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

POLITICAL HISTORY

therefore have been an event of comparatively rare occurrence.”1 The Baudhāyana-Śrautasūtra (XV. 1.1) also says that the king, who is desirous of Aśvamēdha must be a conqueror and (ruler) of all land (Aśvamēdhēna yakshyamāṇō bhavati rājā vijitī sārvabaumaḥ). This is further corroborated by the Āpastamba-Śrautasūtra (XX. 1.1), which says: rājā sārvabhaumō=śvamēdhēna yajēta, “the king who is (ruler) of all land may perform Aśvamēdha.” It will thus be seen that originally an Aśvamēdha sacrifice was considered worthy of celebration by a sārvabhauma king only. Things were, however, changing, even in the (Śrauta) Sūtra period. For the Āpastamba-Śrautasūtra just quoted is followed immediately by apy=asārvabhaumaḥ, “Even (a king) who is not (ruler) of all land (may perform it).” Aśvamēdha was not thus the be-all and the end-all of a universal ruler only, as it doubtless was to start with. Its performance must thus have come in later times to be associated with a variety of purposes. One of these was certainly putraprāpti, ‘attainment of a son’, and the well-known instance of it is the Aśvamēdha celebrated by Daśaratha, king of Kōsala. At the very beginning of the Rāmāyaṇa, Daśaratha is made to declare this his intention with the words putr-ārthaṁ hayamēdhēna yakshyām=īti matir=mama, infront of Vaśishṭha, Ṛishyaśṛiṅga and others. And it was done, and the expected fruition also obtained.2 Another object with which the sacrifice was performed is pointed to by stanza 4 of Act I of the Mṛichchhakaṭika, where Śūdraka, the reputed author of the drama, is represented to have performed the Aśvamēdha after abdicating his throne in favour of his son, and thereby apparently to have lived for one hundred years and ten days before he cremated himself in a sacred fire.3 A third end in view is indicated by the Aśvamēdha celebrated by Yudhishṭhira, the account of which constitutes one whole parvan of the Mahābhārata called the Āśvamēdhika-parvan. Yudhishṭhira had already performed the Rājasūya for attaining to the rank of Sārvabhauma. Nevertheless, after regaining the kingdom from Duryōdhana who had wrested it from him, he performs the Aśvamēdha, with the express object, we are told, of washing off “the sin committed in consequence of the slaughter of kinsmen” (jñāti-vadhyā-kṛitaṁ pāpaṁ).4 Elsewhere in the same parvan, that is, in the Āśvamēdhika-parvan, the Aśvamēdha is described as ‘purificative of all sins’.5 This leaves no doubt as to the main purpose of celebrating an Aśvamēdha.
>
Even Manu expresses the same opinion, when he says yath=Āśvamēdhaḥ kratu-rāṭ sarva-pāp-āpanōdanaḥ (XI. 260). Nevertheless, after reconquering his dominion, it was necessary for Yudhishṭhira to proclaim his position as Sārvabhauma through the performance of Rājasūya. If we carefully study the movements of the sacrificial steed of Yudhishṭhira, we find that the animal goes from Hastināpura, the capital of the Pāṇḍavas, first to the Trigarta country, in the extreme north-north-west of India, from there to Prāgjyōtisha in Assam in the extreme east, from Prāgjyōtisha again to Sindhu (Sind) in the extreme west, from Sindhu to the country of Maṇipura in the extreme east again, from there to Magadha, and then only to the south to such countries as Kōsala, Taṅgaṇa, Draviḍa, Andhra, Raudra, Māhishaka, Kaulagiri, thence northwards to Surāshṭra, Prabhāsa, Dvārāvatī, Pañchanada, and lastly to Gandhāra.6 If such was the progress of the sacrificial steed, the conclusion is irresistible that the horse was taken from one frontier province to another in order that the Aśvamēdha should be combined with the dig-vijaya.

Now, there can be no doubt as to the motive with which Samudragupta performed his Aśvamēdha. We have already remarked that his Allahabad pillar inscription makes no mention of it at all. But the same record leaves no doubt whatever that when the praśasti was composed,
_________________________________________________________________

1 SBE., Vol. XIII, Intro., p. xv.
2 Rāmāyaṇa, I.8.1; I.12.3, 9, 12 etc.; I.14.35 ff.; and 59; I.18.1 and ff.; Muirs Sk. Texts, Vol. IV, pp. 170 ff.
3 Upon this the commentator Pṛithivīdhara gives the following gloss: agni-pravēśō=pi Sarvasvāra-nāmakē yajñaviśēshē yathā Śarabhaṅgēna kṛitas=tathā bōddhavyaṁ. As regards Śarabhaṅga, see Rāmāyaṇa, III. 5. 38.
4 Mahābhārata, XIV, 88.16.
5 Ibid., 71.16.
6 IC., Vol. I, p. 116.

>
>