Archaeology For Beginers

Looking at this comparatively new field of study, first we need to understand the concept of archaeology. It is such a varied concept that it is an anthropological, historical and scientific study because it is a study of mankind looking at its history with the help of modern scientific methods.

Modern archaeology developed as a discipline from the 19^th c. although most of the ancient civilizations were discovered much before this, e.g. Egyptian civilization was known during Napoleon’s military expeditions (1798-1800). Major breakthrough came in this field after World War II as it started getting scientific aid and conceptually with Binford’s argument that its potential is much more than counterfeit history. Today most of the countries have their own government archaeological departments. Until the previous century archaeologists had an historical approach, also known as processual archaeology, but modernist thinkers emphasize on postprocessual archaeology which focuses on varied perspectives of different social groups.

Now we shall look at the goals of an archaeologist and the means to achieve it. The goals of postprocessual archaeologists, according to Sharer and Ashmore, should be to: (1) consider the form of archaeological evidence and its distribution in time and space; (2) determine past function and thereby construct models of ancient behaviour; (3) delimit the processes of culture and determine how and why cultures change; (4) understand cultural meaning through symbols, value and worldview. In order to achieve these goals, the most important thing for any archaeologist is evidence, so one should clearly identify the context of various kinds of evidences (viz. artefacts, ecofacts and features), i. e. immediate matrix, its provenience and its association with other finds.

For the purpose of obtaining evidences an archaeologists has to go through a long process of which sampling is the first step. After preparing the research design, one needs to take a sample because it is not possible to dig the whole site. Sampling are of two types non-probabilistic sampling where primary emphasis is on presence or absence of material, and probabilistic sampling which is based on the theory that the samples collected are related in mathematical terms to the population sampled. Probabilistic sampling is further categorized as cluster sampling, nested sampling, simple random sampling, systematic random sampling, systematic unaligned sampling, and stratified random sampling. Now it is upon the archaeologists to select the best method and also fraction and size of sample.

The second step is ‘Site Survey’ which is to illuminate a landscape signature and detecting and comprehending a settlement pattern. In the process of surveying, one needs to discover and identify sites. The factors in survey design include visibility (the extent to which an observer can detect the presence of archaeological materials), obtrusiveness (cultural visibility of the materials produced by society) and accessibility (effort required to reach a particular survey area). One must prepare the background for research with the help of literature, local informants, history and ethnohistory, and environmental variables. Further, field methods in site survey are pedestrian survey, which is simply surveying by walking through the site, subsurface survey, which is digging holes in low visibility area, test-pitting, which is considered as the most effective methods by most of the archaeologists, and chemical survey, which is used to study soil anomalies. Remote sensing is carried out for detection of evidence without digging soil. There are certain instrument anomaly surveys techniques like CAT scan, magnetic survey using proton magnetometer, electrical resistivity surveying where a current is passed through the soil, ground penetrating radar is an instrument which releases an electromagnetic pulse into the ground and its reflection time is dependent upon the density and distance of whatever the pulse encounters. Aerial survey is also done for the same purpose by doing aerial photography and infrared photograph. At last mapping of surveyed site is necessary. A significant new development in the field of mapping is made with the use of GIS (Geographic Information System). Aerial photography is useful even for mapping.

Archaeological field photography is a technical work which we shall see in brief. Its basic purpose is photo documentation which is to produce a comprehensive and precise pictorial record of an investigation, and photo illustration which is to provide images appropriate for use in public presentations. Some basic elements of photography include film speed, diaphragm opening, exposure time, light intensity and relationship between them. The matters to be photographed are general site views, features and burials, excavation processes, soil profiles, artefacts etc.

After completing site survey, the next step is ‘excavation’. First, we must make note of the tools required for this purpose: large tools are like vehicles, chainsaw, shovels etc. and hand tool like pointing trowel, margin trowel, line level, plump bob, whisk broom, ice pick, brunton compass, measuring tape, folding wood rule, marking pen, paint brushes, sledge hammer, magnifying glass, hand sprayer, plastic sheets, tags and personal safety equipment. Some of the excavating techniques are step trenching where a large area opened at the top which gradually narrows as the dig descends in a series of large steps, strip method where digging begins at the edge of the area to be excavated, quartering where the mound is laid out into four quadrants and each quadrant is excavated systematically, architectural unit excavation where an architectural unit (viz. house, room or pit house) are used as excavation unit, area excavation, i.e. orderly exploration of a sizable expanse of a site, and stripping which is used to remove large areas of overburden to expose stable land surface bearing cultural features (viz. living floors, houses etc.). Now let’s look at methods, which are vertical face method where a unit is dug entirely as a single vertical face, unit level method where the technique is to dig each pit, defined by the lines of the gird system, and natural stratigraphic level method which involves peeling of the visible strata in a site deposit. After excavation is done, one needs to screen the excavated deposits, which enables archaeologists to recover many objects that might otherwise be overlooked, and then they are washed with gasoline. Apart from these above mentioned methods, different techniques are required for special sites, e.g. water saturated sites, caves, rock shelters etc. After the work is done, the holes should be back filled.

For record keeping of the evidences archaeologists require to mark their vertical and horizontal location, classify them on the basis of their attributes, viz. surface, shape and technology; noting stratigraphic position etc. All these records have to be maintained in a tag attached to these evidences. Maintaining of records in a computer makes the procedure comparatively easy. Further, for the protection of certain objects made of lithic, ceramic etc. needs special care, and rock art can be easily maintained pictographs and petroglyphs.

After the field work is over, laboratory work begins of which the first step is ‘dating’ of evidences. The two basic problems of dating are security of context and contamination of sample with more recent materials. Different dating methods are used for different materials which is to be dated, e.g. for biological dating DNA are studied, for calculating a tree’s age tree ring dating is done. Apart from this some of the common dating methods fall under two categories, namely radioactive methods and trapped electron dating methods. Under radioactive methods, the most popular is radiocarbon dating in which decay of carbon atoms are calculated as it is known that half life of C-14 is 5730 years. Its greatest advantage is that it can be used anywhere and also radiocarbon dating along with AMS is opening up new possibilities. The other techniques under this category are potassium-argon dating which is mainly used for dating of rocks, uranium series dating which is useful for dating of objects that are 5,00,000 to 50,000 years old, and fission –track dating. Techniques under the second category are thermo-luminescence dating. It is possible to empty electron traps by the application of heat, so this technique is used for fired materials, viz. pottery, ceramics etc. The other techniques under this category are optical dating which is used for dating of minerals that have been exposed to light for a long time, and electron spin resonance dating which is useful for materials that decompose when heated. The other dating methods are obsidian hydration, amino-acid racemization, chlorine-36 dating, archeomagnatic dating etc. Further, dating of the climate is also necessary, e.g. dating of Pleistocene epoch has been very popular since the 19^th century. For this purpose deep-sea cores and ice cores are studied. These layers contain remains micro-organisms which when tested reveal their ages. Another method is pollen dating where with the help of pollen grains, experts construct detailed sequences of past vegetation and climate. Last in this is faunal dating where animal remains are studied for this purpose.

The other laboratory works include ‘stratigraphy’ which is the study of the layers. The major principle in archaeological stratigraphy is the law of super position. Its main goal is to work out the sequence of deposits and elicit the events producing them. Creating ‘typological sequence’ which is supposed to be done by studying the changes. One step of this is seriation which is exercised in relative chronology. This is further divided into contextual seriation where the duration of different artefact styles, and frequency seriation where frequency of objects is measured. After performing the entire above mentioned laboratory works, the results are matched with the historical records. Earlier only historical methods were used for dating now, archaeologists are able to give accurate chronology by matching the two.

Another important work for the archaeologists is to identify the physical characteristics of human being which include their sex (mostly done by examination of genitalia, breasts, beards etc.), interpreting age at the time of death, height & weight, their looks, walking posture (study of their foot prints is important for this), use of hands, development of speech, sexual behaviour, eating habits etc. All these things are known by detailed scientific analysis of human skeletal and dental remains.

After obtaining the evidences and studying them scientifically, archaeologists and historians use them for reconstructing social, economical and environmental history. Regarding social history, the first question is regarding scale of the society and next is internal organization. An American anthropologist Elman Service developed a four-fold classification of societies, namely bands of hunter-gatherer whose sites mainly consist of seasonally occupied camps, segmentary societies (tribes) where agglomerate structures are found, chiefdoms(their graves consist of rich good which is considered as the grave of the chief) and early states which show urban patterns. Scholars are able to make out the above mentioned considerations by studying the number of human remains, settlement patterns, and further information are gathered from written records, oral traditions and ethnoarchaeology. Further, there are specific methods for various sites.

In order to understand the economic history one needs to study interactions among societies and exchange relations between them. Here exchange refers not only to the exchange of goods but also of ideas. Early indications of exchange came from artefacts of different origin found from other sites. Apart from this there are other methods, viz. the study of distribution, production, consumption, exchange and symbolic representations. Greater understanding of trade networks come from studies of production in areas like mines and quarries.

For understanding of environmental archaeology one needs to study the whole ecosystem on a global scale. Evidences for this comes from cores from sea and ice, isotopes are useful for studying temperatures and winds, glaciated landscapes, varves, rivers, sediments, soils and other environmental factors.

At last, there are certain archaeological ethics which every archaeologist and historians should follow. One must note that the archaeological properties are communally owned so it should be placed in a museum, although there could be a conflict for private ownership. The work done should always be beneficial for the people, i.e. use of the past should be done in a positive way that we learn a lesson from them, e.g. we must learn the art of town planning from Harrapan people.

Making of Early Medieval Western Europe

In order to understand the process of transformation from Antiquity to Feudalism, first we need to look at classical Antiquity. Graeco - Roman civilization was urban based. Yet at the same time it always had the effect of the trompe l’ oeil facade, on its posterity. Every municipal order was essentially dominated by agrarian proprietors. As Graeco – Roman world was located on the coastal areas; their inter-local trade was carried out mainly through water-ways. In the words of Perry Anderson, “the slave mode of production was the decisive invention of the Graeco – Roman world, which provided the ultimate basis both for its accomplishments and its eclipse.” Although, slavery was the dominant form of labour, free peasants, dependent tenants and urban artisans also existed. The binding force between rural producers and urban appropriators was the commercial act of commodity purchase realized in towns, where the slave markets existed. The slave mode of production tended to paralyze productivity in both agriculture and industry, although this phase witnessed certain developments, e.g. spread of oil and wine cultures, rotary mills etc. Now we should look in detail in specific areas. In Greece, local kingship was overthrown by tribal aristocracies and cities were founded under the domination of these nobilities. The social structure of these towns still reflected much of the tribal past with hereditary units. One decisive development towards classical Greece was ‘slavery’. Initially, it was done to solve the problem of labour shortage but gradually their number started increasing, e.g. in the 5^th century there were80, 000 - 100, 000 slaves in Athens to 30 – 40,000 citizens.

In Rome, a hereditary nobility kept unbroken power through an extremely complex civic constitution. The republic was dominated by Senete. Some slow changes led to the broadening in the composition of the Senete which resulted in the formation of widened nobility, including both ‘patrician’ and ‘plebeian’ families. The struggle of the poor classes to gain more rights resulted in the creation of the tribunate of the plebs which formed a secondary and parallel executive agency, designed to protect the poor from the oppression of the rich. In the early 3^rd century, the tribal assemblies which elected the tribunes gained legislative powers. The decisive innovation of the Roman expansion was economic in nature which was the introduction of slave latifundium. The advent of slavery as an organized mode of production inaugurated the classical phase of Roman civilization. The spectacular series of campaigns won by Rome provided it with the manpower that was required by large land holdings emerging from the late 3^rd century. Roman power integrated the Western Mediterranean and its northern hinterlands into classical world. Perry Anderson says that the slave agriculture was the most profitable to the landowners but its dynamic was very restricted as it rested on the annexation of labour rather than exploitation of land. The two major inventions of this period were water mill and reaping machine.In Hellenistic world, majority of the population were free tenant peasants and there was relatively little slavery. Even urbanization was minimal.

The system of slave mode of production was not a successful one. In the words of George Duby, “at the end of the 6^th century, Europe was profoundly an uncivilized place.” Therefore, some internal crisis occurred in this system. J. Le Goff says, “Rome exploited its empire without creating anything. No technical innovation had occurred since the Hellenistic age. Rome’s economy was fed by pillage; successful wars provided slave manpower and precious metals drawn from the hoarded treasures of the east.” In addition to its internal problems Western Europe suffered from Germanic invasions in two phases. The first great invasion took place when a loose confederation of Suevi, Vandals and Alans crossed Rhine on 31^st December 406. They were followed by Visigoths, vandals and others which shattered the military, political and economic unity of Western Europe. The next set of invasions was led by Frankish take over of northern Gaul and Anglo-Saxons’ control over most farmlands of Britain at the beginning of 7^th century. J. Le Goff quotes St. Jerome, “the city which conquered the universe is itself conquered.”

Now we must look in detail at the changes brought by these Germanic invasions in Western Europe. As a result of the first wave of invasions, provinces freed themselves and then turned into conquerors; Spaniards, Gauls and Orientals invaded the Senate. Yet the Germanic tribes were capable in themselves of constituting a new political system. Therefore, they depended heavily on the pre-existent imperial structures. The regime of hospitalitas was imposed on local Roman landowners by the Visigoths, Burgundians and Ostrogoths. All surviving pacts between Romans and barbarians, governing the division of land, involved only the provincial landowner and one Germanic partner. Initially, sortes (allocated land) was not a hereditary property but within a generation or so Germanic aristocracy was consolidated on the land, with a dependent peasantry beneath it. In this scenario, state formation was ineluctable. The political and judicial shape of the new Germanic States was founded on an official dualism, separating the realm administratively and legally into two distinct orders: the inability of the invaders to master the old society and organize a coherent new polity. These were rudimentary monarchies. All the major Germanic invaders were still pagan. The Christian religion consecrated the abandonment of the subjective word of the clannic community. Therefore we can say that the first wave of Germanic invasions had, comparatively, a little impact on Western Europe.

According to Perry Anderson, the second wave of Germanic invasion determined the later map of Western feudalism. J. Le Goff agrees with Anderson on this point. Peter Heather says that much information about this period and its chronology is gathered from archaeological evidences, family tree, and kings’ lists. By CE 600, lowland Britain was dominated by Germanic speaking elites. The new understanding shows that the province’s population was much too large to make ethnic cleansing, but the linguistic evidence from post CE 600 shows little sign of indigenous influence on the Germanic tongue of the Anglo-Saxon world. Still there is a debate among historians over the exact number of Germanic immigrants. The Romano-British population outnumbered the immigrants, but, gradually, both the cultures got mixed into each other. At the same time Frankish power was building up west of the River Rhine. Frankish groups figured more prominently in the declining Western Empire’s affair from the 460s. The rigid dualism now disappeared and there was no further resort to hospitalitas system. The village communities became widely entrenched, first in France. Villages multiplied, while villa declined, especially in England. In the Frankish kingdoms taxation progressively lapsed. On the other hand, Franks adopted Catholicism directly with the baptism of Clovis in the last years of the 5^th century. In the whole process the victim was trade networks. Therefore, in order to carry out trade, water routes were discovered. As a result, the ancient cities which were not on the water routes declined.

Another major factor responsible for transition was emergence of Christianity. In CE 312, Emperor Constantine declared Christianity as official religion of Rome. With the passage of time, the Church started acquiring power and land which later became an important characteristic of Medieval West. In this regard Perry Anderson comments, “In late Antiquity, the Christian Church, indubitably contributed to the weakening of the powers of resistance of the Roman imperial system. Yet the same Church was also the moving site of the first symptoms of liberation of technique and culture from the limits of world built on slavery.”

Apart from the above mentioned factors there were other factors also which contributed in the process of transition. These factors include the natural world and population. Throughout this period, forest held sway over the whole natural world. There were also great variations in soil type and in addition to that droughts and heavy rains created troubles. Climatic variations along with outbreaks of epidemics led to dramatic demographic changes, e.g. there was a decline in population of Europe during the 6^th century due outbreak of plague.

The synthesis of the two cultures resulted in the rise of feudalism. Karl Marx says that the result of the Germanic conquests as a process of interaction and fusion generated a new ‘mode of production’ which was a synthesis of its two predecessors. Some obstacles came in this intermingling of cultures. Here, Marc Bloch says, ‘the action of one civilization upon another is not necessarily in proportion to the balance of the numbers present.’ Perry Anderson talks about the feudal characteristics that descended from various groups: the vassalage may have its roots in either the German comitatus or the Gallo – Roman clientele, or contribution of both; on the other hand, manors certainly descended from Gallo – Roman villas; the medieval villages were Germanic inheritance. Serfdom probably descended from classical statute of colonus and from the slow degradation of free Germanic peasantry by quasi-coercive commendation to clan warrior; at the peak of the medieval polity, the institution of feudal monarchy itself represented a mutable amalgamation of the German war leader and Roman imperial ruler. Church was the only institution which survived from Antiquity to middle ages. Most of the people in the new society knew no Latin, so it became monopoly of the elites. Christian Church was the first one to advocate this. Also, Church’s victory in the later did nothing to alter traditional attitudes to either technology. It was the epoch of Charlemagne which led to the critical synthesis between donations of land and bonds of service. During the end of 8^th century, vassalage and benefice slowly fused. The other characteristic features of feudalism are: a large autocratic estate composed of a demesne and a multitude of small peasant plot; the size of the nobles’ domain ranged between 2, 000 to 4, 000 acres; agrarian yields remained extremely low (in the ratio of 1:1); great bulk of dependent rural labour force; a pseudo – centralized empire of Rome; dynastic wars among regional magnates. With these characteristics feudalism solidified in Europe for next two centuries.

Thus, Medieval Europe was born from Antiquity following the phase of transition which lasted for about four centuries.

Important Sources For Reconstruction of Mauryan History

Historians consider Mauryan Empire as the greatest empire of early India. In order to reconstruct the history of the Mauryas, historians depend on many sources, which are of various kinds and also belong to a large time bracket. The two major categories of sources are literary sources and Asokan inscriptions. Some of the greatest literary works of this period are Arthashastra and Megasthenes’ Indica. Apart from that other literary works include Puranas, Dharmasutras, Buddhist texts, viz. Dipavamsa, Mahavamsa and Vinaypitaka, Panini’s Astadhyayi and Jaina texts, viz. Rajavalikathe. Now we should look at these texts in detail. We also have some archaeological as well as numismatic evidences for this period.
Arthashastra is considered as the most important text for the reconstruction of the Mauryan history which is on science of statecraft. It is a practical guidebook for governing an inhabited territory by a monarchy, in the continuation of which management of finance (artha) plays a major role. Arthashastra consists of 15 books (Adhikaranas): the first 5 deal with internal administration (tantra); the next 8 with inter-state relations (avapa); and the last two with miscellaneous topics. There are two main debates among historians regarding this text, regarding its authorship and its chronology. The general belief is that it is composed by Kautilya in 4th century BCE. Later historical texts, viz. Kamandaka’s Nitisara, Dandin’s Dashakumaracharita, Vishakhadatta’s Mudrarakshasa and Bana Bhatta’s Kadambari support this view. However, many historians challenge this view. B. N. Mukherjee comments, “The pandect explicitly states that it is based on most of the books on the Arthashastra composed by earlier acharyas.” Mukherjee further says that in two places its authorship is attributed to Kautilya, but in the last section, Vishnugupta is said to its author. Here, Mukherjee argues that probably Vishnugupta was the personal name of the author and Kautilya was his gotra. Even if the relevant sections are considered as the interpolations, the references to Kautilya as the final authority in the text and the expression Kautilyarthashastra at the end of each adhyaya ascribe it to a person known as Kautilya.
Looking at the debate regarding the time frame of Arthashastra, various opinions range from the Maurya to the Gupta period. Raychaudhuri argues that this text could not belong to the Mauryan period because Prakrit was the language of the Mauryas whereas, Arthashastra is written in Sanskrit. He further says that Kautilya was against the use of wood for building purposes whereas Megasthenes states that cities near river and sea were made of woods. Upinder Singh contradicts this point by saying that Megasthenes was not an acute observer. Moreover, his work has survived only as second hand paraphrases. She also contradicts the statement that Arthashastra does not contain any reference to the Mauryas by saying that it is a theoretical, not a descriptive work. Romila Thapar contradicts Raychaudhuri’s argument that there is no reference in the Arthashastra to the royal titles used by the Mauryas by saying that there was no set formula for royal titles at this time. B. N. Mukherjee says, “A pre-Christian date for the Arthashastra is strongly advocated by numismatic evidence. In Kautilyan state the only medium of exchange was the coin. The Arthashastra refers to the minting of silver pana and copper mashaka and kakani. H. C. Raychaudhuri says that Hemchandra and Taranath were of the belief that Kautilya continued to serve as minister for some time after the accession of Bindusara. T. Trautmannn rightly says, “What the Arthashastra loses by way of individuality it gains by synthesising the merits gained by generations of thinkers. In its impersonal and abstract way, it sums up ancient Indian beliefs about the state with an authority which no individual creation could possess.”
The next major text of this period is Megasthenes’ Indica. Here various scholars have presented their views regarding the authenticity of the facts mentioned in this text. Before looking at the text, first we need to see the background of Megasthenes. He was the representative of Seleucus Nikator at the court of Sibyrtios, who was the governor of Arachosia (present day Kandhar). After a treaty between Chandragupta and Seleucus, he was sent as an ambassador to the Mauryan court, but we lack information regarding the frequency and duration of his visits. According to Upinder Singh, one major problem with this text is that the original text is lost and it survived only as fragmentary quotations due to which India is seen through a double filter – the first is Megasthenes interpretation; and the second is interpretations of Megasthenes by later Graeco – Roman writers. Arrian also refers to his visiting King Porus as well. One of the most debatable issues here is that Megasthenes is quoted as having listed the following seven divisions of Indian society: philosophers, cultivators, herdsmen, artisans, traders, soldiers overseers and councillors. Romila Thapar quotes R. C. Majumdar as “His description of the seven castes which are unknown to Indian literature or tradition may be cited as an example where, on a few basic facts he has reared up a structure which is mostly inaccurate and misleading.” And she says that this statement resulted from a lack of careful reading and understanding of the text. Diodorus quoting Megasthenes writes that the Indian people are divided into seven mere. He further says that no one was allowed to marry outside caste or change their profession. Strabo also quotes Megasthenes and refers to the people of India being divided into seven mere. However, when talking about marriage and occupation he refers to the groups as gene and confirms the restriction on marriages. Although, he says that only the philosophers were allowed to marry outside their genos. As mentioned earlier, Arrian quoting from Megasthenes says that all the Indians were divided into seven genes, which was different from mere. He also testifies that it was unlawful to marry outside genos or change profession. Here Romila Thapar says that it is important to consider whether he was referring to varna or jati. We are certain that he was not referring to varna because unlike his description, varna were four in number; there is no mention of other varnas except for Brahmans; and even the untouchables and chandals are not mentioned in his description. This was permitted only to the sophistai. However, Romila Thapar says that Megasthenes was regarded with suspicion even by his contemporaries. Comparing Megasthenes notion about chora basilike with the sita bhumi (crown land) mentioned in Arthashastra, Romila Thapar says that this was the most important system of tenure of land but the problem lies with statement that there were only crown lands. Apart from that, she says that Megasthenes reference to self-governing cities is puzzling. According to many historians, another problem with Megasthenes is that he mentioned that there were no slaves in India. Ramchandra Dikshitar concluded that it was impossible to depend on such an unreliable source as the work of Megasthenes, which contained very little useful evidence. He was even against attempts to compare the Selucid envoy’s data with the Indian evidence. However, H. C. Raychaudhuri says that the most important information provided by him was the description of Pataliputra, which Arrian quotes in chapter X of his Indica: “The largest city in India, named Palimbothra, in the land of the Prasians, where the confluence of the river Erannobaos and the Ganges, which is the greatest of rivers. The Erannobaos would be third of the Indian rivers.”
The other literary works include Puranas, which gives information about the chronology of the Mauryas and it is the only text which describes relationship of Chanakya and Chandragupta; the Ceylon chronicles, Dipavamsa and Mahavamsa describe at great length the part played by Asoka in spreading Buddhism; Dharmasutras which reflect some elements of customary law and contained rudiments of legislative literature ; avadan of Asoka is a Buddhist text, containing cycle of legends about this king.
Now let us look at Asokan inscriptions. There are about 150 inscriptions of Asoka, in total, which are under three categories, namely major rock edicts, pillar edicts and minor rock edicts. These inscriptions are distributed in a particular pattern: the set of 14 major rock edicts are located in the bordering areas of the empire; the 6 pillar edicts are found in the Ganga Valley; and the minor rock edicts (MRE) are distributed in the maximum area across the empire. Apart from these major inscriptions there are others also, viz. some cave inscriptions, Sohgaura Bronze Plaque inscription, silver coin inscription etc. K. A. Nilkanth Sastri talks about characteristics of these inscriptions. The language of these inscriptions is Magadhi (the official language of the royal chancery of Pataliputra), the inscriptions in Shahbazgarhi and Mansera are in the Kharosthi alphabet written from right to left, except the Laghman fragments are written in Brahmi script. In all the inscriptions except for Maski inscription, otherwise Asoka is addressed as Devanam Piyadasi etc. Apart from these inscriptions, there are also inscriptions with specific characteristics, e.g. there is an inscription consisting of Greek and Aramaic versions of one of his edicts mentioned in RE XIV. This is known as Shar-i-Kuna, the two Kalinga inscriptions are meant only for Kalinga (which, according to D. C. Sircar is considered as RE XV of Asoka ), two Barabar cave inscriptions records gifts of caves to Ajivikas. D. C. Sircar gives a detail transliteration and meaning of Asokan inscriptions from which we get many useful information. RE II mentions the names of some non-Indians and using this information, we can decide the time period of Asoka because it seems from the inscription that they were his contemporary. RE XIII mentions that Kalinga was an unconquered territory until Asoka’s conquest, although this has been challenged by B. M. Barua on the basis of Hanthigumpha inscription of Karvela which says that Nandas already conquered some part of Kalinga. The other information are like Asoka was against Vedic practice of killing of animals for sacrifice , Asoka was an upasak (follower) and not a monk till the promulgation of Maski inscription where he mentions this. One of the major sources from this period which is not considered as inscription is Asoka’s ‘Lion Capital’ at Sarnath. Most of the scholars agree that Asoka’s main purpose for making these inscriptions was to propagate Dhamma. There are also later sources, e.g. Rudradaman inscription of CE 150.
Scholars use these sources for the reconstruction of Mauryan history and one of its major parts is their chronology which is also a topic of much debate among historians. The known chronology of the Mauryas begins with the rise of Chandragupta Maurya, but there are many opinions for the genealogy of Mauryas. Medieval inscriptions represent Maurya family as belonging to the solar race. In the Rajputana Gazetteer, they are described as a Rajputana clan. Jaina traditions represent Chandragupta as the son of the chief of the peacock-tamers. In the Divyavadana Bindusara the son of Chandragupta, claims to be an anointed Kshatriya. In the same work Asoka calls himself a Kshatriya. In one more assumption, the Moriyas were the ruling clan of the republic of Pipphalivana which probably lies in the present day Gorakhpur district.
Mauryas rose to prominence under Chandragupta Maurya. Some historians, agreeing with puranas and Chanakya – Chandragupta Katha, says that Kautilya who is also known as Chanakya and Vishnugupta played a major role in the rise of Mauryas. According to most of the documents, Mauryas came to prominence after removing Nandas from power. As per the account of Milindpanho, “Sometime after his acquisition of sovereignty, Chandragupta went to war with the perfect generals of Alexander and crushed their power.” B. N. Mukherjee says that there is a controversy about the chronology of Chandragupta’s early conquests. While some scholars date the downfall of the Nandas earlier than his conquest of the Punjab area from the straps of Alexander. According to Justin, Chandragupta, after collecting a band of mercenary soldiers, instigated the Indians to overthrow the existing government. Thereafter, he was preparing to attack Alexander’s perfects. These incidents must have taken place in or around 317 BCE. H. C. Raychaudhuri quotes Justin and says that when Chandragupta acquired his throne in India Seleucus was laying the foundation of his future greatness.” As per the Jaina traditions, Chandragupta, in the last days of his life, adopted Jainism and died as per Jaina tradition of slow starvation in about 300 BCE, after a reign of 24 years.
Chandragupta was succeeded by his son Bindusara who is also known as Amitraghata (slayer of foes) or Simhasena. In Asoka’s RE VIII, Asoka as well as his predecessors are addressed as Devanampiyam. H. C. Raychaudhuri talking about Bindusara’s family says that, a passage from RE V says that Asoka had many brothers and sisters. The Divyavadana mentions two of these brothers, namely, Susima and Vigatasoka. Susima is said to have been the eldest son of Bindusara and a step brother of Asoka, while Vigatasoka is reputed to have been the youngest son of Bindusara and co-uterine brother of Asoka. According to Puranas, Bindusara died after 25 years of reign and according to Buddhist tradition, he died after 27 or 28 years of reign. Both Divyavadana and Ceylonese chronicles agree that there was a great struggle for the throne after his death. Asoka was not the real successor, but he is said to have overthrown his eldest step – brother with the help of Radhagupta whom he made his Agramatya .
After the death of Asoka, around 232 BCE, the mighty monarchy of the Mauryas started declining. H. C. Raychaudhuri talks extensively on this topic also. He says that there is hardly any source talking about Mauryas later than Asoka. Different sources give different descriptions regarding his children, e.g. Vayu Purana says that Kunala succeeded Asoka, Matsya Purana gives the names of his successors as Dashrath, Samprati, Satadhanvan and Brihadrath. Rajtarangini mentions Jaluka as the successor of Asoka in Kashmir etc. But it is widely accepted that Kunala was his successor, as it is mentioned both in Puranic as well as Buddhist traditions. Kunala was succeeded by Dashratha whose reality is established by a brief dedicatory inscription at Nagarjun Hills. Indrapalita succeeded Dashratha. The last of imperial Mauryas of Magadha is considered to be Brihadratha after which Pushyamitra Sunga, although it is evident from various sources that Mauryas continued to rule as feudatories till CE 1069, i.e. during the Gupta period.

Anti – Semitism during Nazi Period

First of all, we must understand the term anti–Semitism. It was hatred towards Jews on racial basis. Most of the racial ideologues considered physical characteristics as the basis for defining races. It was believed that physical and psychological differences between individuals and races indicated their relative worth. Charles Darwin’s theory of natural selection led to the development of individual species. He suggested that breeding could make up for the diminishing impact of natural selection. Although he was not a racist but his ideas were used by others in advocating racist ideologies. The zoologist Ernst Haeckel converted Darwin’s teachings into Monism which was based upon the foundations of comparative zoology. According to Haeckel, the central races were the most developed ones. Alfred Ploetz claimed that the Germanic (West Aryan) race was the most outstanding civilized race. There were many others who supported this view. In this regard it is said that the above mentioned scientists who belonged to the class of urban bourgeoisie saw their urban living space threatened by hordes of fecund proletarians bearing the physical and psychological imprints of deplorable living and working conditions. Eugenics and racial hygiene was one response to the social question. This gave way to anti – Semitic theories. Chamberlain considered German as superior to others in all respect. Protestants and Roman Catholics, agreeing with Chamberlain held Jews responsible for liberalism, socialism and Communism.
Now we will see the political processes involved in the development of anti–Semitism. Its foundation was laid as early as the 18th century. In contrast to rest of Europe, the emancipation of Jews took place on a greater scale in Germany. Although these emancipated Jews did not experience equal status. Most Jews resided in particular parts of cities for security reasons and also for ethnic solidarity. About 60% of Jewish population was in the higher level of middle class, outside petty bourgeoisie. They remained under-represented in most areas of civil services. But gradually there was an increase in negative feeling towards them. In a pamphlet published in 1793, Fichte singled out the Jews because they lived in a separate state. Ardent, during 1814 – 1815, regarded the French, Poles and Jews as the curse for Germany and called for purity of races and the prevention of cross breeding. Friedrich Ruhs in 1815, in his pamphlet denied civil rights to the Jews because they practiced different religion and turned down the opportunity to assimilate. Panikos Panayi argues that during second half of the 19th century, motives of 1848 revolution became irrelevant because nationalism triumphed over liberalism. The period between 1848 and 1867 was of progress for the German Jews in all spheres, e.g. number of Jews in state parliament increased and they even gathered wealth, in 1848 their population was 410, 000 which increased to 470, 000 in 1867 etc. The all round development of the Jews strengthened the anti-Semitic feeling among the Germans. Further, entry of large number of eastern European Jews into Germany during the 1890s played a major role in this. This hostility increased at the end of 1916 when the Prussian War Ministry ordered an investigation into the number of Jews serving in the army. Panikos Panayi says, “By 1918 anti-Semitism had become a part of the racist ideology.”
As a reaction to increasing anti-Semitism, Jews began to assimilate, displayed pride in their Jewishness and even took the claims of the Jew haters. After 1871 many Jews quickened their assimilation into the German population through inter-marriages, conversion or name changing. Some leaders of the Jews decided to stand against the rising tide of anti-Semitism, even some organizations came up for this purpose. One of the earliest organizations that came up was Das Judische Comite Vom on 1st December 1880. Zionism also developed in Germany during the Kaiserreich but only Eastern Jews got attracted to this. The assimilation of the Jews is also considered as negative by many as they feel that the Jews were not ready to mix with non-Jews.
The condition of the Jews was no good even during the Weimar period. According to Panayi this period was a link between Wilhelmine and Nazi anti-Semitism. During 1920s eugenic ideas increasingly moved into the mainstream. Weimar represented a nationalist state and an increasingly racist one, especially for Jews, whose position deteriorated, either because of persecution or economic collapse. The other parties including The Catholic Centre Party also resorted to anti-Semitism.
With the coming of Nazis into power, life of the Jews got worse than before. Like rest of the German population, they also faced the consequences of the failed Weimar economy. Statistics show that during 1930s much of the German industrial and market sector was occupied by the Jews. In cultural sector also Jews rose to prominence. To mention some of the names who were important here are Fritz Lang, Max Reinhardt, and Arnold Zweig etc. In politics, they had not any important position except for a few, viz. Walther Rathenau and Rudolf Hilferding. The socio-economic status of the Jews added further fuel to the fire of anti-Semitism. In the early years of 1930s various pamphlets and articles declared removal of the Jews as necessary for revival. Until 1933, the Jews did not face any official discrimination because probably some of the state machinery like court and army had deep anti-Semitic prejudices. With increasing anti-Semitism, the Jews who were proud to be Germans lost their faith.
We can say that the coming of the Nazis represented the most extremist form of anti-Semitic feeling that existed in Germany. Panikos Panayi says, “Nazism essentially combined the concept of the German volk, with its origin in Herder, with the racial ideas which had emerged during the course of the 19th century, so that the Germans became the pure Aryan race, while other groups remained inferior.” In Mein Kampf Hitler compared races of men with species of animals and breeding occurred between animals of the same type. Apart from racial discrimination, Jews were also considered as socialists and Hitler accused Jews for Germany’s defeat in World War I. Considering importance of preserving nations, he advocated that the barbaric methods to control non-Aryans were necessary.
The first step taken by the Nazis against the Jews was their exclusion. Racial anthropologists, biologists, hygienicists, economists, historians, geographers and sociologists created the conceptual framework and scientific legitimisation for the implementation of the Nazi racial policy. The first anti-Jewish law was promulgated in 1933. Legislation commenced with the Law for the restoration of the Professional Civil Service, followed by measures against Jewish physicians, teachers and students, which forced them to acquire their pre-emancipation occupation of itinerant peddling. After 1933, anti-Semitic violence declined until Kristallnacht and during this period activities of the Jews were controlled by the state. All the institutions were Nazified by excluding all the Jews from them, but the businesses of the Jews survived. The cultural centres of the Jews were also attacked. The next law towards this was ‘Military Service Law’ of 1935 which made Aryan ancestry mandatory for service in the armed forces. In the same year Nuremberg law was also passed which forbade Germans from marrying or having sexual relations with the Jews. Several institutes of racial hygienicists came up of which the most important was the ‘Kaiser Wilhelm Society’. On 3rd November 1938 by a decree which permitted Jews to alienate their bonds, shares, jewellery and works of art only to the state. On 5th December the regime arbitrarily reduced pensions paid to Jews who had been dismissed from public services. In February 1939, Jews were obliged to surrender all precious metals in their passion to the state. In the months between Kristallnacht and the World War II further measures were taken against the Jews due to which they started migrating. Despite the obstacles put up by the Nazis and the reluctance of other states to accept Jews, about 115,000 migrated in the final 10 months , but migrations does not guaranteed security to them. In the first years of the war, further restrictions were put on the freedom of the German Jews. The other Jews whose business survived the pogrom, now lost them. The term given to this is ‘Aryanization’ of German economy. Apart from these there were several other restrictions put on the Jews, viz. they were suppose to wear a yellow star while coming out , from 1st September 1939, a curfew kept Jews off the streets between 9pm and 5am in summer and 8pm and 6am in winter, their radio sets were confiscated which cut them off from rest of the world, about 45% Jews received hostile behaviour from their non-Jewish fellow mates , over 80% believed that their neighbours were supporting Nazis, more than half suffered persecutions . Even those who survived lived in fear . In such a scenario, Jews were forced to break the laws made by Nazis, in order to survive.
In this case, we must also look at the positive side. As per the statics of Johnson and Reuband, 38% of the surveyed survivors answered that they received significant help from non-Jewish Germans. These help came in the later years of Nazi Germany, when Jews required it the most. About 61% of survivors who remained in Germany after 1941 affirmed that they received significant help from German civilians. Germans helped Jews in various ways, viz. 41% were helped in escaping or hiding, 29% got food, 10% were warned about roundups, deportations etc.
The atrocities on Jews by Nazis were not confined only in Germany but to other parts of the Europe as well. During World War II, Hitler got possession of other European nation, viz. Poland, Netherlands, some parts of Russia etc. He continued with his anti-Semitic policies in these countries as well. There are two personal diaries which give a nice account of the lives of Jews in an anti-Semitic atmosphere. The diary of Mary Berg describes the condition in Poland and Anne Frank describes for Netherlands. Before looking at the descriptions of Mary Berg, we must look at background of her. She was a Polish Jew whose mother was an American. Therefore she was a fortunate one as Jews with passport for neutral countries were exempt from wearing Jewish star and doing forced labour. They even had better chances for survival. She was only 15 years old when Hitler attacked Poland in 1939. She along with her family was pushed to live in a ghetto in Warsaw, where she lived until she moved to U.S.A. in 1944. The contents of her diary are her real life experiences. Later, this diary became very popular.
Mary Berg, in her diary, says that the Nazis were pushing more and more people into the ghettos. The quarter of Lodz which has been turned into the ghetto is one of the oldest and poorest sections of the city which composed mostly of small wooden houses without electricity or plumbing. There was a certain level of inequality even within the ghetto. Terror always surrounded the people but they tried to live a normal life by flirting, romancing, watching theatre plays, going to restaurant, students making and selling paintings on misery for a few penny etc. All these activities within the ghetto were regularly inspected by the Nazis. But gradually, situation started worsening, so self-help organizations started coming up to relief funds. Wealth played a very important role within ghetto as it influenced in getting job and a better living place. It even exempted somebody from forced labour. According to the rule use of French or English was forbidden in public but this rule was regularly broken. Any mode of communication, viz. radio and telephone, were restricted for the Jews. Gazeta Zydowska newspaper was the only legal way of communication within ghettos. Nazis discovered a secret radio station being run in a house. The male members of the house were arrested and shot. Due to lack of sanitation facilities diseases were spreading rapidly in these ghettos, as a result mortality rate was increasing. When the Nazi soldiers went near these ghettos they were caught by diseases, so they held Jews responsible for this. There was also a widespread belief that Nazis spread the diseases in ghettos to test its effect for biological warfare. The shortage of things, whether it be the daily use stuff, eating stuff or medicine in the ghetto led to the smuggling of these indispensible items and selling them at high rates. Therefore, some successful smugglers, viz. Zelig and Silberman made their fortune by smuggling. This shows that in such a scenario money can be made only by dishonest means. Mary Berg describes an incident where an uprising took place in the ghetto and in order to suppress the uprising, Nazi forces attacked the resistors with armoured vehicles. The people who tried to escape were put back into fire by the Nazis. In short, the life in these ghettos had in had increased mortality, lack of food, clothing and medicine, no education, no rights, manhunt, forced labour, racial discrimination etc.
Similarly, Anne Frank gives description of Netherlands where she faced racial discrimination as a teenager. Her family shifted to Netherlands from Germany because of increasing anti-Semitism in Germany. Her father got the opportunity to start a business in Netherlands. But unfortunately, Hitler attacked Netherlands and had to witness Hitler’s anti-Semitic policies even in Netherlands. It was on her 13th birthday that her parents gifted her diary which she called as ‘Kitty’ and where penned down her real life experiences of anti-Semitism. In July 1942, they were forced to leave their house and go into hiding. They were also supposed to go walking because use of public transport was prohibited for them. In the hide out they were not able to contact anybody except for a few ones. After sometime, they were joined by other families. At first they were happy to have a new company but later, it became difficult for them to adjust. The Frank sisters were not able to study properly and they always lived in terror that they will be shot some day. In August 1944 they got arrested as somebody informed about them to the Nazis. Along with them about 100,000 Jews were arrested and sent to the prison at Amsterdam. Then they were interrogated and finally they were deported. Out of the 1,019 passengers, 549—including all children younger than fifteen—were sent directly to the gas chambers. With the other females not selected for immediate death, Frank was sent to deportation where she was forced to strip naked to be disinfected, had her head shaved and was tattooed with an identifying number on her arm. By day, the women were used as slave labour. During the winter of 1944 – 1945, the typhus epidemic broke out which killed Anne and her sister. Otto Frank was the only survivor out of eight.
The story and experiences of Anne Frank is just an example of what Jews went through during the Nazis preoccupied Netherlands. These experiences are not confined only to the Jews of Poland and Netherlands. The terror of anti-Semitism spread even in Eastern Europe, viz. USSR, Czechoslovakia and Romania.
Hitler and other Nazi members found the ultimate solution to the problem of Jews. They decided for the holocaust. Nazis brought the Jews to the concentration camps in such a way that others don’t get to know about it. As mentioned earlier, even those who survived were not allowed to reveal anything. Although, the survey carried out by Johnson and Reuband suggest that most of the Jews knew about the mass – murder through some way or the other. The methods mostly employed by Nazis in killing of Jews were gassing them or shooting them. Burleigh and Wippermann have mentioned some accounts which describe the mass – murder of Jews, e.g. Felix Landau was an SS man who volunteered for the task forces which operated in the Lemberg region. He described the way in which he along with five other soldiers killed 23 Jews. Panayi gives the number of Jews that were killed throughout the Nazi period: in Poland 570,000 out of 825,000; in Czechoslovakia 24,000 leaving only 22,000; 300,000 out of 757,000 in Romania; and in Greece about 10,000 survived out of 70,000 or 80,000. He also mentions the figures given by Lucy Dawidiwicz who estimates that in all the places 5,933,000 out of 8,861,800 Jews were murdered, i.e. 67% of the total Jewish population got diminished. He also says that Bulgaria was able to save all of its Jews.
With the end of World War II and also of Hitler, the process of mass – murder stopped. But the rule of Nazis represented one of the most horrific events in the world history.