English
t It may be worth noticing here that Nagarjuna, in his old age, when Siliv yAhana was on the throne, is said to have resided in this capital of Kosala which our traveller visited, which is another reason why we should try to ascertain its position, if possible—Histoire de Hiouen Thsang, 186. { Vivien de St. Martin, in his valuable memoir, takes him from Warangol to Rajamendri on the Godavery, though admitting that this would make his route south-east instead of south. He was not then aware of the existence of Durnacotta, which is in the exact direction and distance indicated, He probably would now adopt this rectification. . See Mémoires de Hiouen Thsang, vol. II. p. 396. HISTORY OF MONUMENTS. 155 (543 B.c.), which we now know to be the correct one, it would place the period of prosperity 457 a.p., which would’ accord perfectly with what we gather from other circumstances. Although, however, this indication may not be of much value, it seems evident from this passage that about the middle of the sixth century Buddhism had suffered such a blow as to prevent any such work as this being undertaken. Even if it is contended that Dhanakacheka may not be Dharanikotta, the facts remain the same. From what our author says of what he saw in Kalinga on the one hand and Djourya* on the other, it is evident that, in the century before his visit, war, pestilence, and famine had swept over the three Kalingas, and nearly obliterated the original population. We know, too, that in the neighbouring province of Orissa the Keéari family, worshippers of Siva, had raised themselves before that time (a.D. 473) on the ruins of the Buddhist dynasty ; + and we also know that in the year 605 the Chalukyas conquered Venga,} the country in which Dharanikotta was situated, and they were neither Buddhists nor Snake worshippers. From all these circumstances it may therefore fairly be assumed that it was at some time before the middle of the sixth century, or before 550 A.v. at all events, that all the buildings around the Tope were completed. If wecan thus fix, at least approximatively, the period before which our buildings must have been completed, we can with equal probability ascertain the date when they were commencef. In the first place, we find that Colonel Mackenzie collected a considerable number of coins about “ Durnacotta.” Some of these were Roman, others of the Bactrian Kadphises type,§ showing that the place was probably of some importance about the Christian era; but as none of these were found in the Tope itself, they have no direct bearing on our investigation. Those coins which were found in the Tope were all of lead, but their date not having yet been ascertained they at present afford us no assistance in our enquiry.|| Krapas the slabs, however, from the Tope, sent home by Colonel Mackenzie, there is one which bears. directly on this point. It is photographed in Plate LXXVIIL., Figs. 2. and 3. The sculpture on the front is of the age of the inner Rail, probably the fifth century, but on the back of the same slab is a bas-relief evidently of about the same age as those. of the Sanchi Tope. This confirms the evidence we acquire from the coins that a city: and buildings did exist here as early as the Christian era, but proves at the same time that none of the buildings we now find there are so early. Some centuries must have elapsed between the times when the sculptures on the back and front of that slab were executed. Colonel Mackenzie also collected a number of traditions referring to a Mokunti Maharaja] who, among the Hindus on the spot, is the reputed builder of the * Histoire de Hiouen Thsang, p. 185 and 189, and Mémoires, vol. II. p. 116. } Stirling’s Account of Cuttack, Asiatic Researches, vol. XV. p. 264. { Journal R. A. S., N.S., vol. I. p. 254. § Asiatic Researches, vol. XVII. p. 561 and 582, Plate TI. Fig. 29, c. 41. || Asiatic Journal, vol. XV. p. 471. Madras Journal, vol. XIX. p. 220,.et seqq. | On the spot it is called the Doop Mogagala of Mokunti Maharaja. *Mogasala, in the Telinga language, signifies a court for public affairs, and the distribution of justice. “ Doop ” is Hindostani for sun, or rather sunshine; translated into architectural language this would be “ Hypethral Basilica.” This would perhaps be the best term that could be applied to it; but it involves a theory it is as well to avoid at present. See Asiatic Journal, vol. XV. p. 469. , v2 156 THE TOPE AT AMRAVATI. Tope,* and curiously enough among his: own manuscripts there is one which places a Mokunti Raja exactly where we want him, if looking for a founder of the central building, which, from the evidence of the architecture, seems almost certainly to date from about the year 200, which is the date given to this king in that document.t On examination, however, these traditions are found to refer either to Rudra Deva of Warangal (4.D. 1132), or more probably to Pratapa Rudra of Orissa (aD. 1508), and have, consequently, no- bearing on the date of the monument. They are all of Brahminical origin, and Benares is the scene of action, but like most Puranic traditions they are foolish and fabulous in the extreme, and refer to a persecution, when the last feeble remnants of the Bauddhas, here called Jainas, were finally expelled from India. It is curious to find Buddhists in India as late as the beginning of the sixteenth century; but though this: has little reference to our present enquiry, we must bear in mind that the inscription translated ‘by: Mr. Prinsep,t and Sir Walter Elliot’s excavations, prove that Amravati was a temple of the Buddhists at least as late as the twelfth or thirteenth century. My impression is that the Tooth relic again visited the place in 1187, but of this hereaftér. Turning to the monument itself, we find upon it a great number of inscriptions, and my friend General Cunningham has kindly undertaken to investigate this branch of the subject. The result of his labours will be found in Appendix E. Unfortunately they merely record that the pillar, or bas-relief, or object on which they are found, is the gift of some piously-disposed persons whose. names are given; but these names, with one doubtful exception, are, unluckily for our purpose, all unknown to fame. At present, therefore, it is only from the form of the characters that the inscrip- . tions aid in ascertaining the date of the monument. Generally this may be described - as the Gupta alphabet, as used either immediately . before or after aD. 318. No trace of the Lat character occurs, though that was used in a modified form at Sanchi on the northern limits of the province , certainly after the Christian era.§ The inscriptions in which the form of the letters most closely resembles that found at Amravati are those of the Kenheri and Nasick Caves. If Dr. Stevenson || is right in ascribing these to the first half of the. fourth century, and I see no reason to tore gs “* Asiatic Journal, vol. XV. p. 470, et seq. Wilson’s Catalogue of Mackenzie’s MSS., vol. I. p. cxxiv., and Taylor in Madras Selections, Second Series, No, XXXIX. p. 229, et seq. {+ Madras Journal, No. 19, April 1838, p. 352. t It is to be regretted that the Dalad4vansa has not been completely gadieinial for it appears that ‘in the twelfth or thirteenth century the tooth relic was taken back to India at a time apparently when (1187) a Kirti-Nissanga, a prince of Kalinga, was one of the. many Indian princes who held sway in Ceylon. Tt is said to have been conveyed to the banks of the Ganges (Upham’s History of Buddhism, p. 32), But as Landresse suggests (Foé-Koué-Ki, p. 345) this more probably was the -Godavery, or, in ~ other words, the Kistnah. From some particulars’ furnished me by Sir Walter Elliot, it seems that the part of the monument he dug into was a chapel formed of old slabs arranged unsymmetrically by some prince about that time, so as to form a chapel for some unexplained purpose. It may have been to receive this relic. The inscription translated by Prinsep (J. A. S. B., vol. VI. p. 218) shows that Buddhism was flourishing at Amravati in—say the twelfth century. Altogether nothing would surprise me less than to find that the Tooth relic sojourned here for seventy-six years before its recovery by the Ceylonese, about 1314 of our era. The materials exist for settling this a but they ive not yet been made available. , § Cunningham, Bhilsa Topes, p. 264. _ | J. B.B.R.A.S., vol, V. p. 39, et seq. HISTORY OF MONUMENTS. 157 doubt his correctness in this respect, this evidence, “ valeat quantum,” would assign to the Amravati Tope the same epoch. The evidence derived .from the architecture of these Caves confirms this attribution to the fullest possible extent. Two drawings have already been given (Woodcuts 11. and 12.), and more will appear in the sequel, but meanwhile, if I am correct in ascribing the Nasick Cave to Gotamiputra (a.p. 809) and the Kenheri Cave to the age of Buddhaghosa (a.p. 410), this evidence, as far as it goes, would fix the erection of the great Rail at Amravati within the limits of the fourth century. | A good deal has yet to be accomplished before this branch of the investigation can be said to be complete; but everything that has yet been brought to light tends to confirm the assumption that the extreme elaboration of ornament which placed sculptured discs on the intermediate bars, as well as on the pillars of Buddhist Rails, was not introduced before the third century, and every building where it is; found must consequently be dated subsequent to the year 200 at the earliest. In’ so far, therefore, as either paleographic or architectural evidence is concerned, the great Rail belongs to the fourth century. The central building, as will afterwards | appear, is older, and the inner Rail more modern.