Epigraphia Indica Vol 16

Author(s): F W Thomas, H Krishna Sastri
Publisher: Archaeological Survey of India

Page 51

26
EPIGRAPHIA INDICA.
[VOL. XVI.
This inscription was first brought to the notice of scholars by Kaviraja Shyamala Dasa in the Journal of the Bengal Asiatic Society, Vol. LVI, Part I, pp. 77 ff., No. 1 and Pl. V. It is on a stone slab then fixed in a Bauli, or well with steps, but now deposited in the Victoria Hall, Udaipur. The original place of the inscription, as indicated by the material and the shape of this slab, was the Hathi-vada at Nagari. Hathi-vădă acquired its name from the fact that Akbar's army used it as an elephant-stable. The wall is massive, built of dressed stonepieces without cement. Mr. Bhandarkar is of opinion that the beautiful column described by Kaviraja Shyamala Dasa, which also belongs to the same architectural type as the Hathi-vādā, was removed bodily from its original site somewhere in the neighbourhood of the Hathi-vaḍa.
Unfortunately the inscription is fragmentary; a single slab of the inscribed portion gives the three lines reproduced here. The lines continued both right and left, as is evident from the context. The inscribed surface measures 3' 3" x 8", and the average height of each letter is 14". The letters are in a good state of preservation. The lines are regular, and the letters well executed. The inscription is in the Northern Brahmi of the later Maurya, or Early Sanga, period.
It is of great importance from the point of view of religious history. It is the earliest monumental proof of the fact that temples were erected to Vasudeva and to his brother, and that the followers of the cult included even Brahmins. Further, this is the earliest inscription in Sanskrit yet discovered in the country. It refers to the building of puja-sila-präkära in the Narayana-vaṭa, or Narayana compound (Hindi, Bada). The puja-sila-prakara was probably a railing round the temple or the statues. As its name signifies, it may have been a railing of slabs, like those discovered at Sanchi. It was dedicated to the gods Samkarshana and Vasudeva. Samkarshana and Vasudeva as gods appear also in the Nanaghat1 Inscription, which in view of the Hathigumpha Inscription of Kharavela (165 B.C.) is to be assigned to circa 200 B.C. There the two gods are described as belonging to the Lunar Family. They were thus the deified heroes whom the Jatakas, Papini and the Purapas treat as historical personages and as belonging to the Vrishni family of the Lunar Kahattriyas.
The worship of Krishna is not found in the Jatakas, nor is it found in Panini. The view that Papini notes the deified Vasudeva cannot be maintained. My reasons for this opinion are given in my Hindu Polity; so I need not repeat them here. But the worship of Krishna with almost all his signification, e.g. of the child Krishna (Damodara) and Trivikrama, was known as early as Baudhayana's Dharma-sutra, the date of which has been assigned by Bühler as circa 400 B.C. I demur to this dating, and my reasons are given in my Tagore Lectures. Baudhayana's Dharma-sutra cannot be earlier than about 200 B.C. Krishna as a god is in the Arthadastra not prominent (see Bk. 13, ch. 3). The two inscriptions (Nanaghat and Ghosündi) and Baudhayana's Dharma-sutra, therefore, are the earliest records establishing the deification of Krishna. It should be noted that in the inscription the first place is given to the elder brother Samkarshana, and Vasudeva is not yet more prominent than his brother, who later on is completely outraced and superseded by his junior. The process had probably already begun, as the "Narayana-rata" indicates the prominence of one only of the two, and the later history would suggest that it was Vasudeva who had begun to be identified with Narayana. On these data we can say that Krishna's worship began before 200 B.C., and that at that time probably it was not very ancient. In arriving at this conclusion our inscription is of the greatest value. While the Nanaghat record still remembers the family of the two brothers, the Ghostindi inscription detaches them completely from their human associations and treats them as devas pure and simple The Garuda-dhvaja dedication of Heliodorus similarly treats Vasudeva as a god, and it is noteworthy that it does not mention the elder brother Samkarshapa at all. In the
1 Arch. Sure. W. Ind., Vol. V, pp. 60 ff.; Lüders, List of Brahmt Inscriptions, ante, X, App., No. 1119. 1 J. B. O. R. 8., Vol. III, pp. 425-485. J. R. 4: 8, 1909, pp. 1053 ff.