Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

Historical Geography of Ancient India c5: Introduction

Historical Geography of Ancient India c5

Language
English

Contents

Introduction

I. Sources

c5.s1.1

To reconstruct a systematic geography of ancient India Vedic literature, *Brāhmaṇas*, *Upaniṣads*, *Dharmasūtras* and *Dharmaśāstras* render us some help. Of the geographical names in the *Ṛgveda* those of the rivers alone permit of easy and certain identifications. The Epics and the *Purāṇas* are recognized as a rich mine of geographical information about ancient India. They contain some chapters giving a fairly accurate account of not only the different territorial divisions of India but also of her rivers, mountains, lakes, forests, deserts, towns, countries and peoples. The *Tirthayātrā-Digvijaya* sections of the *Mahābhārata*, the *Jambukhaṇḍavinirmāṇaparva* of the same epic, and the *Kiṣkindhyā-kāṇḍa* of the *Rāmāyaṇa* are rich in geographical information. The *Bhuvanakoṣa*, the *Jambudvīpavarṇanā*, the *Kūrmavibhāga* sections of the *Purāṇas*, the *Bṛhatsaṃhitā*, the *Parāśaratantra* and the *Atharvapariśiṣṭa* are equally important in eliciting valuable geographical information. No less important are Pāṇini’s *Aṣṭādhyāyī* (4.1.173, 178; 4.2.76; 5.3. 116-117, etc.), Patañjali’s *Mahābhāṣya*, *Kauṭilīya Arthaśāstra* and the *Yoginītantra* for a study of early Indian geography.

c5.s1.2

The geographical accounts in the different *Purāṇas* are more or less identical, and the account in one is often repeated in another; in some cases a larger account is summarized into a shorter one. The list in the *Vāyu*, *Matsya* and *Mārkaṇḍeya Purāṇas* is a long one, while that in the *Viṣṇu* is very short. The Pauranic lists of countries and peoples occur also in the *Mahābhārata*, sometimes in a more detailed form. The particulars of the country of Bharata as given in the *Bhīṣmaparva* of the *Mahābhārata* (ślokas 317-78) are almost the same as in the *Purāṇas*, but in some cases additional information can be gathered. It is obvious that these lists are framed in pursuance of a traditional account handed down from earlier times. But it must be admitted that the accounts are substantially correct. The fabulous element as pointed out by Cunningham is confined, as a rule, to outside lands, and their allusions to purely Indian topography are generally sober.

c5.s1.3

The *Viṣṇu Purāṇa* list of countries is very meagre; the *Mahābhārata* has a much longer catalogue without any arrangement; so also in the *Padmapurāṇa*. The longest list of countries and peoples of India is, however, contained in the *Mārkaṇḍeya*, the *Skanda*, the *Brahmāṇḍa* and the *Vāyu Purāṇas*. The *Mārkaṇḍeya Purāṇa* contains a description of Jambudvīpa and mentions the forests, lakes and mountains around Meru. It mentions the nine divisions of Bhārata, the seven mountain ranges in India and twenty-two separate hills. It describes the course of the Ganges and refers to the famous rivers in India, grouping them according to the mountain ranges out of which they arise. The principal peoples in India and on its borders are also mentioned in it, arranged according to the natural regions of the country. The majority of the names of countries and peoples found in the *Purāṇas* is very much the same as we find in the *Nadyādivarṇanā* section of the *Mārkaṇḍeya Purāṇa*, but there is also quite a good lot of names that are entirely new and original. The *Mārkaṇḍeya Purāṇa* (Ch. 57) which really contains the strictly geographical information of other major *Purāṇas*, has a section called the *Kūrmavibhāga* containing a list of countries and peoples of India arranged according to the position of the country conceived as a tortoise, as it lies on water resting upon Viṣṇu and looking eastwards.¹ This arrangement is based on earlier astronomical works, like those of Parāśara and Varāhamihira. This chapter is invaluable from the topographical standpoint. The Bhāgavatapurāṇa also contains some geographical information. So we find that the Purāṇas are really very important for a geographical study of ancient India.

c5.s1.4

¹ This conception fits well with our present knowledge of the topography of India.

c5.s1.5

The innumerable Māhātmyas require to be carefully studied from the geographical standpoint. The extensive Māhātmya literature which contains portions from the Purāṇas or Saṃhitās, deals with the topography of the various tīrthas or holy places. Their geographical importance is very great in the sense that evidences may be adduced from them to enable us to locate important sites. One finds it tedious to read the legendary history of tīrthas or holy places, but to a geographer it will never be a fruitless study.

c5.s1.6

The later Sanskrit literature abounds with geographical information. As for example, Rājaśekhara’s Kāvya-mīmāṃsā (p. 93) clearly states the five traditional divisions of India. It contains some useful geographical information about Utkala, Sumha, Niṣadha, and Kāśmīra (Ch. 17), Aṅga, Vaṅga, Puṇḍra, Vālhika, Pañcāla, Śūrasena, etc. (Ch. 3). The Raghuvaṃśa (4th sarga, śls. 35, 38), the Naiṣadhīyacarita by Śrīharṣa (5th sarga, śls. 50, 98), the Meghadūta by Kālidāsa (Pūrvamegha, śls. 24, 25, 26), the Daśakumāracarita by Daṇḍin (6th ucchvāsa), the Harṣacarita by Bāṇabhaṭṭa (6th and 7th ucchvāsas), Dhoyi’s Pavanadūta (27) may be utilized for our geographical knowledge. A fairly good idea of Kālidāsa’s knowledge of geography may be gathered from his works.

c5.s1.7

To present a complete geographical picture of India in the Buddha’s time and later, Pali literature is undoubtedly the most important. From about the time of the Buddha to about the time of Aśoka the great literature of the early Buddhists is certainly the main source of the historical and geographical information of ancient India, supplemented by Jaina and Brahmanical sources here and there. Texts or narratives of purely historical or geographical nature are altogether absent in the literature of the early Buddhists, and whatever historical or geographical information can be gathered is incidental and very much reliable. Thus for the history of the rise and vicissitudes as well as for the geographical situation and other details of the sixteen Mahājanapadas, the most important chapter of the Indian history and geography before and after the time of the Buddha, the Pali Aṅguttara Nikāya is the main source of information which is supplemented by the Jaina Bhagavatīsūtra and the Karṇaparva of the Mahābhārata. For later periods when we have abundant epigraphical and archaeological sources and literary sources, too, which are mainly Brahmanical, as well as the accounts of the classical geographers and the itineraries of the Chinese pilgrims, the geographical information contained in Pali and Sanskrit Buddhist literature is considerably important.² Some geographical information may also be available from Tibetan texts.

c5.s1.8

² Vide Law, Geography of Early Buddhism and Geographical Essays, Ch. I.

c5.s1.9

The Pāli Piṭaka, specially the Vinaya and the Sutta, contains incidental references to cities and places connected with the gradual spread of Buddhism. They supply us with an abundant information concerning the Madhyadeśa or the Middle country and the localities bordering it. The Milindapañha which is an important non-canonical Pali text, and the Mahāvastu, a Buddhist Sanskrit work of great importance, contain many important geographical notices. The Pali commentaries, specially those of Buddhaghosa, and the chronicles of Ceylon, specially the *Dīpavaṃsa* and the *Mahāvaṃsa*, furnish us with chips of information as to the geographical knowledge of the Buddhists.

c5.s1.10

The Sanskrit Buddhist texts which are later in date than the Pali texts, have some geographical information. Cities of fiction which are not part of the real world, are found in them. Countries like Ratnadvīpa and Khaṇḍadvīpa, cities like Vandhumatī and Puṇyavatī, and mountains like Triśaṅku and Dhūmanetra, mentioned in them, admit hardly of any identification and help only to add to the legendary element pervading most of the accounts of the Sanskrit Buddhist texts. The Sanskrit Buddhist texts which are very important from religious and philosophical points of view, do not elicit much information of a historical or geographical character. The *Mahāvastu* speaks mostly of the life of the Buddha; the *Lalitavistara* and the *Buddhacaritakāvya* also refer to the Master's life. The *Bodhisattvāvadānakalpalatā* gives a number of stories relating to the former existences of the Buddha, while the *Aśokāvadāna* speaks of Aśoka and his times. Very few Sanskrit Buddhist texts have a great corroborative value. Really speaking, they are not important from geographical standpoint. They were mostly written from the 6th century onwards to the 12th and 13th centuries of the Christian era. They no doubt contain the most important contemporary evidence as to the religious history, but geographically they speak of very remote times. For already by the 6th and 7th centuries of the Christian era the whole of the Indian continent with its major divisions and sub-divisions, cities, countries, provinces, rivers, mountains, etc., had become too widely known to its people. Contemporary epigraphic, literary and monumental evidences abound with information regarding many geographical details. Moreover, the Indians of those centuries had also planted their political, cultural and commercial outposts and colonies not only in Suvarṇabhūmi (Lower Burma) but also in Java and Sumatra, Campā and Kamboj. Their priests and missionaries had already travelled to China and Central Asia carrying with them Sanskrit Buddhist texts. But it is difficult to find in them any idea of far wider geographical knowledge and outlook of the times. Even the Indian continent is not fully represented in its contemporary geographical information.

c5.s1.11

The earlier texts of the Jainas have many geographical and topographical references. The *Acārāṅgasūtra*, *Bhagavatīvivāhapaṇṇatti*, *Nāyādhammakahāo*, *Uvāsagadasāo*, *Amṭagaḍadasāo*, *Aṇuttarovavāiyadasāo*, *Paṇhāvāgaraṇāiṃ*, *Vivāga-sūya*, *Ovavāiya-sūya*, *Rāyapasenaiya-sūya*, *Paṇṇavaṇā*, *Jambuddīvapaṇṇatti*, *Nirayāvaliya-sūya*, *Nisīha-mahānisīha-sūyas*, *Kalpasūtra*, *Uttarādhyayanasūtra*, and the *Āvaśyakasūtra* contain geographical data. The *Jambuddīvapaṇṇatti* which is the sixth *upāṅga* of the Jainas, contains a description of Jambudvipa as well as that of Bhāratavarṣa. It speaks of seven *varṣas* or countries constituting seven main divisions of Jambudvipa. Although it gives us the mythical geography of the Jainas, there is much that is of great value to geographers of ancient India. It is no doubt an interesting Jaina treatise on geography and it should be studied along with the *Vividhatīrthakalpa* which is not included in the Jaina canon. The *Vividhatīrthakalpa* of Jinaprabha Sūri contains legends mixed up with facts. Great care should be taken to separate fact from fiction in order to present a true geographical picture.¹

c5.s1.12

¹ Law, Some Jaina Canonical Sūtras, Appendix II.

c5.s1.13

The inscriptions of Aśoka and those at the Khaṇḍagiri and Udayagiri hills of Orissa also help us greatly. Coins too sometimes enable us to locate a particular nation or tribe. As for example, the discovery of some copper coins at Nāgri, a small town 11 miles north of Chitor, enables us to locate the kingdom of king Sivi of the Sivi Jātaka.

c5.s1.14

Among the early classical geographers Hecataeus of Miletus (B.C. 549–486) was the first Greek geographer whose knowledge stopped on the frontier of the Persian empire, the river Indus. He knew the people called Gandhāri on the upper Indus. He was acquainted with the names of other Indian peoples of the frontier hills (Cambridge History of India, I, 394). Herodotus (B.C. 484–431) wrote about India, much of which was drawn from Hacataeus. He knew that the population of India was great.¹ In fact, most of his allusions to India refer to the times of Darius and Xerxes (Ibid., I, 329). From a passage in Herodotus (IV. 44) it appears that the valley of the Indus from its upper course to the sea including the Punjab and Sind, was annexed by the Persians or was brought under their control (Ibid., I, 336). Regarding minor states in India in the period from 325 B.C. to 300 A.D. some information has been supplied by him (B. C. Law, Indological Studies, Pt. I, 11). Ktesias (B.C. 398) collected materials during his stay for a treatise on India. His account was unfortunately vitiated by a large number of fables and it was left to the followers of Alexander to give to the Western world for the first time fairly accurate accounts of India and its inhabitants.

c5.s1.15

¹ Cambridge History of India, I, 395.

c5.s1.16

The great conqueror carried scientific men with him to chronicle his achievements, and described the countries invaded by him. Some of his officers were men of literary culture. Of his companions three men enriched the Greek conception of India by their writings. Nearchus was one of them. His book contained a good deal of incidental information about India (C.H.I., I, 398). Alexander's Indian expedition produced quite a large number of narratives and memoirs relating to India. All these works are lost, and their substance is found in brief in Strabo, Pliny and Arrian. Some subsequent writers made considerable additions to the stock of information concerning India, among whom may be mentioned Diodorus, Strabo, Curtius, Arrian, who was the best of Alexander's historians, and Justinus.² The Greek and Roman historians of Alexander carry on geographical knowledge eastwards beyond the Jhelum (Hydaspes), the eastern limit of Gandhāra to the Beas (Hyphasis) (Cambridge History of India, I, 58-59).

c5.s1.17

² McCrindle, Ancient India as described by Megasthenes and Arrian, pp. 5ff.

c5.s1.18

Strabo's geography furnishes us with some information about the well-known Assaka or Aśmaka tribe. Though Strabo speaks of the country of the Gandarai, the name of the Gandhāra country is not mentioned by any of Alexander's historians. According to Strabo Taxila lay between the Indus and Hydaspes (the Jhelum). It was a large city which was governed by good laws. According to him the country of the elder Poros, the Kekaya country, was extensive and fertile, having in it some 300 cities. The principality of the younger Poros was called Gandaris. But this name is not to be taken as conclusive. He says that the region where Sophytes ruled was marked by the presence of a mountain composed of rock salt of sedimentary origin, yielding enough salt to meet the demands of the people of India as a whole. He further says that in the realm of Sophytes dogs were characterized by remarkable courage. He gives an interesting account of the inhabitants of the territory of Mousikanos. The king of the territory of Oxykanos was called by him and Diodoros as Portikanos. He tells us that the Parthians deprived Eukratides of a part of Bactriana. The conquests by the Bactrian Greeks were, according to him, partly achieved by Menander (middle of the 2nd century B.C.) and partly by Demetrios, son of Euthydemos (cir. 190 B.C.). Such historico-geographical information, among other details, is found in his geography.

c5.s1.19

Megasthenes who lived long in India gives us topographical matters of great value. He came to the court of Candragupta Maurya on an embassy. He himself said that he had often visited Sandrokottos, the greatest king of the Indians. According to Arrian he also visited king Poros. The fragments of his *Indika* furnish us with invaluable materials concerning India, her inhabitants, rivers, countries, cities, size, fertility of the soils, wild animals, horses and elephants, Indian trees, peoples, castes, tribes, races, occupations, Indian philosophers, Śramaṇas and Brāhmaṇas, etc.

c5.s1.20

Arrian who distinguished himself as a historian, was the famous author of the account of the Asiatic expedition of Alexander the great. He also gave us a fine description of India. His *Indika* consists of three parts: the first part deals with the general description of India chiefly based on the accounts of the country given by Megasthenes and Eratosthenes; the second part gives an account of the voyage made by Nearchos the Cretan from the Indus to the Pasitigris, chiefly based on the narrative of the voyage written by Nearchos himself; and the third part gives ample evidence to prove that the southern parts of the world are uninhabitable on account of excessive insolation. In his *Indika* he refers to the regions beyond the river Indus on the west inhabited by the two Indian tribes, Astakenoi and Assakenoi. He mentions the countries lying to the east of the Indus as denoting India proper. He states the dimensions of India, and deals with her rivers, tribes, etc. He divides the Indian people into about seven castes and describes the hunting of wild animals by the Indians, etc.

c5.s1.21

Eratosthenes wrote a scientific geography. He described India on the authority of Alexander's historians.

c5.s1.22

Pliny treats of the geography of India in his *Natural History*, which was dedicated to Titus, son of Vespasian and his successor as emperor. The first ten books of this history were probably published in A.D. 77. Books III-VI are devoted to geography and ethnography. His treatment is uncritical but extremely valuable judging from the incidental facts presented by him.

c5.s1.23

The *Periplus of the Erythræan Sea* by an anonymous writer is a guide-book containing an account of trade and commerce carried on from the Red Sea and the coast of Africa to the East Indies (modern Indonesia). It is really a guide-book to the Indian ocean including its bordering seas, the Red Sea and the Persian Gulf. The articles of trade, which were handled by the ports, are mentioned in the *Periplus* (Translated by W. H. Schoff, 1912, pp. 284-288). According to the *Periplus* tin was shipped from Egypt to Somaliland and India. Ebony came to Rome from both India and Egypt. Minnagara was the name given temporarily to some cities in India during the period of the Scythian occupation. After the collapse of the Indo-Scythian power these cities resumed their former names with their autonomy. This guide-book contains some information about the Indus, Syrastrene (Surāṣṭra), Barygaza (modern Broach), the river Mahī (Mais), the river Narmadā (Nammadus), Arachosii (the country around the modern Kandahar), Gandaraei (Gandhāra), Ozene (Ujjain), Tagara (modern Ter), Suppāra (modern Sopara), Calliene (modern Kalyāna), Pandian Kingdom (Pāṇḍya), etc.

c5.s1.24

Ptolemy's *Geography* is a work of great importance. Ptolemy was indebted to Marinus of Tyre for his materials. His treatise is divided into eight books. His description of India within the Ganges Valley, and his account of the countries, cities, towns, rivers, mountains, hills, etc., deserve to be studied with great care. The position of India beyond the Ganges, inland towns and villages of the trans-Gangetic India, seven mountain ranges, rivers of the Indus system, and the territories and peoples of India classified according to the river-basins, are some of the topics ably treated by him. His *Geography* is undoubtedly very helpful to the geographers of ancient India.

c5.s1.25

The itineraries of Chinese pilgrims are of inestimable value as sources of the ancient Indian geography. The accounts of Fa-Hien and Yuan Chwang who toured all over Northern India are very important. The account of Yuan Chwang who visited India in the 7th century A.D., is fuller and more exhaustive. For an accurate and exhaustive geography of Northern India during the 5th and 7th centuries of the Christian era, the accounts of these two pilgrims are the most important sources of information. There was another Chinese pilgrim who visited India in the 8th century A.D. He was U-Kong (*Calcutta Review*, August, 1922). The accounts of other Chinese pilgrims, Song Yun and Hwiseng, are short and describe only a few places in north-west India. I-tsing who visited many important places in ancient India in 673 A.D. gives us a detailed account. Another Chinese pilgrim named Wang-hiuen-t'se who came to India in 643 A.D., wandered over and visited the countries of the Lord Buddha, as he himself said in his account.¹ He visited Magadha and ascended the Gṛdhrakūṭa hill (Ki-tche-Kiu) and left there an inscription. He also went to Mahābodhi at Gayā. As related in his account he visited five Indies. At the head of the Tibetan and Nepalese cavalry he marched on Magadha, defeated the Indian troops, captured the capital, seized the king and took him triumphantly to China. He himself visited Nepal and Tibet. His description of Tibet (Tou-fan) is interesting. This Chinese pilgrim in his leisure time wrote a book entitled *Account of the Voyage*. He narrates an interesting account of the law of Magadha which was then prevalent. If someone was guilty, he was not beaten by a rod, but recourse was taken to a wonderful weighing. His inscriptions engraved on the Gṛdhrakūṭa and at Mahābodhi have been translated by Chavannes. His account of the places in India visited by him is very useful from geographical standpoint.

c5.s1.26

¹ It is related in Sylvain Levi's article *Les Missions de Wang-Hiuen-T'se dans l'Inde*, published in the *Journal Asiatique*, 1900. This paper has been recently translated into English by Dr. S. P. Chatterjee.

c5.s1.27

The geographical accounts of Muslim writers are equally helpful. Alberuni, who was in the territory of modern Khiva in A.D. 973, distinguished himself in science and literature. In his book on *India* he deals with its geography which is sure to render some help to geographers. India as far as known to him was Brahmanic and not Buddhistic. In the first half of the 11th century A.D. all traces of Buddhism in Central Asia, Khurashan, Afghanistan and North-Western India seem to have disappeared. There his notes on Buddhism were very scanty. Benares and Kashmir were then two centres of Indian learning. He had not the same opportunity for travelling in India as Hiuen Tsang had. Hence his geographical notes are not so very exhaustive. In his book on *India* (English edition by Dr. E. C. Sachau, Ch. XVIII) he deals with the Madhyadeśa, Prayāga, Sthāneśvara, Kānyakubja, Pāṭaliputra, Nepal, Kashmir and other countries and towns, rivers, animals, the western and southern frontiers of India, the western frontier mountains of India, islands, rainfall, etc. He also refers to the Hindu method of determining distances between the various parts of India.

c5.s1.28

Kalhaṇa’s *Rājatarangiṇī*, the well-known Kashmir Chronicle of the 12th century A.D., should be used with caution as it contains a large number of confused ancient traditions. It is valuable, says Vincent Smith, as it gives a trustworthy account of local events (*Early History of India*, 4th Ed., p. 10).

c5.s1.29

Marco Polo, the famous Venetian traveller, visited South India and Central Asia in the 13th century A.D. The account of his travels may be found useful. (Vide *Travels of Marco Polo* by L. R. Fawcus published in *Introducing India*, Pt. I, R.A.S.B. publication.)

c5.s1.30

There are other means of approach to the historical geography of India, such as, the early surveys contained in the Imperial and Provincial Gazetteers, which are really mines of information. The *Reports of the Archaeological Survey of India*, and the geographical references in the *Epigraphia Indica*, *Corpus Inscriptionum Indicarum*, *South Indian Inscriptions* and *Epigraphia Carnatica*, contain detailed geographical knowledge of the most definite character. The *Census Reports of India* are equally important.

c5.s1.31

In the *Imperial Gazetteer of India* (New Edition, Vol. II, Historical, The Indian Empire, pp. 76-87), Dr. J. F. Fleet’s attractive note on Geography will no doubt be helpful to researchers. He has shown the importance of the study of early Indian Geography and has traced the principal sources of this interesting branch of study.

c5.s1.32

The *Annual Reports of the Archaeological Survey of India* contain detailed accounts of the excavations carried out by the Archaeological Department at different sites of historical importance, and they dwell at length upon the topography of places of geographical interest, e.g., Besnagar, Bhiṭā, Kāsīā, Pāṭaliputra, Rājagṛha, Sārnāth, Vaiśālī, Takṣaśilā. The Annual Report for 1907-08 contains an account of the ancient temples of Aihole with the topography of the site. In the Report for 1915-16, M. B. Garde writes a paper on the site of Padmāvatī, which is mentioned in the *Viṣṇupurāṇa* as one of the three capitals of the Nāgas and described in Bhavabhūti’s *Mālatī-mādhava* as the place where the hero of the poem, Mādhava, was sent by his father from Kuṇḍinapura in Vidarbha. Padmāvatī is identified with modern Pawaya on the confluence of the Sind and the Pārvatī. The Report for 1927-28 contains a note by K. N. Dikshit on the identification of Puṣkaraṇa in the Susunia inscription of Candravarman. Puṣkaraṇa of the inscription (ed. H. P. Śāstrī, *Ep. Ind.*, XIII, p. 133) is identified with the village of Pokharan, 25 miles to the north-west of Susunia. The Reports for 1925-26, 1927-28 and 1928-29, contain accounts of the excavations at Paharpur in the Rajshahi district, while the Report for 1928-29 contains an account of the excavations at Mahāsthān in the Bogra district of north Bengal,¹ identified with the ancient site of Puṇḍravardhana.

c5.s1.33

¹ Now in East Pakistan.

c5.s1.34

‘The Buddhist Antiquities of Nāgārjunakoṇḍa, Madras Presidency’, by A. H. Longhurst, published by the Archaeological Survey of India as their Memoir No. 64, gives an interesting account of the Buddhist antiquities discovered at the Nagarjuna’s hill on the right bank of the Kṛṣṇā river in the Palnāḍ taluk of the Guṇṭur district. Most of the scenes in the beautiful bas-reliefs recovered from the ruined stūpas at the site illustrate well-known stories connected with the life of the Buddha. The author has taken much pains to identify the different scenes portrayed in the sculptures. He has given us a very readable account of the locality and an interesting history of the site. The chief buildings and antiquities discovered during the explorations have not escaped the careful attention of the author, and he has furnished us with a very good account of them. The fruitful result of his careful investigation embodied in this monograph will surely be appreciated by every student of early Indian geography.

c5.s1.35

Explorations in Sind by N. G. Mazumdar published as a Memoir No. 48 by the Archaeological Survey of India is a valuable contribution to ancient Indian geography. It contains prominent topographical features of Sind and its climate. It also gives an account of the excavations carried out at the site during the years 1927-28, 1929-30 and 1930-31.

II. Different Names of India

c5.s2.1

Bounded on the north by stupendous mountain ranges and on the other three sides by the mighty seas and ocean, India constitutes a distinct geographical unit. The vastness of the country with its infinite variety of fauna and flora, races and languages, religions and culture justly entitles it to be called a great sub-continent. The remote parts of this great country revealed themselves to the observers and explorers of ancient times only gradually and by stages. It is for this reason therefore that we do not meet with any comprehensive term to designate the whole country in the earliest records. The word ‘India’ is derived from the name of the river Sindhu or the Indus.¹ The Chinese also knew the ancient name of India as Shin-tuh or Sindhu.² In the *Ṛgveda* (VIII. 24. 27) it is referred to as Sapta Sindhavas or ‘the Seven Rivers’. The designation doubtless corresponds to the term Hapta Hindu found in the *Avestan Vendīdād*.³ In the famous inscriptions of Darius at Persepolis and Naksh-i-Rustam the entire territory watered by the Indus and its affluents is styled simply Hi(n)du.⁴ Herodotus calls it ‘India’ which was the twentieth division of the Persian empire. It should, however, be noted that the Vedic Sapta Sindhavah and the Persian Hi(n)du corresponded only to a particular part of India lying to the north-west. But ‘India’ of Herodotus was already acquiring a wider denotation, for the Greek historian speaks of the Indians who ‘are situated very far from the Persians, towards the south, and were never subject to Darius’.⁵

c5.s2.2

¹ Cambridge History of India, I, p. 324.

c5.s2.3

² Law, Geography of Early Buddhism, p. xvi; Legge, Fahien, p. 26.

c5.s2.4

³ Cambridge History of India, I, p. 324.

c5.s2.5

⁴ Ibid., p. 335.

c5.s2.6

⁵ Raychaudhuri, Studies in the Indian Antiquities, p. 81.

c5.s2.7

The exploration of practically the whole country had been completed in or about the fourth century B.C. The literature of the period, both Greek and Indian, shows acquaintance not only with the realm of the Pāṇḍyas in the south, but also with the island of Tāmraparṇi or Ceylon.⁶ The people felt the necessity of a comprehensive term for the territory extending from the Himalayas in the north to the sea in the south. The term was Jambudvīpa which was then used. In Buddhist literature Jambudvīpa figures as one of the four Mahādvīpas or the four great continents including India with Mt. Sineru (Sumeru) in the centre of them. A portion of Jambudvīpa known as the Aṅgadvīpa was inhabited by the Mlecchas according to the Vāyupurāṇa (48. 14–18).

c5.s2.8

⁶ Bhandarkar, Carmichael Lectures (1918), pp. 6ff.; Cambridge History of India, Vol. I, pp. 423ff.

c5.s2.9

Childers (Pali Dictionary, p. 165) points out that when opposed to Sihaladīpa, Jambudvīpa means the continent of India.¹ It is difficult to be definite on this point. In Sanskrit Buddhist texts we have references to Jambudvīpa.² The Minor Rock Edict No. 1 of Aśoka mentions Jambudvīpa³ which denotes the vast country ruled by that great emperor. In the Epics and Purāṇas Jambudvīpa is described as one of the seven concentric islands, encircled by seven samudras.⁴ Of these seven islands the Jambudvīpa is the most alluded to in various sources and is one which is in its narrower sense identified with Bhāratavarṣa⁵ or the Indian peninsula.

c5.s2.10

¹ Law, Geography of Early Buddhism, p. xvi; Geographical Essays, p. 5.

c5.s2.11

² Mahāvastu, III, 67; Lalitavistara, Ch. XII; Bodhisattvāvadānakalpalatā, 78th Pallava, 9.

c5.s2.12

³ R. K. Mookerjee, Aśoka, p. 110.

c5.s2.13

⁴ Law, Geography of Early Buddhism, p. xvi; Cunningham, Ancient Geography of India, p. xxxvi.

c5.s2.14

⁵ Mahābhārata, VI. 6. 13; Brahmāṇḍapurāṇa, 37. 27–46; 43. 32.

c5.s2.15

An interesting account of Jambudvīpa (Pali Jambudīpa) is found in Pali-Buddhist texts and commentaries. Jambudvīpa has been named after the Jambu tree. (Visuddhimagga, I, 205–206; cf. Vinaya Texts, I, 127; Aṭṭhasālinī, p. 298). According to the Papañcasūdanī, the commentary on the Majjhima Nikāya, it is called Vana or forest (Vol. II, p. 423). It is also called Sudarśanadvīpa which is said to derive its name from a tree growing in it, the branches of which extend over 1,000 yojanas. (Brahmāṇḍapurāṇa 37. 28–34; 50. 25–26; Matsya, 114. 74–75; cf. Mahābh. VI. 5. 13–15; VI. 7. 19–20). The Sineru which is the highest of the mountain peaks, was encompassed by seven celestial ranges, named Yugandhara, Īsadhara, Kāravika, Sudassana, Nemindhara, Vinataka and Assakaṇṇa. The Jambudvīpa looks like a lotus with Meru as its karṇika (pericarp of a lotus) and the varṣas or mahādvīpas, Bhadrāśva, Bhārata, Ketumāla and Uttarakuru as its four petals.⁶ Buddhaghosa, the celebrated Pali commentator, points out that Jambudīpa was 10,000 yojanas in extent and it was called Great (mahā).⁷ The five great rivers, Gaṅgā, Yamunā, Sarabhu, Aciravatī and Mahī, after watering Jambudīpa fell into the sea.⁸ The Buddha, while relating the Cakkavattisīhanāda Suttanta, predicted thus: ‘Jambudīpa will be mighty and prosperous, the villages, towns and royal cities will be so close that a cock would fly from each one to the next’. According to the Sumaṅgalavilāsinī Jambudīpa had 500 islands (Vol. II, p. 449). In Jambudīpa there were pleasant parks, pleasant groves, pleasant grounds and lakes, but their number was not great. Moreover, there were many steep precipitous cliffs, unfordable rivers, inaccessible mountains and dense thickets of stakes and thorns.⁹ Gold was collected from the whole of Jambudīpa.¹⁰ Aśoka built 84,000 monasteries in the whole of Jambudīpa.¹¹ The Sāṃkhya, Yoga, Nyāya and Vaiśeṣika systems of philosophy, arithmetic, music, medicine, the four Vedas, the Purāṇas and the Itihāsas, astronomy, magic, spells, the art of war, poetry and conveyancing were taught here.¹² There were disputants here in arts and sciences.¹³ The importance of Jambudīpa was very great as it was often visited by Gautama the Buddha besides Mahinda.¹ The people of Jambudīpa led a virtuous life according to the *Kathāvatthu* (p. 99). The whole of Jambudīpa was stirred up by Sānu, the only son of a female lay disciple who mastered the *Tripitaka*.² The *Cūḷavaṃsa* refers to the great Bo-tree at Jambudīpa (Vol. I, p. 36). There were heretics and monks here and the unruliness of the heretics was so very great that the monks stopped holding the *uposatha* ceremony for seven years.³ A dreadful famine once visited it.⁴

c5.s2.16

⁶ Nīlakaṇṭha’s commentary on the Mahābhārata, VI. 6. 3–5; Mārkaṇḍeya, 55, 20ff.; Brahmāṇḍa, 35. 41; 44–45.

c5.s2.17

⁷ Sumaṅgalavilāsinī, II, 429.

c5.s2.18

⁸ Ibid., p. 17.

c5.s2.19

⁹ Aṅg. Nik., I, 35.

c5.s2.20

¹⁰ Papañcasūdanī, II, 123.

c5.s2.21

¹¹ Dīpavamsa, p. 49; Visuddhimagga, I, 201.

c5.s2.22

¹² Milinda, p. 3.

c5.s2.23

¹³ Therīgāthā Commy., p. 87.

c5.s2.24

¹ *Dipavaṃsa*, p. 65.

c5.s2.25

² *Dhammapada Commy.*, IV, 25.

c5.s2.26

³ *Mahāvaṃsa*, p. 51.

c5.s2.27

⁴ *Dhammapada Commy.*, III, 368, 370, 374.

c5.s2.28

Bhāratavarṣa was just one of the nine *varṣas* or countries constituting the nine main divisions of Jambudvīpa. The Jaina work *Jambuddīvapaṇṇatti* speaks of seven *varṣas* as constituent parts of Jambudvīpa. According to the Epic and Puranic authors Jambudvīpa was originally divided into seven *varṣas*. Two other *varṣas* were added later to the original seven and the total number of *varṣas* was raised to nine.⁵ Thus with the Jaina and Brahmin writers Jambudvīpa as a continent was thought of as of much wider extension than Jambudvīpa as known to the Buddhists. Among the *varṣas* of Jambudvīpa Bhāratavarṣa lay most to the south. In agreement with the Great Epic⁶ and the *Purāṇas*, the *Jambuddīvapaṇṇatti* derives the name Bhāratavarṣa from King Bharata, a descendant of Priyavrata, son of Manu Svyambhava,⁷ whose sovereignty was established over it.⁸ Bhāratavarṣa, according to Pauranic cosmology, was divided into *nava-khaṇḍas* or nine divisions ‘separated by seas and as being mutually inaccessible’.⁹ But Bhāratavarṣa, as we now know it, is not separated by seas within itself, nor are its component parts ‘mutually inaccessible’. It is not thus our India, covering present geographical area. Of the nine *khaṇḍas* eight have been shown to be divisions not of India proper. They are not so many provinces of India, but of Greater India, and are islands and countries that encircle the Indian Peninsula.¹⁰ This fact was also noted long ago by scholars like Alberuni and Abul Fazl.¹¹ The ninth *dvīpa* or *khaṇḍa*, i.e., Kumārī or Kumārikādvīpa, which is described in the *Purāṇas* to have been girt by sea (*sāgarasaṃvṛtaḥ*) and to have been inhabited by the Kirātas at its eastern extremity, and the Yavanas at its western, with the Brāhmaṇas, Kṣatriyas, Vaiśyas and Śūdras thrown within, seems to be identical with India proper.¹²

c5.s2.29

⁵ Law, *India as described in early texts of Buddhism and Jainism*, p. 1 n; Law, *Geographical Essays*, 119ff.; Cunningham, *Ancient Geography of India*, pp. 8, 749ff.

c5.s2.30

⁶ *Mahābh.*, Bhīṣmap., III. 41.

c5.s2.31

⁷ *Bhāgavatapurāṇa*, XI, 2. 15ff.

c5.s2.32

⁸ B. C. Law, *India as described in early texts of Buddhism and Jainism*, p. 14.

c5.s2.33

⁹ Cunningham, *Ancient Geography of India*, p. 751; Law, *Geographical Essays*, p. 121; *Markandeya*, 575—nine *dvīpas*.

c5.s2.34

¹⁰ Cunningham, *Ancient Geography of India*, Appendix I, pp. 749–754.

c5.s2.35

¹¹ Raychaudhuri, *op. cit.*, p. 78, f.n. 4.

c5.s2.36

¹² Law, *Geographical Essays*, p. 121.

c5.s2.37

The early Greek writers regarded the Indus as the western boundary of India, but they knew of Indian settlements in the valley of the Kabul and its tributaries. Accordingly some regarded the Cophes, i.e., the river Kabul, as the furthest limit of India on its west.¹³ The inclusion of Yonas or Yavanas, who probably occupied the place near Kabul, and of the Gandhāras, who were located in the region comprising the modern districts of Peshawar in the North-Western Frontier Province and Rawalpindi in the Punjab, both in Pakistan, among the peoples of *Uttarāpatha* in the Great Epic and the *Purāṇas*, suggests that India at one time embraced within its boundaries not only the land lying immediately to the west of the Indus but also the north-eastern corner of the Iranian Tableland. The mango-shaped island of Ceylon,¹ which does not form part of India proper, is both geographically and culturally closely connected with it.

c5.s2.38

¹³ McCrindle, *Ancient India as described by Megasthenes and Arrian*, p. 156.

c5.s2.39

¹ *Amradvīpa* in the Inscription of Mahānāman, II (*C.I.I.*, Vol. III).

III. Shape and Divisions of India

c5.s3.1

The ancient Indians had a very accurate knowledge of the true shape and size of their country. Alexander's informants gathered their knowledge from the people of the country and described India as a rhomboid or unequal quadrilateral in shape with the Indus on the west, the mountains on the north and the sea on the east and south.² In the *Mahābhārata*, the shape of India has been described as an equilateral triangle divided into four smaller equal triangles.³ Cunningham observes, ‘The shape corresponds very well with the general form of the country, if we extend the limits of India to Ghazni on the north-west, and fix the other two points of the triangle at Cape Comorin, and Sadiya in Assam’. (*C.A.G.I.*, p. 6.) That India was divided into nine portions was first pointed out by Parāśara and Varāhamihira. It was afterwards adopted by the authors of some of the *Purāṇas*.⁴ In the *Kūrmaniveśa* section the surface of India is made to conform to the convex shape of the upper shell of a tortoise ‘lying outspread and facing eastwards’. Some Pauranic passages suggest that the ancient Indians were acquainted with the four-fold conformation of India. This is also borne out by the early Greek accounts of the country. We learn from Strabo that Alexander caused the whole of the country to be described by men well acquainted with it. They were undoubtedly of Indian origin. Not long afterwards the Hellenistic ambassadors who were accredited to the court of the great Maurya kings at Pāṭaliputra also wrote accounts of India based partly on their own observations and partly on the information derived from the Indian sources. In the *Geography* of Ptolemy we find that the acute angle formed by the meeting of the two coasts of the Peninsula at the Cape Comorin, is changed to a single coast line running almost straight from the mouth of the Indus to the mouth of the Ganges.⁵ According to the early Buddhists, India is broad on the north whereas in the south it has the form of the front portion of a cart and is divided into seven equal parts.⁶ This shape of India corresponds to a great extent to the actual shape of the country which is broad on the north having the Himalayas extending from east to west and triangular towards the south. It agrees wonderfully with the description of the shape given by the Chinese author Fah-kai-lih-to. According to him the country is broad towards the north and narrow towards the south. The Chinese traveller, Hiuen Tsang, who visited India in the 7th century A.D., describes the shape of the country as a half-moon with the diameter or broadside to the north and the narrow end to the south. His travels were mainly confined to the north of India which may be said to resemble a half-moon with the Vindhyas as its base and the Himalayas spreading its two arms on two sides as the diameter. About the size of India Megasthenes and Deimachos consider the distance from the southern sea to the Caucasus to be over 20,000 stadia.⁷ According to Megasthenes the breadth of India at the shortest is 16,000 stadia and its length is at the narrowest 22,300 stadia.¹ The Sanskrit Buddhist texts give us no glimpse as to the size and shape of India.

c5.s3.2

² *C.A.G.I.*, p. 2.

c5.s3.3

³ *Ibid.*, p. 5.

c5.s3.4

⁴ *Ibid.*, pp. 6-7.

c5.s3.5

⁵ *Ibid.*, p. 9.

c5.s3.6

⁶ *Dīgha*, II, p. 235.

c5.s3.7

⁷ McCrindle, *Ancient India as described by Megasthenes and Arrian*, p. 49.

c5.s3.8

¹ McCrindle, *Ancient India as described by Megasthenes and Arrian*, p. 50.

c5.s3.9

We have five traditional divisions of India according to the early Indian texts. The *Kāvyamīmāṃsā* (p. 93) clearly states that the eastern country lies to the east of Benaras; to the south of Māhiṣmatī (identified with Māndhātā on the Narmadā) is the Deccan or the Dakṣiṇāpatha; to the west of Devasabhā is the western country; to the north of Pṛthudaka, (modern Pehoa, about 14 miles west of Thaneswar) is the northern country (Uttarāpatha), and the tract lying between the confluence of the Jumna and the Ganges is called the Antarvedī. By the time when the *Kāvya-mīmāṃsā* came to be written the Aryans had already outstripped the older limits of the Madhyadeśa, and Aryandom had extended up to Benaras.

c5.s3.10

As with the Brahmanical Aryans, so with the Buddhists, Āryāvarta to which Patañjali refers in his *Mahābhāṣya* (12. 4. 1, p. 244) is described in the Dharmasūtras and the Dharmaśāstras to have extended from the region where the river Sarasvatī disappears in the west, to the Black Forest in the east and from the Himalayas in the north to the Pāripātra in the south. Almost all the Brahmanical sources give a description of Madhyadeśa or Āryāvarta, the most important division of India. The Middle country was the cradle on which the Brahmanical Aryans or the Buddhists staged the entire drama of their career. The five divisions, as indicated in the Bhuvanakoṣa section of the Purāṇas, are identical with those given in the *Kāvyamīmāṃsā*. They are as follows:—
(a) Madhyadeśa (Middle Country),
(b) Udicya or Uttarāpatha (Northern India),
(c) Prācya (Eastern India),
(d) Dakṣiṇāpatha (Deccan), and
(e) Aparānta (Western India).

c5.s3.11.1

Pāṇini in his *Aṣṭādhyāyī* mentions Prācya-Bhāratadeśa (8. 3. 75). The boundaries of Madhyadeśa or Majjhimadesa have been referred to and explained in early Brahmanical and Buddhist texts. As early as the age of the Sūtras the country of the Aryans, which is practically identical with the country later on known as Madhyadeśa, is described in the *Dharmasūtra* of Baudhāyana as lying to the east of the region where the river Sarasvatī vanishes, to the west of the Kālakavana which is identified with a tract somewhere near Prayāga,² to the north of Pāripātra and to the south of the Himalayas³ as already pointed out. The eastern boundary thus excluded not only the country now known as Bengal but also Behar which in ancient times included the entire Magadha country. The *Dharmaśāstra* of Manu calls the Āryāvarta of the Sūtras to be the Madhyadeśa. He defines it as extending from the Himalayas in the north to the Vindhyas in the south and from Vinaśana in the west to Prayāga in the east.⁴ The Āryāvarta of the Sūtras and the Madhyadeśa of Manu are, according to the *Kāvyamīmāṃsā* (p. 93), known as Antarvedī which extends up to Benaras in the east. The eastern boundary of the Madhyadeśa gradually expanded itself with the progress of time so as to include places which acquired sanctity within the Brahmanical fold. The boundaries of the Buddhist Majjhimadesa as given in the *Mahāvagga* (Vol. V, pp.

c5.s3.11.2

12-13), may be described as having extended in the east to the town of Kajaṅgala (identified with Ka-chu-wen-ki-lo of Yuan Chwang) beyond which was the city of Mahāsāla; in the south-east to the river Salalavatī (Śarāvatī); in the south to the town of Śatakarṇika; in the west to the Brāhmaṇa district of Thūna (identified with Sthānīśvara); in the north to the Usīradhaja mountain (identified with Usīragiri, a mountain to the north of Kaṅkhal, Hardwar). The Divyāvadāna (pp. 21-22), however, extends the eastern boundary of the Majjhimadesa still further to the east so as to include Puṇḍravardhana which in ancient times included Varendra, roughly identical with north Bengal. The other boundaries as given in the Divyāvadāna are identical with those as in the Mahāvagga. Madhya-deśa, which is mentioned in the Belāva copper-plate of Bhojavarman and the Barrackpore copper-plate of Vijayasena (N. G. Majumdar, Inscriptions of Bengal, III, 16ff.), is, according to Aśvaghoṣa, said to have been situated between the Himalayas and the Pāripātra mountain which formed the southern boundary line of the Madhyadeśa (Saundaranandakāvya, II, v. 62). The four boundaries of the Uttarāpatha are nowhere mentioned in the Brahmanical or Buddhist texts. According to the Brahmanical tradition recorded in the Kāvyamīmāṃsā the Uttarāpatha or northern India lay to the western side of Pṛthudaka (Pṛthudakātparataḥ Uttarāpathaḥ).

c5.s3.11.3

The Brahmanical definition of Āryāvarta excludes the greater portion of the land of the Ṛgvedic Aryans, which, however, is included in the Uttarāpatha. The entire Indus Valley, which was the cradle of the Ṛgvedic culture and civilization, is included in the Uttarāpatha according to the Kāvyamīmāṃsā. The Dharmasūtras of Vasiṣṭha and Baudhāyana and the Dharmaśāstra of Manu point out that the Uttarāpatha lies to the west of the place where the river Sarasvatī disappears. The Buddhist northern division is also to be located to the west of the Brāhmaṇa district of Thūna or Thāneśwar. The Uttarāpatha mentioned in the Hāthigumphā Inscription of Khāravela probably signifies the region including Mathurā in its south-eastern extension up to Magadha. The Uttarāpatha may be supposed to have been originally a great trade-route—the northern high road, so to say, which extended from Sāvatthī to Takkasilā in Gandhāra. It is not at all improbable that the Uttarāpatha in Pali literature might have also signified the entire northern India from Aṅga in the east to Gandhāra in the north-west and from the Himalaya in the north to the Vindhyas in the south. Bāṇabhaṭṭa, the author of the Harṣacarita, seems to include within Uttarāpatha the western part of the Uttara Pradeśa, the Punjab and the North-Western Frontier Provinces of India and Pakistan.

c5.s3.12

² C.A.G.I., Intro., pp. xli and xli, f.n. 1.

c5.s3.13

³ Baudhāyana, I. 1, 2. 9; Vasiṣṭha, 1. 8.

c5.s3.14

⁴ *Himavad-Vindhyayor-madhyam yat prāk Vinaśanādapi pratyageva Prayāgāśca Madhyadeśaḥ.*

c5.s3.15

According to the Kāvyamīmāṃsā (93) the country lying to the west of Devasabhā was called the Paścāddeśa¹ or the western country. According to the Pali Sāsanavaṃsa (p. 11) Aparāntaka or western India lies to the west of the upper Irawady. Sir R. G. Bhandarkar points out that Aparānta was the northern Konkan whose capital was Surpāraka, modern Sopara. The western sea-board of India was called Aparāntaka or Aparāntika according to Bhagavanlal Indraji. Aparānta is often mentioned in the Mahābhārata (Bhīṣmaparva, IX. 335; Vanaparva, CCXVII. 7885-6; Śāntiparva, XLIX, 1780-82). According to the Mārkaṇḍeya Purāṇa (Ch. 58) Aparānta seems to have been located north of the Sindhu-Sauvīra country. According to D. R. Bhandarkar Ariake is Aparāntika. Aparānta is referred to in Aśoka’s Rock Edict V. It is also mentioned in Luders’ List No. 965. From the Nasik record of Gautamī Balaśrī we learn that her son extended his sway over Aparānta which was reconquered later by Śaka satrap Rudradāman of Western India as evidenced by the Junāgaḍh Rock Inscription of 150 A.D. For further details vide Law, *Tribes in Ancient India*, p. 392; Law, *Indological Studies*, I, 53.

c5.s3.16

¹ Devasabhāyaḥ parataḥ Paścāddeśaḥ, tatra Devasabhā-Surāṣṭra Daseraka-Travana-Bhrigukaccha Kacchīya-Anarta brāhmaṇavāha Yavana-prabhṛtayo janapadāḥ.

c5.s3.17

Dakṣiṇāpatha is the region lying to the south of Māhiṣmatī identified with Māndhātā according to the *Kāvyamīmāṃsā*, as already pointed out. Some hold that it is situated between the Bridge of Rāma and the river Narmadā (Hultzsch, *S.I.I.*, I, p. 58; cf. Fleet, *I.A.*, VII, 245). The *Dharmasūtras* testify to the fact that Dakṣiṇāpatha lay to the south of Pāripātra, generally identified with a portion of the Vindhyas. The *Mahāvagga* of the *Vinaya Piṭaka* and the *Divyāvadāna* seem to record that the Dakṣiṇajanapada lay to the south of the town of Śatakarṇika. Buddhaghosa, the celebrated Buddhist commentator, defines Dakṣiṇāpatha or the Deccan as the tract of land lying to the south of the Ganges (*Sumaṅgalavilāsinī*, I, 265). The whole tract of land lying to the south of the Ganges and to the north of the Godāvarī is known as Dakṣiṇāpatha according to the *Suttanipāta* (Prologue of Bk. V; *Vinaya-Mahāvagga*, V, 13; *Vinaya-Cullavagga*, XII, 1). The Sanskrit Buddhist texts refer to Dakṣiṇāpatha as having extended southwards beyond the Śarāvatī river and the Pāripātra mountain.

c5.s3.18

The Damiḷas who had two settlements on both sides of the Ganges are identified with the Tamils. They were warlike, and the island of Laṅkā was very much troubled by them from time to time. They are described as uncultured (*anariyā*). ‘Might is right’ was their policy which they rigidly followed, with the result that they were defeated and mercilessly massacred in almost all the battles with the Ceylonese (*Mahāvaṃsaṭīkā*, 482; Law, *Tribes in Ancient India*, 168ff.; Law, *Geographical Essays*, Ch. IV). They were disrespectful to the Buddhist Stūpas (*Mahāvaṃsa-Ṭīkā*, 447).

c5.s3.19

The Prācya or the eastern country lay to the east of the Madhyadeśa, but as the eastern boundary of the Madhyadeśa changed from time to time, the western boundary of the Prācya country consequently diminished. According to the *Dharmasūtras* the eastern country lay to the east of Prayāga. The *Kāvyamīmāṃsā* points out that it was to the east of Benaras, while according to the commentary on the Vātsyāyana *sūtra* it lay to the east of Aṅga. The western boundary of the Pūrvadeśa shrinked still more and extended to Kajaṅgala according to the *Vinaya Mahāvagga*, or to Puṇḍravardhana according to the *Divyāvadāna*.

c5.s3.20

The Sanskrit Buddhist texts refer to the three divisions of India, namely, Madhyadeśa, Uttarāpatha and Dakṣiṇāpatha. Pāṇini refers to Uttarāpatha in his *Aṣṭādhyāyī* (5. 1. 77). Patañjali also mentions it in his *Mahābhāṣya*. Daṇḍin in his *Kāvyādarśa* (I. 60; I. 80) refers to the people of Dākṣiṇātya and Adākṣiṇātya. The last two divisions are mentioned in name only; there is no defining of their boundaries nor is there any description of the countries or regions that constitute the divisions. Two other divisions, namely, the Aparānta or western and the Prācya or eastern are not referred to even in name, but are suggested by the boundary of the Madhyadeśa as given in the *Divyāvadāna*.

First 96 of 636 passages. Read on

Linked texts (114)