The ancient and medieval architecture of India: a study of Indo-Aryan civilisation

THE MAURYAN

DYNASTY

3

Western scholars

seem to make it necessaryto abandon

the

theory

thattheearly

Aryan

invadersofIndiawereonly

nomads

whose

practice

in the arts

was chiefly

confined to war and

agriculture.

Ifitbetrue—astheRussianscholar,Sheftelovich,

asserts

—that the Kassites,who tookBabylonin

1746

B.C.,and

establishedadynastytherewhichlasted 600 years,

wereAryans

speakingVedic

Sanskrit,

whosechiefgodwas

Stiryas,Babylon

mustbe

regardedas a half-wayhouseoftheAryan racein its

marchtowards

theIndus

Valley,

and someatleast oftheearly

Aryan tribes

must have acquired, before theyentered India,

notonlythehighspiritualculturewhichis reachedin

the Rig

Veda, but a prolonged experience of the civic

arts, including

architecture.

RecentGerman excavationson the siteof Babylonshow

thatthescienceofbuilding inVedictimeshadadvancedmuch

farther than has hitherto been suspected. The Babylonians

had apparently perfected the construction ofradiatingarches

centuriesbeforeRomewasfounded,anditisprobablethatboth

Romanand Indianbuildersderivedtheirknowledgeofitfrom

the

samesource inWesternAsia.

When

the

seatofimperial

power was transferred from Persia to

Eastern

India in the

fourthcenturyb.c,itmusthavebeen asnatural an inclination

for

Chandragupta

Maurya to supplement local architectural

talent

atP^taliputraby

bringingexpertsfrom Persepolis

as it

isforAnglo-Indianrulersinthepresentdayto

supersede

itby

expertsfromLondon—forWesternAsiawasthegreatculture-

centreoftheIndo-Aryan race.

Butitisagreatmistakeof

Anglo-Indianwriterstoassume

that Indian buildingunderthe Mauryandynastywas wholly,

oreventoalargeextent,

animportationof

"

styles

"

borrowed

from Persepolis. Chandragupta andAsoka might set

Perse-

politan fashions in their

palaces, just as Indian princes of

to-daytry toimitate

the fashions of London

and Paris; but