Archaeology and identity of the first Buddhists

There is neither history nor archaeology for Buddhism in the period claimed for its founder, Siddhartha Gautama, that is, ca. 563 to 483 BCE. This, despite claims to the contrary.

Conclusion: towards an archaeology of Buddhism
At the outset of this chapter, it was stated that the main aim was to question many of the traditionally accepted generalisations and typologies of Buddhist archaeology and to provide a basis from which a new typology of Buddhist might be created. It has been demonstrated that there is no contemporary evidence of the individual known as the Buddha, and that even his image has no historical relevance as the first examples were produced centuries after his death.
– Archaeology and world religion by Timothy Insoll (Routledge, 2001)

Studies in the last decade or so have begun to offer a view of the history and archaeology of Buddhism that is more modern and less ‘Protestant’ than that of the first (mainly British and German) archaeologists of 19th-century.

Right: the Buddha, in the Greco-Buddhist style for Apollo, 1st-2nd century CE, Greco-India (Modern Pakistan). (Standing Buddha. Tokyo National Museum).

Doctrinal developments and cultic practices

Inscriptional evidence can provide a balance to the literary/canonical accounts of doctrinal developments within Buddhism, and not infrequently presents a picture which casts doubt on prevailing views derived from the latter sources. The development of the Mahayana as an independent sect, for example, appears on the basis of epigraphic sources to have been considerably later than received opinion would have it.

Conversely, concepts such as the transfer of merit which are traditionally associated with the Mahayana are found to be prevalent in pre-Mahayana or “Hinayana” inscriptions.

The resolution of such apparent conflicts of evidence is no simple matter, but there can be no question that in Buddhological studies as a whole the testimony of the inscriptions has not generally been given the weight it merits, and that the entire field of the history of Buddhism, which has traditionally been dominated by a strongly text-oriented approach, must be reexamined in its light.

The studies of P.. Lamotte and more recently of G. Schopen have opened the door to this more pragmatic approach, but much more remains to be done; in the words of the latter scholar, “This perfunctory preference for formal literary sources – which is quite common in historical works on Indian Buddhism – can only result in ‘histories of Buddhism’ which have little relationship to what practicing Buddhists actually did.”
– Indian epigraphy: a guide to the study of inscriptions in Sanskrit, Prakrit, and the other Indo-Aryan languages, by Richard Salomon (Oxford University Press US, 1998)

Buddhism begins in Greco-India as Greco-Indian and its first texts appear in the Greco-Roman-Indian period. In The language of Buddhist archaeology we see how it is a development of Greco-India. Buddha first appears in the Greco-Roman-Indian period.

Talks given  by Victor Gunasekara to the Diggings Club at the Brisbane Museum  in 2002 on ‘The Buddhist Archaeology of India‘ provide an overview of excavations:

Sanchi as a Prime Archaeological Site: Archaeological Monuments – The earliest monastery (listed as No. 51) seems to date from the 2nd century BCE…

Lars Fogelin’s Archaeology of Early Buddhism is focused on the archaeological investigations of the Thotlakonda monastery, an Early Buddhist monastery located on the eastern coast of India in Andhra Pradesh overlooking the Bay of Bengal.

Roman coins at Thotlakonda monastery

The monastery ruins were excavated between 1987 and 1991 by the Andhra Pradesh Department of Archaeology and Museums. Fogelin conducted archaeological survey of the region around Thotlakonda over several months between November 2000 and March 2002.

Thotlakonda was occupied by about 65 monks, more or less, between the 3rd century BCE to about 200 CE.

The telugu name Thotlakonda derived from the presence of a number of a rock-cut throughs hewn in the bed rock of the hillock. Thotlakonda was well within the influence of ancient Kalinga region which was an important source of dissemination of Buddhist culture to Srilanka and various parts of south-east Asia. It provides an insight into the process of trans-oceanic diffusion of Indian culture, especially Buddhism.

The excavations reveal Satavahana lead and Roman silver coins indicating foreign trade – a copper pot consecrated in the stupa was found along with Roman coins; terracotta tiles stucco decorative pieces, sculptured panels miniature stupa models in stone, Buddha padas etc; were also found. The excavations also yielded 12 Brahmi Label inscriptions. Thotlakonda witnessed peak activity between 2nd Century BCE and the 2nd Century CE owing to brisk Roman trade and religious missions sent abroad.

The lofty stupas shining during the day with their light lime plaster and with rows of wick lamps during nights might have served as guiding landmarks of Nautical Commuters.

Hinayana Buddhism appears to have been practiced here which involved worship of Gautama Buddha through symbols like Pudukas and other material remains and not in human form. Thotlakonda declined by the end of 3rd Century CE. Scholarly opinion is that this decline could be due to the rise of Hinduism and decline in maritime trade.

The first Buddhists

If the legend of Siddhartha Gautama has any substance, despite the lack of either archaeology or history, then where might he be found? Who could he have been?

Right: Ernst Emil Herzfeld (July 23, 1879–January 20, 1948) German archaeologist and Iranologist.

A possible answer comes from Dr Ranajit Pal, in his Gotama, Zoroaster and Sariputta in the Persepolis Tablets – a prince of Persia:

The inscribed Persepolis Fortification tablets are one of the most authentic set of documents in world history. Due to the efforts of R. T. Hallock, W. Hinz and others, the tablets, which date from 509 to 494 B.C., have provided rich historical data…A careful study not only indicates the presence of Buddhism in Iran but also sheds light on the elusive Zoroaster…

It is stunning to realize that BatiÅÅa or UpatiÅŝa (PF 1129, PF1570 and PF1942) was none other than the great Åariputta, author of the famous commentary Niddesa and one of the closest associates of Gotama Buddha. It is just possible that he is the same as Umaya.

The title ŝaramana of some officials in the tablets points to a link with Buddhist history as the Buddhist were later called Shramanas. The ubiquitous Åœudda-Yauda-ŝaramana (or Åœudda-Yauda-Damana) now turns out to be Åœuddhodana, father of Gotama Buddha. Åœedda-ŝaramana of tablets is Åœedda-Arta or Siddhartha Gotama himself who was the same as Gaumata. Incidentally Gotama’s father and all his uncles had Dana-names and Al-beruni gave his name as Buddho-dana. This reveals his kinship with Daniel the Jew. Other names in the tablets such as Yaŝudda, Karaŝna etc. rubbishes the Nepalese origin theory of Fuhrer. In fact the Elamite scribes who wrote the tablets can be seen as half-Indians; Rama (Rim-Sin) was called an Elamite in the Sumerian texts.

For most writers Zoroastrianism was a purely Persian and Central Asian phenomenon while Buddhism pertained to the Indians. The confusion in the history of Zoroaster can be seen from that while Boyce places him around 1700-1500 B.C., E. Herzfeld, T. C. Young Jr. and J. Duchesne-Guillemin put his date in the 6th century B.C. Incidentally this coincides with the rise of Buddhism and as both the religions were similar heresies against old Vedic type religions, there is the possibility of a link. At Merv and other sites Zoroastrian and Buddhist artifacts are found side by side. M. Boyce writes,

Another name attested on the Elamite tablets, and elsewhere in Aramaic script, is DÄmidÄta. There is no dispute that this means ‘Created (or given) by the Creator’, but it is uncertain to which divinity it refers. It seems probable that in ancient times it meant Varuna, and so this may well be yet another traditional name in honour of ‘the Baga’ – the god who in Iran was never named. In later times, however, the adjective was understood to refer to Ahuramazda.

As ‘dat’ means ‘law’, DÄmidÄta may not have meant ‘Created by the Creator’. The absence of Zoroaster’s name in the tablets does not construe that Zoroaster the person is absent as he had other names. According to Herzfeld, his adversary Graehma was Gaumata who can be seen to be the same as Gotama. In the Indian texts Gotama’s adversary is Devadatta which finally leads one to Damidadda of the tablets. Damidadda who was the same as Bagadada, was Zoroaster. The Pali texts indicate that Devadatta founded a parallel religious sect.

Left: Coin of Shapur I the Great, Fire altar with two stylized attendants.

The first tangible evidence of Buddhism appears with the Edicts of Ashoka, inscribed on stones and pillars, that latter of which, in The archaeology of Alexander the Great: 2. Altars, I describe as probable Zoroastrian fire altars taken eastwards by the Macedonian army of Alexander.

Right: Ashokan Pillar at Vaishali

Ashoka is known as Piyadasi (in Pali) or Priyadarshi (in Sanskrit) meaning “good looking” or “favored by the gods with good blessing”

All men are my children. I am like a father to them. As every father desires the good and the happiness of his children, I wish that all men should be happy always.
– Edict of Ashoka

In Archaeology of good governance, I describe how these Edicts seem based upon the model set by Cyrus the Great.

Emissaries of Ashoka, such as Dharmaraksita, are described in Pali sources as leading Greek (Yona) Buddhist monks, active in spreading Buddhism (the Mahavamsa, XII[2]). It was Greeks who represented Ashoka and his new-found faith within the Hellenistic courts of the Greco-Roman world.

This ruler is known by various names, though who he is beyond these names and Edicts, is unknown. Ranajit Pal,  supported by scholars such as Thomas McEvilley, identifies him as a Seleucid satrap of Bactria, Diodotus I Soter (Saviour) (ca. 285 – ca. 239 BCE). Diodotus rebelled against Seleucid rule soon after the death of Antiochus II in c. 255 or 246 BCE and wrested independence for his territory.

Gold coin of Diodotus c. 250 BCE. The Greek inscription reads “(of) King Diodotus”.

This event is recorded by Trogus, Prol. 41; Justin xli. 4, 5, where he is called Theodotus; Strabo xi. 515). His power seems to have extended over the neighbouring provinces. Diodotus was a contemporary, a neighbour, and probably an ally of Andragoras, the satrap of Parthia, who at about the same time also proclaimed independence from the Seleucid Empire.

Diodotus, the governor of the thousand cities of Bactria (Latin: “Theodotus, mille urbium Bactrianarum praefectus”), defected and proclaimed himself king; all the other people of the Orient followed his example and seceded from the Macedonians.
– Justin, XLI,4

The new kingdom was to further grow in power and engage into territorial expansion to the east and the west:

The Greeks who caused Bactria to revolt grew so powerful on account of the fertility of the country that they became masters, not only of Ariana, but also of India, as Apollodorus of Artemita says: and more tribes were subdued by them than by Alexander… Their cities were Bactra (also called Zariaspa, through which flows a river bearing the same name and emptying into the Oxus), and Darapsa, and several others. Among these was Eucratidia, which was named after its ruler.
– Strabo, XI.XI.I

Some of the edicts describe the efforts made by him to propagate the Buddhist faith throughout the Hellenistic world, which at that time formed an uninterrupted continuum from the borders of India to Greece.

The conquest by Dharma has been won here, on the borders, and even six hundred yojanas (5,400–9,600 km) away, where the Greek king Antiochos rules, beyond there where the four kings named Ptolemy, Antigonos, Magas and Alexander rule, likewise in the south among the Cholas, the Pandyas, and as far as Tamraparni (Sri Lanka).
– 13th Rock Edict, S. Dhammika

The edicts are inscribed in the Greek language as well as in Aramaic. One of them, found in Kandahar, advocates the adoption of “piety” (using the Greek term eusebeia for Dharma) to the Greek community:

Ten years (of reign) having been completed, King Piodasses made known (the doctrine of) piety (Greek: eusebeia) to men; and from this moment he has made men more pious, and everything thrives throughout the whole world.
– Trans. from the Greek original by G.P. Carratelli

In the 2nd century CE, Clement of Alexandria recognized Bactrian Buddhists and Indian gymnosophists for their influence on Greek thought:

Thus philosophy, a thing of the highest utility, flourished in antiquity among the barbarians, shedding its light over the nations. And afterwards it came to Greece. First in its ranks were the prophets of the Egyptians; and the Chaldeans among the Assyrians; and the Druids among the Gauls; and the ?ramanas among the Bactrians; and the philosophers of the Celts; and the Magi of the Persians, who foretold the Saviour’s birth, and came into the land of Judea guided by a star. The Indian gymnosophists are also in the number, and the other barbarian philosophers. And of these there are two classes, some of them called ?ramanas, and others Brahmins.”
– Clement of Alexandria The Stromata, or Miscellanies Book I, Chapter XV

Hellenisation

It appears easy for many to forget, when reading the history of Egypt, Judea, Persia and Northwest India in Classical Antiquity, that the rulers for much of this period were Greek and even after the passing of their rule, the dominant culture was Greek. Some 70 cities were named Alexandria, scattered like pearls to form the immensely-valuable trading routes between West and East.

Many of the stylistic elements in the representations of the Buddha point to Greek influence: the Greek himation (a light toga-like wavy robe covering both shoulders: Buddhist characters are always represented with a dhoti loincloth before this innovation), the halo, the contrapposto stance of the upright figures, the stylised Mediterranean curly hair and top-knot apparently derived from the style of the Belvedere Apollo, and the measured quality of the faces, all rendered with strong artistic realism. Some of the standing Buddhas were sculpted using the specific Greek technique of making the hands and sometimes the feet in marble to increase the realistic effect, and the rest of the body in another material.

Demetrius I himself may have been the prototype for the image of the Buddha.

The earliest Hellenistic statues of the Buddha portray him in a style reminiscent of a king, where the traditional Buddhist symbols (the Dharma wheel, the empty throne, the Bodhi tree, the lions) are absent. Demetrius may have been deified, and the first Hellenistic statues of the Buddha we know may be representations of the idealized Greek king, princely, yet friendly, protective and open to Indian culture.

Left: Heracles depiction of Vajrapani as the protector of the Buddha. British Museum.

Another characteristic of Demetrius is associated to the Buddha: they share the same protector deity. In Gandharan art, the Buddha is often shown under the protection of the Greek god Herakles, standing with his club (and later a diamond rod) resting over his arm. This unusual representation of Herakles is the same as the one on the back of Demetrius’ coins, and it is exclusively associated to him (and his son Euthydemus II), seen only on the back of his coins.

Right: Winged Atalante, Gandhara, Tokyo National Museum

Other Greek deities abundantly used in Greco-Buddhist art are representation of Atlas, and the Greek wind god Boreas. Atlas in particular tends to be involved as a sustaining elements in Buddhist architectural elements. Boreas became the Japanese wind god Fujin through the Greco-Buddhist Wardo. The mother deity Hariti was inspired by Tyche.

Particularly under the Kushans, there are also numerous representations of richly adorned, princely Bodhisattvas all in a very realistic Greco-Buddhist style.

A recent interpretation of the archaeology of pilgrimage sites related to the life of Gautama Buddha is that the monks believed that Buddha continued to be present – long after his earthly passing – in these places. The monks believed that when they died, within the boundary of the site, they would be reborn, in heaven. (Burial Ad Sanctos and the Physical Presence of the Buddha in Early Indian Buddhism: A study in the Archaeology of Religions, Bones, stones, and Buddhist monks: collected papers on the archaeology, epigraphy, and texts of monastic Buddhism in India, Volume 2 of Studies in the Buddhist traditions, by Gregory Schopen, University of Hawaii Press, 1997.)

The paper suggests that this belief derives from pre-Ashoken tradition: pre-Buddhist, before Greco-India and dates the earliest stupas as second century BCE.

These minds of Antiquity can seem impenetrable to the modern. The cultures of Greece, Rome, Judea and Egypt were each influenced in their own ways by Greco-India and this was not one-way, as we see in Buddhism.

Related posts:

1. The Zen of Buddhist archaeology: earliest texts
2. The language of Buddhist archaeology
3. Archaeology of a magical, distant land
4. Archaeology of faith and trade
5. Archaeology of good governance
6. Greco-India: an introduction
7. Helios and Selene in Alexandria on the Oxus
8. Private: An army of divine men and the secret army of Mithras
9. Archaeology of a first-century wizard
10. Mani and Authorship of the Canonical Gospels