Beyond the monastery walls: The archaeology of early Buddhism in north coastal Andhra Pradesh, India.

Abstract

Existing interpretations of the broader social role of Early Historic Period (c. 300 B.C.--A.D. 300) Buddhist monasteries in South Asia tend to emphasize two possibilities. The first is that Buddhist monasteries were centers for religious isolation. The second claims monasteries were actively engaged in fostering the development of long distance trade networks. This thesis is an argument for a third possibility---ritual engagement with local laity. I argue that these different possibilities are not only a debate between historians---they were tensions that existed within the monastic community at one Early Historic Period Buddhist monastery, Thotlakonda, in north coastal Andhra Pradesh, India. These tensions were manifested in the layout and organization of the monastery and in the larger landscape in which it was located. Between November 2000 and March 2002, I conducted six months of systematic archaeological surface survey in the area immediately surrounding Thotlakonda monastery. In this time I surveyed 7.3 km<super>2</super> and identified 134 archaeological sites. Archaeological features identified during survey included walls, terraces, reservoirs, one Early Historic Period village, and a <italic> stupa</italic> (a Buddhist ritual structure). The challenge of my work is the identification of the material consequences of religious practice. My approach links religious and other architectural spaces within a regional landscape of meaning and interaction. I employ architecture to derive the social implications of spaces, and landscape to link them within a larger social context. I conclude that Thotlakonda monastery had multiple, conflicting religious and economic relations with the local communities that supported it. As suggested in numerous early Buddhist religious texts, the monks attempted to isolate themselves from society. However, their isolation was balanced with obligatory ritual functions they performed for the laity. While I found only limited evidence for active monastic involvement in long distance trade, the monastery was heavily enmeshed in local trade networks. Overall, I argue that Buddhist monks attempted to promote themselves as the sole arbitrators of Buddhist ritual, but that the laity resisted the authority of the monks, maintaining their own ritual and social interests.