Product Code Database
Kharavela was the emperor of Kalinga (present-day eastern coast of India) in the 2nd or 1st century BC. The primary source for Kharavela is his rock-cut Hathigumpha inscription. The inscription is undated, only four of its 17 lines are completely legible, others unclear, variously interpreted and disputed by scholars. The inscription written with Jainism-related phrases recites a year by year record of his reign and panegyrically credits him with public infrastructure projects, welfare activities, patronage of the arts, and many military victories. Historians agree that it is best and most complete biography of Kharavela available. He was a follower of Jainism.
In 1885, the colonial era epigraphist Bhagwan Lal Indraji read the 16th line of the Hathigumpha inscription as a reference to Maurya kala and 165th year after this new timeline, which he called the Mauryan era. Indraji concluded that Kharavela was born in 127 BCE and became king in 103 BCE. Indraji's interpretations were questioned by scholars and has been largely rejected.J.F. Fleet (1910), The Hathigumpha Inscription, The Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland, Cambridge University Press, pp. 824-828,
According to Sudhakar Chattopadhyaya, the 16th line does not mention Maurya kala ("Maurya era") but reads Mukhya kala ("the main era"). Chattopadhyaya relies on the description of Kharavela's fifth regnal year in the Hathigumpha inscription, which he says implies that Kharavela flourished ti-vasa-sata years after the Nandaraja. Hem Chandra Raychaudhuri identifies Nandaraja with Mahapadma Nanda or one of his sons. The expression ti-vasa-sata can mean 103 or 300 years; Chattopadhyaya does not consider 103 plausible, since it would contradict Ashoka's records. Based on this, he places Kharavela in the second half of the first century BCE or the first half of the first century CE.
Depending on the variant readings, different dates continue to be published in post-colonial era texts. Alain Daniélou, for example, places Kharavela between 180 BCE and 130 BCE, identifying him as a contemporary of Satakarni and Pushyamitra Shunga. According to Rama Shankar Tripathi, Kharavela reigned during the third quarter of the first century BCE. Many other scholars, such as D.C. Sircar and Walter Spink, date Kharavela and the Hathigumpha inscription in the 1st-century BCE to early 1st-century CE.D. Sircar (1965), Select Inscriptions Volume 1, Calcutta University Press, page 213–214 footnote 1
The Hathigumpha inscription also contains a word that has been interpreted as Aira or Aila. According to a small inscription found in the Mancapuri Cave, Kharavela's successor Kudepasiri also styled himself as Aira Maharaja Kalingadhipati Mahameghavahana (Devanagari: ऐर महाराजा कलिंगाधिपतिना महामेघवाहन). Early readings of that inscription by scholars such as James Prinsep and R. L. Mitra interpreted Aira as the name of the king in the Hathigumpha inscription. Indraji's work corrected this error, and established that the king mentioned in the Hathugumpha inscription was Kharavela and that he was a descendant of Mahameghavahana. It does not directly mention the relationship between Mahameghavahana and Kharavela, or the number of kings between them. Indraji interpreted the inscription to create a hypothetical family tree in 1885, but this is largely discredited.
The word Aira or Aila was then re-interpreted, by Benimadhab Barua and Sahu to be the Prakrit form of the Sanskrit word Arya ("noble"). Jayaswal and Banerji interpret the same word to be referring to the Aila dynasty, the mythical Pururavas dynasty mentioned in Hindu and Jain texts; Kharavela's Mahameghavahana family might have claimed descent from this Pururavas dynasty. Scholars such as Sircar and Sharma, based on later discovered Guntupalli inscriptions, state that Kharavela was one of the ancient Mahameghavahana dynasty king from Kalinga.
Some scholars such as Paul Dundas question whether he was a Jain, or another ancient king who supported Jainism and is valorized in an inscription written at a Jain site. One reason for doubts is that Hathigumpha inscription explicitly states he was a devotee of all religious sects ( sava-pāsanḍa pūjako) and repaired temples dedicated to a variety of gods ( sava-devāyatana-sakāra-kārako).
Other reasons to doubt Kharavela was a devout Jain is also found in many lines of the Hathigumpha inscription. The repeated mention of violence and wars in the inscription, says Dundas, raises questions whether Kharavela was merely partial to Jainism given the central doctrine of Ahimsa (non-violence) in Jainism.
According to Helmuth von Glasenapp, he was probably a free-thinker who patronized all his subjects (including Jains).
The inscription states that Kharavela was a great patron of art and music and well versed in the science of Gandharvas. He held festivities and assemblies and entertains his capital with exhibition of dapa, dancing, singing and instrumental music.
The inscription praises Kharavela's might and his patronage to all temples, stating that he repaired all the temples and whose chariot and army are irresistible.
|
|
