The Concept of Bhāratavarṣa and Its Historiographical Implications

Chapter Info (Click Here)

Book No. – 49 (History)

Book Name – The Concept of Bharatvarsha (B.D. Chattopadhyaya)

What’s Inside the Chapter? (After Subscription)

1. From Jana to Janapada

2. Bharatavarsa in the Purānas

3. Conquest of the Quarters (Dig-jigīsā)

4. An Exercise in Synthesis? Rājasekhara’s Kāvyamīmāmsā

5. The Meaning of Bharatavarsa

6. Summing Up

Note: The first chapter of every book is free.

Access this chapter with any subscription below:

Half Yearly Plan (All Subject)
Annual Plan (All Subject)
History (Single Subject)
CUET PG + History

LANGUAGE

The Concept of Bhāratavarṣa and Its Historiographical Implications

Chapter – 1

Harshit Sharma

Alumnus (BHU)

Contact

The choice of the concept of Bhāratavarṣa as the theme of this essay is based on various reasons, including its traditional association with India and the idea of a country with specific boundaries, despite the partition of 1947.
Bhāratavarṣa is seen as a term that conveys the image of a country that has always existed, even though the actual geographical boundaries have changed.
The history of India or Bhāratavarṣa and its evolution over time needs to be critically examined in terms of historical change, especially in terms of the link between geographical space and historical consciousness.
The assumption that the concept of India is synonymous with Bhāratavarṣa has been widely accepted, particularly since the 19th century in both history-writing and general thinking.
An example of the identity of Bhāratavarṣa with India is seen in a Purāṇic cosmographer’s statement, where the southernmost varṣa, Bhārata, is equated with India.
The Indian Constitution also formalized this identity with the declaration “India that is Bharat shall be a union of States”, emphasizing the unity of the country, but not necessarily the unity of its historical understanding.
The terms India and Bhāratavarṣa have different origins, one perceiving the country from a geographical outer perspective and the other within a cosmographic structure.
Bhāratavarṣa has different nuances, and its segments are described in varying contexts in early texts, which require a deeper exploration.
The historical understanding of India has been taken for granted without sufficient attention to how space and national identity were defined and redefined over time.
Nationalism is historically acquired and may undergo changes, rather than being an intrinsic feature of a space or the people inhabiting it.
Today, we take for granted that we belong to a geographically bounded and constitutionally defined country, but it is necessary to revisit how this understanding has evolved historically.
There are sharply different approaches to India or Bhāratavarṣa, and one such position insists that unity was a fundamental quality of the country, evidenced through geographical concepts, networks of pilgrimage centres, and political unity attempts in the past.
The idea of India or Bhāratavarṣa as an ancient, unified nation has permeated writings on its history, especially in relation to its geography.
Another position, argued by Subaltern Studies, contends that India as we know it today is a product of nationalist invention in the 19th century, and not an objective reality of earlier times.
This view denies any pre-national existence of the concept of India and sees the idea of India as invented by nationalist imagination.
C.A. Bayly and Mathew Edney highlight the British role in mapping India and creating a territorial integritythrough colonial knowledge, marking the emergence of British India.
The pre-colonial concept of India is debated, with Irfan Habib arguing that India existed as a geographical and cultural unit as early as the 4th century BCE, with a distinct identity that separated it from other regions.
According to Habib, Al Biruni understood India as a cultural unity, and by the time of British conquests in 1757, India was seen as not only a geographical expression but also as a cultural and political unit.
The discussion of Bhāratavarṣa often interweaves with discussions on nationalism, but this connection is not inevitable.
The essay’s main aim is to understand Bhāratavarṣa as a historically evolved concept, to explore how it was articulated in different contexts, and how this understanding affects the historiography of early India.

From Jana to Janapada

In early India, the term Bhāratavarṣa did not appear in textual references, and early references focused on janas(peoples or communities) and natural landmarks like rivers to define locations.
The Bharatas are mentioned in the Ṛgveda, but not as part of fixed territories.
The Brāhmaṇa texts (e.g., Taittirīya Brāhmaṇa, Aitareya Brāhmaṇa, Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa) first mention the concept of janapada (inhabited country), and the significance of diś (directions) is introduced, which defined the location of the janapadas.
The Aitareya Brāhmaṇa specifies different regions, identifying various kings and the quarters (eastern, southern, western, northern) and their sovereignty over these areas.
The central region, or madhyamā diś, became regarded as the core or center from which other directions were measured.
The first mention of a country or segment of space accommodating the janapadas is found in Jambudvīpa in early Buddhist texts, which describes it as one of the four mahādīpas (great islands), extending around Mt. Sineru.
Jambudvīpa was sometimes seen as identical to Bhāratavarṣa, while in other contexts, it was a broader region within which Bhāratavarṣa was located.
Jambudvīpa in Aśoka’s inscriptions (3rd century BCE) referred to a territory over which he ruled, extending from Afghanistan to the Deccan, including areas outside the Indian subcontinent.
The term Jambudvīpa had both cosmographical and geographical significance, incorporating familiar janapadanames.
Bhāratavarṣa was part of an elaborate cosmographic schema but did not initially correspond to the geographical boundaries of the Indian subcontinent as understood later.
Khāravela, king of Kaliṅga (first century BCE), mentioned conquering Bharadavasa (Bhāratavarṣa), implying that Kaliṅga was not considered part of Bhāratavarṣa during his rule.
The idea of Bhāratavarṣa as a key part of a cosmographical schema is first clearly articulated in the Purāṇas, especially during their compilation.
Purāṇic texts provide a fully developed concept of Bhāratavarṣa and its spatial segments, with some variations across texts.
The Viṣṇu-Purāṇa, Raghuvaṃśam by Kālidāsa, and Kāvyamīmāṃsā by Rājaśekhara offer different perspectives on the evolution of the concept of Bhāratavarṣa.
These texts illustrate the development and stereotyping of the concept of Bhāratavarṣa over time and the changes in its geographical and cosmological significance.

Bhāratavarṣa in the Purāṇas

Purāṇic evidence does not strictly pertain to the geography of India, as it represents Bhāratavarṣa within a larger cosmological framework.
The term Bhāratavarṣa-varṇanam refers to the description of Bhāratavarṣa as part of the cosmos, with references to creation, genealogies, and world divisions.
Bhāratavarṣa should be understood in relation to its cosmographical context, rather than as a direct geographical entity.
The details in different Purāṇas vary, with some internal contradictions, making it necessary to consider them within their cosmographical framework.
The Viṣṇu-Purāṇa presents Bhāratavarṣa as part of the creation narrative, starting with the Svayambhū-vaṃśa, linking it to the seven sons of Manu and the division of dvīpas (islands).
Bhāratavarṣa, located within Jambudvīpa, was ruled by Nābhi and later Bharata, and the country was named Bhārata after Bharata’s rule.
Bhāratavarṣa is divided into nine portions (bhedāḥ) in the Viṣṇu-Purāṇa, and the region’s cosmographical structurecontinues in later chapters.
Bhārata is described as lying north of the ocean and south of the snowy mountain (Himādrī), with Bharatī being the progeny in the region.
The description of Bhāratavarṣa combines geographical landmarks (mountains like Mahendra, Vindhya, etc.) and cultural significance with regions defined by directions (east, west, center).
The central zone (Madhyabhāga or Madhyadeśa) is emphasized as the core, contrasting with outlying areas and housing the Brāhmaṇas, Kshatriyas, Vaiśyas, and Śūdras.
Janapada communities are located by their respective directions: Kurus, Pāñcālas in the center, Kāmarūpas in the east, Saurāṣtras and Ābhīras in the west.
Bhāratavarṣa is part of a larger cosmographical design, and while it cannot be identified as a specific territorial unit, it incorporates geographical knowledge of the time.
The division of space in the Purāṇas follows a cartographic principle dividing the world into four cardinal directions and further subdividing them, though it does not always correspond to actual locations.
In the Viṣṇu-Purāṇa, regions like Puṇḍras, Kaliṅgas, and Magadhas are grouped with the southerners, despite their actual geographic locations.
The Purāṇas represent Bhāratavarṣa through genealogy connected to Manu’s sons and the original division of the patrimony.
Bhāratī Santatiḥ refers to the lineage of Bharata, not in the exaggerated sense of “children of Bhārata” but simply as those born in his lineage.
Bhāratavarṣa stands out from other varṣas due to its focus on Karma and the existence of the four varṇas, marking it as a karma-bhūmi, in contrast to other bhoga-bhūmi regions.
Bhāratavarṣa is portrayed as the best of all regions, as it experiences yugas, unlike others, which do not face calamity, death, or moral divisions.
The concept of dig-vijaya (conquest of quarters) helps further understand the sovereign nature of Bhāratavarṣa, particularly through the dig-vijaya of the Ikṣvāku ruler Raghu in Kālidāsa’s Raghuvaṃśam.

Conquest of the Quarters (Dig-jigīṣā)

Raghu’s mission of conquests in the Raghuvaṃśam begins with the east (prācī), leading him to the shore of the ocean surrounded by palm groves, where he encountered the Suhmas and Vaṅga princes.
He crossed the Kapiśā river and proceeded to Utkala, then moved beyond the Mahendra mountain to subdue the Kaliṅgas.
Further, Raghu’s army marched south, following the path of sage Agastya, crossing the Kāverī river and reaching the valley of Malaya mountain.
Key landmarks in the southern region include the confluence of the river Tāmraparṇi and the ocean, Malaya and Dardura mountains described as the “breasts of the region.”
Raghu continued his march, crossing the Sahya mountain, subjugating Aparānta and Kerala, and advancing toward Trikūṭa.
He then moved towards the Parāsikas by land route and encountered the Yavanas in the west, known for their cavalry prowess.
A fierce battle ensued where Raghu defeated the western peoples, symbolized by the severing of their bearded heads, which covered the earth like honeycombs.
Raghu’s march continued to the north (Udīcya), crossing the Himalayas and reaching the upper reaches of the river Gaṅgā, where he encountered the Kirātas and other mountain tribes.
Beyond Mount Kailāsa, Raghu crossed the Lauhitya river and reached the kingdoms of Prāgjyotiṣa and Kāmarūpa, completing his conquest of the quarters.
This dig-vijaya (conquest of quarters) prepared Raghu for the Viśvajit (conquest of the world) sacrifice, symbolizing his achievement as a sovereign ruler.
The Raghuvaṃśam converges the geography of space defined by the four diś (quarters) and the sovereignty a monarch aspired to, symbolized by cakravarti-kṣetra.
The description references various communities, natural landmarks, and flora and fauna, associated with each diś in Raghu’s journey.
Kālidāsa’s purpose was not to provide strict geographical accuracy, but to delineate the space a sovereign must conquer, using the concept of the four quarters.
Arbitrariness is noted in the journey’s locations: Kerala appears after Sahya, Kāmarūpa and Prāgjyotiṣa are separated and placed in the north despite being located in the east.
The journey’s circular nature is indicated by the combination of four directions and the return to Prāgjyotiṣa and Kāmarūpa, portraying a sovereign’s expansive reach.
Raghuvaṃśam uses the existing geographical knowledge of cardinal directions, major physical landmarks(oceans, mountains, rivers), and the locations of various ethnic communities.
The text also shows familiarity with distinctive flora, fauna, and special characteristics of different regions and ethnic groups.
Kālidāsa’s material reflects geographical knowledge and cultural awareness within the cosmological framework of the Raghuvaṃśam.

An Exercise in Synthesis? Rājaśekhara’s Kāvyamīmāṃsā

The idea of Bhāratavarṣa, as articulated in the Purāṇas, consists of various communities and janapadas and continues in Kālidāsa’s brief account of the conquest of the four quarters, though the term Bhāratavarṣa is not explicitly used.
This idea becomes more stereotyped with modifications in individual texts.
Rājaśekhara’s Kāvyamīmāṃsā discusses deśa-vibhāga (division of the country) after examining the meanings of Jagat (universe) and Bhuvana (world), suggesting that a deśa could represent the entire Jagat or a part of it.
In this context, Rājaśekhara locates Bhāratavarṣa within the Purāṇic structure outlined in the Vayu-Purāṇa, dividing it into nine parts and associating different janapadas with the four quarters.
Innovation in Rājaśekhara’s design includes suggesting specific geographical points from which the different quarters begin, with Āryāvarta (central region) as the core.
Āryāvarta is geographically defined as the area between the eastern and western oceans and between the Himalayasand the Vindhyas.
Rājaśekhara proposes that the Pūrvadeśa (eastern region) begins from Vārāṇasī, the western region (paścād-deśa) from Devasabhā, the southern region (Dakṣiṇāpatha) from Māhīṣmatī, and the northern region from Pṛthūdaka.
The suggested overlaps of the regions point to the centrality of Āryāvarta and Antarvedī (region between Yamunāand Gaṅgā) in defining the quarters.
Rājaśekhara’s division of the quarters includes three main Purāṇic elements: enumeration of janapadas, mountain ranges associated with each quarter, and the rivers flowing from them.
Additionally, Rājaśekhara lists natural products associated with each quarter, such as trees (Sarala, Devadāru), grapes, saffron, chowrie, deer-skin, rock-salt, and horses in the Uttarāpatha (northern region).
Rājaśekhara introduces the concept of cakravartikṣetra (field of the sovereign), linking it with Jambudvīpa and Bhāratavarṣa.
He describes the spread of the cakravartikṣetra from Kumārīpura to Bindusarovara over a stretch of thousand yojanas, highlighting the symbolic significance within Bhāratavarṣa.
Rājaśekhara’s design of Bhāratavarṣa firmly establishes a framework that is primarily Purāṇic, but genealogically disconnected in his presentation.
This design of Bhāratavarṣa was likely intended as a useful template for future composers to adapt to their individual cases.

The Meaning of Bhāratavarṣa

The details of Bhāratavarṣa in different texts provide insight into its evolving perception over time.
Initially, Bhāratavarṣa was not a well-defined geographical entity, but a part of what later evolved, possibly corresponding to the janapada of the Bharatas, alongside Kuru, Kosala, Magadha, and others.
The term janapada defined habitats of different communities, and with the expansion of the meaning of Bhāratavarṣa, janapadas became components of it, located in terms of their diś (directions) in relation to the middle region.
The developed notion of Bhāratavarṣa evolved from the concept of diś and represented an open-ended country (deśa) that was not geographically bounded.
Despite Purāṇic attempts to define Bhāratavarṣa geographically, such as between the Himalayas and the ocean, the janapadas and ethnic communities did not correspond to these limits, showing diś as a fluid concept.
For instance, in Rājaśekhara’s evidence, the Uttarāpatha (northern region) beyond Pṛthūdaka (modern Haryana) included communities like Śaka, Kekaya, Hūṇa, and others, highlighting the flexibility of the concept of diś.
Similarly, Siṃhala (Śrīlaṅkā) is often located in the southern region in sources, again showing the fluidity of Bhāratavarṣa.
Bhāratavarṣa, as an open-ended space, was part of a cosmography in the Purāṇic worldscape, with creation narratives and royal genealogies, including the Bharata genealogy.
Over time, the idea of Bhāratavarṣa was not static; in texts like Kālidāsa’s, the idea included familiarity with local resources and products, like those mentioned by Rājaśekhara in his descriptions of the quarters.
Chronologically, Bhāratavarṣa evolved from the notions of jana to janapada, to varṣa, and to deśa.
Bhāratavarṣa was not a sacred space or an incomprehensible spectacle, nor did it serve as a national consciousness in the modern sense.
The concepts of svadeśa (one’s own country) and videśa (foreign country) were not relevant in the context of Bhāratavarṣa.
The early perception of Bhāratavarṣa did not revolve around the idea of nationalism, borders, or the distinction between ‘foreigners’ and ‘natives’.
The division of society was seen more in terms of varṇa (social classes), which determined who was considered inside or outside, rather than by invasions or the existence of foreigners.
During colonial rule, the perception of Bhāratavarṣa shifted, becoming a concrete territorial entity with a mappable identity.
Bhāratavarṣa in the colonial period became associated with the history of a definable country, resulting in the development of ideas like foreign invasions and the formation of ‘Hindu’ and ‘Muslim’ periods.
This view of Bhāratavarṣa created a historical narrative that imposed a division between ‘Hindu’ rule and ‘Muslim’ rule, a notion that was a misconstruction of the historical understanding of Bhāratavarṣa.
Bhāratavarṣa, in its earlier form, was an idea that could accommodate diverse spaces and their social characteristics within a structure that had both the ideal and its variants.
The modern concept of India identified with Bhāratavarṣa in the colonial period is a burden that continues to shape perceptions in the neo-nationalist age.

Summing Up

Inscriptions from the tenth to fourteenth century provide important evidence on the evolving concept of Bhāratavarṣa.
This period is recognized as crucial for the crystallization of regional divisions in India.
A Rāṣṭrakūṭa period inscription from 929–30 (north Karnataka) mentions a janapada called Purikara, describing it as an ābharaṇa (ornament) of Bhāratamahīmaṇḍala, showing Bhāratavarṣa as a reference point for localities.
A twelfth-century inscription (AD 1181) from Kurgod (Bellary district, Karnataka) refers to the country of Kuntalaas part of Bhārata-kṣetra, which itself is part of Jambudvīpa surrounded by seas.
Inscriptions from Andhra (late thirteenth and early fourteenth century) articulate the reference to Bhāratavarṣa by detailing local landscapes and sacred sites.
A fourteenth-century inscription from Pithapuram (East Godavari district, Andhra) describes land from the southern ocean to the Himalayas as Bhāratavarṣa, including the land of the Andhras, associated with three famous shrines: Śrīśaila, Kāleśvara, and Drākṣārā ma.
The inscription also mentions five gardens and holy rivers like Gautamī, Kṛṣhṇaveṇī, Malaprabhā, Bhīmarathī, and Tuṅgabhadrā.
Śrīkākula, the abode of Viṣṇu, is mentioned as a place for the protection of the three worlds.
This type of reference to Bhāratavarṣa in local inscriptions was a device for valorization, linking a region or settlement to a universally recognized cosmographical landmark, akin to how royal lineages would affiliate with epic-Purāṇic genealogies.
Another fourteenth-century inscription from the same region refers to Jambudvīpa, nine khaṇḍas, and Bhāratavarṣa, noting it lay between the Himalayas and the ocean.
The inscription describes a land with prosperous cities, beautiful mountains, impenetrable forests, and fortresses, highlighting the diversity of languages, customs, and the division into multiple countries.
By this period, Bhāratavarṣa had become an essential reference point for both minor and major regions, being cited in written records regardless of the scale of the place.