Dynastic rule and religious ritual: A study of the S´ulkīs in early medieval Odisha

People in power, as at present so also in the past, were interested in perpetuating it, and they could usually do so by making it appear to be derived from, and based on, popular consent. Thus, power was not exercised merely by its actual possession; ruling groups or individuals had continuously to look for ways to legitimise it. Legitimate power or authority had the advantage of making the rules and regulations flowing from it appear proper and just. It invested those in power with a moral agency. In pre-modern societies, power was also sanctified by the force of tradition, as it is in modern times by constitutional and civil laws. Cultural traditions, values, symbols and idioms varied across locations and junctures, necessitating continuous engagement in the cultural domain by the ruling elite. Similarly, the preferred strategies straddled a wide range from fantastic origin myths and bombastic family traditions and genealogies to identification with epic-Purāṇic heroes and deities or appropriation of some of their attributes through familiar contemporary poetic tropes. While some of these provided political validation, some others invested ideological sanction in incumbent rulers or the dynasty as a whole. ¹

The relationship between rituals and legitimacy has been posed in the wider context of the study of the cult of Jagannātha in Odisha and, deriving from it, especially in the context of the evolution of the Jagannātha trinity some attention has been paid to the shaping of the individual deities and their prehistory, including Stambheśvarī, to whom we shall soon refer below. ² The present effort is to delineate the larger historical and cultural context in the subregion (maṇḍala) of Kodālaka so as to contextualise the relationship between repetitive formalised behaviour and legitimacy. Admittedly, rituals have a demonstrative capacity and an ability to construct affiliations and identities. In adopting the cultic practices of the conquered or subordinated people rulers have through time tried to gain acceptance for their rule or new-found status. The efficacy of the ritual agent, that is, Stambheśvarī (lady of the post/pillar) in this case needs to be examined in its socio-political context, while simultaneously looking at the possibility of the creation of new rituals to serve desired ends. This contribution also deals with the relation between these developments and the changing identity of the subregion.

The Śulkīs, also known as Stambhas, because the names of the rulers of the dynasty were suffixed with the word stambha, ruled over Kodālaka maṇḍala, comprising parts of the erstwhile Dhenkanal district (comprising the present Anugul and Dhenkanal districts). Their capital Kualo, assumed to be a corruption of Kodālaka, is located near the banks of the Brahmani river about 10 km east of Talcher (see Figure 1). Based on the use of an era in their inscriptions, that has been identified with the Bhaumakara era, and some preferred epithets used for successive Śulkī rulers, the Śulkīs are supposed to have been the subordinates of the Bhaumakaras during the ninth century, though their origins may be traced back to the latter part of the previous century. Kancanastambha is the first known king of the family. His son Kulastambha I or Kalahastambha enlarged the extent of the Śulkīs’ kingdom by subduing some local tribes. He is said to have assumed the significant title of Vikramāditya after defeating the Śavara chief Dhekata. Dhekata has been identified with the traditional Dhenka Śavara chief, and the name Dhenkanal for the locality seems to have been derived from him. While Kalahastambha chose to use the title Rāṇaka, his son and successor Ranastambha preferred to be called Mahā-sāmantādhipati, vide the latter’s Talcher grant dated year 103 or 839 AD. ³ Ranastambha was known by other names, such as Alanastambha, Nidayastambha and Kulastambha, and is credited with the building of a number of Śiva temples. The construction of the Kanakeśvara temple complex at Kualo was very likely patronised by him. ⁴ Ranastambha was endowed with conflicting titles, being called samadhigata-pañca-mahāśabda and Rāṇaka, as also Mahārājadhirāja and paramabhaṭṭāraka. Whereas the former pairs were titles used by intermediary sāmantas, the latter were the privileges of monarchs or superior overlords, and the use of both sets of epithets simultaneously unmistakably indicates the vacillating relationship between the incumbent Śulkī king and the Bhaumakara overlord. Ranastambha was succeeded by Jayastambha who too bore high-sounding titles such as Mahārājadhirāja and ‘Lord of the whole Gondrama’ (Śakala Gondramādhinātha). It is believed that the Bhaumakara rulers were not comfortable with such assertion of authority by one of their sāmantas or semi-independent subordinates, which challenged their suzerainty, and consequently it led to the overthrow of the Śulkīs under his successor, incidentally another Kulastambha. Interestingly, Bhogin Kalyānadeva, who wrote Ranastambha’s Dhenkanal grant, and Bhogin Kalyāna, the writer of the Hindol plate of the last Kulastambha, appear to be the same person, and that would mean that the dynasty did not continue for very long. ⁵

OPEN IN VIEWER Figure 1.

The S´ulkī Principality in Odisha

Three rulers in the family, namely, Ranastambha and his son Jayastambha, and Analastambha, son of Kalahastambha, styled themselves as ‘Lord of the whole Gondrama’, ⁶ like some of the then competing rulers from different ruling lineages. It has been suggested that the title was assumed by those rulers who occupied the territories in and around the former undivided Dhenkanal district. The expression seems to have been derived from the predominance of the Gond tribe over the other autochthons in the subregion. ⁷ It comprised the upper valleys of the river Brahmani from Bajrakote almost up to Talcher. The terrain is covered with dense jungles, hilly tracts and a range of hills. It is known to be rich in minerals and has a dense growth of Śāl forests. Even today the region is inhabited by the Gond, Juang and Khond tribes.

The contents in the land-grant inscriptions show a gentle evolution of society with the passage of time, perhaps corresponding with the extension and consolidation of the power of the state. Besides the shift in the titles, the information about officials and the addressees gradually gets better. Whereas the Dhenkanal plate of Ranastambha mentions only the bhogika among the officers and pūrogān (leading members of the settlement) along with the other important intermediaries of the state as addressees, the list of officials gradually expands to include cāṭa, and bhaṭa, among others like visyapati, pustakapālas and karaṇa, as well as references to janapadān (inhabitants of the janapada/locality), which normally would have stood for the middle peasants. ⁸ The granted villages in some instances included waste lands and forests (sa-padr-āraṇya). ⁹ Such evidence not only suggests the forested nature of the tract, but also that there was a continuum between vana (forest) and kṣetra (cultivated ground). It is of some interest that we come across references to the transfer of residents such as weavers, cowherds, fishermen and other people (sa-tantuvāya-gokūṭa-kaivarta-ādi jana-pramāṇiya´) together with the village. At times the brewers/distillers and other common people (śauṇḍik-ādi-prak¸tikah) or even the blacksmiths (lohaka) get included in the list in lieu of some of the already mentioned artisans. ¹⁰ Clearly, all professional groups were not to be found in all the villages. Given the backward nature of the subregion or its developing character, the transfer of people in different occupations to the donated settlements was to the natural advantage of the donees. The absence of reference to the boundary markers of the donated settlements in these instances, not to speak of absence of references to adjoining settlements, and the transfer of rights to fishing, hunting and ferrying seem to suggest that the cultivated and forested zones were more intermixed in contrast to maṇḍalas like Kaliṅga or Tosali/Utkala in the coastal tract. On the other hand, we have comparable subregions like Khijjingakota which do provide similar material. ¹¹ There is reference to an additional occupational category in the Śulkī records, namely, kā´sāra-kula-putraka, denoting son of the brazier family, ¹² which again suggests a forested environment, the source of charcoal. The focus on only human qualities of the rulers and the absence of comparisons with epic-Purāṇic characters and appropriation of their attributes further testifies to an early stage in the formation of royal power. ¹³ It is noteworthy that the subregion came into historical limelight largely under the rule of the Śulkīs and their successors the Nandodbhavas and Tuṅgas.

The praśastis of the land-grant charters of the successive kings continuously record that they obtained the boon and favour from the illustrious goddess Stambheśvarī (Stambheśvarī-lavdha-vara-prasade), who was also their family deity (kula-devatā). The use of the suffix stambha meaning pillar or post in his name by every ruler of the lineage, as has been already indicated, is proof of the close affinity between the ruling family and the local deity. In one instance it is mentioned that Bhagavatī Stambheśvarī Bhaṭṭāraka, the king’s family deity, was worshipped by kings, demons, the learned, saints and people (sur-āsura-vidvān-muni-vanditā). ¹⁴ Significantly, some grants were also made with the goddess Stambheśvarī-bhaṭṭāraka as witness (pramāṇa/sākṣi), further reinforcing the family’s affiliation to her. ¹⁵ Together these may suggest as, in fact, Hermann Kulke does, that ‘they claimed to have received their kingship in their capital Kodalaka through the grace of the Goddess Stambheśvarī’. ¹⁶

The deity Stambheśvarī is still worshipped in different parts of Odisha under the Prakritic name Khambeśvari and the representation of the goddess is in the form of a post or pillar. Aska, in Ganjam district, has a locally popular temple of the goddess, where she is worshipped not by Brāhmans but by aboriginal priests (śūdra munis). She appears to be a tribal goddess received from the adjoining Kandhamal region. ¹⁷ The temple legend associates the origins of the deity with forests, and tantric practices. Even today goats are sacrificed and the goddess receives non-vegetarian offerings (bhoga), particularly during Dussehrā festival. ¹⁸ The deity is usually worshipped by the procedures which apply to Vana Durgā, thus signifying her subsequent identification with Durga. Similarly, in Sonepur town in the western part of Odisha the deity is popular. It may be mentioned that the first recorded evidence for Stambheśvarī worship comes from the Terasinga plates, in Kalahandi district, of Mahārāja Tustikara, who flourished in that locality in the middle of the first millennium. He is presented as a devout worshipper at the feet of the deity (Stambheśvarī-pādabhaktaḥ). ¹⁹ It is not, however, possible to say with any certainty whether this deity and that worshipped by the Śulkīs were the same. Given the physical attributes of the deity and its popularity in western and central Odisha all that can be conjectured at the moment is that it derived its social following, in the early medieval times, from its indigenous roots. The Śulkīs are said to have been a part of the Śaulika tribe, which lived between Kaliṅga and Dakṣina Kośala. The adoption or usurpation of the autochthonous deity had the advantage of establishing legitimacy among the autochthonous population.

The dynastic inscriptions begin with the invocation and adoration of the god Girīśa, that is, Śiva, or veneration of Hara’s (Śiva’s) lotus feet. The construction of a number of temples for the god Sadāśiva by the rulers is also repetitively rendered in the family’s copper plate charters. Many ruling kings are further represented as the devout worshippers of the god Maheśvara (parama-maheśvara). ²⁰ The juxtaposition of Stambheśvarī with Śiva in the land grant records is interesting, and is appropriate, given the latter deity’s known relationship with Devī. The Kanakeśvara temple complex at Kualo, their political centre, was most likely built by Ranastambha. It is of the pañcayatana type with subsidiary shrines at the four corners of the complex. These are known as Baidyanātha, Pashcimeśvara, Kapileśvara and Balukeśvara. Besides, there are some more Śiva-liṅgas in the compound, suggesting that it was the abode of eight forms of Śiva. ²¹ The temple, it is said, soared to a height of 100 feet; making it larger than any known temple of that time in the region. (The Liṅgarāja at Bhubaneswar was after all a product of the mid-eleventh century.) The impressive liṅga in the main shrine is about 5 feet high from the floor. In the vicinity of the temple an image of Mahisāmardinī is being worshipped today in a modern structure as Kanakadurgā, which might well be a part of the temple complex. A good number of sculptural remains in varying stages of preservation are present in the compound. At the entrance portal are placed the Gaṅgā and Yamunā. Further, the image of the Nandi and remains of large Nāga figures in human form with a canopy of hoods have been reported at the site. The niches in the shrines carry representations of different aspects of Śiva. Kārttikeya, Gaṇeśa and Mahisāmardinī constitute the parsvadevatās. Gaṇeśa is presented both in seated and standing pose. So is Kārttikeya with or without the peacock. The door lintel has an image of Gaja-Lakṣmī. There is an image of Pārvatī in one of the niches of the major shrine. Three images of Ardhanāriśvara have been located on the temple and the debris in the compound. Among the images on the corner shrines are Hari-Hara, Hara-Pārvatī, where Śiva is shown playing the vinā, Natarāja and Durgā. It is a living site and even today the liṅgas in the temple complex are worshipped by a non-Brahmana priest.

Admittedly, the new ritual centre in the capital of the Śulkīs was overwhelmingly Śaivite in its overall ethos. Śiva and his family, including Nandi, were housed in different forms in the temple complex. Varying forms of Śakti such as Pārvatī, Durgā and Mahisāmardinī were also present, but so were Lakṣmī and Viṣṇu in their Gaja-Lakṣmī and Hari-Hara renderings, respectively. Incidentally, there is also an epigraphic reference to the issue of a grant to a Brahman donee from Madhyadeśa, who was a devout worshipper of Viṣṇu, with the intention of honouring Viṣṇu Bhaṭṭāraka. ²² The construction of a monumental temple symbolising the creation of a new ritual and ritual centre seems to have synchronised with the consolidation of ‘Hinduised’ kingship in a developing subregion. The early medieval times were marked by the emergence of a multitude of cults, sects and beliefs where the trinity comprising Śiva, Viṣṇu and Śakti, the mother goddess, came to be the most influential deities. Like sacred centres at other political capitals of the times, the Kanakeśvara complex was also accommodating the major gods and goddesses to signify the state’s responsiveness to the plural socio-religious foundations, and accommodation of various ethnic and cultural strands, namely, tribal, folk and elite, or what is known in some quarters as ‘antagonistic tolerance’. Conformation to the dominant religious and cultural trends also helped in reaching out to the neighbouring ‘Hinduised’ kingdoms and courts and winning their social acceptance. In brief, whereas Stambheśvarī as the kuladevatā facilitated the creation of consent to rule within Kodalaka manḍala, the monumental temple through the adroit use of rituals and symbols dramatically represented the localisation of the regional and trans-regional cultural flows, while through imperceptible stages gently universalising the local deity Stambheśvarī, to be ultimately accommodated as Subhadra in the regional Jagannātha trinity, an established part of the ‘great tradition’.

Like Araṇyavāsinī and Ghaṭṭavāsinī in Mewar, or other mother goddesses in the peripheral areas of the country in the past, ²³ the Stambheśvarī cult moved from obscurity to visibility after the ruling lineage declared its affiliation with it. The Brāhmanisation of the deity is visible in her Sanskritised name as against the Prakrit Khambeśvari (khamba, meaning pillar/post) and her worship by all ranks, ranging from the king to the common people. This, perhaps, to draw on an idea from A. Eschmann, symbolised the transition from sign to icon and its Hinduisation. ²⁴ Appropriation of the autochthonous deity was obviously promoted under political motives of those who controlled the newly emerging monarchical state in an area largely inhabited by aborigines. In fact, it was a two-way process involving interface between Brahmanical ideology and popular culture, with long-term consequences for both, insofar as it helped in the making of a shared culture. Hinduism indeed represents a continuum at various levels, including one between vana and kṣetra. ²⁵

In a situation of local state formation in the subregion of Kodālaka in the second half of the first millennium, warranting the shaping of a legitimatory strategy the coexistence and interplay between regional traditions (deśācāra) and the local inheritances (lokācāra) need to be appreciated. The Brāhmanical mode of appropriation was at play, and it is clearly manifest in passages where the donee is described as being proficient in conducting sacrifices, well versed in yajña, niyama, japa, tapa, and one who was humble and refined. ²⁶ The inscriptional records demonstrate the simultaneous operation of several processes of change, leading to the making of a historical subregion. ²⁷ The late transition in the subregion should not surprise us because comparable processes were also actualised in Khiñjali and Khijjiṅgakoṭā maṇḍalas within the same region of Odisha at the end of the millennium. ²⁸ In Khiñjali maṇḍala, in the Sonpur–Baudh–Kandhamal territories, the Bhañja dynasty almost contemporaneously worshipped goddess Stambheśvarī (stambheśvarī-lavdha-vara-prasāda), while also being the devotees of Śiva and Viṣṇu.