,

and

a

somewhat

rounded

47







form of

ta.

The

present

excavations

have

not

yielded

any

remnants

of

a

railing

that

might

have

surrounded

the

st?pa.

Later

activity

at

the

site

is

indicated

by

an

inscription reporting

the dedi

cation

of

an

?yaka

pillar

in

the

reign

of

Vasisht?

putra

Sr?

Chamtam?la,

the

founder

of

the

Ikshv?ku

dynasty.

The

Post-Asokan

st?pa

at

Kesanapalli

was

apparently

enlarged

in

the

early

part of the third century A.D.

South

of

Amaravati

at

the site of

Bhattiprolu

also there

was

fairly

extensive

activity

at

an

early

date,

with the construction of

a

st?pa.

Two

of

the three

caskets

found

at

the

site

are

said

to

be

for

the relics of

the

Buddha

himself,

and

this

may

be

regarded

as

some

indication

of the

antiquity

of the

st?pa.

The

inscriptions

mention

a

Ku

beraka

raja

under

whose

auspices

the

st?pa

and

the

relic caskets

seem

to

have

been

prepared.

The

inscriptions

on

the

caskets

display

certain fea

tures

that

appear

to

be

a

local

peculiarity

for

which

we

have

no

explanation.

The forms of

the

letters,

considered

together

with

the

inscriptions

on

the

crystal,

suggest

contemporaneity

with the

records

of

Post-Asokan

Stage

A

at

Amaravati.

The

sculptured

pieces

recovered

from

Bhatti

prolu

include

two

fragments

of

drum slabs

similar

in

style

to

those

from

the

st?pa

at

Jaggayyapeta.

On

palaeographic

evidence,

the

Jaggayyapeta

st?pa

too

appears

to

have

been

constructed

during

the

Post-Asokan

period.

Chanda

inscription

2

engraved

on

a

sculptured

fragment

from

Jaggayyapeta,

indicates

that the

st?pa

there

was

completed by

the

end

of

the

first

century

B.C.

At

the

site

of

Amaravati,

the

end

of

the

Post

Asokan

period

seems

to

have

been

followed

by

a

general

lull

in

activity

over

a

span

of

fifty

years

or

so,

after

which

construction

began

again

when

work

on

the

main

st?pa

was

commenced.

On

the

evidence

of the

neranjara

pillar

it

would

seem

that the

existing

Post-Asokan

st?pa

was

enlarged

and

its

railing

dismantled and

discarded,

some

pieces

being

re-used.

Bernet

Kempers

describes

the

process

thus.

"Part

of

the

carved

work

was

used

for

the

new

one,

not

only

for

the

decoration,

but

also

for

building

materials.

Reverence for

the

past

did not

prevail.

Thus a

square

block

(or

part

of

it),

which

was

decorated

on

two

sides

at

least

with

series

of

superposed

bas-reliefs

(pos

sibly

it

once

formed

a

corner

of the

entrance)

was

transformed

into

an

octagonal pillar.

The

four

corners

of

the

block

were

cut

off,

only

the

top

and

some

parts

of the

base

were

preserved.

The

shaft

of

the

pillar

was

smoothed

and

is

con

siderably

smaller

than

the

base.

.

.

The latter

was

only

crudely

worked?it

was meant

to

be

underground?the

corners were

cut

off without

care,

the

planes

were

not

smoothed and

partly

preserved

their

carving,

as

far

as

it

had

not

been

broken

during

the

work. Thus

the

two

frag

ments

of

the

decoration

of

the

old

block

were

preserved by chance. Originally they formed

part

of the

greater

panels

of the block."7 The

pillar

was

re-carved

perhaps

to

take

a

seated

lion

on

top,

in

which

form

it

may

now

be

seen

in

the

Madras

Museum. It

would

seem

to

us

that

cir

cumstances

not

only

permit,

but

actually

call for

a

gap

of

some

decades between the

completion

of

the Post-Asokan

st?pa

and

the

re-use

of

its

ma

terials

for the

construction

of

the

main

st?pa.

Several

palimpsest

pieces

and

split

pillars

indicate

that

there

was

no

gap

in

the

re-use

of

pieces

on

the

main

st?pa

itself,

but

in

this

instance

it

in

volved

the

complete dismantling

of

one

st?pa

for

use on

another.

It

would

seem

to

us

that

there

is

a

fundamental

difference

between

the

two.

The

inscriptions

on

certain

sculptured

pillars,

cross-bars,

coping

pieces

and

drum

slabs that

dec

orated

the

main

st?pa

at

Amaravati,

will

be

our

concern

now.

We shall

examine

records

inscribed

on

pieces

belonging

primarily

to

the

Early

Phase

or

First

Period.

The

evidence afforded

by

these

inscriptions

has

never

been made

the

subject

of

a

study,

and

a

palaeographic analysis

indicates

that

these

records

may

be

subdivided

into

Stage

I

(Pre-Nahap?na),

Stage

II

(similar

to

records

of

Nahap?na

and

Gautam?putra

S?takarni),

and

Stage

III

(those

displaying

features

characteristic

of the

inscriptions

of

Pulum?vi).

We

shall

see

that

in

certain instances

the

palaeographic

de

velopment

of the records

does

not

coincide

exact

ly

with

the

sculptural development.

In

pointing

this

out

we

do

not

intend

to

imply

that in

such

instances

the

order of the

sculptures

is

to

be

reversed.

Rather,

we

shall

attempt

to

find

an

explanation

for

the

slight

inconsistency

or

dis

crepancy

between

palaeographic

and

sculptural

evidence.

STAGE

I

Inscriptions

of

Stage

I,

or

of

Pre-Nahap?na

style, display

in

general

a

tendency

towards

an

angularity

of

the letters. There is

a

lengthening

of the

verticals

of

ka,

ra

and

a,

all

of

which

main

tain

a

straight

lower

end,

and

an

equalization

of

the

verticals of

sa.

We

have

an

early

form

of

da,

48







s

V

<

s:

?<

z:

<5

M?

2

cet

-j

-*

CD

<Txs>

C

3.

T7

C

-D

<

3*V

(A

CM

3

4^

G^?j

J

|D

?C

?*~

W-3

50

~?

*>

-9

?--9

r*

<

SE

uu

V?

<c

z:

UJ

>

I

o

il

i

i

I

S?

h

?J4

PC3

T3

uu

po:

o

rP*

H

3

x

7C

4

u

4>ig_

te*

S?*

,

"0

'

Q

H*t

?JC

v-'

fC-V

-o

^

3

8

o?*-?

^

*

^HP?

?T?,

^^l-<^>

r^

-<

Aoh

j?

1

?,

""-o

j?

"^

Oo

??

-p

-o

.-5C?.

5C

3C

a c- <

-D-6?J

?

^

c

*

-)

-

*->

-^

?Jfc

PC

c?

a

<

4-

c-

<

3

3

^

J>

Si

.S?

Ci

J5

<

o

U)

I

\

o

a.

I?

X*.

ol?

1

MJ

??

>

-

c

n>3

^

S '

__5_

vu

H

-^

X

.-)

p

1

^

J

4

va

-

*?

-J

+1

5

H

-a

H:

>a

-)

?

-?

-o-i.

j>

?

<

X

-J

+

?-

k*

^

vo

^

v>

^

o

?l

o

-4

i

>c

?

S*

-

~>

*? r< 4^

<

o

<

?^

X

3

4

C

*^?euj

?

?

3

?-

i

\

?,

I

^

?6^

~H4-i

l'?.

*

i

*

i

i

*

l

i

4

5

49







the

form

of

ta

is

h-shaped,

and

there

is

a

ten

dency

towards

the notched

variety

of

bha.

The

inscriptions

are

in

general

similar

to

those

in

the

Karle

chaitya

recording

the

donation of

various

portions

of

the

cave

(Fig.

13).

1-1.

The

yaksha

Candamukha

inscription

is the first

record

to

be

considered

in

this

group

(Sivaramamurti,

PL

LXV

9;

Chanda

36).

The

inscription

is

very

brief and unfortunately does not include key

letters such

as

ga,

pa

and

ta:

it

is,

however,

very

precisely

engraved

as

compared

with

inscriptions

of the

Post-Asokan

period.

One feature

that

may

be

regarded

as

an

indication

of

its

later

date is

the

definite

lengthening

of the vertical

of

ha.

The

forms of

da,

ma,

sa

and

na

offer

few

clues.

The

form

of

va

may

again

be

taken

as

an

indica

tion

of

the

later date of

the record.

The

letter

has

a

flattish

base,

but this

in

itself

is

no

indica

tion of

an

advanced

age

as

the

va

with

such

a

base

occurs

in

inscriptions

of

various

ages.

Here,

however,

the

va

has

no

vertical

at

all,

and this

feature?an unusual one?usually

occurs

at

a

late

date.

The

form

of

kha

is

a

very strange

one

and

may

in fact

be described

as

unique:

this

is

apparent

from

the

fact

that

so

reliable

and

ac

curate

an

authority

as

Chanda

should

read

it

as

ga.

However,

the

letter

occurs

twice

in

the

in

scription

and Sivaramamurti's

reading

appears

in

little

doubt.

The

yaksha

piece

has

been

classified

as

an

?yaka

slab with

pilaster

(Barrett,

B.M.Q.

p.

43

).

Presumably

the

yaksha

comprises

the shaft

of

the

pilaster

which

then terminated

without

the usual

inverted ghata

and addorsed

animal

capital.

The

piece

is

an

unusual

one,

the

only

similar

handling

of

the

pilaster

figure

being

on

the

Chakravartin

slab from

Jaggayyapeta

where

the

remnants

of

more

than

one

chaitya

arch

are

visible

above

the

pilaster

figure.

A

noteworthy

feature

is

the

large

heavy

square earrings

seen

on

the

yaksha

slab:

these

are

strikingly

similar

to

those

on

a

yakshi

fragment

recently

recovered

at

Amaravati

(An

cient

India

20/21,

PL

XLIV

A),

and

to

those

worn

by

the

Queen

on

the

Jaggayyapeta

Chak

ravartin

slab.

It is similar also

to

those

seen on

the

British

Museum

palimpsest

drum

slab

(Bar

rett, PL

V).

The later age of the

yaksha

slab is

indicated

also

by

the

carving

of

the

chaitya

arch

which is

depicted

with

a

distinct

inward

curve

at

the

lower

end.

It is

highly

advanced

when

com

pared

with

those

depicted

on

pieces

belonging

to

Post-Asokan

Stage

B,

and

is

definitely

closer

in

style

to

the

arches

carved

on

the

block

forming

the finial

of

an

?yaka pillar

of the main

st?pa

(Fig. 8).

This

yaksha

?yaka-platioicm

slab,

to

gether

with the British Museum

?yaka

slab

(Bar

rett,

PL

V),

the slab

in

Madras

depicting

a

vriksha-chaitya

(Sivaramamurti,

PL

XV,

1),

and

the

slab

representing

the

worship

of

a

domed

chaitya

(A.R.A.S.I.

1908/09,

PL XXIX

d)

were

among

the

very

first

pieces

to

be

carved

at

the

site when work began on the main st?pa. The

?yaka-platiorm

slabs

certainly comprised

the

first

sculptural

work

on

the

st?pa,

prior

probably

to

work

on

the

railing.

Other

records

of

Stage

I

include:

1-2.

The

donatory

inscription

on

the

"Sri"

coping

(Sivaramamurti,

PL

XV,

3).

1-3. A

fragmentary

record

on

a

similar

coping

with the

dwarf-and-roll theme

(Burgess,

PL

XXXI,

3).

1-4.

The

record

on

the

garment

of

a

life-size

figure

of

a

worshipper (Chanda

39;

Siva

ramamurti, PL XVIII, 2,

3).

This record

at

present

has

so

few

letters

intact that

it

is

difficult

to

be

very

specific

on

its

palaeographic position

and

it

could,

in

fact,

have

belonged

to

an

earlier

stage.

1-5.

A

much blurred

inscription

on a

slab

de

picting

the facade of

a

building

(Stern

and

B?nisti,

PL

X

a).

We

have

been

unable

to

locate

any

translation

or

photograph

of

an

estampage

of

this record.

1-6.

Gift of

a

coping

stone

(Chanda

29).

1-7.

Donation

of

a

cross-bar

(Chanda

32).

1-8. Donation of three

cross-bars,

engraved

on

the

corner

of

a

disc with

a

big

lotus

(Chanda

33).

1-9. A

fragmentary

donation

(Chanda

35).

I-10.

Donation

mentioning

the

navakarmika,

engraved

on a

fragment

of

a

rail

pillar

(Chanda

40).

1-11.

Gift of

a

coping

stone

(Chanda

42).

1-12.

Gift of

a

coping

stone

and

a

Buddhap?da

(Chanda

44).

1-13.

Gift of

a

cross-bar

(Sivaramamurti

No.

85,P1.LXV,

16).

1-14.

Gift

of

a

coping

slab,

engraved

on

a

split

pillar

(Sivaramamurti,

No.

94

and

PL

LXV,

11).

1-15.

A

fragmentary

donation

engraved

on

a

slab

showing

the

lower

portion

of the

feet

of

a

man

and three

women

(Burgess,

PL

LVIII,

33).

50







I-16.

Donation of

a

pillar

engraved

on

the

lower

portion

of

an

octagonal

pillar,

on

the

re

verse

of

which is

a

list

of

Pallava

kings

(Burgess,

PL

LXI,

51).

1-17.

Fragmentary donatory

record

engraved

on

a

cross-bar with

a

lotus

medallion

(Bur

gess,

PL

L

VI,

14).

1-18. A

fragmentary inscription

on a

broken

pillar

at

Amaravati

(An.

Rep.

Ind.

Ep.

1959/60,

No.

43).

STAGE

II

Belonging

to

a

slightly

more

advanced

stage

in

which

the

script

shows affinities

with the

in

scriptions

of

Nahap?na

and

Gautam?putra

S?ta

karni,

are a

group

of records

on

various

sculp

tured

pieces.

These

inscriptions

display

a

light

but distinct

curve

of

the

lower

ends of

the

verti

cals

of

a,

ka and

ra,

and

also of

medial

u.

The

form

of da

is

occasionally

of

the

early

variety,

but

more

often

of

a new

form

open

to

the

right.

II-1.

The donation

of

a

chaitya

pillar,

engraved

on

an

octagonal

sculptured

column

(Fig.

12.

Also

Barrett,

Fig.

IX,

b,

c,

d).

II-2.

The

fragmentary

inscription

on

the

re

verse

of the Madras

Museum

palimpsest

(Douglas

Barrett,

"Two

Unpublished

Sculptures

from

Amaravati",

B.M.Q.

XX,

1956,

PL

XXIV,

a,

b).

II-3.

The

inscription

on

a

slab

representing

the

Great

Departure

(Barrett,

Catalogue

No.

73,

Middle

Phase).

The

inscription

is

badly

damaged

but

the letters

may

be

discerned reasonably clearly in Fergusson's

reproduction

(Fergusson,

PL

XCVI,

3).

II-4.

The record

on

a

pillar

carved with

st?pas

and

standing

Buddha

figures

(Stern

and

B?nisti,

PL LXVII

a).

This

pillar

indicates

that

plain unsculptured

columns

were

oc

casionally

set

up

with

donatory

inscrip

tions

on

them,

and that

sculptures

were

added

at

a

later

date:

the

carving

in

this

instance

belongs undoubtedly

to

the

Late

Phase.

II-5.

The donation of

a

pillar,

inscribed

on

a

fragmentary

slab

built into

a

temple

(Bur

gess, PL LIX, 39).

II-6 &

7.

The

fragmentary

inscriptions

on

two

drum

slabs classified

as

Middle

Phase

pieces

(Barrett,

PL

XVI,

XVII),

appear

to

be

long

to

the

transition

to

Stage

III.

Once

again

Fergusson's

reproductions

are

valua

ble for

the

inscriptions (Fergusson,

PL

XCV,

3,4).

II-8.

The

inscription

on

the

top

of

the rail

pillar

seen

in

Barrett,

PL

XXIV

also has

an

in

scription

belonging

to

the

transition

to

Stage

III

(Fergusson,

PL

LXI,

1).

II-9.

The

inscription

at

the

top

of

the rail

pillar

on

Barrett,

PL

XXI b

belongs undoubtedly

to

the

transition

to

Stage

III.

STAGE III

The

inscriptions

of

Stage

III,

of the

time

of

Pulum?vi,

reveal

definite

advances

in

script.

The

lower ends of

the

verticals

of

ka,

ra

and

a are

invariably

curved,

and

in

the

case

of

jha

and

?a,

optionally

so.

Elaborate

flourishes

of

medial

i

and

u

may

be

seen.

The

left

arm

of

pa,

ha and

ba

usually

curve

inward,

and

the form

of

da

is

always

the latter

one,

open

to

the

right.

A

new

form

of

ta

now

appears:

the letter

is

formed

in

a

single

stroke

and results

in

a

hooked

variety.

The

earlier

form

may

be

seen

to

persist,

however,

in

several

inscriptions

of this

stage.

III-l

&

2.

Prominent

among

Stage

III

pieces

are

two

donatory

records

on

Early

Phase

rail

pillars

(Barrett,

PL

XX

b;

Barrett,

Cata

logue

No.

1

).

The

inscriptions

display

all

the

advanced

features characteristic of the

records

of

Pulum?vi,

with

the elaborate

curves

of the

lower ends of

the

verticals

and the

flourishes of the

medi?is.

These

rail

pillars

with

one

face

plain

and

the

other

carved

with

one

full

lotus

and

two

half-lotuses,

belong undoubtedly

to

the

earliest

stage

in

the decoration

of

the

rail.

The

inscription

on

Barrett,

PL XX

b

is

intact and

refers

to

the

gift

of

two

p?

dukas

by

Sivaka and

various

members of

his

family,

while

the

record

on

Barrett,

Catalogue

No.

1

is

fragmentary.

Ill-3.

Belonging

to

the

Early

Phase

is

a

slab

that

formed

part

of the final

projection

of

a

gateway,

with

mortise

holes

in

the

top

to

hold

the

lion

figure,

and

in

the

base

to

fix it

to

a

pillar

(Barrett,

PL

XIV

b).

The

inscription

on

the

slab

refers

specifically

to

the

donation

of

a

lion-seat

(sihath?na).

The

script displays,

even more

than

the

two

rail

pillars

considered

above,

the

elab

orate

flourishes

characteristic of

the

rec

ords

of

the

time

of

Pulum?vi.

It

is

apparent

that

there

is

some

discrepancy

here

between

the

palaeographic

and

sculptural

evidence?a

discrepancy

which

must

be

recog

nized and

discussed.

Any

scholar

comparing

the

n







pieces

discussed

as

III-3

and

II-9

will

agree

that

the

inscription

on

II-9

undoubtedly displays

(whatever

the

reason

for

this

may

be)

an

earlier

form

of

script.

Yet

sculpturally

the situation

is

reversed

as

the

carving

of

II-9

is

of

a

later

date

than

III-3.

The

main

discrepancies

between

palaeographic

and

sculptural style

will be

exam

ined

below

and

at

the

same

time

we

shall

con

sider the

slight

anomalies

presented by

some of

the

inscriptions.

In

the

course

of

examining

the

contents

of

various

records,

we

have

come

across

a

number

of

instances

in

which

the donations

are

apparently

inscribed

on a

piece

other

than

the

one

actually

donated.

The

possible

implications

of

this

will

be

apparent.

While

this

explanation

does

not

provide

all

the

answers,

it

nevertheless

raises

interesting possibilities.

The

inscriptions

on two

Early

Phase

rail

pillars

belong

to

the

time

of

Pulum?vi

(III-l

and

2),

while

the records

on

two

coping

stones

that

must

have crowned pillars of this type belong

to

the

Pre-Nahap?na

stage

(1-2

and

3).

It would

ap

pear

possible

that

the

rail

pillars

were

also

set

up

in

the

Pre-Nahap?na

stage

with

the

inscriptions

being

added

in

later

days.

The record

on

one

of

the rail

pillars

certainly

refers

to

an

unconnected

gift

of

footprints

of

the

Buddha.

The record

on

the

other

rail

pillar

is

fragmentary.

This

explana

tion,

while

possibly

valid

in

this

particular

in

stance,

may

not

be extended

to

all

such

problem

records.

The

Pulum?vi

style

inscription

on

the

slab

for

a

lion

mount

(an

Early

Phase

piece)

reports

the

gift

of

that

very

slab

(III-3).

It in

dicates

either

that

the

piece

itself

must

be

as

signed

to

the

Middle

Phase,

or

that

the

Early

Phase

which

commenced

at

an

earlier

date,

per

sisted

into the

time of

Pulum?vi.

The

fragmentary

inscription

on

the

top

of

the

magnificent

Middle

Phase

rail

pillar

(H-9)

refers

to

the

gift

of

two

p?dukas

by

the

mother

of

?nada,

The

portion

of

the

inscription

referring

to

the actual

donation

is

quite

intact.

While the

record

belongs palaeographically

to

the

Pre

Pulum?vi

stage,

the

pillar

itself

is

one

of

the

finest

examples

of

the

Middle

Phase

rail

pillars,

and

must

have

belonged

to

the

time

of

Pulum?vi.

It appears probable that an unsculptured pillar

was

set

up

at

an

earlier

date

and the

donation

of

the

p?dukas

(which

one

assumes

were

located

nearby)

was

engraved

on

it.

This

inscription

was

left

intact

when

the

pillar

was

carved

at

a

later

stage.

That

this

in

fact

did

happen

is indicated

by

the

piece

discussed

earlier

as

II-4. This

pillar

has

a

record

in

the characters

typical

of the

in

scriptions

of

Nahap?na

and

Gautam?putra

S?ta

karni,

while the

carving depicts standing

Buddha

figures

and

belongs

undoubtedly

to

the

Late

Phase. It is

apparent

in

this instance

that

an un

sculptured

pillar

was

donated

at

an

early

date

and

the

gift

inscribed

on

it. When

it

was

later

carved,

the

earlier

record

was

allowed

to

remain.

This

explanation

seems

most

probable

for the

magnificent

Middle Phase rail

pillar

under con

sideration. There

is

the

possibility

that the

earlier

script persisted

into

the

Middle

Phase,

but

it

seems

unlikely

that

once

the

pillar

with

its

splen

did

carving

was

completed (presumably

through

the

munificence

of

an

un-named

donor)

an

un

connected record would then have

been

inscribed

on

it.

The third

possibility?an

unlikely

one?

is

that the

rail

pillar

actually

belongs

to

an

earlier

period.

One other

anomalous

inscription

to

which

we

may

draw

attention,

although

it

does

not

pose

any

problems

of

sculptural

or

palaeographic

dis

crepancy,

is

the

donatory inscription

engraved

on

a

Late

Phase drum

frieze

(Barrett,

PL

X

&

XI).

The record

mentions

various

gifts

to

the

"Great

Chaitya"

at

Amaravati

including

that

of

two

chaitya

slabs,

three

p?dukas,

a

coping,

and

a

slab

with

a

flower

vase.

It

also

mentions

the

erection

of

some structure

at

the

st?pa

at

R?jagiri

(Luders,

No.

1225).

It is

interesting

that

apart

from

the

various

gifts

at

Amaravati

(engraved

on an

unconnected

slab)

donations

to

other

stupas

are

even

recorded.

Other

examples

of

such

anomalous

inscriptions

exist.8

Two drum slabs of the Middle Phase contain

inscriptions

that

illustrate the

transition

to

the

days

of

Pulum?vi

(II-6

and

7).

Either these

pieces

belong sculpturally

also

to

the

transition

from

the

Early

to

the

Middle

Phase,

or

the earlier

style

of

script

persisted

side

by

side

with

that

of

Pulum?vi.

Another

fragment,

apparently

from

a

drum

slab,

displays

an

even

earlier

style

of

script

(1-15).

We

must

consider also

the

questions

raised

by

a

comparison

of

the slab

II-2

with

Chanda

in

scription

2

that

belongs

to

Post-Asokan

Stage

B.

The latter

inscription,

engraved

on

a

fragment

from Jaggayyapeta, indicates that the decoration

of

the drum

of the

Jaggayyapeta

st?pa

took

place

in

the

Post-Asokan

period.

The

inscription

on

the

reverse

of

the Madras

Museum

palimpsest,

which

is

a

quadrant

slab

(II-2),

belongs

to

the

stage

illustrating

the

transition

to

the

days

of

Pulum?vi,

and indicates

that

the

similar

decora

tion

of the drum

at

Amaravati

belongs

to a

later

52







date.

It

is

certainly

true

that

apart

from the

treatment

of

the

shaft

of the

pilasters

"no

stu

dent

.

.

.

would

be

able

to

distinguish stylisti

cally

between the

pilaster

forms

on

either

type

of slab

[?yaka-platiorm

or

quadrant]

or

between

those

of

Amaravati

and

Jaggayyapeta."9

On

this

basis,

it

might

be

expected

that

Post-Asokan

Stage

B

and

Stage

II

of the

main

st?pa

belong

fairly closely

together.

However, the appearance

of the male

and

female

figures

on

the

shafts

of

all

pilasters

at

Jaggayyapeta,

and

on

the

shafts

of the

?yaka-plztiorm

slabs

only

at

Amaravati

(though

not

necessarily

on

all

such)

may

defi

nitely

be

considered

as

an

earlier

feature,

which

was

followed

on

the

quadrant

slabs of the

Amara

vati

st?pa,

by

shafts decorated

in imitation

of

a

rail

pillar

with

one

full

and

two

half-lotuses.

Construction

of the

main

st?pa

at

Amaravati

was

commenced

some

time

after work

at

Jaggayya

peta

was

completed,

and

the

?yaka-phtforms

were

carved

first

with

the

shafts

of the

pilasters

following the earlier style of Jaggayyapeta. The

quadrant

slabs

were cut

later,

probably

contem

porary

with

the

carving

of the

rail,

and

the

sculpting

of

human

figures

on

the

pilaster

shafts

was

abandoned. The

inscription

on

the

Amara

vati

quadrant

slab

(II-2)

is

then

understandably

later than

any

on

the

Jaggayyapeta

st?pa.

We

may

also

note

that

there is

undoubtedly

a

certain

difference

in

the

treatment

of

the

sculptured

scenes on

the

?yaka

slabs

at

Jaggayyapeta

and

Amaravati.

The

scenes

at

Jaggayyapeta?the

Chakravartin

or

the

Punyas?la?reveal

a

com

pletely

flat,

entirely

incised

treatment.

The

Amaravati ?yaka slabs by

contrast

reveal

a

deeper

cutting,

and

the British

Museum

palimpsest

for

example

(Barrett,

PL

V)

could

no

longer

be

described

as

incised,

although

the

cutting

is shal

low

and

flat

as

compared

to

later

sculptures.

We

must

now

consider

the absolute

dating

of

the records

on

the

main

st?pa

at

Amaravati. We

have termed the

Stage

I

records

Pre-Nahap?na,

by

which

we mean

prior

to

the

first

known

rec

ord of

Nahap?na

of

the

year

41.

We do

not

believe

that

his

inscriptions

refer

to

the

Saka

era

of

A.D.

78,

and

largely following

the

argument

of

the editorial article "Date of

the

Karle

Chait

ya",

in

Lalit Kala

3/4, 1956/57,

we

would

iden

tify

the

year

41

with the

year

A.D. 95.

On

this

basis

we

would

place

the

Stage

I

records

roughly

between

A.D. 50-95.

Stage

II

then

belongs

be

tween

A.D.

95-110,

and

Stage

III

to

A.D.

110

138.

Those who

assign

Nahap?na

to

the

Saka

era

may

adjust

the dates

accordingly.

We

have

seen

earlier

that

pieces

belonging

sculpturally

to

the

Early

Phase

have

engraved

on

them

inscriptions

of

all three

stages:

these

pieces

could

then

be

placed

anywhere

between

A.D. 50

and

A.D. 138.

This

period

may,

however,

be

lessened

to

around

sixty

years

by

assigning

the

Stage

III

inscriptions

to

the

first

years

of

Pulu

m?vi?to

around A.D.

110.

The first

appearance

of his new style of script may justifiably be

placed

towards

the

start

of his

reign.

That

the

sculptural

decoration of

the

monument

in

Early

Phase

style

extended

over

such

a

period

is

cer

tainly

feasible. It

would

seem

to

us

that the

Early

Phase

had

a

slow and

somewhat

uncertain

start,

possibly

under the influence

of

one

of

the

branch

lines

of

the

S?tav?hana

dynasty,

while

their

central

territories

were

being

lost

to

the

Kshahar?tas. With the

re-establishment

of

S?ta

v?hana

power

and the

extension

of their

domains,

work

on

the

monument

was

subject

to

accelera

tion.

While

a

few

pieces

of

Early

Phase

style

may

still have been carved in the time of Pulum?vi,

stylistic

development

was

rapid

and

there

was a

swift

transition

into the

style

of

the Middle

Phase.

The

one

or

two

pieces

of Middle

Phase

style,

which

bear

Stage

II

inscriptions,

indicate

that

Early

and

Middle

Phase

styles

undoubtedly

co-existed

for

some

time,

just

as

Stage

II

and

Stage

III

styles

of

script

must

have been

in

vogue

side

by

side for

a

certain

length

of

time.

Among

the artisans

involved

in

work

at

Amaravati

there

would have

been

the

older

master

craftsmen

and

the

younger

pupils,

and

there

must

undoubtedly

and

understandably

have been

stylistic

distinc

tions

between their work.

In

sculptural style,

as

in

palaeographic

style,

the

transition

from

one

phase

to

another could

not

have been

so

abrupt

that,

at

any

certain

time,

two

stages

in

the de

velopment

of

a

style

may

not

be

found

together.

/ must

acknowledge

here

the

help

and

advice received

from

Mr.

Douglas

Barrett

of

the

British

Museum,

who

was

kind

enough

to

read

through

the

typescript

of

this article

and

offer

me

sug

gestions for

the

improvements.

Ultimate

responsibility for

the

views

on

the

dating

must,

however,

rest

with

me.?V.

Dehejia.

53







NOTES

1. D.

C.

Sircar,

"Fragmentary

Pillar

Inscription

from

Amaravati",

Epigraphia

?ndica, XXXV,

1%2,

pp.

40-43.

2.

Barrett,

British

Museum

Quarterly,

XXXII,

1967,

p.

45.

3.

The

chaitya

arch is

depicted

without the

tie-rod

on

the

top

most

panel

of

the

left

pillar

on

the

south

torana.

4.

Barrett,

ibid.,

p.

46

f.

5.

The

inscription

mentions

the

erection

of

a

garuda-dhvaja by

the ambassador from king Antialkidas, who is known to have

ruled

between

120-100

B.C.

6.

Mohd. Abdul

Waheed

Khan,

A

Buddhist

Stupa

at

Kesanapalli

(District

Guntur,

Andhra

Pradesh),

Hyderabad,

1969.

7.

A.J.Bernet Kempers,

"Note

on

an

ancient

sculpture

from

Amaravati",

Acta

Orientalia, X, 1932,

p.

365.

8.

Consider,

for

example,

the

inscription

on

a

drum

pilaster

belonging

to

the Late

Phase

(Barrett,

PI.

Villa)

which

reports

the

gift

of

a

p?duka

slab

(Luders

1217).

9.

Barrett, ibid.,

p.

44.

ABBREVIATIONS

Ancient India

20/21?A.

Ghosh

and

H.

Sarkar,

"Beginnings

of

Sculptural

Art

in

south-east

India:

a

stele

from

Amaravati",

Ancient India

20/21,

(1964

&

65),

pp.

168-177.

A.R.A.S.I.?Annual

Report

of

the

Archaeological

Survey of

India.

An.

Rep.

Ind.

Ep.?Annual

Report

on

Indian

Epigraphy.

Barrett?Douglas

Barrett,

Sculptures

from

Amaravati in

the British

Museum, (London, 1954).

Barrett,

B.M.Q.?Douglas

Barrett,

"The

Early

Phase

at

Amaravati",

British

Museum

Quarterly

XXXII, 1967,

pp.

35-48.

Burgess?James

Burgess,

The

Buddhist

Stupas

of

Amaravati

and

Jaggayyapeta, (London,

1887).

Chanda?R.

P.

Chanda,

"Some

Unpublished

Amaravati

Inscrip

tions",

Epigraphia

Indica,

XV,

1919/20,

pp.

258-275.

Fergusson?James Fergusson,

Tree and

Serpent

Worship,

(London,

1873).

Luders?H.

Luders,

"A

List of

Brahmi

Inscriptions",

Appendix

to

Epigraphia

Indica,

X,

1909/10.

Sivaramamurti?C.

Sivaramamurti,

Amaravati

Sculptures

in

the

Madras Government Museum, (Madras, 1942).

Srinivasan,

Lalit

Kal??P.

R.

Srinivasan,

"Recently

discovered

in

scriptions

from

Amaravati

and

their

significance",

Lalit Kola

10,

1961,

p.

59

f.

Stern and

B?nisti?Philippe

Stern

and Mireille

B?nisti,

?volution

du

style

Indien

d'Amaravati, (Paris, 1961).

54

Documents

Dehejia Early Activity at Amaravati