Dehejia Early Activity at Amaravati

Early Activity at Amaravati
Author(s): Vidya Dehejia

Reviewed work(s):
Source: Archives of Asian Art, Vol. 23 (1969/1970), pp. 41-54
Published 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 forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
.
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
This content downloaded on Tue, 5 Mar 2013 16:26:22 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
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
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
in Ancient 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 t?
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
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
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
Stage
III
(Fergusson,
PL
LXI, 1).
II-9. The
inscription
at the
top
of the rail
pillar
on
Barrett,
PL XXI b
belongs undoubtedly
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
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
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

Dehejia Early Activity at Amaravati

Încărcat de

Informații document

Descriere originală:

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Dehejia Early Activity at Amaravati

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Early Activity at Amaravati

Author(s): Vidya Dehejia

S-ar putea să vă placă și