The Indian Analyst
 

South Indian Inscriptions

 

 

Contents

Index

Introduction

Contents

List of Plates

Additions and Corrections

Images

Contents

Bhandarkar

T. Bloch

J. F. Fleet

Gopinatha Rao

T. A. Gopinatha Rao and G. Venkoba Rao

Hira Lal

E. Hultzsch

F. Kielhorn

H. Krishna Sastri

H. Luders

Narayanasvami Ayyar

R. Pischel

J. Ramayya

E. Senart

V. Venkayya

G. Venkoba Rao

J. PH. Vogel

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

EPIGRAPHIA INDICA

borders of India the quaint painting which cover the walls of the dgon-pas are executed up to the present day─ so I was told in Lahul─ by those of the lamas who possess the most accurate knowledge of their stupendous pantheon.

This much, at any rate, is certain, that the Sârnâth and the Śrâvastî image were made by the same master, if not by the same workmen. The style is that of the Mathurâ school ; the material is the red sandstone of the Agra quarries. All this points to the conclusion, already referred to above, that the donors of these images has their home at Mathurâ where, as early as the reign of the satraps Rajula (or Rañjubula) and Śoḍâsa, a school of sculpture flourished, which was strongly influenced by the Graeco-Buddhist art of Gandhâra. Seemingly this Mathurâ school created a Bôdhisattva type, specimens of which found their way to other famous centers of Buddhism. And all evidence now available points to the fact that these were the very first images of the kind set up at those places.[1] For where else but at these sacred spots, hallowed by the presence of the Buddha himself, should we expect to find such images ? And yet not a fragment of anything earlier than these has been found there. On the other hand, would Friar Bala and his companions have carried those gigantic statues from Mathurâ to Śrâvastî and far-off Benares, if there had been local artists capable of converting a block of stone into a sacred image ? Would he have thought it necessary to mention expressly that the image represented a Bôdhisattva, if such images had been familiar to the pious ? Let us bear in mind the numberless images of Mediæval India, all evidently made locally,─ those of Sârnâth in Chunâr sandstone, those of Gayâ in basalt,─ among which we hardly ever find one marked with the name of the deity which it represents.[2] Among the numerous inscribed Buddhist images of the early Gupta period Dr. Bloch can quote only three examples in which the subject is mentioned.

>

Then, if Friar Bala was a monk of Mathurâ, who were his patrons, the great satrap Kharapallâna and the satrap Vanaspara ? That they were Buddhists is evident ; and it may be inferred from their titles that the former was the latter’s father, and from their names that they were of foreign extraction. As to the latter point, it is impossible at present to arrive at a definite conclusion. For though these two names have a distinct Iranian sound,[3] I need only refer to the instance of the Mughal rulers of later days, to demonstrate the unsoundness of inferring anything therefrom as to their ethnographic origin. Perhaps from their connection with Friar Bala we may hazard the conjecture that their seat of government was at Mathurâ, where a line of foreign rulers is known to have existed only about a century before. It is true that on the Kshatrapa coins found in and round that city the names of Kharapallâna and Vanaspara do not occur. But this fact can easily be accounted for on the assumption that Kharapallâna, though possibly a descendant of the independent satraps of the 1st century B.C., now owed allegiance to Mahârâja Kanishka, in whose reign the inscriptions are dated, and consequently used the Kushana coinage. May we go a step further and assume that his son Vanaspara, who in the umbrella inscription is mentioned before Kharapallâna, resided at Benares and ruled the eastern portion of the province governed by his father ?

The Sârnâth inscriptions partly confirm and partly modify Dr. Bloch’s conclusions regarding the Śrâvastî epigraph. They show that he is undoubtedly correct in his interpretation of
__________________________________________________________

[1] That statues already existed in India at an earlier period is proved by the Parkham image (A. S. R. Vol. XX. p. 40 and Plate vi.) with its inscription in Maurya Brâhmî. But apparently it has no connection with Buddhism.
[2]A. Foucher, Êtude sur l’ Iconographie Bouddhique de l’ Inde (Paris, 1900), pp. 4 ff. and 7 ff. Regarding the Mathurâ sculptures the author remarks : “ Elles sont tout de suite reconnaissables à la belle couleur rouge tachetée de jaune du grès des Vindhyas.
[3] The ending âna is also found in Hagâna (Cunningham, Coins of Ancient India, p. 87) and in Nahapâna (A. S. R. Western India, Vol. IV. p. 99). For the first member of the name Kharapallâna we may compare Kharamosta and Kharaosta (Bühler, J. R. A. S. for 1894, p. 532, and Rapson, Indian Coins, p. 9).

Home Page

>
>