22 August 2024: Due to technical disruption, we are experiencing some delays to publication. We are working to restore services and apologise for the inconvenience. For further updates please visit our website: https://www.cambridge.org/universitypress/about-us/news-and-blogs/cambridge-university-press-publishing-update-following-technical-disruption
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 24 December 2009
Emphasizing the importance of balanced geographical and historical knowledge in the late sixteenth century, Richard Hakluyt remarked: ‘Geographie and Chronologie are the sune and moone, the right eye and left eye of all history.’ In current studies of archaeology and history this emphasis remains apt, for to write a proper account of both artifacts and kings, they must be set geographi- cally in space and chronologically in time. The regions south of the River Yamunā, anciently known as Gopakṣetra, Daśārṇa, and Jejākadeśa (Maps 1 and 2), are rich in antiquarian remains, and have played an important role in the history of India, especially from the Gupta period to the time of the Muslim invasion. Their historical geography, however, has been generally ignored, and scholars have been content to describe the area simply as ‘ Central India’. The purpose of the present essay is to give an introduction to the historical geography of these provinces, and as such it can be taken as a foundation for further studies in local history and archaeology.
1 Schwartzberg, Joseph E. (ed.), A historical atlas of South Asia (Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1978),x plate IX.A.3.Google Scholar
2 Mānavadharmasdstra II, 21Google Scholar, and Sircar, D. C., Studies in the geography of ancient and medieval India (Delhi, Motilal Banarsidass, 1971), 303. Schwartzberg, Historical Atlas, plate III.D.3, is confused in showing the extent of Madhyadeśa.Google Scholar
3 Indian Archaeology–A Review, 3, 1955–1956, 19–20Google Scholar and plate XVIII.
4 For the term Gopakşetra in Kacchapaghāta epigraphs see Sinha, V. K., ‘Kacchapaghata rajvarhsa kd navina abhilekha ‘, in Gvāliyar darśsan, ed. Dvivedī, Harihar Nivās (Gwalior, 1980), 217–19.Google Scholar
5 Gopagiri, and Gopādri, are mentioned in many inscriptions, for example: I A, 15, 1886, 36 and 41Google Scholar; Epigraphia Indica (El), 1, 1892, 154 and 134 (which gives the description of Gopādri as the unique abode of marvel).Google Scholar
6 Vasudev Vishnu, Mirashi, Bhavabhūti (Delhi, Motilal Banarsidass, 1974), 77–8.Google Scholar A pleasant description of Padmāvatī, showing familiarity with Bhavabhūti's kāvya, is found in the inscription from the Vaidyanātha temple, Khajurāho; see El, 1, 1889–1992, 147 (verses 6 and 7).
7 Trivedi, H. V., ‘ The Yajvapalas of Narwar’, Journal of the Madhya Pradesh Itihāsa Parishad (JMPIP), 2, 1960, 22–32.Google Scholar The linguistic transformation Nalapura > Narwar shows the ancient name of Naresar is Naleśvara, and not Nareśvara as is commonly believed. For the Naleśvara inscription see Harihar Nivās Dvivedī, , Gvdliyar rdjye ke abhilekha (Banaras, Sulemani Press, v.s. 2004, no. 121.Google Scholar
8 Vasudev Vishnu, Mirashi, ‘Gwalior Museum stone inscription of Patanga Śambhu’, JMPIP, 4, 1962, 6Google Scholar, has shown the town was called Aranipadra and not Ranipadra.
9 ibid., p. 6, and Corpus Inscriptionum Indicarum (CII), 4, p. clii, Mirashi has demonstrated the original Terambi and Kadambaguhāa were in Avanti, and when the Śaiva ācāryas moved to Gopaksetra, places where they settled were named after their former seats.
10 CII, 4, pp. 220-1.
11 Keilhorn, F., ‘Two Inscriptions from Terahi, [Vikrama-] Samvat 960’, Indian Antiquary (IA), 17, 1888, 201–2Google Scholar, and Bhavabhuti, , MālatĪ-Mādhava, transl. Bhandarkar, Ramkrishna Gopal, revised with additional notes by Vasudev Vishnu Mirashi (Poona, Bhandarkar Oriental Institute, 1970), 374 and 541.Google Scholar
12 Bhattacharyya, P. K., Historical geography of Madhya Pradesh from early records (Delhi, Motilal Banarsidass, 1977).Google ScholarFor a review, see Chaudhuri, S. B., JAS, 22, 1980, 57–61.Google Scholar
13 Singh, U. V., ‘Excavations at Eran’, JMPIP, 4, 1962, 41–4.Google Scholar The ancient name of Eran is given as Airikina in two Eran inscriptions (CII, 3, pp. 18 and 161), as Erakina in a donative inscription at Sānchī(EI, 2, 1894, 375, and John, Marshall and Alfred, Foucher, The monuments of Sanchi, 3 vols., London, Probsthain, 1940, in, 145Google Scholar), as Airikina in a seal from the excavations (Bajpai, K. D., Sagar through the ages, Sagar, University of Sagar, 1964, 30Google Scholar), and Erakanya on early copper coins (ASIR, 14, 1878–1879, 149Google Scholar, and plate 31, nos. 17–18).
14 For the name Vatodaka, , El, 26, 1941–1942, 117.Google Scholar The local tradition, reported by Patil, that Badoh was called Badnagar (Vatanagara) is of no value. Patil, D. R., The cultural heritage of Madhya Bharat, (Gwalior, Department of Archaeology, Madhya Bharat Government, 1952, 108.Google Scholar Compare the transformations Prthūdaka > Pehoa, Agrodaka > Agroha, Khajuravahaka > Khajuraho, and *Amardaka > Amrol.
15 Law, B. C., Ujjayini in ancient literature (Gwalior, Archaeological Department, 1944).Google Scholar
16 Sircar, , Geography of ancient and medieval India, 205–10.Google Scholar A fragmentary inscription from monastery 43 at Sānchī, dating to the late seventh or early eighth century, mentioning some rulers of greater Mālava (atula mahamdlavaksmapa...) is the first record equating Daśārna and Mālava. Marshall, and Foucher, , Monuments of Sanchi I, 395–6.Google Scholar
17 Hem Chandra, Ray, The dynastic history of northern India, 2 vols. (Calcutta, University of Calcutta 1931–1936), II, 669–70.Google Scholar Jejākadesa comes from the name of the scion of the Candella house; in an inscription of Mihira Bhoja (c. A.D. 836-85) the area is still referred to as Vatsa; see El, 17, 1925–1926, 108 (verse 11).Google Scholar
18 The oldest name for Deogarh was Luacchagira (El, 4, 1895–1897), 309–10).Google ScholarIn an inscription of the time of KIrtivarman dated A.D. 1098 (IA, 18, 1889, 238)Google Scholar it is called Kirtidurga after the king in whose time the fort was conquered. The modern name Deogarh is apparently a synonymous derivation from Kirtidurga.
19 Mirashi, V. V., ‘Three ancient famous temples of the Sun’, Purāna, 8, 1966, 38–51.Google Scholar
20 For Rāśrakuta and later invasions along this route, see Sircar, , Geography of ancient and medieval India, 1971, 305.Google Scholar
21 As demonstrated by Sikandar Lodīs invasion of Gwalior from the south in the fifteenth century. For bridges see Jean, Deloche, Les ponts anciens de 1'lnde (Paris, Ecole Française d'Extreme-Orient, 1973).Google Scholar
22 Krishna, Dev, Temples of North India (Delhi, National Book Trust, 1969), 49Google Scholar; Viennot, O., Temples de Vlnde centrale et occidental, 2 vols. (Paris, Ecole Française d'Extreme-Orient, 1976), passim.Google Scholar
