In the early medieval period, Vikramasila mahavihara emerged as one of the most prominent Buddhist centres of learning along with three others in eastern India - Nalanda, Oddantapuri and Somapura. According to the Tibetan traditions, the extensive and magnificent establishment of Vikramasila was founded by the illustrious Pala ruler Dharmapala in the beginning of the ninth century but it was destroyed in the thirteenth century. The Tibetan sources furnish other descriptive details. It was located on a hill on the bank of the Ganga in Magadh. The central shrine was founded by a massive wall. Among the three contemporary mahaviharas in the eastern region of the country (Vikramasila, Oddantapuri and Somapura), it was the biggest and the most important.
Despite such literary references, the exact geographical location of the site of Vikramasila mahavihara has remained a matter of controversy among scholars. The probability of the site of Antichak - about fifty kilometers to the northeast of the Kahalgaon Railway Station in Bhagalpur district, of Bihar, was first considered by C. Oldham in 1930, while editing the report of Francis ti Buchanan.
Prof. B.P. Sinha of Patna University took up excavations at Antichak from 1960-69. The team partially exposed the central, brick-built cruciform shrine along with two circumambulatory passages decorated with terracotta plaques. Because of limited resources, the University team could not continue with the work. The excavations were then taken over by the Archaeological Survey of India.
From 1971-72 to 1980-81, Excavation Branch-III, of Patna of the Survey took up large scale excavations at Antichak under the direction of Dr. B.S. Verma, the then Superintending Archaeologist. It brought to light the largest excavated monastery complex in India (300 x 300 m), comprising a series of about 208 monastic cells and a few basement chambers. The complex faces north and has only one entrance (mahavihara) which is boldly articulated with a pillared-hall with flanking chambers, stepped-terraces and a spacious paved pathway leading to the shrine. The cruciform shrine situated in the centre of the monastic court has its arms meticulously aligned to the middle of the sides. Conceived as a gigantic fortified edifice, the monastic quadrangle is embellished with a massive circular tower at each corner and with four similar circular towers alternating with four square ones on each side. The towers are spaced out at regular intervals.
Some of the noteworthy artefacts recovered from the Antichak excavation include a large number of terracotta plaques depicting Buddhist and Brahmanical deities, animals, birds figurines; many beautiful stone sculptures of various gods and goddesses; a few small bronzes of Buddhist deities viz. the Buddha, Maitreya, Vajrapani, Avalokitesvara and Manjusri. Some coins and inscriptions were also retrieved.
The Antichak excavations have been extremely significant on at least two counts. First, they have revealed that in its plan and conception, the complex corresponds to the monastic scheme unearthed at Buddhist sites such as Paharpur and Mainamati in Bangladesh. The Paharpur complex, in particular, is very similar in both plan and grandeur. Second, the excavations have established a firm chronological bracket for the site, i.e., the period between the 10th and 12th centuries AD. The palaeography of inscribed artefacts (such as seals, sealings, stone images and legends on coins) coupled with stylistic analysis of sculptures have been crucial in determining the chronology.
But how far have the excavations helped in identifying the Antichak monastery with the Vikramasila mahavihara? The geographical and cultural evidence from the site as well as its chronology seems to strongly suggest such a correlation. The material remains of the Antichak monastery are located at a distance only about two kilometers from the Ganga. On the basis of the cultural evidence, it seems that a monastic complex of this magnitude would surely have figured among the three contemporary mahaviharas of the east, discussed in Tibetan accounts. Since Oddantapuri has been conclusively identified with a mound in Biharsharif town, near Nalanda and Somapura with the site of Paharpur, discussed above, therefore Antichak appears to have been the site of Vikramasila mahavihara. The traditional accounts recording Pala-period patronage of this mahavihara fits in comfortably with the chronology established for the site.
However, a neat correspondence between Vikramasila and Antichak or even between Vikramasila and the scattered archaeological remains in the area of Antichak-Pattharghatta is problematic. This is because the excavations have not yielded corroborative epigraphic evidence, i.e., inscribed seals, sealings or copper plates bearing the name of the monastery. The discovery of such inscribed material has proved to be the clinching evidence in the identification of several monastic sites in India. Therefore, in the light of available information, the identification remain tentative.
It gives me great pleasure to place before the scholars this detailed excavation report of Antichak. For seeing the book through the press, I must thank several people in the Publications team: Dr. P.K. Trivedi (Director), Dr. Arundhati Banerji (Superintending Archaeologist), Shri Hoshiar Singh (Production Officer), Dr. Piyush Bhatt, Ms. Tajinder Kaur and Dr. Vinay Kumar Gupta (Assistant Archaeologists). Ms. Sanjukta Datta provided very useful editorial assistance.
The mound in the village Antichak was first mentioned by Buchanan in AD 1811 who expressed his opinion that the mound might be the ruins of a royal house. But in AD 1930, Oldham identified the mound as a probable site of Vikramasila mahavihara. Since then, for long, the exact geographical location of the site of the Vikramasila mahavihara of the Pala period was a matter of controversy among the scholars of India and abroad. Dr. B.P. Sinha of the University of Patna, analyzing all the facts before him, arrived at the conclusion that the mound in the village Antichak, might be the most probable site of the Vikramasila mahavihara. On this presumption he started excavations on the highest mound and partially exposed a huge brick stupa. He continued his excavations for about nine sessions (1960-69).Continuous excavation of a huge mound and its elevated surrounding areas for a long time was, however, not possible for the University on the consideration of the fund and time involved therein. The shortage of technical personnel was another factor. Ultimately, he approached the Government of India to take over the work of exposing the entire area to settle the long controversy regarding the location of the Vikramasila mahavihara.
The Government of India, under the auspices of the Archaeological Survey of India, sanctioned the "Vikramasila Excavation Project" to excavate the area. The Project work started in the year 1971 under my supervision, and it continued till 1980. The excavations which commenced in1971-72 were spread over ten field seasons and these seasons covered the hottest months of these years. In the first season, a part of the mound in the north was exposed which yielded the remains of the Main Gate along with the pylons. In the next season, both the sides of the Main Gate including Postern Gate in the northern wing of the mahavihara were exposed. This gave the clue of the entire plan of the mahavihara and accordingly, in the subsequent years diggings, the complete monastery-complex was exposed. Simultaneously, a few trenches were laid in front of the main monastery upto a distance of about 150 m away towards north. These trenches also yielded many important structures of late phase.These structures were constructed of the building materials robbed from the main monastery when the vihara was plundered. A fairly good number of Buddhist as well as Brahmanical deities were discovered from this area.
During the eight years field work, the main concentration was shifted to the central shrine which was partially exposed earlier by the Patna University team. The remaining lower portion of the shrine on its four sides were exposed. We also opened the northern chamber of the shrine leaving the others untouched. In the ninth year's dig, the so called library-complex in the southern side was excavated. In the same season just outside the Main Gate towards eastern side, excavations yielded votive stupa-complex. A few trial-trenches were also laid on another mound located towards the northwestern corner of the Main Monastery at a distance of about 0.5 km known as Dharohara in Madhavarampur village. This area is also known as Jangaliasthan. The excavations resulted in the discovery of the remains of a medieval fort of about thirteenth century AD, which was partially exposed.
It will not be out of place to record here that inspite of all hardships including non-cooperation of a section of the villagers, whose lands were acquired and also due to non-availability of the technical staff, I could manage to execute the work of getting the site excavated in scheduled time and maintained the records of the excavations with the help of newly recruited Technical Assistants and Site Supervisors. The result of the excavations, no doubt, pin pointed the site as the actual remains of the once famous Vikramasila mahavihara.
The report of the excavations is delayed due to my promotion as Director. Subsequently my retirement in quick succession in the year 1984 is another reason for the delay. In December 1989, I was appointed Consultant in the Archaeological Survey of India for a period of 15 months to complete the report of the Antichak excavations. Under the scheme, I only prepared the draft copy of the report. Due to non-availability of the technical assistance the report remained incomplete, inspite of my best efforts to finish the report in time. I used to remind the concerned authority regarding the report, but my request was never entertained sincerely because in official records no pending report was marked against my name. But I was conscious on my part that the report of Antichak excavations was pending and I was feeling very much guilty because of non-completion of the report in time. It will be a sort of discredit to the excavator who did not bring out the report after exposing the site. Archaeological excavations if not properly documented and reported in time is equivalent to the destruction of the evidence regarding the history of the site. However, I was awaiting for an appropriate time which came to me at last with the posting of Shri S.C. Saran as Superintending Archaeologist in the Excavation Branch -III at Patna. Soon after he joined Patna, he paid a surprise visit to me and assured me to extend maximum facilities to me, in case I take up the work of completing the report of Antichak excavations. Shri Saran fulfilled his commitment and it is his efforts that I am now presenting the report of the Antichak excavations to the scholars who are interested in its archaeological discoveries.
**Contents and Sample Pages**
For privacy concerns, please view our Privacy Policy
Send as free online greeting card
Email a Friend
Manage Wishlist