C. 600-200 BCE
With the possible exception of the Buddha’s relics said to reside within stupas across Asia and some recent archaeological finds at Lumbini (Coningham et al. 2013), there are few Buddhist archaeological remains dating to the life of the Buddha (traditionally 563 bce to 483 BCE; but see Bechert 1995), or the centuries immediately following his death.5 Critically, this lack of specifically Buddhist remains is not due to a general lack of archaeological remains from the sixth through fourth centuries bce. Archaeologists have excavated numerous sites from this period. Despite the large number of excavations, archaeologists have mostly failed to find remains that can either be definitively identified as Buddhist or, if identified as Buddhist, that unequivocally date to this early period. In some sense, this should not be surprising. During the life of the Buddha and the centuries immediately after his death, Buddhism was a small and developing religious order. It is unlikely that archaeologists would stumble upon the few material remains created by the Buddha or his followers, let alone stumble upon the small subset of those remains that can be unambiguously identified as Buddhist.
Despite a common view of archaeology by non-archaeologists, archaeologists are remarkably ineffective at identifying singular events of origin. Given the fragmentary and limited nature of archaeological evidence, archaeologists can usually only identify the periods in which social movements or technological advances become common—the periods in which the material remains of these movements or technologies become ubiquitous. The lack of Buddhist archaeological remains dating to the life of the Buddha or the centuries immediately after his death is neither surprising nor an indication that Buddhism was not practiced at this early date. None of this should be taken to mean that archaeology has nothing to offer the study of Buddhism in the sixth through fourth centuries bce. What archaeology can provide is an analysis of the larger social context in which Buddhism emerged.
In some sense, an archaeological history of Buddhism and a textual study of Buddhism must begin at different times. Textual histories can rely on later Buddhist accounts to discuss the biography of the Buddha. An archaeological history, on the other hand, can begin only when archaeological traces of Buddhism first become ubiquitous. This occurs only in the third century bce with inscriptions by the Mauryan King Ashoka and a few other archaeological remains. Even here, however, what can be said of Buddhism through archaeology is limited. It is only in the second century bce that the archaeological remains of Buddhism become sufficiently numerous as to be approached in a rigorous way. Despite these difficulties, in this chapter I will examine the archaeology of the sixth through third centuries bce in order to tease out what can, and cannot, be learned about the ways early Buddhists established and perpetuated their religion. For the most part, I hold off on discussing the material remains of Buddhism from the second century bce until Chapter 4. At times, however, an understanding of the third century bce depends on archaeological and epigraphic information from the second century bce or later.
Given the paucity of Buddhist archaeological remains from the sixth through third centuries bce, an archaeological investigation of these early remains must rely on the retrospective use of more recent archaeological and historical evidence. For example, in the third century bce the Mauryan King Ashoka had columns erected at several locations that we know were Buddhist pilgrimage centers in later periods (e. g., Sanchi, Sarnath, Bodh Gaya). Unfortunately, later constructions and modifications of these centers have obscured all of the material traces prior to the second century BCE. Viewed retrospectively, it is likely that Ashoka had these columns erected at locations that were already established pilgrimage centers in the third century BCE, if not earlier, but without material evidence this claim must remain somewhat conjectural. Throughout this chapter, I reference more recent archaeological sites and historical sources that are more thoroughly discussed in later chapters.
I begin this chapter with a discussion of the broader social context of early Buddhism from the sixth through third centuries bce, with information drawn from archaeological and historical sources. This is followed by an examination of the limited archaeological evidence for early Buddhism in the sixth through fourth centuries bce. The bulk of this chapter examines the archaeological evidence for Buddhism in the third century bce. While limited, this evidence suggests that in the third century bce, Buddhists were attempting, with only partial success, to establish a collective Buddhist identity within a highly individualistic religious tradition. At the same time, rulers, like Ashoka, were attempting to legitimize their authority through association with the Buddha, the sangha, and other developing religious orders.
World History
