Vijayapuri citadel · Telugu History

The citadel was the fortified heart of Vijayapuri, the capital of the Ikshvakus in the valley at Nagarjunakonda.¹²³ It was first identified in the Archaeological Survey’s excavations of the 1950s.¹²³ These excavations were made because the Nagarjunasagar dam was going to flood the valley.¹²³

Earlier observations

A. H. Longhurst excavated the Buddhist monuments in 1927–31.⁴⁵⁶ He saw the valley as a natural fortress, shut in by hills on three sides and the river on the fourth.⁴⁵⁶ Two hills guarding the river front had brick fortifications.⁴⁵⁶ The bricks of the walls on Nagarjuna’s hill matched those of the Buddhist buildings.⁴⁵⁶ He thought the walls were built during the Buddhist occupation, if not earlier.⁴⁵⁶

He noted traces of a rampart with a central gateway running about half a mile between the two fortified hills.⁶ In the cultivated centre of the valley, where he placed the ancient city, he found the remains of a large pillared hall.⁷⁸ It had five carved pillars, one showing a Scythian soldier and another a figure he took for Dionysus, and these suggested a royal palace to him.⁷⁸

The walls and gates

In 1957–58 the excavators traced the citadel wall.² It enclosed a trapezoid (a four-sided shape) about 3,000 by 2,000 feet.² On the west it ran parallel to the Krishna at an average of 350 feet from the bank.² On the south it crossed the top of the 170-foot Peddakundellagutta hill.² It still stood up to about 16 feet above the ground outside.²

Trenches showed two phases.² First came a rampart of earth and gravel about 80 feet wide at the base.² Later a burnt-brick wall 9 to 14 feet thick was built on it, or on bare rock where the ground was high.² Except where it crossed the hill, a ditch 12 feet deep and 74 to 132 feet wide surrounded the wall.²

Two main gateways were found, on the east and the west.²⁹ The western one was at least 17 feet wide, and on the north was a narrow postern (side gate) that may have been an emergency exit.²⁹

The pottery from the layers beneath and above the rampart was all of the Ikshvaku period.⁹ The later layers yielded coins of Virapurushadatta and Ehuvula Chamtamula.⁹ Many religious buildings outside the walls were built only after the ditch had partly filled with debris from the brick wall.⁹

The four lines of defence

In 1958–59 the excavators found that the inner slope of the rampart had a retaining wall.¹⁰¹¹ The outer face of the brick wall had a rubble packing.¹⁰¹¹ A strong brick wall outside the western gate suggested an outwork or barbican (an outer defence of a gate).¹⁰¹¹

The citadel was the second of four lines of fortification in the valley:¹⁰¹¹

the first, of rubble, guarded the landward entrance on the east¹⁰¹¹
the second was the citadel wall¹⁰¹¹
the third ran along the Siddhaladhari hill¹⁰¹¹
the fourth, on Nagarjuna’s hill, was medieval¹⁰¹¹

Inside the citadel

Near the eastern gateway were barracks, including stables, and a well-plastered cistern.²⁹ East of the area connected with the horse sacrifice was a group of houses within a brick enclosure.¹⁰ It suggested to the excavators a separate quarter for royal buildings.¹⁰

The tank of the horse sacrifice

Near the centre of the citadel, inside a massive enclosure wall, was a square brick tank.¹² It was about 27 feet across and 8½ feet deep, built in four tiers with side steps.¹² A drain kept the water at about the height of a man.¹² Animal bones, thought to be of a horse and a goat, lay nearby.¹²

The excavators interpreted the tank as the purifying bath taken at the close of a horse sacrifice (ashvamedha).¹² They took a smaller two-tiered tank shaped like a tortoise to be ritual too.¹² Chamtamula, the first known Ikshvaku king, is praised in his descendants’ inscriptions as a performer of the horse sacrifice.¹³

The river front

The palace area, as the excavators first called it, included a stepped ghat with a balustrade (low railing) down to the Krishna.¹⁴¹⁵ North of it ran a zigzag stepped brick embankment.¹⁴¹⁵ They thought it was perhaps meant for royalty and its retinue (followers).¹⁴¹⁵ Some covering slabs of the ghat bore short inscribed labels and mason’s marks.¹⁴¹⁵ Lead coins of Chamtamula and Virapurushadatta were found there.¹⁴¹⁵

A heavy brick embankment ran along the whole river flank.¹⁶¹² South of the main ghat it had a U-shaped recess like a dock.¹⁶¹² The northern river flank and the fortified zone held mainly Brahmanical shrines, including temples of Karttikeya.¹⁶¹²

The stadium

The excavators uncovered what they called a stadium.²⁹ It lay between the north-western corner of the citadel and the Pushpabhadrasvamin temple at the foot of Nagarjuna’s hill.²⁹ It had a sunken brick arena 309 feet long, 259 feet wide and 15 feet deep.²⁹ The arena was laid out on the cardinal points (north, south, east and west), with flights of steps all round.²⁹

The steps, with 2-foot treads, were evidently for sitting.⁹¹⁷ On the south side, six narrower staircases led up to a platform 11 feet wide that ran round the top.⁹¹⁷ A pavilion on the west side was rebuilt twice, and a drain carried rainwater from the arena.⁹¹⁷ The remains were later buried under thick layers of silt and sand.¹⁷

The town outside

East of the citadel lay a planned township, which the excavators took to be the eastern part of Vijayapuri.¹⁸ It had a main street 25 feet wide, lanes of 15 feet and by-lanes of 8 feet.¹⁸ It also had walled house compounds, many with rows of storage jars.¹⁸ One house was a goldsmith’s shop, and another held a hoard of 900 Ikshvaku coins.¹⁸

A. Ghosh (ed.), Indian Archaeology 1957–58: A Review (1958), p. 3 (archive.org (opens in a new tab)). ↩ ↩² ↩³
Indian Archaeology 1957–58: A Review (1958), p. 5 (archive.org (opens in a new tab)). ↩ ↩² ↩³ ↩⁴ ↩⁵ ↩⁶ ↩⁷ ↩⁸ ↩⁹ ↩¹⁰ ↩¹¹ ↩¹² ↩¹³ ↩¹⁴ ↩¹⁵ ↩¹⁶ ↩¹⁷ ↩¹⁸ ↩¹⁹
Indian Archaeology 1957–58: A Review (1958), p. 9 (archive.org (opens in a new tab)). ↩ ↩² ↩³
A. H. Longhurst, “Excavations at Nagarjunikonda”, Annual Report of the Archaeological Survey of India 1927–28 (1931), p. 114 (archive.org (opens in a new tab)). ↩ ↩² ↩³ ↩⁴ ↩⁵
A. H. Longhurst, The Buddhist Antiquities of Nagarjunakonda (1938), pp. 1–2 (archive.org (opens in a new tab)). ↩ ↩² ↩³ ↩⁴ ↩⁵
Longhurst, Buddhist Antiquities of Nagarjunakonda (1938), p. 3 (archive.org (opens in a new tab)). ↩ ↩² ↩³ ↩⁴ ↩⁵ ↩⁶
Longhurst, Buddhist Antiquities of Nagarjunakonda (1938), p. 11 (archive.org (opens in a new tab)). ↩ ↩²
A. H. Longhurst, “Excavations at Nagarjunikonda”, Annual Report of the Archaeological Survey of India 1928–29 (1933), p. 104 (archive.org (opens in a new tab)). ↩ ↩²
Indian Archaeology 1957–58: A Review (1958), p. 6 (archive.org (opens in a new tab)). ↩ ↩² ↩³ ↩⁴ ↩⁵ ↩⁶ ↩⁷ ↩⁸ ↩⁹ ↩¹⁰ ↩¹¹ ↩¹² ↩¹³
A. Ghosh (ed.), Indian Archaeology 1958–59: A Review (1959), p. 8 (archive.org (opens in a new tab)). ↩ ↩² ↩³ ↩⁴ ↩⁵ ↩⁶ ↩⁷ ↩⁸ ↩⁹ ↩¹⁰
Indian Archaeology 1958–59: A Review (1959), p. 9 (archive.org (opens in a new tab)). ↩ ↩² ↩³ ↩⁴ ↩⁵ ↩⁶ ↩⁷ ↩⁸
Indian Archaeology 1956–57: A Review (1957), p. 37 (archive.org (opens in a new tab)). ↩ ↩² ↩³ ↩⁴ ↩⁵ ↩⁶ ↩⁷ ↩⁸ ↩⁹
J. Ph. Vogel, Prakrit Inscriptions from a Buddhist Site at Nagarjunikonda, Epigraphia Indica XX (1933), p. 4 (archive.org (opens in a new tab)). ↩
A. Ghosh (ed.), Indian Archaeology 1955–56: A Review (1956), p. 25 (archive.org (opens in a new tab)). ↩ ↩² ↩³ ↩⁴ ↩⁵
Indian Archaeology 1955–56: A Review (1956), p. 26 (archive.org (opens in a new tab)). ↩ ↩² ↩³ ↩⁴ ↩⁵
A. Ghosh (ed.), Indian Archaeology 1956–57: A Review (1957), p. 36 (archive.org (opens in a new tab)). ↩ ↩² ↩³
Indian Archaeology 1957–58: A Review (1958), p. 8 (archive.org (opens in a new tab)). ↩ ↩² ↩³ ↩⁴
A. Ghosh (ed.), Indian Archaeology 1959–60: A Review (1960), p. 9 (archive.org (opens in a new tab)). ↩ ↩² ↩³ ↩⁴