The Indian Analyst
 

North Indian Inscriptions

 

 

Contents

Introduction

Contents

Preface

List of Plates

Abbreviations

Additions and Corrections

Images

Introduction

Political History

Administration

Social History

Religious History

Literary History

Gupta Era

Krita Era

Texts and Translations

The Gupta Inscriptions

Index

Other South-Indian Inscriptions 

Volume 1

Volume 2

Volume 3

Vol. 4 - 8

Volume 9

Volume 10

Volume 11

Volume 12

Volume 13

Volume 14

Volume 15

Volume 16

Volume 17

Volume 18

Volume 19

Volume 20

Volume 22
Part 1

Volume 22
Part 2

Volume 23

Volume 24

Volume 26

Volume 27

Tiruvarur

Darasuram

Konerirajapuram

Tanjavur

Annual Reports 1935-1944

Annual Reports 1945- 1947

Corpus Inscriptionum Indicarum Volume 2, Part 2

Corpus Inscriptionum Indicarum Volume 7, Part 3

Kalachuri-Chedi Era Part 1

Kalachuri-Chedi Era Part 2

Epigraphica Indica

Epigraphia Indica Volume 3

Epigraphia
Indica Volume 4

Epigraphia Indica Volume 6

Epigraphia Indica Volume 7

Epigraphia Indica Volume 8

Epigraphia Indica Volume 27

Epigraphia Indica Volume 29

Epigraphia Indica Volume 30

Epigraphia Indica Volume 31

Epigraphia Indica Volume 32

Paramaras Volume 7, Part 2

Śilāhāras Volume 6, Part 2

Vākāṭakas Volume 5

Early Gupta Inscriptions

Archaeological Links

Archaeological-Survey of India

Pudukkottai

RELIGIOUS HISTORY

POPULAR RELIGION

       As early as 1900, R. G. Bhandarkar contributed an article to the Journal of the Bombay Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society,1 entitled A Peep into the Early History of India, etc., wherein he contended that the most noteworthy feature of the Gupta period was “Vigorous Brahmanic Revival and Renovation.”2 The evidence which he urged in support of his theory was then considered to be of an irrefragable character. This explains why his views are still accepted by a good many scholars. Evidence of another type is, however, gathering momentum which prevents our accepting this theory.

       He relies upon a two-fold line of argument in support of his conclusion. The first relates to the performance of the sacrificial rites. In Chandragupta II’s inscription at Mathurā and Skandagupta’s Bihār and Bhitarī inscriptions, Samudragupta is represented, says R. G. Bhandarkar, as having performed the Aśvamēdha, which is pointedly spoken of as having gone out of use for a long time (chir-ōtsann-āśvamēdh-āharttuḥ). “This is the first instance of the Brahmanic revival under this dynasty.” This achievement was considered so important that Samudragupta struck gold coins or medals, on the obverse of which is the figure of a horse let loose, and the title Aśvamēdha-Parākrama on the reverse. Similar coins bearing on the reverse the legend Aśvamēdha-Mahēndra have been found. Mahēndra was a title assumed by Kumāragupta I, as is evident from some of his coins on which his proper name as well as the title occurs. It seems, therefore, that he too performed the horse-sacrifice indicative of supreme sovereignty. The present epigraphic evidence, however, runs counter to this conclusion. Even when R. G. Bhandarkar wrote on this subject, the contents of the Nānāghāṭ cave inscription of Sātakarṇi were well known to scholars. There Sātakarṇi, or rather his wife,3 is represented to have performed not only a good many sacrifices, but, above all, celebrated Rājasūya once and Aśvamēdha twice. This clearly indicates his or her rank as a supreme ruler. Slightly earlier than this record is that found at Ghōsuṇḍi, not far from Chitōrgaṛh in Rajasthan. The contents of this inscription also were fairly well known4 when A Peep into the Early History, etc. was published, though it was critically edited much later in the light of two or more copies found on Hāthi-Bāḍā at Nagari in the Epigraphia Indica.5 This also credits Gājāyana Pārāśarīputra Sarvatāta with the celebration of a similar Aśvamēdha, as is clear from the text rājñā bhāgavatēna Gājāyanēna Pārāśarīputrēṇa Sarvatātēna Aśvamēdha-yājinā etc. The patronymic Gājāyana indicates that Sarvatāta was a Brāhmaṇa and perhaps a Kāṇva ruler. Sarvatāta is not a proper name and may have belonged to any ruler, possibly the last ruler of the Kāṇva line. But earlier than Sarvatāta was Pushyamitra, the founder of the Śuṅga dynasty (187 B.C.). An inscription of this ruler was found some time ago at Ayōdhyā which has dvir=Aśvamēdha-yājinaḥ Sēnāpatēḥ Pushyamitrasya.6 This conclusively shows that Pushyamitra, like Sātakarṇi, performed the horse sacrifice, not once, but twice. We may thus take it that Brahmanism was revived with the advent of the Brāhmaṇa Śuṅgas to power, that is, long, long before the time of the Guptas. What then becomes of the expression chir- ōtsann-āśvamēdh-āharttā which has been used in Gupta inscriptions with reference to Samudra-
______________________________________________

1 Vol. XX, pp. 356 ff.
2 Ibid., pp. 392 ff.
3 ASWI., Vol. V, pp. 60 and ff.
4 JASB., Vol. LVI, pt. i, pp. 77 ff., No. 1 and Plate V. a.
5 Vol. XXII, pp. 198 ff.
6 Ep. Ind., Vol. XX, p. 57.