Magadha, Palibothra and Jones' Blunder

       Indology was fostered in the chrysalis of the British Raj. In the train of the conquerors were also scholars and noble benefactors who laid down their lives for the study of India's past. Sir William Jones was an 18th century Jurist and Orientalist whose founding of the the Asiatic Society of Bengal in 1784 (with Charles Wilkins) was a landmark in Oriental studies. Jones, the chief justice at

the Calcutta Supreme Court, was a prolific linguist and and studied the ancient Indian Law books in Sanskrit. His translation of the drama Shakuntala of Kalidasa created a worldwide stir and highlighted the literary heritage of ancient India. Jones also observed that Sanskrit was related to classical Greek and Latin and that they were linked to Gothic, Celtic and Persian. He is famous for the observation that Sandrocottus of the Greek writers was Chandragupta.

        However, Jones was unaware that many famous cities in modern India had older counterparts in Iran-Baluchistan and his idea that Patna in eastern India was  Megasthenes' Palibothra was a fatal error that has no archaeological basis. Martin Carver and Dilip Chakrabarti claim that Jones' idea is proved beyond doubt by reports of the Chinese travellers, but this contradicts the basic tenets of archaeology as these were written a thousand years later and are not valid documents for Mauryan history. That there was an India within modern Iran was suspected by great scholars like A. Toynbee, Sir Aurel Stein and Sir Charles Eliot. Sadly, writers such as R. Thapar   

Patali near Jiroft was Pataliputra, capital of Chandragupta/Orontobates

and D. Chakrabarti overlook that Herodotus (Herod., I, 125) indicates that some of Cyrus' tribes were in fact Indians.

 "The rest of the Persian tribes are the following: the Panthialaeans, the Derusiaeans, the Germanians, who are engaged in husbandry, the Daans, the Mardians, the Dropicans and the Sagartians".

      The Derusiaeans were related to the Druhyus and and the Panthialaeans are the Panchalas of a later era. The Sagartians seem to be related to the people of King Sagara who were linked to Sogar in the Gulf area which was 'India'. The Dropicans echo Drupada. The Daans remind one of Gotama Buddha whose name, according to Al-beruni, was Buddho-dana.

       Jones' view that the crucial state of Magadha was Bihar is baseless. The first epigraphic mention of Magadha is an Asokan edict in faraway Bairat and there is no warrant for an ancient Magadha in Bihar. Magan in west-Baluchistan must have been the early Magadha. Manu of the RigVeda was Manium of Magan (Mannu according to Poebel). The Sumerian records always cite Dilmun, Magan, and Melukhkha together which implies that they probably formed a confederation. Manu was the king of Dilmun, Magan and Melukhkha. Also, Rama was Ram-Sin (Rim-Sin) of Larsa, ruler of Sumer, Elam and Indus-Saraswati. The true hinterland of Sanskrit was not only the Indus-Saraswati area but also Magan. Although the Sishunagas or Kakavarnas of Magadha have no trace in Patna, the In-Susinaks and the Kak-kings like Kak-Siwe-Tempti are well known from Magan.

     Great thinkers such as A. Coomaraswamy had no qualms to write that little is known about the origins of Chandragupta. Appian wrote that Androcottos the Indian king dwelt near the Indus, not Patna where R. Thapar places him. Androcottos was Sandrocottos or Chandragupta Maurya (Moeris of the classical writers) who was being chased by Alexander through Gedrosia. The king later rejoiced his 'victory over the Indians' at Kohnouj near  Patali (28°19'58" La., 57°52'16" Lo.). Patali in the Jiroft area dates from the 4th millennium B.C. and must have been Pataliputra, Moeris' capital. Jiroft, or Djiroft, was Dvaravati, capital of Kamboja. Nearby cities like Multan, Kohnouj, Konarak, etc. show that this was the true India of

The Palace of Palibothra may be under the ruins of Patali (Courtesy CHN )

yore. Excavations here may unearth the lost Royal Palace of Palibothra and Alexander's relics.

        Although a Palibothra at Patna crippled Indology by banishing figures like Chandragupta, Rama and Manu, it became very popular as it brought Palibothra near the Imperial capital Calcutta. However, a high price had to be paid for the boon. The true geography of ancient of India became obscure. The great archaeologist A. Ghosh criticised Cunningham's unscientific approach in the identification of ancient cities like Vaishali, Sravasti etc. as these were based on local tradition, not genuine archaeological finds of Buddha's era. It is shocking that apart from Gotama's mortal remains, which were brought from the North-west, no Indian Buddhist relic is older than the third century B.C. To circumvent this Dr. A. Fuhrer was let loose by the British colonial administration and he established forgery as an important tool in Nepalese and Indian archaeology. Gotama's birthplace was hijacked to Nepal and this has now been legitimised by a United Nations stamp. The so-called Rama Janmabhumi at Ayodhya in Eastern India and the Rama setu are also upshots of Jones' error which has corrupted the basis of Indian archaeology. B. B. Lal's identification of a site near Delhi as Hastinapura of the Mahabharata has also been doubted by A. Ghosh and many others.

     Chronology became a bane of Indology. Despite a century of research and two London conferences, the date of Kanishka is still uncertain. Unaware of Jones' error, R. L. Basham and R. Thapar have reduced Rama into a minor tribal king bloated up by poetic fancy. Gotama came down to the 5-4th century BC and Kalidasa, who used to be dated to the 2nd century BC, has been labelled as a Gupta age poet. Even the Bhagavad-Gita, ascribed to the 2nd century B.C. by J. L. Brockington and others, has been dragged down to the Gupta age. 

      Jones had a high regard for Indian culture and his mistake was unintended, but as T. A. Phelps writes, there were others in the colonial government who aided a thug, Dr. A. Führer who moved pillars and other relics and produced fake inscriptions to locate Gotama's birth-place in Nepal. The great Buddhist scholar B. M. Barua dismissed Chandragupta of Patna and Vincent Smith strongly criticised Führer. Dilip Chakrabarti, author of a book on Indian Archaeology, mentions some lapses of the colonial era but whitewashes the atrocious frauds in Nepalese archaeology. M. Witzel, who claims special familiarity with Nepal, also suffers from visions of a Nepalese Gotama and makes a spirited attempt to defend Palibothra at Patna.

       Jones' blunder and Führer's skullduggery have severely distorted world history but once the heap of untruth accumulated over the centuries is cleared, a renascent Non-Jonesian Indology emerges which ushers in sweeping changes in world history. In the Buddhist texts Magadhese is said to be the earliest language which is absurd in case of a Magadha in Bihar but if the scenario is shifted to Baluchistan-Kerman the situation changes radically. This is the area where some of the oldest scripts and languages of humankind have been found. A Magadha in the North-West also solves some long-standing puzzles in the history of the Pali language.    

      The new Non-Jonesian Indology reveals a totally unknown Zoroaster and exposes grave flaws in the mammoth Encyclopedia Iranica which underrates the Indian element in Persian history and omits the Pali and Sanskrit sources. No sane discourse on world history can ignore the priceless evidence of the Indian texts.

Colonial Indology and the Blunder of Jones

Alexander The Great In A Wider World

     The Jonesian bag of lies concerning Palibothra has sullied world history. Even after more than two millennia, the spectacle of the party of the Greeks and Macedonians streaming out of Europe and risking their lives across continents and seas to mingle with the exotic peoples of Africa and Asia appears stupefying. Alexander belongs to the whole world and his history has to written from a world perspective. He was

aware of his unique role in history and had expert writers in his train to chronicle his mission yet there is little about him that is beyond doubt. This is due to two factors, the inability to stamp out the lies spread by his own generals who succeeded him (and probably poisoned him), and more importantly, bungling in geography.

     If Jones' idea is rejected, Patali in Karman-Baluchi-stan becomes Palibothra where Alexander had come. Only Justin wrote that he had defeated the Prasii, and though this is generally ignored, it not only seems to be true but also calls for a drastic re-assessment of the history Alexander. In the new geographical scenario, Moeris, Orontobates, Sashigupta and Orontes all appear to be aliases of Chandragupta Maurya who was once an ally but later turned a foe. From the fact that Chandragupta's rise coincides with the fall of Alexander it is judicious to suspect a link between the two. This is hinted by the crucial fact that Diodotus of Erythrae, co-editor of Alexander's diary, was in fact none other than Chandragupta. There is, therefore, ample ground to suspect that he had a hand in the poisoning of Alexander.

      Written history is at times an imperfect mirror of truth. In Alexander's history, Orontobates is usually relegated to footnotes yet it was together with him that Alexander created history. He fought against Alexander in the battle of Gaugamela but there is much more to his history than can be gleaned from a literal interpretation of Arrian, Plutarch or Diodorus. The crucial fact that he was a close confidant has escaped the notice of all. He was a gifted and multi-faceted personality who masqueraded under many aliases. Diodotus of Erythrae, Mithridates-II and Andragoras were also names of Moeris. Arrian wrote that Orontobates who was present in Darius' army at Gaugamela hailed from the Persian Gulf area. From Diodorus' report it turns out that Tiridates who handed over the Persian treasury at Persepolis was also from the gulf area. From a careful study of Mauryan history it can be seen that Tiridates was the same as Orontobates/ Sashigupta. There can be no doubt that Alexander considered chicanery to be a valid instrument of war and diplomacy. The great Hellenic scholar Sir William Tarn noted that Alexander had no control over Armenia ruled by Orontes. This was Chandragupta who had retreated from Prasii.

      The Alexander-Orontobates saga has, in fact, a cinematic touch. It is stunning to realize there is a Princess between Alexander and Orontobates. It is very likely that Ada II, daughter of Pixodarus, whom Alexander once wanted to marry, became the wife of Orontobates. Thus Alexander must have known him long before the expedition. It is very likely that Sashigupta joined hands with the generals to poison the king.

      Tarn wrote that Alexander gave a call for Brotherhood of Man at the Opis Banquet but this has been disputed by E. Badian whose arguments satisfied a large section of the academic community. However, there there are grave flaws in Badian's standpoint. Although Tarn-bashing has now become a favourite sport, he had greater insight into the eastern civilizations. Badian on the other hand, relied solely on the Greco-Roman reports and totally missed that Alexander sat on a throne that was probably adorned by Gomata who was the same as Gotama Buddha (see infra).

      Due to the heinous Nepalese forgeries the crucial hint hidden in the name Alexandria Prophthasia has been missed by all. Prophthasia was Babil or Kapil(avastu), an abode of Prophets like Gotama Buddha, Zoroaster and Abraham. This adds a totally new dimension to his call for amity which is the central plank of Buddhism.

        Regrettably, the Harvard professor also missed the very significant fact that the Opis Banquet was was held in the month of Mithra and probably on the day of Mithra when the traditional feast of Mithra is held. It is common knowledge that an important motto of the Mithraists was Brotherhood. Alexander's call for Homonoia was later followed up by Asoka who was the same as Diodotus-I.

      The paucity of direct archaeological proof of Alexander's expedition has disturbed many scholars. Great archaeologists like Sir Mortimer Wheeler were baffled by the absence of any trace of the 12 grand altars which he had set up to commemorate his arrival in India. However, a careful study shows that at least some of these pillars were re-inscribed by Asoka.

        A contemporary scholar writes,

It is nonsense to report on the politicians without informing the reader on the philosophers with whom they studied and consorted, or to discuss Jesus without reference to the politics of Roman Judaea.

       Alexander studied under Aristotle, the greatest philosopher of the day, and the stamp of Aristotle can be clearly seen in many of his actions but as Mary Renault wrote, in his later years he was also greatly influenced by the Indian sage Calanus. But who really was this sage? It can seen that Calanus was Asvaghosha (Sphines of Plutarch or Aspines). Alexander's relationship with this great philosopher and playwright invalidates the imputations of E. Badian and P. Green that he was some kind of a conquistador.

      Sadly, due to Jones' error, it has been overlooked that the locale of the drama Mudrarakshasa was not Patna but the North-west where Alexander had come. It seems that Chandanadasa of the drama is a ghost of Alexander. The respectful treatment of Chandanadasa in the drama shows that Alexander was very different from the the villain he has been painted as by Badian and Green. The fact that the mother of Darius III courted death by refusing food after hearing about Alexander's death and that the Prasiians treated his altars with great respect shows that Badian was wrong.

        Groomed by such great thinkers as Aristotle and Asvaghosha, Alexander embodied not only Western science but also Eastern religiosity - he had become an Anagarika (world-citizen) in the true sense of the term. His call for Homonoia (Samanvaya in Sanskrit) was echoed by Moeris' grandson Diodotus-I, and had a momentous impact on history. R. Stoneman writes, (Alexander The Great, p. 23),

With Greek resistance annihilated, Alexander was ready to turn his attention to the crusade against Persia which had been his father's ambition and was to become the dominant motif of his own career. Why did he undertake this?

He was short of money and the lure of Persian gold was surely a motivating factor, but he could have consolidated the gains after Persepolis and continued to rule as many of his predecessors had done. When Permenio, his able lieutenant, asked him to accept Darius-III's offer for peace he declined. Badian ascribed this to his thirst for absolute power but this is short-sighted. He had no craving for money and except for occasional bouts of drinking, had temperate habits. Arrian wrote about his yearning for the unknown (Gk. pothos) which provides a valuable insight into his psyche.

      J. G. Droysen wrote with great insight that during the Hellenistic era Greek and Eastern cultures mingled in the lands conquered by Alexander to form the cultural milieu which became the crucible of Christianity. If almost no words are commensurate for the description Diodotus-I/Asoka, the same is true of Alexander the Great who swept away all, as it were. His impact on the civilizations of both the East and the West is immense.

     The Nobel laureate Wole Soyinka has highlighted the exploitive role of both Christianity and Islam in Africa but notwithstanding the bloodletting it caused, Alexander's expedition had a very different outcome. Ignoring the vast Indian literature and adopting an overly Europeanist view, writers like E. Badian and A. B. Bosworth have failed to grasp why he was called 'Great' even by the Romans, centuries later. The fact that he was so dearly loved by his army men also clashes with Badian's characterisation of Alexander as a brutal and bloodthirsty maniac whose personal ambition was unlimited. Despite some lapses, Tarn, who had a clearer view of the East, appears to have been far closer to the truth.

Alexander's Dream of a United Nations

Discovery of Alexander's Missing Altar

Alexander's Mission and World Peace

Alexander the Great in a Sanskrit Drama
Sashigupta and the Poisoning of Alexander

A Letter to Alexander From an Indian Sage

Gotama Buddha and the Nepalese Bluff in World History

       Buddhism literally throbs with the history and geography of India. The archaeological finds from Sanchi, Ajanta, Bharhut, Amaravati, Mathura and the Gandhara area (now in Pakistan and Afghanistan) firmly link India with the rise of Buddhism. The Indian tradition of tolerance and moderation goes beyond the sixth century B.C. and the roots of primitive Buddhism can be traced to the Indus-Saraswati era, yet there is much more to the history of early Buddhism than meets the eye. In fact, Buddhist history is a strange mix of facts and fiction that baffles the discerning reader. Historians such as H. C. Raychaudhuri and R. Thapar boldly affirm that Gotama belonged to the Nepal area but sadly there is no firm archaeological basis at all for this conjecture.

       Nepal is a beautiful country but a careful study reveals that Gotama of Nepal is a nauseating fraud. Absolutely nothing in the literature, art, history or archaeology of early Nepal has the faintest hint of Buddhism. The British researcher T. A. Phelps has exposed the widespread forgeries of the thug Dr. A. Führer who moved pillars and other relics and produced fake inscriptions to locate Gotama's birthplace in Nepal. Gotama was a prince but after he was abandoned in the wilderness of the Terai by Führer, his history went to pieces. C. Humphreys points to the stark archaeological scenario in Nepal,

The Lumbini gardens, where Gotama was born, lie in the difficult Nepal Terai, and Kusinara, where the Buddha passed away, has little to show'.

   The renowned Belgian scholar E. Conze also flatly dismisses the fanciful text-based accounts,

To the modern historian, Buddhism is a phenomenon which must exasperate him at every point and we can only say in extenuation that this religion was not founded for the benefit of the historians. Not only is there an almost complete absence of hard facts about its history in India; not only is the date, authorship and geographical provenance of the overwhelming majority of the documents almost entirely unknown, ......

     Another famous Belgian expert, E. Lamotte, held that if miracles are sieved out from Buddhist legend, only a travesty remains. Miracles apart, the flaws lay not so much in the legends as in the faulty analytical methods. It is overlooked that in the 6th century B.C. 'India' extended up to southeast Iran and that Gotama belongs to Seistan-Baluchistan, not Nepal. The American archaeologist D. B. Spooner ignored Nepal and wrote in 1915 that Chandragupta and Gotama were from Iran. He was branded as an upstart by the Jonesian lobby and textual hearsay continued to be paraded as sober history. Fortunately, after rejecting the Nepalese frauds, Gotama can be seen to be related to Rama and Darius-I.

       There is perhaps little in ancient Indian sculpture that matches the Imperial majesty of Persepolis but

The art of Sanchi harks back to Kapilavastu or Eden

the pathos of Buddhist art is peerless. Indebted as it was to the Greek genius for its inception, the art of Ajanta, Sanchi, Bharhut and Gandhara is soul-searching and universal. Buddhism and Hellenism knew no barriers of caste or nationality but much that has been written about the Greek or Roman inspiration of Gandhara art has fallen flat because it has been missed that its first two patrons were Alexander and Diodotus-I (Asoka) and that Kapilavastu was not in Nepal or U.P. Sir William Tarn wrote,

'Alexander indirectly created Asoka’s empire and enabled the spread of Buddhism' .

Indeed, as already shown, Asoka had re-inscribed Alexander's altars, and even though he does not mention Alexander or Chandragupta, he must have been influenced by the former's call for Brotherhood.

The Greek-style prayer hall at Sanchi is a relic of Asoka who was Diodotus-I

       The legacy of the Macedonians and Greeks in India is yet to be truthfully acknowledged. The pillars of Asoka are the first examples of Indian Buddhist art, and a careful study shows that at least one of them was an altar of Alexander brought from Topra near Chandigarh. This reveals the timeless heritage of Alexander in India. The Greek contribution to Indian culture goes far beyond Buddha icon and Buddhism, in this sense, is an universal religion. As the eminent art historian Sir John Boardman writes, the dating of Gandhara art is too late by about two centuries. A similar view is held by M. Busagli and T. McEvilley. This again shows that Buddhism did not originate in the east.   

       The first step in a sane history of Buddhism is the determination of the location of Kapilavastu but this is mired in endless disputes. Although it was in India that Buddhism flowered into a world religion, much greater care is needed in regard to the history of its inception. Niharranajan Ray states categorically that Indian Buddhist art was only the Hellenistic Greco-Indian art of a later phase,

The fact remains therefore that we have no examples extant of either sculpture or architecture that can definitely be labelled chronologically as pre-Mauryan or perhaps even as pre-Asokan.

This gap of three centuries is impossible to bridge and points to a basic error in Buddhist history. Vincent Smith warns,

...the mystery of Kapilavastu will continue for many years to be the sport of unverified conjecture.’

      This queer statement has to be grasped in the backdrop of Führer's forgeries yet Smith's pessimism appears unjustified if one turns away from Nepal and notes that early India was not British India but extended far beyond Seistan. In glaring contrast to the darkness of Nepal, the most brilliant Buddhist monuments belong to Afghanistan, Gandhara and and even faraway China but not Nepal or Eastern U. P. where one would expect them in the current theory.

     About the great Buddhist heritage of Afghanistan, W. Ball, a keen observer on Buddhist history, writes,

There are far too many to list here, but one cannot pass on without mentioning Afghanistan's most famous Buddhist monument: the colossal statues at Bamiyan. To my mind, these extraordinary statues and the vast rock-cut monastic complexes associated with them are not only perhaps the greatest of all Buddhist monuments, but as a sheer, positive statement of religious belief and self-confidence, rank with the greatest religious monuments of mankind.

The question is why Afghanistan but not Nepal? This reminds one of the thousand Buddhas and the colossal statue of Gotama at Yun Kang in China. Again by far the largest number of Buddha images are from the Gandhara area, not Nepal or eastern U.P. where one should expect them in the present theory.

Bamiyan was near Kapilavastu, birth-place of the Buddha

About Buddhism in Iran, R. E. Emmerick, a principal contributor to the Encyclopedia Iranica, writes,

 
How far west Buddhism spread in Iran we do not know. On the basis of archaeology it seems possible to infer that it never flourished west of the line joining Balkh to Qandahar, the so-called Foucher line. The Russian discovery of a Buddhist stupa at Gyaur Kala near Bairam ‘Ali more than four hundred kilometers west of Balkh in the Merv oasis is hardly sufficient evidence to induce us to consider that Buddhism was ever very prominent further west. The common adage often applied to the spread of Buddhism to the east is relevant to the west: one swallow does not make a summer.

    This obtuse assessment clashes with the report of Al-beruni,the greatest scholar of the world of his day:

In former times, Khurasan, Persis, Irak, Mosul, the country up to the frontier of Syria, was Buddhistic, but then Zara-thustra went forth from Adharbaijan and preached Magism in Balkh (Baktra). His doctrine came into favour with king Gushtasp, and his son Isfendiyad spread the new faith both in East and West,both by force and by treaties. He founded fire-temples through his whole Empire, from the frontiers of China to those of the Greek Empire. The succeeding kings made their religion (i.e. Zoroastrianism) the obligatory state-religion for Persis and Irak. In consequence the Buddhists were banished from these countries, and had to emigrate to the countries east of Balkh.

  This crucial data confirms the presence of Buddhists in Iran in the 6th century BC beyond any doubt and calls for drastic reform in Iranian history. Where did Mani find the Buddhists? Balkh, says Emmerick, but it may also have been southeast Iran which was 'India'.

    Hsuan Tsang reported that Langka-lo in Persia had more than 100 monasteries and more than 6000 brethren. If one ignores Emmerick, it becomes crucial to enquire about this Langka where thousands of Buddhist monks resided. Was Langka near Bandar-e Lengeh in the Gulf? Incidentally about 70 km inland of Bushehr are the mysterious rock-cut cave complexes at Chehelkhaneh. Nearby Haidari caves could also have been a great Buddhist site. W. Ball writes,

The tendency for Buddhists everywhere in antiquity - from Ajanta to Bamiyan to Tun Huang - to cut their places of worship from the rock is well known, and has almost become as much a definitive feature of Buddhist architecture as the ubiquitous stupa. Thus in both cave complexes here, there are many features, such as shapes, layout and arrangement of the rooms, that resemble known Buddhist cave complexes elsewhere. The large elliptical niches cut into the cliff faces at both Chehelkhaneh and Haidari for example, are another such feature that occurs frequently in Buddhist cave architecture, where they traditionally frame a seated Buddha. Haidari in addition contains a ritual circumambulatory in its main chamber, which is an essential feature of Buddhist monastic complexes elsewhere, usually surrounding a stupa but also a Buddha image or similar object of worship.

    Ball is not aware of the Nepalese bluff and ascribes the caves to medieval Buddhist traders but Buddhism in Fars has a long history. The strong influence of

Ajanta-like murals from Gour in Fars

Buddhist art in eastern Iran has been noted by R. N. Frye. (The Golden Age of Persia, p.41). Recently Ajanta-like murals have been found from  Gour which are dated to the Sasanid era but there is more. The

  Ancient Buddhist caves in Fars (Haidari). Courtesy M. Compareti

presence of names such as Ŝaman, Ŝedda-ŝaramana and Ŝudda-yauda-ŝaramana, Mandumatiŝ, Tiŝŝa etc. in the Persepolis tablets indicate that Buddhism in Fars is older than Gotama Buddha. Recently there were reports of discoveries of Buddha-era caves from Gwadur in the Gulf area but the true significance of this has not been appreciated due to the Nepalese frauds.

     Another precious clue is offered by Xerexes. In a trilingual inscription, he boasts over his destruction of the Daivas,

Among these countries (that submitted to him) was (one) where previously daivas were worshipped. Then, by the favour of Ahura Mazda, I destroyed that daiva place, and I had proclaimed, the daivas shall not be worshipped. Where previously the daivas were worshipped, there I worshipped Ahura Mazda properly with the Law (arta).

The identification of the Daivas is a serious problem in Persian history. R. N. Frye does not recognize the true Gaumata yet writes with clear insight,

It is generally agreed that the daiva worshippers were not Babylonians or Egyptians but rather Iranians, or at least Aryans. One may ask whether the Indians living within the Achaemenid empire, who worshipped the old gods, may have been regarded as daiva worshippers.
 

        Due to the Nepalese smokescreen, no one took up Frye's cue. Tradition has it that Bhallika and Trapussa two merchant brothers from Bactria visited the Buddha immediately after his enlightenment, became his disciples and then returned to Balkh to build temples dedicated to him. That this does not fit in with a Kapilavastu in Nepal occurred to none.

To study Buddhist art of the 6th century B.C. one has to venture to the North-west. It is Afghanistan-Seistan-Baluchistan that provides the most ancient traces of Buddhism.

     Sir Aurel Stein, one of the greatest antiquarians of all times, found a very ancient shrine at Kuh-e Khwaja in Seistan which he labelled as Buddhist. He found nothing ancient in Nepal yet, due to Führer, saw only Bodhisattvas and missed that this was the birthplace of Gotama Buddha. This created a sensation but has been duly forgotten. Roman Ghirshman, a noted Iranologist missed the full import of Stein's discovery but wrote with unfailing instinct that the murals of Kuh-e Khwaja are the precursors of Gandhara art, which points to its great antiquity. Nearby Dahan-e Gholaman is heedlessly termed a 'slaves entrance' but to any keen observer Gholaman is a clear echo of Gotama. Seistan is not only the home of all ancient Iranian lore including the Shahnama, it is also the locale of the Lalitavistara.

The magnificent ruins of Kapilavastu or Prophthasia (Kuh-e Khwaja)

       Kuh-e Khwaja was Kapilavastu. The important Buddhist text Mahaparinibbana Sutta states that the "Mauryas", a kshatriya people, had received the relics of the Buddha. The Mauryas are said to be from Pipphali-vana which appears to be Babil in Seistan.

       Babil is cognate with Kapilavastu and there are several sites named Vasht in Seistan. Vasht reminds one of Queen Vashti of the Book of Esther. Herzfeld wrote about Bawer, said to have been founded by the legendary Jamshid, which is Babil. Kapilavastu was the holiest religious centre of the ancient world. The Tarikh-i Seistan states that Ali, son-in-law of Prophet Mohammed, was buried in Seistan.

   Herzfeld wrote that the Magi went to Palestine from Kuh-e Khwaja. I. M. Diakonoff held that the Prophet Zoroaster was from Seistan. This is also stated by Gnoli who, unfortunately, is hoodwinked by Führer. Khwaja Moinuddin Chishti, founder of the venerated Indian shrine of Ajmer Sharif which stands for amity amongst people of all creeds hailed from Seistan.

    Much has been written on the role of the Silk-Road in the spread of Buddhism but no one realised that it passed through the Land of the Buddha.

The Silk-Road grazed past Kapilavastu in Seistan

Furthermore, all the ancient Buddhist manuscripts have been found from North-west India, Central Asia, Ceylon and even China. Experts have dated some of the Dunhuang Cave documents to only 500 years after the Buddha's death, making them among the oldest texts of their kind. This can be understood from the fact that Dun Hang was near Kapilavastu in Seistan. It was linked to the Buddhist heartland of Seistan-Gandhara by the Silk-Road.

    The great art historian G. Yazdani was not aware that Asoka was Diodotus-I but remarks with great acuity about the influence of Ajanta,

 The pictorial figments found in Afghanistan in recent years, at Hadda and in the surrounding country, distinctly show the influence of Ajanta, but since the region was under the sway of the Indo-Greek kings of Bactria and the Indo-Scythian kings of the Kabul valley for several centuries, the influence of Hellenistic and Iranic art may also be traced there.

      The link between Hadda, Bamiyan and Ajanta is Asoka who was the Indo-Greek king Diodotus-I. Seistan-Afghanistan was the cradle of Buddhism. The famous Italian scholar, G. Tucci, notes that the stupa was not indigenous to India; the earliest stupas have been found in West Asia, not modern Nepal or India. Another great scholar, Sir Charles Eliot, wrote that Buddhism spread to China and South East Asia from the north-west India, not Nepal.

       Buddhist art is often defined by its Indian idiom. Contrarily, Dr. Spooner wrote that Gotama was from Iran (part of which was India). Keen observers like M. Rostovtzeff noted Parthian influence on Buddhist Art and D. Schlumberger, who succeeded Foucher, boldly wrote that Greco-Buddhist art was the Indian descendant of Greco-Iranian art. Sadly, modern scholars have neither the taste nor vision for studying Buddhist art of the 6th century B.C.. Pratapaditya Pal rightly highlights the glory of the Buddhist art of Alchi but has no clue about its strong Iranian features. Holding on to a creaky Nepalese perspective he makes a vain attempt to read the mind of the Buddha,

The religion that created Alchi is so far removed from early Buddhism that if Buddha Sakyamuni himself were to visit the monastery today, he would be no less bewildered by its iconographic complexity than the average visitor.

    Although no ancient Buddhist text is known from India or Nepal, 300 Buddhist palm-leaf manuscripts have been found near Merv. In fact, Buddhism and Zoroastrianism were sister religions. T. Kawami writes,

The site, a monastery and stupa, is dated 3-4th cent. and was remodeled and enlarged several times, the stupa simply being encased in a larger "shell" each time. There was large sculpture as a larger than life clay head of Buddha was found. Curiously, the famous "Merv vase" painted with figural scenes containing Zoroastrian elements was excavated in the Buddhist ruins.

       Only the absurd idea of the birth of Buddhism of Nepal obscures that there is nothing curious in the co-existence of Zoroastrianism and Buddhism. This was suspected by Sir Charles Eliot. The assertion that Buddhism is not as old as Zoroastrianism is false as there were many Buddhas before Gotama. In fact the birth-place of one of these Buddhas can be located in Indo-Iran. Mandumatis of the Persepolis Fortification tablets (PF 2069, 2080 and 905) was Bandhumati, the city of birth of Vipassi Buddha, the nineteenth of the twenty-four Buddhas. Vipassi Buddha is depicted on the panel of cave-17 in Ajanta. The Isigili Sutta of Majjhima Nikaya is a priceless document that gives a list of former saints that is absurd in a locale in Eastern India and is linked to the E-sagila of Babylon.

      Had Nepal been Gotama's birth-place, there would have been a Nepali component in Pali. Theravada sources refer to Pali as the language of Magadha but the later Magadhi of Asoka's Edicts is an Eastern dialect rather different from Pali. On the other hand Ardhamagadhi of the Jain texts of Western India closely resembles Pali. For this reason learned scholars like T. W. Rhys Davids and Sukumar Sen held that Pali rose in the Ujjain area. This again shows that Gotama was not an Easterner.

        As in art or archaeology, Gotama's imprint is also found in literature and philosophy of Iran-Baluchistan, not Nepal. The resounding humanism of poets like Hafeez, Attar, Rumi, Omar Khayyam and Amir Khosrow cannot be understood without remembering the call of Brotherhood given by Gotama and echoed later by Alexander the Great and Diodotus/Asoka. Sufism has been described as a universal form of wisdom which has very ancient roots. That the notion of Fanâ of the Sufis is almost identical to the Buddhist idea of Nirvāņa is due to their common origin in Baluchistan-Seistan. 

    Seistan is now in the periphery of India-Pakistan but it was once India proper. Place-names like Kapilavastu (Zabol), Kabul, Budaha, Zabulistan and Dharmasthan, Vasht etc. prove beyond any doubt that this was the true cradle of Buddhism. In his book

Darmashān near Zabulistan (Courtesy Encyclopedia of Islam)

entitled "The History of India, as Told by Its Own Historians"(ed. John Dowson) Sir H. M. Elliot wrote about a district named Budha in Seistan-Baluchistan.

 Budaha in Baluchistan (Courtesy Encyclopedia of Islam)

       The history of Alexander the Great shows that Kuh-e Khwaja was Alexandria Prophthasia, the abode of Prophets. Deluded by Führer's misdeeds, great scholars like Tarn and Herzfeld missed the clear hint in the name Alexandria Prophthasia. Herzfeld dated the stepped fire altar at Kuh-e Khwaja to the first century B.C. which appears to be too late. Y. Yamamoto, on the other hand, correctly identifies it as the oldest surviving Zoroastrian altar.

This mural of Kuh-e Khwaja may be the earliest depiction of Gotama's nativity

        In art Gotama is often shown seated on a lotus which may be related to his true origin. Nelumbo nucifer (Nelumbonaceae) or the Indian lotus is not native to modern India but to wetlands of northern Iran. From there it probably spread to Egypt, India and further east. Persian history provides crucial information about the history of Buddhism.

       A careful study shows that Gotama was the same as Gaumata who hangs like a ghost in Persian history. His tussle with Darius-I as recorded in stone at Behistun is one of the greatest stories and scandals of history yet little is known about the nature or cause of his revolt. P. Briant's account of Gomata in the Encyclopedia Iranica lacks insight but historians like Toynbee and Olmstead suspected Darius’ veracity and concluded that Gaumata was not an imposter. Although R. N. Frye fails to notice the overlap with Indian history, Gaumata was a namesake of Gotama. Gut-ama in Sumerian means ‘one whose mother is a cow’ which agrees with the meaning of Gau-mata in Sanskrit and old Persian. Gaumata was an immensely popular figure. That Darius had lied is also noted by Chester Starr, Dandamayev and W. Culican. T. C. Young Jr. a noted expert on Iran, also saw through the tirades of Darius-I and came very near recognizing the true nature of Gaumata who was also a religious leader. Young writes with rare vision,

Finally, it should be remarked that Darius hurls the epithet ‘Magian’, ‘priest’, at Gaumata almost as though this were the worst possible thing he could say about the rebel in order to discredit his enemy and to support his own cause in the eyes of his followers, if not in those of the populace.

Young also suggests with remarkable insight that Gomata may have preached a new religion,

He then tells us that, 'As before, so I made the sanctuaries which Gaumata the Magian destroyed.’ Clearly Darius and Gaumata had a difference of opinion about sanctuaries, and, therefore, we may assume about religion or, at least, about ritual forms of religious expression. The details of this disagreement escapes us. Indeed, we are not even sure who was the innovator; the Achaemenians may have introduced forms of religion which adherents of an older faith reacted against under Gaumata’s leadership; or the Magian could have been attempting to introduce a new religion which offended the establishment. What is critical in the present context is that the story of Darius’ overthrow of Gaumata probably contains evidence of a religious as well as dynastic, social/economic and political struggle.

  This new religion propounded by Gomata is Buddhism which proves beyond any doubt that Gaumata was the true Gotama. Gomata was a very popular figure who, together with Bardiya, ruled Persia for a period but no statue or other representation of him is known .

The so-called Darius Statue. Gaumata? Courtesy M. Dandamaev 

     M. Dandamaev, however, doubts the identification of a statue from Susa which was discovered in 1972 and was previously thought to represent Darius-I. There is, therefore, the possibility that it represents Gomata or Gotama. Of course it can also belong to Kambuziya (Greek Cambyses) or even Bardiya.

There are many other references to Gotama in the Persian and Jewish sources which have not been recognized. Tattenai (6th-5th century BC) who was the Persian governor of the province west of the Euphrates River (eber nari, "beyond the river") during the reign of Darius I was Gotama, whose name was Tathagata. The Book of Ezra (V: 3,6) states that he led an investigation into the rebuilding of the Temple in Jerusalem about 519 B.C. He sent a report to Darius, who allowed the work to proceed. Tattenai is cited in a cuneiform tablet of 502 B.C. A. Kuhrt refers to the 'good Iranian name' of Bagapa the satrap of Babylon and 'eber nari' during Darius' reign and even considers the link with Tattanu but has no idea that that Bhagapa was Gotama's name and Tattanu also is linked to his other name Tathagata. The Book of Ezra also refers to Shether (Shiddhartha) and Boznai (Buddha). The name Shethar occurs in the Book of Esther. The name Buddho-Dana puts Gotama in the same bracket as Daniel the Jew, a contemporary of Nebuchadrezzar-II and shows that Gotama himself was a Yadu, an Eastern Jew.

        It can be seen that Prophet Abraham was also from the abode of Gotama and Zoroaster. The startling discoveries of Sir Leonard Woolley at Ur in Sumer had such a dazzling effect on scholars that it was not realized that this could not be Ur Kasdim, the home of Abraham. W. F. Albright disagreed with Woolley but no one realized that Ur of Abraham was Urva, one of the sixteen good regions of the Avesta.

        It is indeed uncanny that the patently absurd notion of the rise of Buddhism in Nepal has survived scholarly scrutiny for nearly a century. Sir Aurel Stein whose untiring efforts established the material basis of Buddhism, found nothing in Nepal. The vanishing of Buddhism from India may be due to the fact that after Afghanistan and Seistan ceased to be parts of 'India', Buddhism was seen as an extraneous creed. R. G. Bhandarkar blamed the decline on the rise of the Mahayana which weakened it from within. It has to be noted that Mahayana, from its very inception, was an essentially 'foreign' doctrine. The Mahayanists were often hostile to the Bhakti cult and other forms of Hinduism, yet the generally tolerant approach of the Buddhists to other faiths resulted in the assimilation of Buddhism in a reformed Hinduism. In this sense Buddhism did not disappear from India.

Gudea, Vipassi and the Buddhist Antecedents in Seistan-Baluchistan-Gandhara

Sanchi and Ajanta - Windows to the Garden of Eden

Gotama and Zoroaster in a Non-Jonesian Frame

The Isigili Sutta

Gotama and Zoroaster in the Persepolis Tablets  

       Herodotus gives the crucial information (Herd. I, 125) that the Daan or Dana tribe was in Indo-Iran. Incidentally Gotama's father and all his uncles had Dana-names and Al-beruni gave his name as Buddho-dana. This is confirmed by the Persepolis Fortification Archive, the most authentic body of administrative records in world history. It is stunning to realize that Ŝedda-ŝaramana cited in several tablets is Ŝedda-Arta or Siddhartha Gotama and that the ubiquitous Ŝudda-Yauda-Damana, probably the most important official after Parnaka, is none other than Gotama's father Ŝuddho-dana. It is also likely that Damidada of the tablets is Zoroaster.  Some tablets also mention Tiŝŝa, a great name in early Buddhist history. The tablets were the state records under Darius-I, Xerxes and Artaxerxes-I. Two archives of such tablets were found in Persepolis between 1933 -38 by the archaeological expedition of the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago. Thanks to the painstaking efforts of R. T. Hallock, W. Hinz and others, the tablets, which date from 509 to 494 B.C., have opened up new vistas of research in world history.

    The tablets deal with transactions (mainly covering distribution of grain and other foodstuffs, management of flocks, and provisioning of workers and travellers) at locations throughout most of Persis and eastern Elam, and probably at some locations to the northwest and southeast of those areas. Some texts had different functions. PF 1342, for example, records the transfer of silver from Susa to Matezzis. The records were drawn up at different sites and were sent to the central office at Persepolis. They originated from a vast hinterland of Persis and Elam and some were actually written in Susa.     

     The bronze-age finds at Jiroft call for a reappraisal of the geography of the tablets. It has to be recalled that in the fourth century B.C. Alexander the Great found Indians in this area and rejoiced his victory over them. Jiroft or Djiroft was Dvaravati, capital of Kamboja. Maturban cited in several tablets may have been an early Mathura. Commodities were sent to Persepolis and Susa from Maturban. After Persepolis the most important centres were Shiraz, Matezziŝ and Uranduŝ. From the tablets it seems that Matezziŝ is the most important site. It is said to have been near Persepolis but this is not certain. Hallock writes that although Shiraz is also mentioned quite frequently the largest work group at Matezziŝ is much larger than any at Shiraz. In PF 1572 a group of Indians travelling from the king to India receive rations at Matezziŝ; from this it is presumed that it lies east or north-east of Persepolis. It appears to have been an important city of the Indians. Yaŝda or Yaŝudda, the Haturmakŝa of Matezziŝ, mentioned in PF 760 and PF 761 reminds one of Yashoda of the Indians. Yashoda was the foster-mother of the famous Yadu hero  Kŗşņa.  Karaŝna of PF 1959 is given the designation hazatap but his name echoes Kŗşņa. The Indo-Iranian Yadus appear to be linked to the pre-exilic Jews and, as the name Ŝudda-Yauda suggests, also to the Buddhists.

       The tablets provide priceless data about the economic, religious and social life of Iraq, Iran and India, yet, in a sense, much remains unknown. Mary Boyce (History of Zoroastrianism, p. 132) laments,

Excavations in the 1930's of the Persepolis treasury, and one area of the fortifications, brought to light a remarkable quantity of inscribed material, in Elamite and Aramaic. These discoveries raised great hopes of clear light being shed on the religion of the early Achaemenians, but such hopes were to be disappointed.

In a sense, the learned scholar has herself to blame for the disappointment. Historians of Persia generally underrate the inseparable bond that existed between ancient India and Persia and are beguiled by the Nepalese frauds and Jones' error. A. D. H. Bivar's view that the tablets shed no light on the geography of India is also false. Moreover, the excessive reliance on the Greco-Persian tradition combined with a total neglect of the Pali texts has greatly falsified Persian history. R. N. Frye also writes that Kambujiya and Kurash may be non-Iranian names but stops short of stating that these are in fact Indian.

       The neglect of the Pali sources has greatly impaired the interpretation of the tablets. Ŝakka the Etira (officer in charge of commodities) is cited in PF 1970. PF 1987 also mentions Ŝakka. Sakka is the name of Indra in the Buddhist texts. Gotama was called a Shakya. More significantly Tiŝŝa, a famous name in Buddhist history, is cited in PF 781 and PF 1124. Umaya who is mentioned with Gaumata in PF 756 may be Upatissa or Sariputta. Tammaŝba of PF 793 may be Dhammasava of the Buddhist texts. Ŝakŝaka of PF1511 and PF 1781, who is expressly declared as an 'Indian' (Hinduiŝ), may be Gotama's uncle Sukkho-dana. Furthermore Nunudda of PF 1966 may have been Nanda, Gotama's half-brother.

        Ŝedda appears with Ŝuddayauda in PF 149, and with Abbateya and Mitrabauddha in PF 1224 where he is described as the Hatarmabattis of Persepolis. Hallock explains the name as Atharva-pati, a kind of a priest. His name also occurs in PF 148, PF 221, PF 250, PF 376, PF 573, PF 574, PF 587, PF 635, PF 639, PF 786, PF 1215 and twice in the journal PF 1968. His personal seal is not known but PF 250 which mentions Ŝedda and is sealed by PFS 79 offers a valuable clue.  PFS 79 was also used on PF 241, PF 245, PF 251, PF 262, PF 317 and the journal PF 1948. The apportioner in PF 245, PF 251 and PF 1948 was Ŝuddayauda.

PFS 79, Seal of Gotama? (Picture courtesy Oriental Institute, Chicago)

         That the owner of the seal PFS-79 was a very important person is indicated by H. M. Koch, M. B. Garrison and M. C. Root. This is also indicated by the fact that it was used to seal the journal PF 1948. Koch assigns PFS 79 to an official who oversaw grain transactions at Iriŝdumaka, Makarkiŝ and Dur and wine transactions at Hiran, all in the South-eastern region. Garrison and Root note that PFS 79 always occurs alone in the tablets that it seals which shows that it belonged to a very important functionary.

PFS 79 on PF 1948. A holy relic of Gotama at the Oriental Institute, Chicago?

      The bird-headed winged lion creatures that the hero holds in the seal may be very significant. Garrison and Root note that the birds have their mouths open which may point to an affectionate relationship. In a famous Buddhist legend Gotama rescues a fowl which was injured by Devadatta. Whether this is in any way linked to the fact that Bakadada, and Pirtiŝ (PF 1754) are associated with rations for fowls (basbas) is not clear. Bakadada may have been Zoroaster and the fowls could have been used in rituals.

      The five-pointed dentate crown worn by the hero of PFS 79 is of great importance as it was used only by Darius himself and three other vassal kings. This may, in fact, indicate a family relationship. It is not impossible that the five-pointed crown was linked to the name Spentadata of both Darius and Gomata. That Cyrus or Kurash could have been linked to the Kurus of the Mahabharata was hinted by great scholars like A. Toynbee. Darius was distantly related to Kurash and the same may be true of Gomata. The Kurus were closely linked to the Panchalas who may have had a five-fold aspect. The Panthialaeans mentioned by Herodotus as one of Kurash's tribes may have been Panchalas.

     That Ŝaman was a name of Gotama is well known. Ŝaman corresponds to Haman in the Book of Esther. The eminent scholar on Judaism R. de Vaux hinted that Haman episode was linked to Achaemenian history. In an inscription of Kartir, the Buddhists are called Saman. Al-beruni also describes the Buddhists as Shamaniyas. That Darius-I did not kill Gaumata is clear from the tablets. PF 1537 reads,

Four QA (of) beer Barnuš received, and four men (are) receiving each 1 QA. He carried a sealed document of Ŝaman. (He is) the karamaraš of Ištibara.

The sealed document (halmi) of Ŝaman shows that he was a person of authority. Ŝaman was the same as Ŝedda. Gotama's other name Bagapa is considered to be a good Iranian name by E. Kuhrt but there is more to the name. The Indian god Bhaga who closely resembles the Iranian Baga was a distributor much like the ŝaramanas and this explains why Ŝedda ŝaramana was called Bhgava or Bagapa.

      The scale of misrepresentation of history due to a faulty perspective can be gauged from the tone of Mary Boyce, a leading authority on Persian religion,

Throughout the ancient history of Iran the eastern regions are less well known than the western ones, because of the absence of written records; and there is no literary evidence to shed light on a remarkable building whose remains have been uncovered at Dahan-i Ghulaman, a town of the Achaemenian period in Drangiana (Seistan). The ruins of this town were excavated in the 1960's, and what appears to have been an imposing temple was brought to light. This was built of mud-brick, but had resemblances, it seems, in layout and architecture to the palaces of Persepolis. This has led to its being assigned to the late sixth or early fifth century B.C., a date supported by the few pottery fragments found. Such a building could hardly have been erected without the approval of the Great King - that is Darius, or probably his son Xerexes. Moreover, the town in which the temple stood appears to have been deliberately founded in the early Achaemenian epoch, where no town had previously existed.

       Given such data, one might expect the temple to be a Zoroastrian one, especially since Drangiana was an old centre of the faith. But not only are no Zoroastrian temples known from this early period, the temple at Dahan-i Ghulaman has installations and traces of observances which seem wholly irreconcilable with the Zoroastrian cult.

Firstly, nations like India and Iran are seen as fitted in tight compartments and boundaries which is in sharp contrast to the broader outlook of elder scholars like Sir Charles Eliot who warned against writing history based on modern borders. Secondly, nothing was made out of the significant name Ghulaman which echoes the name of Gotama. Thirdly before the schism centred around Gotama and  Devadatta(Zoroaster), Buddhism Zoroastrianism and were sister religions which were heresies of older sacrificial religions. Mary Boyce forgets the history of Gomata of Shakyavati and also the fact that Sir Aurel Stein had identified a Buddhist temple at Kuh-i Khwaja in Drangiana itself. For her Zoroasrianism grew in isolation and had nothing to do with religions like Buddhism. Sir Charles Eliot, on the other hand, held that they were interrelated.

      Although Zoroaster is supposed to be absent in the tablets, a closer look shows that this may not be the case. According to Herzfeld, his adversary Graehma was Gaumata who can be seen to be the same as Gotama. Although the name Zoroaster is absent, it is crucial to look for his other possible names. Just because the name Asoka or Piyadassi is absent in the Greco-Roman accounts, R. Thapar concluded hastily that he was unknown in the West. As the presence of Elamite kings like Ram-Sin or Rama Chandra shows, the Elamites were half-Indians. Thus it is sensible to expect that the Elamite scribes who wrote the tablets would use Devadatta, the Indian name of Zoroaster. About Damidadda, a functionary at Susa mentioned in PF 1752, Mary Boyce writes (Op. cit. p. 143) with an air of certainty,

Rāman occurs as proper name on Aramaic documents from the treasury and fortifications, and this might be the common noun meaning 'peace, joy, or it might be in honour of the Zoroastrian yazata  Rāman, who is linked with both Mithra and Vayu. Another name attested on the Elamite tablets, and elsewhere in Aramaic script, is Dāmidāta. 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.

Even a rudimentary knowledge of Indian religion shows that Rāman and Vayu are Rama and Hanuman, son of Vayu. Rama can be seen to be an ancestor of both Darius-I and Gotama.

   At one level, 'datta' in Sanskrit and 'data' in Persian does have the sense 'given', and her interpretation, 'given by the Creator', is echoed mindlessly in the academic circles, yet due to her narrow interpretation of Persian religion, Boyce glosses over Rama, a very crucial name of Persian and Indian history and ignores that 'dat' in Persian also meant 'law'. Damidatta is clearly an Elamite rendering of Devadatta, a name of Zoroaster in the Buddhist texts. In the Indian texts Devadatta was the son of Suprabuddha and a cousin of Gotama. Suprabuddha, father of Zoroaster, was probably dead when the tablets were written, but there are about eight references to Supra in the tablets who may be a close relative of Zoroaster. Gopa, (also known as Bhaddakacchana) the wife of Gotama, was the daughter of  Suprabuddha. Zoroaster's wife was Hvôvi. In some texts Ananda, the close associate of Gotama, is a brother of Devadatta.  

        'Baga' had the sense of 'Deva'. Thus Bakadadda cited in many tablets may be linked to Zoroaster. There were perhaps several persons having the name Bakadada but it is highly likely that the owner of the seal PFS 1243 whom Garrison and Root identify as Bakadada may be Devadatta or Zoroaster. H. Koch places him in the Shiraz area. The fact that Pirtiŝ appears together with both Bakadada and Damidadda may be very significant. 

       Devadatta corresponds to Diodotus in Greek and 'dmy dty' in Asoka's Taxila Aramaic inscription. It can be taken to mean 'Deva who is the Ordainer of Law'. 'Deva' not only was a word for god, in the Buddhist texts and the Shahnama it is also a clan-name. Firdausi writes about the 'white Divs' and the black Divs'. Just as the Daevas were despised in the Zoroastrian texts, Devadatta was a hated name in the Buddhist circles. Both Asoka and Gotama are called Deva and Zoroaster who was a relative of Gotama, was certainly also a Deva. Darius' tirade against Gomata does not distract from the fact that the latter was his relative. Darius maligned Gaumata in the Behistun inscription but as Olmsted writes, being a cunning politician he did not kill Gomata. In fact he may have maintained equal distance from both Zoroaster and Gaumata who, as Herodotus testified,  was an immensely popular hero. There is a similar hint also from the Buddhist texts. PF 756 actually names Gaumata.

      The possibility that Zoroaster was already dead and Damidadda was only a namesake cannot be ruled out. However, PF 732, which is sealed by PFS 38, the personal seal of Irtaŝduna (Artystone), names Ŝedda, Artystone, and Bakadadda together which is very significant. Being the wife of both Darius and Bardiya, Artystone may have been close to Gaumata too. This may, in fact, indicate that Zoroaster was alive in the 25th year although Bakadada may again be only a namesake.

       Mary Boyce writes about religion of Darius-I,

It seems unlikely that a magus worshipping at Persepolis under Darius would have venerated any but an Iranian god; and the suggestion has been made that Turma/Turme is a rendering of Old Persian Durvā, nominative or vocative of Durvan, the equivalent of Avestan Zurvan. This interpretation is necessarily speculative.

Turma may only be the very important deity Dharma who, as Sukumari Bhattacharji writes, is closely related to Yama (or Yima), a principal Indo-Iranian god. Turma may even be related to Adhamma or Adam. PF 1138 mentions Kukamukka which is related to the God Kokamukha of the Puranas. Kokamukha was also a holy pilgrimage centre mentioned in the Mahabharata. Kshudrakoka and Mahakoka are known from Bharhut inscriptions.

        One of Zoroaster’s sons was Khvare-chithra (Khwarra = bright) which reminds one of Chitrangada, one of the sons of Dhrtarashtra who may be linked to the Mohenjodaro (Maha-Anga Dwara) area which was Anga. Another Anga was Daranj or Zaranj (Dvara-Anga) in Seistan where Diakonoff and Gnoli place Zoroaster.

       Hallock considers Ŝuddayauda-ŝaramana, (also called Ŝuddayauda-damana) to be an important official who was an assigner and apportioner of ration for workers. The title Damana reminds one of the Damanavadi Sanghas mentioned by the learned grammarian Panini. In PF 372 Ŝuddayauda is declared as a priest. H. Koch, on the other hand, holds that there were two officials of that name, one a Kurdabattiŝ or supervisor of workers who operated in what she calls the South-eastern Region III and a second who was the Kanzabarra or treasurer stationed at Persepolis. Hallock writes that Irŝena was the assigner of workers in the Susa area whereas Karkiŝ and Ŝuddayauda were responsible for the Persepolis area.

PFS 32, Seal of Ŝuddayauda (Picture courtesy Oriental Institute, Chicago)

The hero in the seal apparently has his right shoulder (and the left leg) bare. The human-headed winged lions shown in the seals may have a totemic meaning. Gotama was often called Shakyasimha (simha=lion). The fact that the hero appears bearded may not be related to Ŝuddayauda's actual appearance as even Irtaŝduna, Darius' wife, is shown bearded in her seal (PFS 38). The place where the texts were actually inscribed cannot be established with certainty. According to Hallock they may have been written at the various sites by scribes who periodically travelled about carrying PFS 32, the personal seal of  Ŝuddayauda and the important treasury seal PFS 1 which was also used by him. Hallock writes,

The ubiquitous Ŝuddayauda exercised his functions more or less simultaneously at many different sites. It is unlikely that every time a text mentions Ŝuddayauda it means that he was present at the distribution of the commodities.

PFS 32 appears in thirty inscriptions but only in six of these Ŝudda-yauda is mentioned.

      Ŝuddayauda disappeared in the year 26 and his role as both the assigner and apportioner was taken up by Baratkama who also appears to have been linked to India or Bharata. One of the names of Ananda, Gotama's close associate, was Bharata. He was known to be a very rich person. Ananda who was the son of Amitrodana was also known as Nanda which may correspond to Mannanda or Mahananda of many tablets. Mannanda could also have been Gotama's half-brother. Together with Parnadadda he had the exclusive prerogative of  assigning for artisans and ornament makers. Another possible name of Ananda, son of Amitrodana, is Mitrabauddha.

       The hallucination created by Führer was so great that no importance was attached to Hsuan Tsang's crucial report that Langka-lo in Persia had more than 100 monasteries and more than 6000 brethren. The location of this place where thousands of Buddhist monks resided is of crucial importance in the history of not only Persia but also Buddhism. Was Langka near Bandar-e Lengeh in Laristan in the Gulf?

Chehelkhaneh and Haidari were in Lanka of Hsuan Tsang

     Incidentally about 70 km inland of Bushehr are the mysterious rock-cut cave complexes at Haidari and Chehelkhaneh which must be very ancient. PF 772 refers to the Lan ceremony at Lankuel which may be presumed to be Hsuan Tsang's Langka. Incidentally this region is called Sangara in the Egyptian records which corresponds to the name Simhala of modern Lanka. The civilisation of modern Sri Lanka is closely linked to this region. Lanka holds a very important position in the Buddhist legends and the country of Lanka which was visited by Gotama may be this area. 

     In fact the birth-place of some of the earlier  Buddhas can be located from the tablets in Indo-Iran. Mandumatis of the Persepolis Fortification tablets (PF 2069, 2080 and 905) may have been Bandhumati, the birth-place of Vipassi Buddha, the nineteenth of the twenty-four Buddhas. Vipassi Buddha is depicted on the panel of cave-17 in Ajanta. Vipassi Buddha

Vipassi Buddha depicted at Ajanta was from Mandumatiŝ (PF 905)

preached his first sermon at Khema-migadava which was some kind of a deer-park similar to the famed pairidaeza, which the Greeks rendered as paradeisos. These were fabulous parks and pleasure gardens of the Indo-Iranian kings and nobility which were meant for pleasure and hunting but at some stage violence against animals was censured. The famous letter of the sage Matrcheta to king Kanika (Maharaja Kanika Lekha) in which he urged the king not to be cruel to animals may have been addressed to Alexander the great who was very fond of hunting. The pairidaeza has some similarities with the Assyrian kirimahu. These were not just formal gardens, but were used for growing and storing fruits and also served as zoological parks and hunting reserves.

A 16th century Flemish painter's vision of a nature park

 The Garden of Eden where Adam and Eve lived before expulsion may have been a pairidaeza similar to Khema-migadava.

       Many tablets refer to Kemarukkaŝ which may have been Khema-migadava. Many Buddhist tales are centred around the deer-park at Sarnath which is usually located in eastern U. P. in modern India but this is absurd as it has no sound archaeological basis. The Greeks and others found Pairidaezas such as Khema-migadaya in Kerman-Seistan-Baluchistan. PF 2067 and PF 2068 are famous texts which give crucial religious information,

Tell Uśaya the “wine carrier”, Parnaka spoke as follows:

30 marriś (of) wine (is) to be issued to priests who (are) at Kemarukkaś. Let them perform (lit. “make”) the libation of the god(s) that (is/are) at Kemarukkaś. 22^nd year. As formerly it was given to them.

        Most significant may be the last sentence 'As formerly it was given to them' which has a timeless sense. Although there are many references to single named priests (ŝa-tin or ŝa-tan ) in the tablets, at Kemarukkaŝ are they addressed as a group (ŝatinpe). Also PF 2067 and PF 2068 speak of 'libation for the gods' at Kemarukkaŝ whereas usually the tablets mention libation for a single god such as Ahuramazda, Humban, Mitra, Turma etc. However, PF 351 mentions libation for Adad and Humban together. PF 352, 353 and PF 377 also refer to libation for 'gods'. Many tablets refer to partetaŝ which, according to some scholars, is the same as pairidaeza. PF 149 links Ŝedda with the partetaŝ at Aptudaraŝ which may in fact be Sapta-dvara. The name may be traced even in the Indus-Saraswati seals (2396 00). Saptadvara may be linked to names such as Bodhisatta, Mahasatta, and Mohenjo-daro. In the tablets Kemarukkaŝ is not called a partetaŝ but it was surely an ancient seat of gods of Indo-Iran. Khema is one of the most sacred places in Buddhist history as Sumana Buddha, Tissa Buddha and Kakusandha Buddha were all born here.

    There are numerous references to Sumeru or Meru in the Indian texts which had different senses in different epochs and are difficult to classify. These often have a mythical connotation and are not related to Sumer in Iraq though the origin of the name 'Sumer' in Mesopotamian history is a legitimate topic of study. It was often the cosmic centre of the universe which may be linked to the existence of an ancient observatory here. For the Tibetan Buddhists it was mount Kailash in the Himalayas. Ŝumaru of PF 439 and PF 440 is a place-name of great importance. The name also occurs in Fort 5902 and, in a slightly different form, Ŝumair, in Fort 2512. It often stood for a hill and it is possible that originally it was the hill of Babil (Kuh-e Khwaja) in Drangiana in Seistan. The hill may also mean a ziggurat and Babylon or Babil which was famous for its ziggurat may also have been Meru of the Indian texts. The Old Persian form 'Babiruviya' almost exactly matches the Baveru of the Pali texts. Baveru of the Jatakas may be Babylon or even Kapilavastu which echoes Babil. Hallock interpreted all the references to Bapili in the tablets as Babylon in Iraq but there is a possibility that in some tablets Babil in Seistan may have been meant.

     Pukkusa in the Pali texts was often the name of a person. One of the disciples of Ãļāra Kālama who also taught Gotama Buddha was Pukkusa. Pukŝa of PF 1027 and PF 1049 were grain-handlers but Pukkusa was also the name of a despised caste. This may correspond to Pukŝa who received the hides of slaughtered goats in PF 72.

       As Al-beruni wrote, Gotama’s name was Buddho-dana which agrees with the fact that his father and and his uncles all had Dana-names. The appellation 'Yauda' may be very significant and may indicate that the Gotama's clan was linked to the Indian Yadus who are the ancestors of the Jews. As can be seen from the name of Daniel the Jew (Yahdu), the suffix 'Yauda' may be closely related to 'Dana'. Mirayauda and Karayauda are also mentioned in many tablets.

       Miššabaudda is mentioned in PF 1553 (together with Daaupirtana) and in many other tablets. Hallock renders his name as Mitrabada but a better option may be Mitrabauddha which clearly shows him as a Buddhist. He is linked to Ŝimparra which may be the famed Simhapura which is echoed in the name of modern Singapore, The great importance of this city can be gauged from the fact that PF 1960 has six detailed entries regarding grain dispensed here in the year 23 for workers and horses, and other purposes, adding up to 7530 quarts. Mariyadadda (Mauriya-datta) of PF 690 and 689, Mariyabaddana (Maurya-vardhana) of PF191 seem absurd in the Jonesian scenario. Hiduŝ the priest mentioned in PF 596 may have been a worshipper of Hindu gods. 'Napir' in Elamite meant 'god' and the phrase for "the great god" was napir irŝara which reminds one of the Indian 'Isvara'.  Sandupirzana (Chandra Vardhana) of PF1963 reminds one of Asoka Vardhana. Kunuikka of PF282 is clearly a 6th century B.C. Chanakya. Abbatema who is said to be an Indian in PF 785 remains difficult to place. Mitraparzana or Mitra-vardhana reminds one of Asoka-vardhana and may have been an early Maurya. Ramanuya was a member of Darius-I's family

        Irdabada mentioned in many fortification tablets was a very important nobleman who was a grain officer. Mary Boyce considers him to be a good Iranian which is not untrue, yet there is much more. H. Koch places him in Elam but he may also have been associated with the Jiroft area. He is also cited in the Treasury tablets from Persepolis and is said to have been a 'lance bearer' of the king. He used the seal PFS 100. Irdabada may be Erapata Nagaraja immortalised in the Buddhist texts. The Nagas are usually linked with Nagaland in north-east India but this is totally false. He is also described as Erakapatra who meditated for twenty thousand years in the forest. The Nagas were seen as semi-divine and were strong and handsome. Asoka, who was allegedly very naughty in his youth, was sent to a Naga teacher. Naga maidens were famous for their beauty and many Epic heroes had Naga wives. Their kingdom is called Naga-loka, or Patala-loka, which is filled with resplendent palaces, ornamented with precious gems. Nagas were usually associated with wealth and treasure. L. B. Keny notes their links with the Gulf region. The land of the Nagas seems to be the Jiroft area which was Kamboja.

     Erapata is depicted in the beautiful stone carvings at Bharhut in his two forms, first as a serpent and secondly as a human being with serpent hoods attached to the back of his head. With his Queen and daughter he is shown advancing to the Buddha and then kneeling before him. This is significant, for in PF 771 Irdabada appears to be linked to Ahura Mazda.

Naga King Erapata and his retinue worshipping the Buddha (2nd Cent BC)

       Another important Indian was Virayauda or Mira-yauda, an important supplier of grain and flour who used, not one, but two personal seals, PFS 24 and PFS 18. He had the sole responsibility of assigning the 'razape' or masons (Rajmistry in Bengali) and 'dukape' (plasterers). He may have been the same as the Maurya king Virasena cited by Taranatha. It is not certain whether he can be identified with Viradana or Miradana of PF 2054. Irŝena, the powerful chief who controlled the workers in the Susa area, may also have been Virasena.

     As the name Hinduis shows, 'S' was often changed into  'H'. Thus the important official Harbamiŝŝa, who is mentioned in many tablets, may have been Sarva-mitra or Sabbamitta of the Buddhist texts. He is said to have entered the Sangha after seeing the Buddha's acceptance of the Jetavana. Another Sabbamitta was a learned man who was a teacher of Gotama.     

       Vassakāra, the powerful chief minister of Ajātasattu is mentioned in the Buddhist texts. One can only wonder whether he was the same as Basaka who (with Ammamarda) was entrusted with the huge amount of 5649 Bar of grain at Hiŝema. Herodotus (Herod. VII, 75) mentioned Bassaces, son of Artabanus who commanded the Asiatic Thracians in Xerexes' army. Bakadadda the Indian was probably not a noble but his name echoes Bhagadatta, a famous name in the Puranas. The name Bagadatu also appears in the Babylonian inscriptions.

History of Indo-Iran From the Persepolis Tablets

Diodotus-I Was Asoka

       The blunder of Palibothra greatly falsified the history of Asoka. Apart from the Edicts, archaeology has unearthed very little inscribed material and though some punch-marked coins have been associated with him, this has been disputed. The palace unearthed near Patna is said to be Asoka's, but in the absence of inscriptions this is clearly unacceptable. Even in Taxila, so often mentioned together with his name in the texts, not many inscriptions have been found.

         Sir Mortimer Wheeler, one of the finest minds on ancient India, failed to pinpoint Jones' mistake, but gave important clues regarding Asoka. He wrote,

 'It is just possible that Ashoka had Seleukid blood in his veins; at least his reputed vice-royalty of Taxila in the Punjab during the reign of his father could have introduced him to the living memory of Alexander the Great, and, as king, he himself tells us of proselytizing relations with the Western powers'.

Wheeler noted the unmistakable Achaemenian imprint on his architecture and suggested that he could have been a half-Greek. Yet no one could imagine that this half-Greek was the Indo-Greek king Diodotus-I, known to all classics scholars for his matchless coins. Historians have been deluded by the figure of the thundering Zeus on these coins which illustrates the vigour of Diodotus' youth but have failed to grasp his multi-faceted personality. Sadly, the crucial import of the absence of his inscriptions and other relics has been glossed over.

        What was the religion of Asoka before he adopted Buddhism? The great visionary Ananda Coomaraswamy does not mince words,

Chandragupta Maurya, of whose origins little is known, displaced the last king of the Nanda Dynasty about 320 B. C. and made himself the master of Pataliputra, the capital of Magadha. His famous grandson Aŝoka (272-232) B. C., whose early faith may have been Brãhmaņical, Jaina or possibly Magian, early in life became an ardent Buddhist; ...

      This was first stated by Dr. Spooner but he was shouted down. By which name was Asoka known in the west? From the fact that the Greco-Roman writers do not refer to Asoka or Piyadassi, R. Thapar readily declares that he was unknown in the West. This is ridiculous, they must have used a different name. The most frequent name the king uses for himself in the Edicts is Devanampiya, not Asoka. As 'Nam' and 'Dat' both mean 'law', Devanam (piya) is the same as Devadat or Diodotus. Asoka (Diodotus) was in fact a very well known figure in the Greco-Roman world. After his conversion to Buddhism he had to change his name Devadatta as it was a hated name among the Buddhists. The names of two biographies of Asoka, Asokavadana and Divyavadana also hint that Deva (datta) was a name of Asoka. In the 8th Rock Edict he refers to his ancestors as `Devanampiyah' which shows that `Devanampiya' was his patronymic. The name `Devanampiya' is blindly translated as `beloved of the gods' and is considered by all to be an appellative and, but this is a mistake - `Deva' was Asoka's name proper which explains the name `Devi' of his wife.

      Again, the bilingual Kandahar Edict shows Asoka as the master of Arachosia while the coins point to Diodotus as the ruler. In fact Asoka's history matches that of Diodotus-I line by line. The studies on the Bactrian Aramaic texts by S. Shaked miss the finer points of Bactrian history.

       Significantly, just as Diodotus has only coins but no inscriptions, his contemporary and neighbour Asoka has only inscriptions but no coins. This clearly indicates that Asoka and Diodotus complement each other. H. P. Ray's satisfaction about Asoka's coins is bizarre. Asoka never refers to his neighbour Diodotus because he was Diodotus himself. It is very likely that the Asokan Pillar which was brought to Delhi from Punjab was in fact a re-inscribed altar of Alexander.

        Asoka seems to have died when Diodotus died. R. Thapar notes that his Edicts abruptly stopped appearing by about 245 BC but owing to visions centered on Patna, fails to notice that this is exactly the year of Diodotus' death. Both were fierce warriors in their youth but later became saviors, sôtêr. Pliny indicated three Kalingas of which one must have been in the Parthian region. The location of Konarak in the Gulf area also shows that Asoka's Kalinga war had nothing to with Orissa but is linked to the strife linked to Diodotus and the Parni. Sachchidananda Bhattacharya pointed to several discrepancies in Ashoka’s version of the war.

       It can be seen that Mauryan history is linked to that of the Arsacids. According to Strabo (xi,1-12) the Parthians were a tribe of the Parni or Aparni who belonged to the larger tribe of the Dahae. The name Parthian is related to that of Parthava, the first Iranian region conquered by them. They are identified with the Pallavas in the Indian texts but non-classical sources usually describe them as Arsacids after the name of their founder Arsaces or Assak who, in the opinion to some classical authors, was a Bactrian like Diodotus. As Gotama is said to have been related to the Nandas, the Mauryas also appears to be related to the Achaemenians. Sir Mortimer Wheeler repeatedly stressed the link of the Asokan pillars with Achaemenid art. Also the Arsacid claim of descent from the Achaemenians, which is discounted by R.N. Frye and others, is in fact true.

       The name Assak is clearly linked to Asoka and gives a different derivation of the name Asoka (or Ashoka) from that based on the Sanskrit 'shoka' or 'grief'. The name may be linked to the Assakenians who were linked to Chandragupta by many scholars. The Arsacids were also called Arshakuni which shows the clear link with the Shakas. M. Witzel and H. Falk consider the Shakas to be 'foreigners' in India but as Cynthia Talbot notes, this is short-sighted. The Arsacids claimed to be linked to the Achaemenids who were also Shakas. This is indicated by names such as Dar(a)shaka in the Indian texts. Gaumata's abode was Sikayavatish which also shows the link with the Sakyas. It is likely that Chandragupta was also known by the same name Arsaces or Assak. Ashkh of the Shahnama appears to be Chandragupta.

       In the Minor Rock Edict I Asoka describes his dominion as Jambudvipa which is usually assumed to be modern India. In the version of the edict found at Nittur in Tumkur district of Karnataka, Asoka calls himself a ruler of Pathavi which echoes Parthia, Diodotus' domain. K. P. Jawasawal noted that Jambudvipa was a wider territory covering nearly the whole of civilized Asia. The name Jambu or Gambu may be linked to names like Sisygambis, mother of Darius-III.

      Asoka calls himself 'Piyadassi laja magadhe' which is uncritically thought to allude to Magadha in Bihar. Early Magadha, like Kalinga and Vaňga (Bengal) was also in the North-West. Magan in south east Iran was the early Magadha. The Mauryan homeland is given in some sources as Pippali (vana) which is blindly placed in Nepal but Pippali may be Babil in Seistan which in turn may be a transform of Kapilavastu. Babyl(on) in Iraq later became known as Babil. Names like Kabul and Vasht echo Kapilavastu which was the greatest religious centre of the ancient world. The Mauryas are linked to the Nandas who in turn are linked to the Buddhist Sakyas. Babil in Seistan also may have been the Baveru of the Jatakas. Although there is no hard evidence, Asoka is said to have been the founder of Sanchi which appears to be very likely.

       After rejecting Jones' idea of Palibothra at Patna it becomes logical to link Asoka with Kanganhalli in Karnataka where his inscribed portraits have been found. Kanganhalli (Halli=City) corresponds to Bandar-e Kangan near Patali (28°19'58" La., 57°52'16" Lo.) in the gulf area which was once India. That Moeris, the grandfather of Asoka or Diodotus-I was the same as Orontobates has already been indicated. Arrian wrote that Orontobates who fought against Alexander the Great was from the Gulf area. Bandar-e Kangan was

        Inscribed Portrait of Asoka from Kanganhalli (Courtesy ASI)

near Konarak and Patali and about 10-days boat journey from Kanganhalli. This was once India proper.

                       Bandar-e Kangan was near Patali and Konarak

       Another Bandar-e Kangan was near Firuzabad (Gour) and Katak in Iran. Kangan may be the same as

Geng nearZabol, Zaranz and Gowd (Courtesy Philips Atlas)

Gangan and may be linked to the names Ganga and the Gangaridai mentioned by the Greeks.

Chandragupta’s Suganga palace is known from the records. The Ganga is not cited in the RigVeda and legend has it that it was a celestial river brought to the earth by Bhagiratha. Thus there may have been an earlier Ganga in the north-west. Curtius wrote that the Ganges flows into the Arabian sea. The Greeks used the form Gange and the names Geng, Kang, etc. are found in Seistan. The VYSKs of Kang (Herzfeld, Zoroaster and His Men, vol. 1 p. 78) may be the Vishakhas (Shakas?). The city-name Vishakhapattanam may be a memory of the Vishakhas whose history has been lost. It is not impossible that Vishakhadatta, the author of the Sanskrit drama Mudrarakshasa is Chandragupta himself. The name is given both as Vishakhadeva and Vishakhadatta which may point to Devadatta or Diodotus, a name of Asoka as well as Chandragupta (Diodotus of Erythrae).

      Diodotus' father Bindusara, who can be identified with Bagadates, is linked to Gauda in some texts which may be Gour in modern Iran or Istakhr (Asthagoura of Ptolemy?). 'Khwarra' and 'Goura' meant 'bright' or 'shinning'. Bagadates is known to have been a priest-king from Istakhr.

Snake-motifs from Kanganhalli and Jiroft

      The snake-motif of Kanganhalli leads one to the Nagas of Indian literature who were associated with snakes. Incidentally the snake was also the most important motif of Jiroft art. Nagas were seen as semi-divine and were strong and handsome. Asoka, who was allegedly very naughty in his youth, was sent to Pingala Naga for good education. Naga maidens were famous for their beauty and many Epic heroes had Naga wives. Their kingdom is called Naga-loka, or Patala-loka, which is filled with resplendent palaces, ornamented with precious gems. Nagas were usually associated with wealth and treasure. L. B. Keny notes their maritime links,

Not only were the Nagas a civilized people, but they were a great maritime race since very early times. The civilization of Burmah and some Chinese countries is ascribed to the Naga people of Magadha. They seem to have had a very early trade with the Persian Gulf also. The Buddhist literature speaks of the Nagas of the sea and the Nagas of the mountains.

  The Nagas of the sea were clearly Hindus, Buddhists and Zoroastrians from southeast Iran which was India. Nagaloka, the sphere of the Nagas was also called Patala which resembles Pattala in lower Indus near Mohenjodaro. The name Babhruvahana, son of Arjuna and a Naga Queen is significant and may be linked to Baveru and Babil.

 The Hellenistic World Community and Diodotus

      Diodotus' 13th Edict, written after the Kalinga War is a priceless document of world history. The havoc created by the war filled the king's heart with remorse and totally transformed his character. He adopted Buddhism and became a Soter. This was a great moment in world history and led to a blending of Greek and the Indo-Iranian cultures which Alexander dreamed of. Just as Alexander's history cannot be fully grasped without Diodotus/Asoka, the reverse is also true. In a sense Alexander created the platform from which Diodotus operated. The Encyclopedia Britannica states,

The empire of Alexander and his successors created a great world community which, whether in Macedonian, Greco-Roman, or its later Christian form, established a cultural unity that was destined to be broken only 1,000 years later with the advent of Muslim imperialism (beginning in 7th century AD). This empire was so vast as truly to stagger the imagination. Extending from the Strait of Gibraltar to the Indus River, from the forests of Germany and the steppes of Russia to the Sahara Desert and the Indian Ocean, it took in an area of some 1.5 million square miles (3.9 million square kilometres; most of Europe, the Mediterranean, the Middle East, Africa, Persia, and the borderlands of India) and had a total population of more than 54 million.

      In the 13th edict, after declaring that he had himself found pleasure rather in conquests by Dhamma than in conquests by the sword, Diodotus says that he had already made such conquests in the realms of the kings of Syria, Egypt, Macedonia, Epirus, and Kyrene, among the Cholas and Pandyas in South India, in Ceylon and among a number of peoples dwelling in the borders of his empire. This was a great event in the history of Hellenistic civilization and led to, as Asoka saw it, the Kingdom of God.

Everywhere men conform to the instructions of the King as regards the Dhamma; and even where the kings emissaries go not, there when they have heard of the King’s Dhamma, the folk conform themselves, and will conform themselves to the duties of the Dhamma …..

   In his celebrated History of Hellenism J. G. Droysen made the far-reaching observation that in the Helleni-stic era Greek and Near Eastern cultures mingled in the lands conquered by Alexander the Great to form the cultural matrix from which Christianity emerged. If Alexander was the harbinger of this Hellenistic miracle , Diodotus was its greatest champion. Tarn wrote that most of the Bactrian Greeks became Buddhists. This was due to Alexander and Diodotus-I, due to whom momentous events took place in the Orient that altered human destiny.

       Much has been written about Hellenistic culture that fails to recognize Asoka's determinant role in it. S. M. Burstein rightly emphasizes the interaction of Greeks and non-Greeks during the Hellenistic period in outposts such as Ptolemaic Egypt and Heraclea on the Black Sea but other great centres of Hellenistic culture were Hadda, Sanchi, Besanagar, Amaravati and Nagarjunakonda.

Banquet scene from Gandhara (Hadda, 1st cent. AD)

      The keynote of the Hellenistic revolution was not Hellenic imperialism but a call for Brotherhood of Man which Asoka embraced. F. Holt states unwittingly:

For W.W. Tarn, there was no question - Alexander hoped for a fusion of races, a unity of mankind, and Hellenistic history fulfilled his wish by way of Bactria.

The historiographic problem which, as Holt states, has turned Tarn's 'dream of world brotherhood', the nightmare of three generations, is rooted in two sad lapses - the inability to recognise that Gomata was the true Gotama and that Diodotus-I was Asoka.

     The Hellenistic upsurge ultimately paved the way for the rise of Christianity and Islam. J. Z. Smith writes in the Encyclopedia Britannica (1979),

Finally, the central religious literature of both traditions – the Jewish Talmud (an authoritative compendium of law, lore, and interpretation), the New Testament, and the later patristic literature of the Early Church Fathers – are characteristic Hellenistic documents both in form and content.

       Only misjudgment of historians has denied Diodotus his rightful place in world history. The British science fiction writer and historian H. G. Wells was not quite aware that Asoka was Diodotus, yet wrote with great insight:

"Amidst the tens of thousands of names of monarchs that crowd the columns of history ... the name of Asoka shines, and shines almost alone, a star."

Sir Mortimer Wheeler wrote,

'This book is not a history, but in its last chapter the impersonal disjecta of prehistory may fittingly be assembled for a moment in the in the likeness of a man. Ashoka came to the throne about 268 B.C. and died about 232 B.C. Spiritually and materially his reign marks the first coherent expression of the Indian mind, and, for centuries after his empire had crumbled, his work was implicit in the thought and art of the subcontinent. It is not dead today.'

 A Coin-Portrait of Asoka Who Was Diodotus-I

Discovery of Alexander's Missing Altar

Rama, Shutrukna-hhunte, Rostam and Darius

     Persian history in which Rostam, the greatest hero of the Persian tradition, is a mythical figure, is sadly incomplete. Similarly the Jonesian vision of Rama being a tribal king bloated up by poetic fancy, turns Indian history into a caricature. Another gross miscarriage is that while the greatness of Hammu-rabi is recognized, the true stature of his contemporary Rim-Sin is underplayed. Scanty data often falsifies history - that Iran had no Bronze Age culture was a fond cliché disproved by the accidental discoveries at Jiroft. Yet a greater danger is that of misreading of history due to false preconceptions. Even though learned scholars like Sir Charles Eliot, Arnold Toynbee and Sukumar Sen held that India and Persia are deceptive labels, this has been lost on modern writers. As South-east Iran was 'India' and part of India was under the Achaemenids, it is natural to expect an overlap between the Indian and Iranian traditions. Rama and Shatrughna were brothers and Shutruk-na-Hhunte was an ancient hero of Iran. The Heritage of Persia cannot be grasped without the Heritage of 'India'.

       Commonsense dictates that Naqsh-i Rostam (carvings of Rostam) is a memory of Rostam but he is placed in the Arsacid era by common consent. As this was the traditional burial place of the Achaemenids, it is natural to suspect that Rostam could have been their ancestor. The suspicion is further reinforced by an unknown pre-Achaemenid relief found here which was effaced in the Sasanid era. The very fact that it was copied from an earlier relief at Kurangun (~18th cent. B.C.) hints that the

name Naqsh-i Rostam may be due to this relief. Thus it is very likely that the horned king depicts Rostam.

        The Achaemenian inscriptions do not mention Rostam, instead they mention Arya-Ram-Ana (7th cent. B.C.) whose name echoes Rama, the greatest hero of ancient India whose history is similar to that of Rostam. Rama's life story, the Ramayana, is akin to a scripture for many Indians. J. L. Brockington writes that it was the greatest Epic of the world which influenced a large part of humanity from Indo-Iran to Japan. Indian archaeology has failed to

unearth Rama's relics from UP indicates that Rama's India was a wider world that extended up to Elam. Jonesian writers like R. Thapar and A. L. Basham have held that Rama was a minor tribal hero of UP which is absurd. Contrarily, Sukumar Sen wrote with rare insight that Rama, also called Rama Margaveya, was from what is now Iran (Margu). Rama of Margu is clearly an older namesake of Arya-Ram-ana.

        Kurangun is near the ancient site of Sih-talu which provides the link with the Indian texts. This must have been Sutala, capital of Vali, a famous figure of the Ramayana. In Sumerian history also Valih is a great figure. The king and his wife in the relief can thus be Rama and his wife Sita. Rama was an Ikshaku king which corresponds to the term Uksha-man (Bull-man) or Achaemenian. Shutruk-Na-hhunte is an younger namesake of Shatrughna, Rama's half-brother. Shimut Wartash may be Warad-Sin or Bharata, another brother. Tan Rukurater (~2004 B.C.) echoes Raghu, Rama's ancestor, and Dasa Ratha. Lukh-Ishshan (~2350 B.C.) may have been an ancestor of Lakshmana, Rama's brother.

       Historians like R. N. Frye are totally unaware of the crucial significance of Rama even though Persian history resounds with his name.

  1) Rama and Vayu are venerated in the Avesta.

  2) Bharata was the the Elamite king Warad-Sin.

  3) Lakša of PF 69 is a namesake of Lakshmana.

  4) King Shutruk-Na-hhunte echoes Shatrughna.

  5) Dandakran (PF 666) was the true Dandakaranya.

  6) Arya-Ram-ana was an early ancestor of Darius-I
  7) Ramannuya (PF1855) was close to Darius-I.  

  8) The Ram Bazrang were a Kurdish tribe of Fars.

  9) The Sasanid ancestor Ram-Behist was a Bazrangi

 10) Many Sasanian city-names had the prefix 'Rama'.

 11) Ramakanam is a place-name in PF 1831.

The study of the Persepolis tablets has yielded much information about important figures like Darius and Parnaka yet crucial data remains unknown due to improper prognosis. Even a meticulous scholar like Hallock failed to note the echo of Rama in the name Ramanuya. The name of the Mitannian king Tushratta echoes Dasharatha, Rama's father. Chedor La'omer of Genesis 14 corresponds to Kudur Laghumar of the Babylonian texts and Raghupati was Rama's name.

      Rama's presence in the Indus-Saraswati area is unattested although the frequent symbol of the bow-man in the seals may, in fact, stand for Rama. Post-Islamic Iran also ignores him although his name may be hidden in the many Ram-names like Ramadan, Ram-allah etc.

      Fortunately, the Sumerian texts provide priceless data about Rama. The Sumerian king-lists show that Rama was the same as Ram-Sin of Larsa (~18th cent. B.C.) who ruled Sumer, Elam, and Indus Saraswati. Although Ram-Sin was deified and his memorial has been found at Ur, his relics are unknown from Elam, said to be his homeland. Rim-Sin (also called Ram-Sin) was the longest ruling monarch (60 years) of Sumer. Ram-Sin's reign is termed the golden era of Sumer by the great Assyriologist C. J. Gadd. Ram-Sin is called an Elamite in the Sumerian texts.

       Khotanese literature, which is almost exclusively Buddhist, describes Rama as a Buddhist hero.  Imagining the Buddhists to be from Nepal and Rama from Ayodhya in U. P., the eminent linguist Sir Harold Bailey discounted the Buddhist claim that Rama was one of their own. A careful study, however, shows this suspicion to be misplaced.

      The Buddhist sources trace the genealogy to the primeval Maha Sammata (Maha=great) which agrees with Shem, father of Elam in the Old Testament. This shows the basic unity of the Indian, Elamite and the Judaic traditions. Even if Rama is relatively unknown, the names of his half-brothers Shatrughna and Bharata are radiant ones in Elamite history.  

      The Buddhists traced their genealogy to Okkaka, said to be an ancestor of both the Sakyas and the Kollians. Okkaka is a transform of Ukshaka which is the same as Ukshaman or Achaemenian. According to Buddhaghosa, there were three dynasties with Okkaka at the head of each, all of whom were lineal descendants of the primeval king Maha Sammata or Great Sammata. This may correspond to the three wives of Dasharatha. Bardiya and Cyrus may have been the offsprings of Bharata (Warad-Sin), brother of Rama. Toynbee noted that Cyrus (Kurash) may have been linked to the Indian Kurus. The Achaemen-ids seem to be linked to Gotama as his relative Bhaddia is clearly Bardiya. Gaumata of the famous Behistun record can be seen to be Gotama and both Darius-I and Gaumata were known as Sphendadates.

      Part of the Rama Story is submerged in the Rostam Saga. Like Rama in India, the greatest Iranian hero was Rostam, immortalized in the Shahnama, about whose history little is known. There are traces of the Rama story in the Rostam saga which may have been emended by Surena, who defeated the Romans in the crucial battle at Carrhae and displaced Rama as the mightiest Iranian hero. His personal name is not known but his link with Rama is written in the name of Ram Sahristan, his capital in Seistan. Just as in the Rostam-Sohrab story, Rama's sons fought with him, unaware that he was their father.

       The late Babylonian texts indicate that another name of Rama was Rostam. Rostam's early name was Rotastahm which echoes the names Dasharatha and Dharma (Durma-Ilani) of Rama's father. Naqs-i Rostam can also be read as Naqs-i Rama.

        Rama may have ruled Indus-Saraswati, Iran and Sumer. He was also an ancestor of Gotama Buddha and the Achaemenian kings. I. M. Diakonoff and D. McAlpin have pointed to a link of Elamite with Dravidian but the links between Elamite and Indian civilization also extend to history. Although Rama is usually thought to be an Aryan, he was called Elamite and in Indian art he is usually painted in Blue, whereas his brother Lakshmana and wife Sita are shown as light-skinned.

Ram-Sin of Larsa was the Historical Rama

Rama and Rostam

Shiva Min(uksha) and Mahakala in the Seals

       The Indus-Saraswati civilization, which should have been the very starting point in Indian history, resembles, alas, a butterfly pinned in a glass case - standing apart from all later tradition or society. The principal elements of this highly articulate culture can be seen through the corridors of archaeology, the eternal yogi in meditation, the majestic priest-king in trefoil-studded robe, the enchanting dancing girl, the splendid seals, the magnificent metropolises and so on, but all the characters are muted and frozen. Little is known about their political, ethnic, linguistic, or religious affiliations. From no civilization of antiquity is there such a deafening silence.

          This is the appalling legacy of Jones. Once the crucial state of Magadha was ejected to the distant east, nothing could be made out of the writing of this largest civilization of antiquity. The ancient names of India of yore are Dilmun, Magan and Melukhkha. Other names for greater India are Mar-Khase, (Khasa-land) and even Elam or Ilam, which, in the Dravidian langu-ages, has the sense of an original home. Mar-Khase may be linked to the names Kashmir and Kosala (Khas-la). Dilmun (which in Sumerian means 'one-two') accords with Dravida. Manu is said to have been the king of Dravida and inscriptions from Bahrain, which was a part of Dilmun, show that Manu was the king of Dilmun. Magan was ancient Magadha. Finally Melukhkha was the ancient name of Baluchistan. Fortunately, after purging the Jonesian traits, and rubbishing the cranky idea of M. Witzel that the Indus seals contain no messages at all, progress can be made in the decipherment of the seals. In sophistication and intellectual make-up, the seals have no peer in any other contemporary writing . It is outlandish to assert that the religious life reflected in the RigVeda is text is not that of Hinduism, and even if it is taken as the earliest literary source for Hinduism, the possibility that the seals may contain data relevant to Hinduism cannot just be wished away callously. The hymns may have taken their present form by about 1300 B.C. but Vedic Mythology goes back to a very early era. The texts indicate a cult of the Proto-Shiva Mahakal, at Mohenjo-Daro which may have been a great religious centre of the ancient world.

     In the absence of bilingual texts the decipherment is indeed a daunting task but a modest beginning can be made by making some simple assumptions.

   1. Firstly Magan has to be recognised as early Magadha. The presence of Manu and Rama in Magan and Indus area links Sanskrit with the seals. 

   2. The mature Vedic culture may date from the latter half of the second millennium B.C. but the Indus seals display unmistakable Vedic traits.

   3  The language of the seals is a mix of early Sanskrit and Dravidian. Witzel's idea that the Indus language was para Munda is pure fantasy.

   4  The Indus script reads from right to left like early Brahmi.

   5   Brahmi has to be seen as an offshoot of Indus writing.

        As scholars like S. N. Kramer and G. F. Dales have pointed out, the Indus-Saraswati civilization did not exist in isolation but was closely linked to the other contemporary Bronze Age cultures. Thus important data about the seals can be gleaned from Sumer. Sir Max Mallowan wrote that the signs for god, heaven, star , for water , for earth , for the heaven and the deep , had long been painted on the pottery of Mesopotamia, and Iran and were invested with magical prophylactic meaning. Similar signs also appear in the seals and probably had very similar connotations.

       I. Mahadevan writes that the most frequent symbol was with an incidence of 1395. From the great importance of the bull-cult in Indus-Saraswati, it is natural to expect the sign to be linked to the bull and this exactly turns out to be the case. The similar looking Sumerian sign stood for the bull. More significantly, an almost identical symbol was used at at Tell Halaf in 3000 B.C. for the bull (Mallowan, The Dawn of Civilization, p. 89).

Thus the sign can be read as 'Uksha' which echoes the English word Ox. This later became the Brahmi 'Sa' and perhaps also the Latin U.    

in the head-dress of Proto-Shiva or Minuksha

       One corollary of Jonesian Indology, elucidated by R. Thapar and S. Ratnagar, is that there is no trace of Hinduism in Indus-Saraswati religion. The absurdity of the contention is proved not only by the figure of the ithyphallic Shiva-like Yogi depicted in some seals but also the inscription in these seals which are of crucial religious significance. The clear echoes of the fierce Rudra in Nimrod of the Old testament shows that Indian history and religion has to be perceived from an international perspective. The Yogi has been recognized as an early form of Shiva by many scholars and reminds one of the procreative power of God (Purusha) extolled in the RigVeda to be at the origin of all things. The Yogi is a Lord of beasts like Shiva Pashupati and is ithyphallic like Min, the Egyptian God of fertility and harvest. Min was one of the most ancient gods of Egypt whose cult dates from the pre-dynastic period and was linked to fecundity. He was the Lord of the Eastern desert which seems to point to his eastern origin. This is also indicated by his name Amsu which is similar to the name of Amsa, a Vedic Solar God said to belong to the so-called 'Indo-European' period.

       Apart from their common ithyphallic nature, that the Proto-Shiva was also called Min is evident from the inscription. The fish-sign can be read as 'Min' as the word for 'fish' in Sanskrit, Dravidian and even Sumerian was 'Min' (munnu). Thus the last two signs can be read with certainty as Min-uksha.

       Urban civilization ended abruptly in the north and other areas and in the dark ages that followed, much of the history of the glorious era was obliterated. The name Minuksha is not known in Indian literature but it may have survived in Minakshi, the famous fish-eyed Goddess of Madurai which has quaint echoes.  Her name Minakshi may have been derived from that of her husband Shiva Minuksha. Min was known as Amsu and in India Amsa was a solar-god. This shows the link of the Dravidian cultures with Indus-Saraswati. The ancestors of the Pallavas also seem to have been Harappans. 

        The link of Shiva with Indus-Saraswati religion seems to be indicated by the presence of Mahakala, an allied god. The symbol depicts a Ziggurat and can be read as Maha or Mah, name of the Goddess. The sign stands for a city or citadel and can be read as Bala or Kala (Kella in Bengali). D. Diringer writes that in early Chinese writing the sign designated a gate or Dvara. The 'Gate' had a religious (and probably also juridical) significance and the root Dvara is the key to names like Maha Anga Dvara (Mohenjo-daro), Darab, Dvaravati, Djiroft, Der, Dwaraka, Chanhu Daro, Sutkagen-Dor and the Persian Gates.

       The important text appears in a total of 27 inscriptions of which a large number are in the form of copper tablets from Mohenjo-daro and seems to be of great ritual significance. It can be read as Maha Kala Dvara Uksha which echoes Darius and shows the great influence of Shiva Mahakala in Indus-Saraswati. The name strongly resembles Mekal, the Canaanite God. Mekal was also an ancient city in Palestine. The name Mahakal may be linked to the place-name Makkas mentioned in the Achaemenian documents with Purash. 

      The sign before in the proto-shiva seal may be a compound of and may have been read as 'Ukshu' or just 'Shu'. As the Brahmi 'Ma' was written as , the three signs preceding may tentatively be read as Mashmasshu, the name of an important class of Sumerian priests. The Mashmasshu may have been easterners. 'Nin' or 'Min' in Sumerian meant 'great' which may echo the name of an early god. Were they Indo-Aryans?

       As the links of the Proto-Shiva with Mekal and Min shows, Hinduism, which is a disparate mix of diverse doctrines, cults, and social traits, holds the key to a meaningful study of world religion. Owing to its composite structure, this ancient religion has been likened to an armadillo by Wendy Donigher but T. McEvilley (The Shape of Ancient Thought) discusses it from a broader West Asian perspective.

Shiva Minuksha and Mahakala in the Indus Seals

Saraswati and Ushas in the Harappan Seals

     The Harappan civilisation was based not on one but two large rivers - the Indus and Saraswati. The fact that more than a thousand Harappan sites have been unearthed in the Saraswati basin in Haryana and Sindh shows that the Harappan civilisation should be called the Indus-Saraswati civilisation. Remote sensing data show that in the 4th-3rd millennium B.C. the Saraswati was a mighty river which fell into the sea, but between about 2000 -1700 B.C. geomorphologic changes caused its two main sources to change course. The Sutlej moved westward and became a tributary of the Indus whereas the Yamuna moved eastward and joined the Ganga. Due to the huge loss of water Saraswati became defunct. Did the Helmand, which was called Harahuvaiti or Sarasvati, also at some stage fall into the sea but later became blocked?      

     However though there is sound archaeological basis for the name Indus-Sarasvati, it is not cited in early epigraphic records. Fortunately the name Saraswati can be read in the Harappan seals although this seems to refer to a river or a river group. However, due to the difficulty of reading the seals, the precise socio-religious context of the cults of the Mother-goddess and the Bull cannot be ascertained at this stage.  

      The Harappan custom of burying the dead with funerary items stands apart from later Hinduism, yet in many respects there is a religious continuity with traditional Hinduism and Buddhism. Although no temple has been identified in the Indus cities, the abundance of terracotta figurines of the Bull and the Goddess throw light on the religion of the Indus people. The apparent absence of temples in any Harappan site reminds one of Herodotus’ statement about Persian temples and agrees with Vedic religion.

     Harappan religion can be termed proto-Hinduism. That there is no trace of Hinduism in Indus-Sarasvati religion is a cliché tirelessly repeated by writers like R. Thapar and S. Ratnagar. The great respect for Sarasvati in the great ancient text RigVeda links it with ancient Hinduism. The Encyclopedia Britannica stresses the link of Harappan religion with Hinduism:

... has produced much evidence of the cult of the goddess and the bull. Figurines of both occur, with the goddess being more common than the bull. The bull, however, appears more frequently on the many steatite seals. A horned deity, possibly with three faces, occurs on a few seals, and on one seal he is surrounded by animals. A few male figurines in hieratic (sacerdotal) poses and one apparently in a dancing posture may represent deities. No building has been discovered at any Harappan site that can be positively identified as a temple, but the Great Bath at Mohenjo-daro was almost certainly used for ritual purposes, as were the ghats (bathing steps on riverbanks) attached to later Hindu temples.    

       The bull-cult evident from the seals agrees with Vedic religion. The horned deity who is the lord of animals is Shiva Pasupati. From the seals, his name appears to be Mahakala. Many figurines of goddesses speak of a cult of a goddess who may be Ushas whose symbol is indicated in a seal. The Great Bath at Mohenjo-daro indicates a water-cult the presiding deity of which may have been Ushas who seems to be related to the river Goddess Saraswati. In the RigVeda Saraswati is lauded for the fertilizing and purifying powers of her waters and as the giver of fertility and wealth. Some seals depict rituals which are difficult to interpret but there is clear proof of adoration of the spirits of sacred trees, snakes and streams which are the principal elements of traditional Hinduism. The Indus symbol of the ornate leaf seems to be linked to the Soma cult. More importantly, the wheel sign which is an Asokan icon and an integral element of Indian ethos, appears in many Indus seals illustrating the continuity in the Indian tradition.
       There is also indirect evidence for the presence of Hinduism in the Indus cities. The name of the Mitanni (14th cent. BC) is an echo of the Vedic Mitra. They worshipped Vedic gods like Indra, Varuna, Mitra and Nasatiya. Again the Kashi people (Kassites) who migrated to Sumer from the Zagros area about 1750 BC also worshipped Hindu gods like Suryash and Maruttash and, according to Toynbee, spoke a Sanskrit-like language. However, it is important to note that the religion of the Harappans may have been substantially different from Vedic religion although the Vedas provide a rough framework for studying it. In this respect the data from the seals assume great importance.

      One of the frequently occurring signs in the seal is the compound symbol which occurs on 236 seals. Many scholars have held that the Indus symbols are often conjugated. Thus the symbol can be seen as a compound between  and the symbol which may represent the sceptre which designated royal authority and may thus be read as ‘Ras’. The symbol-pair   occurs in 131 texts and in many copper plate inscriptions which shows its great religious significance. The ending ‘Tri’ or ’Ti’ is significant and cannot but remind one of the great Tri-names like Saraswati and Gayatri.  As Uksha was often shortened to ‘Sa’ the sign-pair  becomes Sarasa-tri or Sarasvati.

       However, Saraswati appears to have been much more than just a river name. Further clarification on Goddess Sarasvati comes from a study of Goddess Ushas.

     From the the Vedas we may now turn to a priceless historical source - Herodotus, who writes,

The following are certain Persian customs which I can describe from personal knowledge. The erection of statues, temples, and altars is not an accepted practice amongst them, and anyone who does such a thing is considered a fool, because, presumably, the Persian religion is not anthropomorphic like the Greek. Zeus, in their system, is the whole circle of the heavens, and they sacrifice to him from the tops of mountains. They also worship the sun, moon, and earth, fire, water, and winds, which are their only original deities: it was later that they learned from the Assyrians and Arabians the cult of Uranian Aphrodite. The Assyrian name for Aphrodite is Mylitta, the Arabian Alilat, the Persian Mitra.

According to most commentators Herodotus' portrayal of Mitra as a kind of Uranian Aphrodite is a horrible mistake but this may be a hasty conclusion. The great historian, in fact, may be providing a crucial information here that greatly clarifies the complex nature of the god/goddess Mitra in Indo-Iran. Herodotus' 'Persia' often includes 'India' but even here a Goddess named Mitra or Mitrâ is not known. The problem merits study from a wider perspective.

       Is Herodotus referring here to Ushas, "the most graceful creation of the Vedic seers" according to A. A. Macdonell ? It is well known that Mitra and Ushas were both solar deities. In the RigVeda (I.123.5) Ushas is said to be related to Varuna who is often jointly invoked with Mitra. As Varuna is associated with waters, the same may be true of Ushas. Was Ushas the presiding deity at the great bath at Mohenjo-daro?

      Ushas is also described as a sister of Bhaga, who is also a solar God like Mitra. Is the name Bhagavati of Sarasvati (and also of Durga) a reminder of her links with Bhaga who was a brother of Ushas? Bhaga may correspond to Baga of Persia and Mary Boyce writes that Baga also meant Mitra. This indicates a close relation of Ushas with Mitra.

      A striking confirmation of the identification of the symbol as Uksha(n) comes from a seal depicting a king kneeling before a great goddess who has been identified by some scholars as Ushas.

Seal depicting Goddess Ushas and the sign

      The stylized symbol around the goddess clearly suggests the Uksha symbol which appears to be linked to Ushas. From the trident symbol on the head of the goddess surrounded by the symbol , the very important symbol which has a frequency of 118, can be identified as Ushas or Usha. Of the 118 occurrences 110 are in the duplet which seems to have special importance. Ushas can be easily seen to be the feminine counterpart of Uksha.  

Seal no. 4049 reads __ Yamina Saraswati Usha Uksha. Seal no. 5076 10   can be read as __ __ Maha Kal Usha Uksha which may indicate that Ushas was a priestess of Mahakal.

      It is probable that the mythology of Ushas later became transformed into that of the graceful goddess of learning - Saraswati.

 A tenth century image of Saraswati from Khajuraho (Photo courtesy ASI)

The father of Ushas was Dyaus, probably represented by in the seals. Dyaus later became transformed into the figure of Brahma. Significantly the incestuous relation alleged between Ushas and Dyaus has a counterpart in that between Brahma and Saraswati. Furthermore Asvins are said to be the companions of both Ushas and Saraswati. 

Urania was the muse of astronomy and astrology. Just like Mitra she is associated with stars. The name Urania seems to be related to Varuna and hence also to Mitra. 

Hundred Names of Chandragupta Maurya

      That no relic of the great Chandragupta is known from Patna or anywhere else in the world exposes the bankruptcy of Jonesian Indology. This has, in fact, turned the great Mauryan into a mythical figure. D. K. Chakrabarti of Cambridge University refers to many 2nd century B.C. texts from Mathura but is silent on the absence of any inscription of Chandragupta from Patna or elsewhere. R. Thapar, another expert on the Mauryas, also evades the issue. The scenario is so bleak that F. R. Allchin drops Chandragupta from his recent book on the archaeology of South Asia. Allchin proposes fresh excavations at Patna but judging from the experience of nearly a century, this is likely to be an exercise in futility. In fact barring Ashoka, no relic of any Maurya or Nanda king is known.

       However, a careful analysis reveals that the two Aramaic inscriptions found at Laghman, Afghanistan, which are attributed to Ashoka, actually belong to Chandragupta. The inscriptions, which have been studied by Scholars like H. Humbach, A. Dupont-Sommer and B.N. Mukherjee, mention Priyadarshi and, as such, have been attributed to Ashoka but this may be unwarranted. On shallow linguistic grounds, Harry Falk makes the novel suggestion that the texts belong neither to Ashoka nor Chandragupta. As H. C. Raychaudhuri stressed, the epithet Priyadarshi was used both by Asoka and Chandragupta. D.C. Sircar also did not agree that the inscriptions belong to Asoka. The injunction against the killing of creatures and fishes in the inscription has been thought to be a characteristic of Ashoka but this is unjustified. Chandragupta is also said to have embraced Jainism in his later years.

       The clinching evidence is that Vakshu (Tarn, GBI, p.101 ) in the inscriptions is clearly Oxyartes who was a contemporary of Chandragupta, not Ashoka.

         That no coins of Chandragupta is known does not concern writers like Chakrabarti or Thapar. A judicious study shows that Andragoras was Chandragupta. The coins of Andragoras have been dated to the fourth-century BC by many scholars, and both Plutarch and Appian use a similar name, Androcottus, for Chandragupta. Tarn gave the crucial information that the Sun's quadriga of Andragoras' coins was also used by Vakshu or Oxyartes. The Charioteer of the Sun God is Aruna in Sanskrit and thus the coin can be seen to belong to Arunadas or Orontes, another name of Andragoras.

     If it is recognized that Bindusara's name Amitraghata is an error for Amitradata, Mauryan history takes a very dramatic turn. It can be inferred that (A)Mitradata was also a name of his father Chandragupta who was a world figure like Alexander the Great with whom his name is often associated. Like Alexander the Great, Chandragupta could also have proclaimed, `Putroham Prthivyah' - 'I am a son of the earth'.

      Mithridates–II who, according to Diodorus, rose to the throne of Pontus in 337 B.C. (Diod. xvi. 90.) appears to be Chandragupta. Diodorus assigns him a reign of thirty-five years(337-302 B.C.), but it appears certain that he did not hold uninterrupted possession of the sovereignty during that period. The circumstances that led to his absence from Pontus are not known; indeed no farther notice of him is available from the date of his accession in 337 B.C. until some time after the death of Alexander (~322 B.C.), when he is found attending the court and camp of Antigonus. The date is important as it is the date of accession of Chandragupta.
    Crucial information comes from a very ancient Indian source, the Sanskrit drama Mudrarakshasa. Curiously in many manuscripts of the drama, Chandragupta is absent but his role is taken up by Rantivarma which suggests that it was another name of the former. As `varma', like `bates', is a title, Rantivarma can be seen to be the same as Orontobates. Diodorus (xix 46, 47) writes that Orontobates was appointed the satrap of Media by Antigonus. He soon after successfully repulsed an attack by some partisans of Eumenes and Peithon. Arrian writes that Orontobates was present in the army of Darius-III in the battle of Gaugamela. From Diodorus we learn that Mithridates-III, son of Mithridates-II succeeded to the throne in 302 B.C. This is Bindusara Amitrodata. Diodorus writes that he added largely to the dominions inherited from his father.

       As in the case of Chandragupta, no coins of any Nanda kings are known. In fact the absence of any Nanda or Maurya coin is seen only as a minor problem by mainstream writers like R. Thapar. Here also progress can be made by shifting the focus to a wider arena. That the Nandas were masters of a vast area stretching up to Baluchistan is known but owing to Jonesian delusions it has not been realised that, like Mithridates-II, the Nandas were also active in the Pontus area.

       G. Waddingham describes a Cilician coin bearing the legend AGR and depicting a king slaying a lion which is similar to SNG-Paris-Cilicie#209. The lion may symbolise the Macedonians who were in conflict with Nandas.

Coin of Agramesh?

AGR may be a reference to Agramesh who, according to Curtius, was the ruler of the Gangaridae and Prasii. Agramesh may be a Nanda king.

 

Parnaka, Uncle of Darius-I, was Purnavarman alias Amitrodana, Uncle of Gotama

       In the inscriptions found from the fortification area of Persepolis the most important treasury official during Darius' regnal years 16 to 25 appears to be Parnaka, who was called Pharnaces by the Greek writers. His special position may have been due to the fact that he was a close relative of king Darius-I. In his personal seal he proclaims himself as the son of Arsames who seems to be the grandfather of Darius-I. His assistant was Ziŝŝawiŝ who appears to be Tithaios of the Greek writers. Surprisingly, from the Aramaic ritual texts it appears that the treasurer at Persepolis from the 7th to the 19th regnal year of Xerexes was one Data-Mithra. Baratkama was treasurer from Darius 32 to Xerxes 6 At this stage it is profitable to digress  to another group of sources.

       Śankarâchârya, the famous Indian philosopher, is known worldwide for his erudition, yet his categorical remark,

“There have been no world emperors (sārvabhauma) after Purnavarman.”

seems unfathomable. That almost nothing is known about the Mauryan king Purnavarman, cited by Hsuan Tsang, is a legacy of Jonesian Indology. The epithet 'world emperor' appears perplexing and the Âchârya excluded great emperors like Asoka and Chandragupta although he must have known about them. Did he consult a lost history written by the Kashmirian historian Kshemendra (similar to the Rajatarangini) which is mentioned by Taranatha?

        For more information one has to turn to the sixth century archives from Persepolis. It is well known that Darius-I had conquered part of 'India' but who was the Satrap in-charge of India? A likely candidate was Parnaka or Pharnaka, the treasurer and the highest officer in Darius-I's government who was also the king's uncle. Many of the Persepolis tablets signed by him show that he was a resident of Arachosia which was called White India. As his name resembles Purnavarman it appears nearly certain that he was the Satrap of India.

        However, being the Satrap of India hardly merits the title 'world-emperor' but a closer study shows that Parnaka was also the Satrap of the Pontic region. This

  There is great confusion in the literature regarding one Data-Mithra who was also a treasurer at Persepolis. Data-Mithra or Mithradata may be just another name of Parnaka or Purnavarman.

         M. Dandamayev writes that Sphendadates was a nickname of Gaumata (quoted by Ctesias) but is totally unaware of the interwoven Achaemenid family tree. The learned Al-beruni wrote that Isfendiyad, son of Gushtasp, drove away the Buddhists from Iran. Al-beruni's data shows that Isfendiyad or Sphendadata was also a name of Darius-I. 

       There is another link between the Achaemenids and the Buddhists - Rama. Imagining the Buddhists to be from Nepal and Rama from Ayodhya in U. P., the eminent linguist Sir Harold Bailey discounted the Buddhist claim that Rama was one of their own. A careful study, however, shows this suspicion to be misplaced. Incidentally, Darius-I also claimed to be a descendant of Arya Ram-ana, probably a descendant of Rama (Ram-Sin), who was said to be an 'Elamite'. This seems to imply that the Ikshaku dynasty was linked to the  Uksha-man (Achaemenid) dynasty. Okkaka, an early ancestor of the Buddhists was clearly a Uksha-king. Thus Gotama appears to be linked to the Achaemenids. As the former were related to the Nandas, the Mauryas also appears to be related to the Achemenians. The Arsacid claim of descent from the Achaemenians is discounted by R.N. Frye but this is an oversight. At this stage it is profitable to turn to a very learned authority. 

        Apart from the common name Sphendadata, Gotama's relationship with Darius can also be guessed from the fact that Mithradata may may have been the same as Amitrodana, Gotama's uncle. 

Dharmapala, Gauda and the Bangash Tribes

     The link of modern Bengal with the Yavana lands in the North-west dates from the pre-Islamic era. The name Vaňga means 'broken' in Bengali and Sanskrit and Bengal or Vaňga-desha appears to have been a country split into two halves with an eastern part in modern Bengal and an western one in the Baluchistan area. Kalidasa’s remark that his hero Raghu uprooted and replanted the Vaňga people like rice plants is very significant. This is a clear hint at a geographical relocation which is also borne out by the history of the Bangash tribes of Iran, Afghanistan and Pakistan.

       Dharmapala, the famous Pala king of Bengal, was one of the greatest rulers of India who controlled not only the whole of the East, Central and North India but also the Yavana lands. This is usually taken to be Baluchistan but his dominion may have extended further West. Significantly,Vaidyadeva's Kamauli grant of Assam links the Palas to Mihirasya vamsa or Sun/ Fire worshipping Iranians. Moreover, Sandhyakar Nandi, a court poet of the later Palas, stated that the Pala dynasty belonged to  Samudrakula (Ocean lineage). This appears to be an allusion to the sea-links of the Palas with Gour in the the Fars area.

        The Buddhist text Arya-Manjushri-mula-kalpa refers to the rise of his father Gopala in Gauda, which is identified with Gaur in modern Bengal where relics of the Palas have been found, but the scenario is complicated by the fact that there was another flourishing city named Gour (Firuzabad) in the land of the Yavanas which Dharmapala controlled. Apart from Gour in Fars there was another Kanauj (Kohnouj) and Patali in the Karman area. 

Dharmapala's vast empire included the Yavana lands

      Curiously the Arya-Manjushri-mula-kalpa states that the people of Gauda spoke an Asura dialect.   Incidentally, the Kambojas, who are closely linked to the history of Bengal are called Asuras in the Markandeya Purana. Further insight is offered by the history of the Bangash tribe of Afghanistan and Pakistan. They are said to be originally from Jalalabad in Afghanistan who have migrated to Pakistan, India and Iran. One of the Maestros of Indian Classical Music, Ustad Amjad Ali Khan, is a member of the

Bangash tribe of Afghanistan. The Indian musical instrument Sarod is a variant of the Rabab played by his grandfather Ustad Hafeez Ali Khan Bangash.

       There are also Bangash people settled in Khorasan and Mazandaran in Iran. The surname Bengalee among the Indian Parsees harks back to an ancient Bengal in the Fars area. Most importantly the Nawabs of Kanauj (Farrukhabad) who ruled until the British period (1801) were from the Bangash tribe. The presence of the Bangash in Kanauj as well as the Kohnouj area shows how carelessly Indian history has been written.
     Place-names like Konarak and Katak in south-east Iran show that this was once early Kaliňga. Thus the presence in this area of Vaňga, which was adjacent to Kaliňga, can be easily inferred. The Aitareya Āraņyaka refers to Vaňga-Magadhāh which indicates that the Vaňgas and the Magadhas were neighbouring people. As Magadha has been identified with Magan in the Baluchistan area it follows that there must have been another Vaňga in the north-west. Aňga, Vaňga and Kaliňga were adjacent states and the as city-names like Zaranj (Dvara-Anga) and Mohenjodaro (Maha-Anga-Dvara) indicate, ancient Aňga was in the north-west. Pundra is linked to modern Bengal and this clashes with Punt in the Gulf area which is referred to in the very early Egyptian documents.

      Gopala, the founder of the Pala dynasty is a shadowy figure in Indian history but a careful study of his history and geography shows him as a great ruler and clears some of the basic misconceptions of Indology. Nothing definite is known about his origin except the names of his father Vapyata, the 'destr-oyer of adversaries', and his grandfather Dayitavisnu, 'bright with all learning'. There is a plaque near the great lake at Bhopal in Madhya Pradesh which says that the name Bhopal is a transform of Gopala who was the ruler of the area. This appears to be very likely but there is much more to Gopala, the true extent of whose empire remains a mystery. He was certainly linked to Gaur in modern Bengal but it does not have the characteristics of the capital of such a great ruler.

      Furthermore, as Iranian history does not know who ruled the Fars area in this period, it is possible that Dharmapala ruled Gour in Iran. Incidentally there was another prosperous city named Gour in Eastern Iran (Firuzabad) which shows the true complexities in ancient geography. That this area was once within greater India has already been stated.

        The origin of the Palas has been ascribed to the Sea, Samudrakula, which appears to be an allusion to the Persian Gulf area which was once a part of India. The strong influence of Buddhist art in eastern Iran has been noted by R.N. Frye. (The Golden Age of Persia, p.41). V. Elisseeff (Encyclopedia of World Art, Asiatic Prehistory) also remarks with striking clarity that from the viewpoint of archaeology, eastern Iran was closer to India.

Ajanta-like murals at Gour (Picture courtesy CHN)

      This Buddhist influence can be clearly seen from the murals recently discovered at Gour in Iran which clearly reveal the close affinity with the Buddhist art of Ajanta. But history of art cannot be studied in a political vacuum. What was the political background behind this strong Buddhist influence or more precisely, who were the rulers of Fars in the 8th century AD? Iranian experts have ascribed the murals of Gour to the Sasanian princes but this is not the whole story. 

    The Palace of Gour

    The name of an elusive king of Bengal, Shashanka, roughly dated between 600-625 AD, has a distinct Sasanian ring. Two of his inscriptions dated to the 8th and 10th year of his reign have been found from Midnapore which had sea-links with Ceylon, Gujerat and eastern Iran. Another undated inscription has been found from nearby Egra. His gold and silver coins have also been found but his capital Karnasuvarna and his Palace remains undiscovered. That he was strongly anti-Buddhist agrees with his Sasanian background and it is just possible that together with a large chunk of India including Bengal, he was also a king of eastern Iran. He was involved in a bitter dispute with Harsha of Kanauj.  

        Vincent Smith’s remarks about Iranian influence on Ajanta art irked R. Thapar and other Indian writers but it contains more than a grain of truth. However what Smith thought to be Persia was in fact Greater India. In Vihara I at Ajanta is a picture of a king and his queen in Persian attire, which harks back to the unbroken Indo-Iranian fraternity. Madeline Hallade writes in the Encyclopedia of World Art,

Symbolic and decorative motifs adopted directly from the Iranian world, or transmitted through its agency, enriched the repertory of Indian art from its first inception; indeed its versatility is early attested by the Buddhist monuments of the 2nd century B.C. (balustrades at Sanchi and Bharhut) 

This influence on Indian Art 'from its first inception' cannot be explained without considering an early India in Iran. Indian art cannot be understood without scrapping Jones' amateurish theory and going back to an unfractured Indo-Iranian fraternity.

 Dharmapala and the Early History of Bengal in a Non-Jonesian Frame

Terah, Eastern Judaism and Buddhism

       As Judaism is older than Abraham, it is judicious to assume that many Judaic traits are in fact carry-overs from the religion of his ancestors. The learned theologist Rev. M. Black proclaims with uncommon insight in the Peake’s Commentary,

 
What we know as Judaism, as distinct from the ancient religion of Israel, is a post-exilic phenomenon.

But where was the Jewish homeland and when did Abraham start his Journey? Although experts on Jewish history like Ran Zadok place Abraham's abode at Ur in Sumer, this is certainly false. Prof. Zadok rightly denies that Sumer was Shinar yet due to his ignorance of the Indian tradition fails to realise that Shinar of the Old Testament is the same as Sineru of the Pali texts and Usinara of the RigVeda. The fact that Usinara was in the north-west is certain and this links Abraham and the early Judaic people with greater India.

        According to most experts Abraham started his westward trek in the first half of the 18th century B.C. which was the time of unprecedented world turmoil. Many civilisations, including the Indus-Saraswati and the Sumerian, collapsed during this period. Incidentally, first half of the 18th century B.C. was most probably also be the date of the fateful Bharata war which is said to have ended an epoch and started another, the Kaliyuga or the dark age. This epoch has to linked to the downfall of the Indus-Saraswati civilisation.

       After the war Yudhisthira started a westward journey to Mount Meru which was certainly in the north-west. This points to the likelihood that the westward journeys of Abraham and Yudhisthira may in fact be related. The Yadus vanished from Indian history after the Bharata war (~1750 B.C.) which appears to be linked to Abraham's westward journey. The early Yahdus may have been from Indus-Saraswati. A careful study shows that Abraham was from Babil or Kapilavastu in Seistan, which was an abode of Prophets.

       E. Herzfeld rejected the local tradition of Kuh-e Khwaja that it was the abode of Ibrahim but this may have been an oversight. His father Terah may be Yadus-Tera or Yudhisthira of the Epic Mahabharata. Yudhisthira's cousin was the great Yadu (Yadava) hero Krishna who may have been an Eastern 'Jew'. His son Yaudheya also appears to be a Yadu. The name Jaddua of the high-priest at the time of the second temple echoes Yadu. D. P. Mishra noted the uncanny parallels between the Indian and the Judaic traditions (Studies In The Proto-History of India, p. 126).

      The biblical authors were only dimly aware of the socio-political background of the Patriarchs. E. A. Speiser wrote that the Patriarchal stories contain traditions and social data that do not fit in with the later times in which they were written down. This can be seen from the confusion regarding Shinar which is equated with Sumer without proper warrant. In Gen. x. 10 the beginning of Nimrod's kingdom is said to have been "Babel, and Erech, and Accad, and Calneh, in the land of Shinar." Two points are to be noted here. Firstly Nimrod (Nim=great) of the Old Testament is the divine archer Rudra of the RigVeda which clearly suggests a location in Indo-Iran. Secondly Babel need not be Babylon but can be Kapil or Babil in Seistan. Shinar is clearly the Sineru of the Buddhist texts. In Gen. xi. 2, Shinar is the site of the tower of Babel which has to be reconsidered in view of the great discoveries in the Jiroft area. 

       Terah is said to have been an idol-maker and a pagan but the Indian evidence shows him as a righteous king (Dharmaputra). Just as E. Badian ignored the Pali and Sanskrit texts in Alexander's history, modern scholars on Judaism like R. J. Zwi Werblowsky, E. S. Gruen and S. Shaked consider Judaism to be only a product of Egypt and Palestine and disregard the evidence of the Mahabharata. On the other hand, the eminent Sanskritist Nicholas Sutton notes the clear traits of monotheism in the religious doctrines of the Mahabharata which offers insights into the religion of Terah.  

         Although a full-fledged meditative tradition is absent in Rabbinic Judaism and Krishna's tenets of love appear rather dissonant in it, a different picture comes from the Jewish mystical tradition and Kabbala. It uses mandalas, such as the ten sefirot, to help explain reality. It has even been conjectured that the star of David originated as a Kabbalistic mandala. Rather like a Buddhist teacher Maimonides counsels on seeking internal peace and personal enlightenment in the Mishneh Torah.

       The Book of Ezra (V: 3,6) states that Tattenai the Persian governor of 'Eber Nari' led an investigation into the rebuilding of the Temple in Jerusalem about 519 B.C. He sent a report to Darius, who ordered the work to proceed. Tattenai was clearly Tathagata or Gotama Buddha. Why was he so interested in the affairs of the Jews? Gotama's interest in the affairs of the Jewish temple again reveals the close relation between Judaism and Buddhism.  

        The central plank of Kabbala is the startling doctrine of the deity. Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan writes that many of its features like the potency assigned to letters, the use of charms and amulets, the theory of emanation as opposed to creation ex nihilio, the doc-trine of the correspondence between the macrocosm and microcosm, belief in rebirth and a definite panth-eistic tendency, are alien to the spirit of Rabbinic Judaism and akin to that of the Indian Upanishads and Tantrism. The roots of Tantrism go back to the earliest phases of human civilization and can be seen in 3rd millennium B.C. Sumer. Werblowsky writes in The Concise Encyclopedia of Living Faiths (p. 26),

Of course Kabbalah is not the same as Jewish mysticism, of which it is merely one phase, though the most important and far-reaching in its effects. In spite of its name which means '[esoteric] tradition' and in spite of the Kabbalist's sincere belief that they only revived the old mystical teachings of Moses and and earlier sages, there can be no reasonable doubt that the system as such evolved in the thirteenth century in Southern France and Spain.

This scepticism is shared by the majority of Judaic scholars but is very short-sighted. Werblowsky wonders in vain,

How must one explain the resurgence of myth in the midst of what is usually considered to be the moral enemy of mythical religion? By what channels or mechanisms did mythical and Gnostic symbols reassert themselves in medieval Jewry? What is the relation of the old, Oriental Gnosticism and the almost explosive reappearance of similar ideas ........ For our present purpose we can ignore these questions .... .

       The answer lies in the Eastern Judaism of Terah. A. Edrei and D. Mendels have written about the split between the eastern and Western Diaspora but their Eastern Jews are only from Babylonia and Russia. Had they been aware of the crucial import of the Indian tradition, writers like Werblowsky and E. S. Gruen would not have missed the link of the term Kabbala with Kaivalya of the Jainas and Moksha of the Hindus. Mani used a similar term Kephalia. 

       Significantly, Seistan was the home of Gotama and also Abraham and Zoroaster. The common origin of Gotama and Abraham suggests that Buddhism is linked with Judaism. Jerusalem, in fact, is less ancient than Kuh-e Khwaja near ancient Shahr-e Shokhta which was larger than contemporary Ur in Sumer. It was called Uri-Salem in the Amarna letters which echoes the name Shilavati or Shilahatta of the birth-place of Joshaphat or Gotama. It can be recalled that many of the early Indian texts were translated by learned Jewish scholars.

       It is stunning to realize that this humanistic Eastern Judaism was the cradle of Buddhism. Gotama's name Buddho-Dana reminds one of Daniel and hints at some link between the Jews and the Buddhists. This is supported by the Persepolis inscriptions. Due to the Nepalese forgery it has been overlooked that Sudda -Yauda-Saramana cited in numerous Persepolis tablets was not only an eastern Yahdu but also the father of Siddhartha who is Sedda-Saramana of the tablets (Sedda-arta). Sedda-Saramana is the Sethar of the Book of Ezra. The conflict between Orthodox Jews and Eastern religion is evident from the history of Nebuchadrezzar and the clashes between Tattenai (Gotama) and the Palestinian Jews. If Josephus' data that Alexander the Great had prostrated before the high priest Jaddua is true, he may have known about a very different brand of Judaism.

 Terah, Eastern Judaism and Buddhism-Hinduism

The Old Testament, a Sourcebook of History

      The various problems in the interpretation of Genesis-14 of the Old Testament are well known. The eminent biblical scholar S. H. Hooke termed this as the ‘erratic block’ in the Pentateuch. A careful study of the Abraham Saga from a Non-Jonesian perspective reveals not only Hammu-rabi but also Rama (Kudur Laghumar) as key figures of the era. 

The location of Kapilavastu in Seistan throws new light on the origin of Zoroastrianism, Buddhism, Judaism and Christianity. E. Herzfeld wrote that the three Magi went from Kuh-e Khwaja. Abraham's homeland appears to be Ur Kashdim near Shahr-i Shokhta in Seistan which was a larger city than contemporary Ur. This reveals new links between the Indo-Iranians and Jews. The Yadus of the early Indian texts appear to be related to the early Yahdus. The study seems to indicate that Shinar of the Old Testament of the Bible was not Sumer but Seistan. The land of Sineru mentioned in the Buddhist texts may be Seistan. Sineru may be the same as Shinar. The Buddhist sources speak of the primeval king Maha Sammata. This genealogical allusion agrees with the Old Testament where the Elamites are described as the offsprings of 'Elam, eldest son of Shem' and shows the essential unity of the Indians, Elamites and the Judaic people. 

Hanging garden of Babylon

Dawn of Religions in the Land of Prophets

New Reflections on Genesis 14

Bindusara Amitrodates or Mithradates

      Being the father of the great Diodotus-I, Bindusara is also of significant historical importance. Although writers of the London school like R. Thapar abandon Bindusara in the gutter of history, there are saner alternatives. If one rejects the notion of a Mauryan capital at Patna and turns instead to Punjab, Afghanistan and beyond, the real Bindusara can be identified within the framework of a Non-Jonesian Indology. The great B. M. Barua saw no link of Chandragupta with Patna.

       Bindusara (301 BC – 268 BC) is said to have been a valiant warrior who greatly expanded his dominion. He has also been remembered for his love for Hellenic culture - a trait which comes as a great help in the search for the flesh-and-blood Bindusara. The crucial information comes from a study of his name Amitrochates which seems to be an error for Amitradates or Mitradates.

Apart from Goura in the Laghman area of Afghanistan there was yet another Gaur in what is now Iran (Firuzabad) which was perhaps more important. Archaeologists have recently found an ancient observatory here (http://iran-daily.com/1384/2520/html/index.htm) which is very similar to those at Jaipur and Delhi. Scholars usually trace the history of Gaur from the 3^rd century AD but it may date from an earlier epoch. Nearby Istakhr can be Ptolemy’s Astagaura.

       Turning now to history it can be seen that Chandragupta was a very powerful ruler and his dominion was larger than that of Seleucus with whom he clashed, but was he an absolute monarch? His identity with Andragoras seems to suggest that, at least in the early years, he acknowledged nominal Seleucid suzerainty. This was probably true also in the case of his son Bindusara.

       This brings one closer to Bagadates, the first indigenous Seleucid satrap who was a contemporary of Bindusara. “Dat” is usually rendered as ‘Given’ but a better alternative may be “Law”. Ashoka drops a valuable clue in one of his Edicts that his ancestors were also Devanampiyas or Devadats (Deva = God = Baga). The Mithraic cross in the standard in the right

side of the coin of Bagadates reveals that Bagadates was also Mithradates. As Mithra in Iran was a god of War, this can also be read as Amitraghata. Mary Boyce writes that Baga also meant Mitra. Bindusara is linked to Gauda in some texts which may be Gour in the Fars area of modern Iran which was once a part of greater Indo-Iran.

       In the little polis of Amyzon in north-west Caria a decree from the time of Philip Arrhidaeus granted citizenship to a man named Bagadates and his son Ariaramnes and on the advice of the oracle at Delphi, appointed the former as the priest of the local goddess Artemis.

Hanuman, Bazrangids and the Indianization of South East Asia

       Hanuman, the close associate of Rama was a figure of great historical importance. That he was known as a monkey-chief should not distract us because there are many indications in the Ramayana itself that he was a normal human being. It is very likely that he was associated with a tribe with a monkey totem. Bāndar, the word for monkey is very significant. Hanuman can be identified with Iliman, an associate of the Elamite king Ram-Sin who ruled Sumer and probably also Elam and India. Iliman’s name can also be read as Anuman as the cuneiform symbol for ‘An’ and ‘Ili’ was the same.

         Hanuman is also widely known by the name Bajarangbali which appears to be very significant. The Bazrangis were a well-known family of Fars. They were the traditional priests of the Anahita temple at Istakhr in Fars. According to Tabari, Ram-Behist the wife of Sasan, the earliest ancestor of the Sasanids was a Bazrangi. The Bazrangis were a maritime people who controlled the costal areas of southeast Iran which was once ‘India’. There is a hint of this in the name Maruti of Hanuman which is associated with mobility. The way in which he brought a mountain of medicinal herbs from a far-away place to cure Lakshmana who was critically wounded, can be readily explained by his maritime links.

        The word ‘Bāndar’ for ‘port’ may be a memory of the Bāndars (Monkey-people). The seventeenth century historian Taranatha refers to a Persian king named Bandero.

        The Bazrangis were the colonizers of Oman and East Africa and their influence reached as far as the Philippines. They appear to have played a major role in the Indianisation or Sanskritisation of South-East Asia.

Hammurabi As Seen From India

        No sensible account of the ancient middle-east can be written without Hammurabi whose greatness can be gauged from many of his letters and other relics that have been found by archaeologists. 

However, a judicious study shows that his law-code was in existence before his reign and he was just one among several able contemporaries such as Siwe-Palar-Khuppak, (whom he addresses as the father), Rama (Ram-Sin) and Shamshi Adad. He was not deified like Ram-Sin and his treatment of his closest ally Zimri-Lim does not reveal a regard for propriety or Law. Some of his love letters also reveal a full-blooded personality. 

Although Hammu-rabi's archaeological imprint is far superior to that of others C. J. Gadd writes that the materials for his history 'are scanty in the extreme'. His Palace remains unknown. The Bible places him at Babil in Shinar which is usually thought to be Babylon in Iraq but it may be in Seistan. The Ramayana links him to Lanka which may be near Bandar-e-Lengeh. 

  Hammu-ravi was The Ravana of Valmiki

Comments from leading scholars   

"Your personal knowledge of the terrain makes your views especially valuable and I agree that Patna is too far east." (to be a Palibothra)

Prof. N. G. L. Hammond, editor of The Cambridge Ancient History and discoverer of Vergina.

* "Dr. Pal departs largely from the trodden path (i.e. the Jonesian Indology) yet presents a cogent, well-documented thesis."

Prof. Sukumari Bhattacharji, noted Indologist and author of  "The Indian Theogony."

* "There is no question of disagreeing with you in any matter"

Mr. I. Mahadevan, noted writer on the Indus script.   

* "I sincerely thank you for the copies of your paper on Ancient Indian History which I received a few days back. Dr. Pal I regret to inform you that given my job of the Director of the Italian Embassy Cultural Centre I have quit Archaeology for good."

  Prof. Maurizio Tosi, distinguished archaeologist and discoverer of Shahr-i Shokhta in Seistan.

* "I am both amazed and impressed by your paper 'An Altar of Alexander Now Standing near Delhi'. It is very convincing (though I would like to see counter arguments) and has changed my view of Alexander in India, of Ashoka, and the Euthydemid dynasty".

Prof. Thomas McEvilley, Rice University, author of

 "The Shape of Ancient Thought".                   
  

* "It is good to know that scholars are making use of them. Too often one feels as if one is working in a vacuum. Good luck on your research".

Prof.  Mark Garrison, Trinity University, an eminent authority on Persepolis Tablets

* "Various renovations occurred at different times (at Kuh-e Khwaja) so the dating is complex with parts ranging from (pre-Sasanian) Buddhist to Sasanian to Islamic. It's very interesting to know that someone thinks the Buddha was born there."

     Dr. Trudy Kawami, Arthur M. Sackler Foundation,

              a commentator on the art of Kuh-e Khwaja.

*  "He has performed an incomparable service in rectifying the western bias that has always been preponderant in studies of Alexander. No one now should look at Alexander without also going to Pal and delving further into the Sanskrit sources and their allusions to Alexander.".

    Dr. Jan-Mathieu Carbon, Corpus Christi College,

          Oxford, in Scholia Reviews 14(2005)

* "I read your article with great interest.  That is the rich nature of Alexander as a scholarly topic; there is always more to consider!"

        Dr. Janet Grossman, The J. Paul Getty Museum

* "I, personally, have been waiting impatiently to see what you have to say concerning Jesus Christ and Alexander."

Prof. John Scarborough, University of Wisconsin

* "Your theses about Jonesian Indology certainly look stimulating and challenging".

Prof. Ian Mabbett, Monash University.

* "Your piece in the Sunday Statesman on Ram is most interesting."

Prof. T. C. Young Jr. Royal Ontario Museum, Toronto, a noted expert on the history and archaeology of Iran

 * "Thank you for your letter and the enclosure which I have read. I regret to say that I cannot give you an opinion on its contents as I am neither a specialist in linguistics nor in the ancient history of west Asia. I am sorry therefore that I cannot be of help to you".

        Prof. Romila Thapar, Jawaharlal Nehru University, co-recipient of the $1mn Kluge Prize (1908).

* "Although I do not agree with your interpretations, I found them interesting reading. One of the few areas in which India is supposed to have made important contributions is religion, and now you are taking that glory away as well".

                Dr. Pratapaditya Pal, noted Art commentator.

Related Sites

* Bryn Mawr Classical Review * Scholia Reviews
* Frauds in Nepalese Archaeology * Babylon
* Alexander-the-Great * Asoka * Pali * Darius-I
*American Buddh. Jour. *Chandragupta

 *Persepolis Fortification Tablets * Trirat's blog

  * 1stmuse * Palibothra-Wiki * Amazon Reviews

*UNED * M. Lahanas  * atgtop10 * Cais-Soas

* Kalyan 97  * Newsfinder * Utrecht Univ.

  * L'Encyclopedie de L'Agora

A New Perspective In World History

Available from Amazon.com

Dr. Ranajit Pal