________________
238
THE INDIAN ANTIQUARY.
[AUGUST, 1882.
Dr. Burgess has adduced excellent proofs-- proofs which probably will only be strengthened as time goes on-to shew that the city of Dhamnakataka was situated at or near Amaravati; and I frankly admit that I was probably in error in placing it 17 miles to the east at Bezavada. This, however, does not invalidate the possibility that the kingdom, of which probably Bezavada formed part, took its name from the great religious centre where stood the magnificent marble stripa now known as the "Amaravati Tope." Amarivatt being situated in a flat plain, it is, indeed, probable that the royal residence should be looked for in a place better adapted for defensive purposes; and in Bezavada just such a place presents itself. No finer position could be chosen in the neighbourhood than the site of this very ancient town, which is protected by steep hills on the west, north, and part of the east, while the south is guarded by the Krishna River. There is no prima facie reason therefore and Dr. Burgess admits this) why the capital city"-the royal residence-of the kingdom of Dhanakataka should not be at Bezavada, though the city of Dhanakataka lay at Amaravati.
Now as to the two monasteries. It must, I think, be conceded that the pilgrim, when he penned his descriptive note regarding them, had in his mind buildings situated on mountains, and could not have been describing buildings in a plain. A very careful translation of the passage in the Si-yu-ki was most kindly made for me by Mr. Beal, to whom I communicated the nature of the questions at issue, so that he might be on his guard. It runs as follows:"Placed on a mountain to the east of the city is to be seen the . . . . Purvašila Samgharama; on a mountain to the west of the city is the AvarasilSamgharama. An early king of this country ............ made in the sides of the mountain long galleries, wide chambers, connecting them with one another along the whole course of the scarp." And this is not the only passage; for in the Life of Hiwen Theang writtten by Hoei-li, the description of the same monasteries is given. It is there said that the Avarasilâ monastery was raised on the side of the hill facing the mountain on which stood the Pârvasils Samgharama (sur le côté opposé de la montagne), and that the reason why the monasteries were deserted in his day was because the spirits of the mountains" had changed their sentiments and driven visitors away by their violence. When we look to Amaravati as a possible site for these monasteries we are met at the outset by the stern fact that that place lies in
. But the remains in both these cases are not Bauddha, but distinctly Brahmanical.-J. B.
a gently undulating plain, and that even if the hills about 3 miles to the east be taken as the site of
the Parvasilâ monastery, we should have to | travel five or six times that distance to the west
before we could find a hill on which to locate its companion. It is clear that Hiwen Thsang could not have been thinking of Amaravati when he wrote the passages quoted above. And if it be contended that possibly the pilgrim might have been confusing two places or more in his mind, and that the monasteries might after all really have been built in a plain, surely the very names of the monasteries themselves tend to contradict this supposition; for one is called the Eastern rock (půrva silá) monastery, the other the Western-or Opposite-rock monastery (avara, or apara, bild).
Dr. Burgess admits that the language of the original passage applies in a very marked degree to Bezavada. There is the eastern hill with rockcut remains. There is the western hill, a lofty ridge rising 600 ft. sheer out of the plain, with rock-cut remains exactly where described," on the side opposite" the first. More than that, there is, as stated by the pilgrim, an " énorme rocher" right opposite Bezavida, exactly in the direction mentioned, due south. This is the Sitånagaram Hill, shaped-as seen from Bezavada-like a steepsided pyramid, or cone, and several hundred feet high. I may have been in error in assuming the hill to the south-west, which contains the Updavalle cave temple, to have been the "énorme rocher" in question, in which was said to lie the "palace of the Asuras;" but if so, the error only tends to make Hiwen Thsang's description still more applicable to Bezavada, because the steep rock at Sitanagaram does actually lie due south. It is true that the pilgrim omits mention of the river, but this omission cannot alter the applicability of the rest of the passage because it may have been purely accidental.
It will perhaps be argued that the applicability of the whole passage to Bezavada may be accident. al. Doubtless; but it is at least an extraordinary coincidence that the pilgrim, writing of a place which must have been at or near Bezavada, should have given a description which so exactly angwers to Bezavada itself. Still this is possible, and possibly on the hills near Bezavada may, by and bye, be found the remains of the monasteries. But it seems almost beyond question that they could not have been at Amaravati.
Everything at present would seem to show that the rock-cut remains to be seen on the Bezavada Hills, or some portion of them at least, are the remains of these monasteries, were it not that
But it contains no cavern so far as we knowJ. B.
