Lochtedeld (Construction of The Kumbha Mela)

James G.
Lochtefeld
THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE

KUMBHA MELA
Hindu religious tradition is often portrayed as established and unchanging by its adherents
as well as outside observers. Each of these groups can have good reasons to assert this, for
Hindus, it reflects the conviction that their religious practices are rooted in antiquity,
whereas for (polemical) outsiders it is evidence for the lack of any meaningful progress. Yet
these assumptions ill explain the workings of any religious community – which not only
constantly changes in response to its times, but also finds ways to clothe these changes in
the garb of tradition. Both of these phenomena can be seen in the Kumbha Mela, a Hindu
festival that is widely believed to be the world’s largest religious gathering. The Kumbha
Mela’s tone and content have been profoundly altered in the recent past, spurred by
changing social, economic, and political conditions. As the real-life Kumbha Mela has
been ‘constructed’ through this process of change, one sees the corresponding ‘construction’
of the sources (textual, mythical, and historical) to provide it with its roots, location, and
raison d’être. These ‘constructed’ sources root the Kumbha Mela in the distant past, both
to give it the authority of antiquity and to portray the festival as unchanging, but these
new sources reflect these new forces. These forces have transformed the Kumbha Mela from
a theater for ascetic military power into a government-controlled mass religious festival,
and this government control is now being challenged by Hindu nationalists. The constant
feature throughout the festival’s history has been the way it has served as a stage on which
groups can enact and contest for authority.
Introduction
On 14 April 1998, an estimated ten million people bathed in the Ganges at Hardwar,
a Hindu pilgrimage city at the edge of the Himalayas. They had come for the climactic
day of the Kumbha Mela, a Hindu bathing festival that is the largest religious gathering
on earth. The Kumbha Mela is celebrated at four different pilgrimage sites: Hardwar,
Prayag1 (near Allahabad), Ujjain, and Nasik, usually at twelve-year intervals.2 Festival
times are determined by astrological considerations, particularly the position of
Jupiter, which cycles through the zodiac in about twelve years.3 The holiest moment
at each site is based on particular positions of the sun and moon, and there are subsid-
iary bathing days clustered around the main bathing day.4 At present the Hardwar and
Prayag Melas are the most important – with the Prayag Mela drawing the largest
crowds by far – and these two melas also celebrate an Ardha (‘Half’) Kumbha Mela
after six years, at the mid-point between the ‘full’ Kumbha Melas.
Although each Kumbha Mela attracts millions of pilgrims, this festival’s primary
actors are the ascetic bands known as akharas.5 At each Kumbha Mela’s holiest
South Asian Popular Culture Vol. 2, No. 2, October 2004, pp. 103–126
ISSN 1474-6689 print/ISSN 1474-6697 online © 2004 Taylor & Francis Ltd
http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals DOI: 10.1080/1474668042000275707
104 SOUTH ASIAN POPULAR CULTURE
moments, these akharas have exclusive rights to the most important bathing places,
which are closed to the public. The akharas process to these bathing places in festive
processions known as shahi snans (‘royal baths’), in which they bear weapons, banners,
and accoutrements of royal authority. Although these processions are now highly
scripted, before 1800 each akhara’s position in the bathing order reflected its actual
status vis-à-vis the others. Bathing at the holiest moment was thus the visible sign of an
akhara’s primacy, and the procession to this bath enacted that primacy. Historical
sources suggest that such claims to primacy were contested, and that disagreements
over bathing order led to bloody struggles.6 Since the early 1800s, the Mela authori-
ties – first British, and later Indian – have maintained the established bathing order,
freezing into custom and privilege what had once been claimed solely by force of
arms. Yet even though these authorities have played an increasingly important role,
the akharas are clearly still the Kumbha Mela’s primary ritual agents. Since at one time
this ritual agency reflected actual power, it seems likely that the akharas have always
played a pivotal role in this festival.
Aside from highlighting various akharas’ prestige, the Kumbha Mela also draws
ascetics from throughout the nation. Such large gatherings are an opportunity to gain
exposure, patronage, and prestige; they provide a showcase for any ascetic seeking a
wider audience, as well as for a host of religious, social service, and political organi-
zations. The Mela arrangements are carried out by their respective state governments
(Uttaranchal, Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, and Maharashtra), which take on the
responsibility for the massive infrastructure – transportation, drinking water, food
shops, medical care, and sanitary arrangements – that will serve millions of pilgrims.
In recent times, the government has used the Mela to promote its own agenda –
including such goals as family planning and cleaning up the Ganges – as well as pro-
moting the Mela as religious tourism, to spur economic development. As the Kumbha
Mela has gained international significance, it not only reflects the currents of popular
Indian culture, but has also become a powerful stage to try to transform that culture,
particularly by Hindu nationalist groups.
Given the Kumbha Mela’s contemporary importance and the cultivated disdain
for novelty in Hindu culture, it is not surprising that contemporary Hindus ascribe the
Kumbha Mela’s origins to the remote past. This reflects the assumption of many
Hindus that the bedrock of their culture is ageless, timeless, and unchanging, and that
contemporary practices have been handed down from the sages in the distant past.
Given its current importance, it is most surprising that sources for the Kumbha Mela
are so sparse; critical consideration of these sources shows that the Kumbha Mela
is not nearly as old as most people would assume, and that the festival’s tone and
emphasis have changed dramatically even in the past century. As the Kumbha Mela’s
tradition and history have been formed, these have helped to promote people’s wish
to participate in it – thereby hinting at the impact mythmaking has upon popular
culture.
Mythical roots?
As with most Hindu religious festivals, the Kumbha Mela has a charter myth, which
not only describes how the festival began, but also accounts for its more unusual
THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE KUMBHA MELA 105
features, such as celebrating a single festival in four different places, the celestial
formulae for determining them, and the mythic ties connecting these contemporary
practices to a long-ago event. As we shall also see, the uncertain provenance of this
charter is also emblematic of the Kumbha Mela’s history.
According to contemporary sources, the charter’s basis is the story of Vishnu’s
Tortoise Avatar, which appears in many of the puranas.7 In most versions, the story
begins with the sage Durvasas becoming angry with the gods and cursing them to be
subject to death. To counteract this curse, the gods needed to churn the Sea of Milk
to obtain the nectar of immortality (amrta). Since the gods could not perform this task
alone, they made a pact with the demons (asuras) to churn the Ocean of Milk together,
and to divide the amrta equally between them. Vishnu himself took the form of a tor-
toise and dove to the bottom of the ocean, to provide a stable base for the churning-
stick, Mount Mandara. As soon as the amrta appeared, the agreement between the two
parties broke down. The asuras grabbed the pot of amrta and began to escape, but
Vishnu took the form of the enchanting maiden Mohini, and beguiled the demons into
giving the pot back to her. She gave the pot to the gods, who took off with the asuras
in hot pursuit. The gods’ flight lasted twelve (divine) days, during which they set the
pot down at one place on each day. Eight of these places were in the heavens, and four
were on earth – Prayag, Hardwar, Ujjain, and Nasik. In each place a bit of the amrta
splashed on the ground, sanctifying the site. Since a divine day is considered equal to
a human year, their twelve-day flight established the current twelve-year cycle.
The gods finally managed to escape their pursuers and divided the nectar among
themselves, but failed to notice that the asura Sainhikeya had slipped into their midst
in disguise. As the Sainhikeya began to drink, the sun and moon alerted Vishnu, who
used his discus to cut off the asura’s head. The sun and moon were rewarded for their
alertness in safeguarding the amrta by having their positions help to determine the
Kumbha Mela’s timing.8 Jupiter’s primacy in determining the Mela’s timing reflects
the belief that Jupiter was the religious preceptor (guru) to the gods, and thus the most
important celestial body. Most importantly, this story also connects the present with
the events in this inconceivably distant past. At each Kumbha Mela’s most propitious
moment, the rivers are said to turn back into the nectar of immortality, and those
who bathe in them gain immeasurable religious merit.
One finds this charter story (or some minor variant) recounted in the Kumbha
Mela literature, in the Madhya Pradesh District Gazetteer (376–77), and on the lips of
any number of pilgrims, for whom the story is firmly embedded in the popular imagi-
nation. Yet there are also some clear problems. The charter’s core story – churning
the ocean of milk – is quite well attested. This is the tale of Vishnu’s Tortoise Avatar,
which according to Bedekar appears in at least seven puranas, as well as the
Mahabharata and the Ramayana. Yet as Bhattacharya (5) and Amado (1114–5) have
noted, the part of this story giving the charter for the Kumbha Mela itself – namely,
the gods’ flight for the twelve divine days, and sanctifying the four spots on earth –
does not appear in the Mahabharata, the Ramayana, or any of the published puranas.
Further lacunae are found P.V. Kane’s History of Dharmasastra, and in the medieval
nibandha (commentarial) literature. Kane’s text gives only the briefest reference to the
Kumbha Mela (5.287), while the commentators are silent both on the charter myth,
and on the Kumbha Mela itself.9 Since both Kane and the nibandha commentators
write voluminously on the Sanskrit religious literature, these elisions strongly suggest
that it does not appear in these sources.
Why is the charter myth for such a well-known festival apparently absent from all
the smrti literature, as well as the later commentarial literature? Given the Kumbha
Mela’s contemporary prominence, this absence is striking and unexpected. The
simplest explanation is that Kumbha Mela was not an important festival when these
texts were being composed, if it existed at all. As it became a popular cultural practice
over time, the Kumbha Mela needed a charter to give it mythic sanction, and the
latter part of the story – the part that fixes the Kumbha Mela – was grafted onto the
well-known story of the Tortoise Avatar.
One clue that this charter was a later addition is the discrepancy between the
charter and the Kumbha Mela festival calendar. As mentioned above, the charter
establishes both the twelve-year Kumbha Mela cycle, and the four Mela sites. The
twelve-year cycle came because the deities fled from the asuras for twelve (divine)
days, which equals twelve human years. Since these sites were sanctified on different
‘divine days’, one would expect the festivals to be celebrated in different years. Yet
the Kumbha Melas at Ujjain and Nasik both occur when Jupiter is in Leo, and thus on
the same divine ‘day’. This internal inconsistency between the charter and the actual
festival cycle is one indication that the charter attempted to integrate and harmonize
already existing festivals.
Still stronger evidence that the present Kumbha Mela charter is a recent creation
comes from the 1883 Nasik District Gazetteer. The entry under ‘Trimbak’ (for
Tryambakeshvar) describes a local festival in the following manner, ‘Once in every
twelve years when the sun enters Leo, or Simhasth, a great fair is held at the source
of the Godavari’ (Gazetteer of the Bombay Presidency, hereafter GBP, 16.652–3).10 The
ensuing descriptions of the akhara bathing processions and the years in which it
was celebrated leave no doubt that this festival is the Nasik Kumbha Mela. Yet this
gazetteer gives a completely different charter myth – the charter myth for the
Tryambakeshvar jyotirlinga.11
The contemporary charter explicitly encompasses all four Kumbha Mela sites, and
ties all four sites to one mythic event. How then to explain the existence of a different
charter focused on Tryambakeshvar alone, with no connection to the other three? The
most convincing explanation is that the contemporary charter did not exist, even late
in the nineteenth century. If one assumes that this contemporary charter is a recent
creation, it is easy to envision composing a story to explain and integrate all four sites
for the Kumbha Mela. Yet if one assumes that the contemporary charter myth is the
original, it is difficult to imagine how the Nasik Mela could have established a separate
mythic identity. Based on this evidence, the Kumbha Mela’s contemporary charter
had yet to be composed even late in the 1800s. This is almost certainly why the early
20th century Hindi guidebooks to Hardwar do not include this charter – or any other
charter, for that matter – even though they describe the Kumbha Mela at great
length.12 To date, the oldest document in which this charter myth appears is Venirama
Sharma Gauda’s Kumbhaparva Mahatmya, which was published at Benares in 1947 (v.s.
2004). Gauda’s text attributes the charter to the Skanda Purana, although it does not
appear in published versions of this purana. Since by this time the Kumbha Mela had
become the pre-eminent Hindu festival, it may well be that Gauda did not compose
this text ex nihilo, but was merely setting down an established oral tradition. Still, it is
instructive that the earliest hard date for the contemporary charter does not appear
until the middle of the twentieth century.
A fragmented history
Given the Kumbha Mela’s contemporary importance, it is surprising to find that its
current charter myth can be traced back only to about a hundred years. This gulf
between claims and documentation is mirrored in the Mela’s history, in which rich
claims and assumptions are belied by surprisingly sparse data. The most grandiose
claims assert that the Kumbha Mela has been taking place from time immemorial,
whereas others link its origin to the philosopher Shankaracharya (780–812?). Other
claims seek to strengthen its antiquity by connecting it to the Vedas (whose antiquity
is unquestionable), or by associating it with historical figures such as Hsuan Tsang,
Vallabhacharya, and Chaitanya.
In fact, none of these claims stand up to scrutiny. The Kumbha Mela cannot have
existed since time immemorial, because the zodiac determines the Mela’s timing, and
the first Sanskrit references to the zodiac are in Varahamihira’s Brhatjataka, in the 6th
century (Mule 3, Kane 5.484). Not only is the Kumbha Mela not mentioned in the
Vedas – as Pandit Ram Shankar Bhattacharya succinctly notes – but it is also absent
from the puranas, the commentarial (nibandha) literature based on the puranas, or
even in the Haridvaramahatmya, the earlier of Hardwar’s two mahatmya traditions.13
Finally, historical investigation belies all of the claims connecting the Kumbha Mela
with historical figures: Hsuan Tsang, Vallabhacarya, Chaitanya, and Shankaracharya.14
In fact, the earliest attested mention of the term ‘Kumbha Mela’ comes in the
Khulasatu-t-Tawarikh, a Moghul-era gazetteer that was probably written in 1695.15 The
text gives a general account of the empire’s various regions, including the following
description of the Ganges:
Although according to the holy books the river Ganges should be worshipped
from its origin to its end, yet Haridwar is described as the greatest of all holy
places on its banks. Every year, on the day when the sun enters the sign of Aries
– which is called Baisakhi – people from every side assemble here. Especially in
the year when Jupiter enters the sign of Aquarius (otherwise named Kumbh) –
which happens once every 12 years – vast numbers of people assemble here from
remote distances. They consider bathing, giving alms, and shaving the hair and
beard at this place, as acts of merit, and the throwing of the bones of the dead into
the Ganges [as the means of] salvation of the deceased (Sarkar a: 19; the italics are
in the original).16
A similar attestation is found in the Chahar Gulshan, a comparable gazetteer whose

initial composition Sarkar dates to 1759, but for which the final editing was done in
1789 (a: xv). The Chahar Gulshan opens by describing northern India, particularly the
holy places and religious festivals of the Hindus in the Delhi region. Among these
festivals, it mentions:
Mela at Haridwar in Baisakh: the largest gathering takes place in the year in which
Jupiter enters the sign of Aquarius, and is called the Kumbh Mela. Lacs of
laymen, Faqirs, and Sanyasis assemble here. If any Faqirs of Prag [or Bairagi?]
come here, they are attacked by the Sanyasis (Sarkar a: 124; the italics are in the
original).
These two brief descriptions give several consistent facts. Both call this festival the
Kumbha Mela, both describe the astrological phenomena still associated with the
Hardwar festival (i.e. the sun entering Aries when Jupiter is in Aquarius), both point
to Jupiter’s astrological position as the reason for this festival’s name, and both
describe the Kumbha Mela as an enhanced version of the annual Baisakhi festival. The
Khulasatu explicitly mentions alms giving as one of the festival practices – indicating
that this was an opportunity for patronage – whereas the Chahar Gulshan mentions that
sanyasis assembled there. Furthermore, both texts use the name Kumbha Mela only
for the Hardwar festival, even though these texts explicitly describe other festivals
now identified as part of the Kumbha Mela cycle – namely, the Magh Mela in
Prayag, and the Simhastha Mela in Nasik.17 The texts clearly show that these others
are important festivals, but neither is connected to the Hardwar Mela.
Hardwar’s sole mention as the Kumbha Mela in these texts clearly shows that it is
the oldest of the four sites – an inference supported by astrological evidence.
Although all four festivals are now called the Kumbha Mela, Hardwar is the only site
in which Aquarius (Kumbha) determines the Mela’s timing. Thus, it makes sense to
call the Hardwar mela the ‘Kumbha’ Mela, but not the others. As Bhattacharya notes:
It seems that the Kumbha Mela gets its name from a big gathering that used to
take place at Haridvar every twelve years on the occasion of a particular conjunc-
tion of planets, one of which was in Kumbha rasi. When such a big gathering was
extended also to other places, the particular conjunction that takes place on such
occasions was also called Kumbha, even though no celestial body was in Kumbha
rasi (7).
Up to now there has been no mention of the fourth Kumbha Mela site, Ujjain,
and from the limited evidence, it seems that Ujjain’s Kumbha Mela had a different
origin than the others. The Kumbha Melas at Hardwar, Prayag, and Nasik grew out of
established festivals, whose trade and patronage opportunities naturally attracted the
akharas. According to a volume published for Ujjain’s 1992 Kumbha Mela, the festival
came there Ujjain by royal initiative:
In 1740 AD, when the founder of the Shinde Dynasty, Ranoji Shinde was ruling
in Malwa with his headquarters in Ujjain, it was decided that it was the state-
responsibility to provide facilities to the pilgrims. Simultaneously, the sadhus of
the Dashanami, Udasina, Natha, Vaishnavite and Saivite faiths were invited from
Nasik to take part in the holy dips and to grace the occasion (Nigam 50).
The original source for this information is the Vikrama-smrti-grantha; the major
difference in the earlier text is that it gives no definite date, but only says that this
event took place ‘during Shinde’s reign’ (555).18 The older source also notes how this
invitation fit into the larger socio-political context – it was religious publicity for a
renascent Hindu kingdom. Ujjain’s religious significance seems to have declined
during centuries under Muslim rule, and many of the temples there had been
destroyed.19 During Shinde’s reign more than a hundred temples were rebuilt and
re-established – most notably the Mahakaleshvar temple – and inviting the akharas to
Ujjain would have been another way to promote Hindu religious revival. It would
have also been a way to reinforce Shinde’s image as a pious Hindu king, by suggesting
comparisons with rulers such as Ashoka and Harsha, both of whom convened such
religious assemblies.
If this account is true, then the Ujjain Kumbha Mela is essentially an extension of
the existing Nasik Mela. This story explains why both Kumbha Melas are celebrated
when Jupiter is in Leo – Madhoji invited the sadhus to Ujjain when they were already
‘in the neighbourhood’ for the Simhastha fair in Nasik.20 Another bit of evidence sup-
porting this story is that all the akharas bathe at the same time in Ujjain, whereas in the
other places one akhara bathes before the others, as a sign of their local pre-eminence.
Simultaneous bathing hints that some outside authority (i.e. Shinde) was in charge of
this festival, rather than the akharas themselves.
In summary, the historical sources for the Kumbha Mela are much sparser than its
present importance would lead one to believe, and the Mela’s charter myth seems to
be of dubious antiquity. What then is certain? There is clear evidence of well-
established bathing festivals by 1700. Some were annual festivals – in the spring at
Hardwar, which is historically attested to about 1600, 21 and during Magh at Prayag,
which has a much longer history.22 There were also festivals tied to Jupiter, and thus
on a twelve-year cycle – the Kumbha Mela in Hardwar, and the Sinhastha Mela in
Nasik. The Nasik Mela’s origins are clearly independent from the Hardwar Mela’s,
since it had a separate charter myth even in the late 19th century, as discussed above.
Astrological evidence supports Hardwar as the original Kumbha Mela site, since it is
the only one in which Aquarius determines the festival’s timing.
These bare facts raise intriguing questions. One cluster of questions centres on the
‘original’ Kumbha Mela, at Hardwar – when and how did it begin? How and why did
it become so important that it became a model overlaid on other existing festivals,
namely the Magh Mela at Prayag, and the Simhastha Mela at Nasik? Yet the more
compelling question concerns the construction of the modern ‘Kumbha Mela’ – how
does one get from these individual festivals, only one of which is called the Kumbha
Mela, to this unified set of four (for which a charter myth would assuredly be
generated)? These questions will be taken up in the following sections.
Agents and origins
As mentioned earlier, the Kumbha Mela’s most important actors are the ascetic
akharas, whose ritual primacy can be seen in their exclusive right to bathe during the
festival’s holiest moments. Various factors have diminished the akharas’ influence in
the past two centuries, but their right to monopolize these bathing times has never
been seriously contested, and one of the Mela authorities’ more vexing tasks has been
to protect and facilitate this right.23 The grand processions in which the akharas
proceed to their baths are not mere theatre. They are symbolically enacting their
sovereignty over the Kumbha Mela. Two centuries ago, bathing order indicated actual
dominance, and several well-attested stories describe bloody battles between various
groups. Given the akharas’ pivotal role in the Kumbha Melas – for which the Hardwar
Kumbha Mela is clearly the model – it seems evident that a search for the festival’s
origins should look to the akharas’ historical roots.
Despite scattered references to martial ascetics, the earliest concrete date for the
akharas is April 1567.24 Several contemporary histories record a battle at Thanesar, a
pilgrimage place north of Delhi, between two Hindu ascetic groups. Two of these
sources describe these groups as Jogis and Sanyasis, and the third as Kurs and Puris,
which are identified as Giris and Puris, two of the Dasanami sub-orders.25 Despite this
difference, all three accounts agree on two important points. The first is that there
was at least one group of sanyasis, and they were clearly naga sanyasis, since they
fought a pitched battle. The accounts also suggest that this battle was about competi-
tion for resources – namely, the right to collect alms from pilgrims coming to the
shrine.26
These same motives can be clearly seen in later conflicts. By the mid-1700s,
Hardwar’s annual Baisakhi fair had become the most important marketplace in north
India, and the entry point for all trade goods from the north and west. Raper’s
account describes a battle between sanyasis and bairagis at the 1760 Hardwar Kumbha
Mela, when this trade was burgeoning; he reports that the sanyasis killed 18,000
bairagis, and then banned bairagis from Hardwar until the British took control of the
Doab (455).27 Similar efforts to control trade and patronage were almost certainly
behind the sanyasi-bairagi battle in Nasik at the 1789 Sinhastha Mela. The Khulasatu
describes the Simhastha festival as important fair; this would have drawn great num-
bers of people, and thus the potential for significant patronage.28 After the Nasik battle
the ruling Peshwa shifted the bairagi bathing-place to Ram Kund in Nasik, which
effectively removed the bairagis from the main festival venue, and thus away from
potential sources of patronage (Burghart, 374). According to Ghurye, this same ruler
promulgated a similar separation at Ujjain (112).
All these examples reveal burgeoning sanyasi influence in North India – political,
military, and especially economic.29 The akharas have always had a strong presence in
Hardwar, where they control virtually all of the important shrines. The original
Kumbha Mela, that is the Hardwar Mela, arose from this sanyasi dominance, and prob-
ably began in the late 1500s.30 This is about a century before the Kumbh Mela’s first
attested description (in the Khulasatu), and shortly after the first hard date for the naga
sanyasi akharas, the Mela’s most important agents. 31 As the akharas grew stronger with
the Moghul decline, their economic interests would have pulled them to other impor-
tant sites – Prayag during the Magh Mela, Nasik during the Sinhastha Mela, and
Ujjain, a long-standing sacred and trading centre.
As mentioned above, the contemporary Kumbha Mela – four places, one festival,
and a unifying charter – did not arise until the late 19th or the early 20th century.
Kama Maclean argues that the Prayag Kumbha Mela began in 1870, and was instituted
by the Prayagwals (local pilgrimage priests) as a way to concentrate pilgrim traffic at
longer intervals than the annual Magh Mela (890–1). The Prayagwals had actively
opposed the British in the 1857 rebellion, and had not only suffered harsh retribution,
but also remained under a cloud of suspicion. In the early years of colonial rule, the
British showed considerable distaste for large religious festivals, which were seen –
often rightly – as breeding grounds for epidemics. According to Maclean, these con-
siderations induced the Prayagwals to promote the Kumbha Mela to generate large
crowds every twelve years, rather than the smaller annual crowds at the Magh Mela.
Although I take minor issue with a few of her claims, the dearth of earlier evidence is
quite telling.32 Around the turn of the 20th century these four different festivals, each
patronized by the akharas, had been transformed into one festival linked by a single
charter. Although the akharas’ presence may have spurred this process, I seriously
doubt that they wrote this unifying charter, or even cared about such matters. Their
presence at these festivals was about maintaining their status, patronage, and power.
The forces responsible for ‘constructing’ one festival from these four lie in other,
deeper social currents, to which the Kumbha Mela’s ongoing changes bear clear
witness in attendance patterns, theme, calendar, and organization.
Changes
At the cusp of the twentieth century, the Kumbha Mela’s tone, structure, and
attendance patterns were profoundly transformed. One significant shift has been the
phenomenal growth of the Prayag Kumbha Mela, which is now by far the largest –
perhaps because it has greater festival space, or perhaps because of its location in the
densely populated Gangetic plain. Yet until the end of the 19th century, the Hardwar
Mela consistently drew much larger crowds; from 1796 to 1867, the estimated
crowds on the primary bathing day topped two million.33 The accuracy of these esti-
mates can be disputed, but these numbers are much larger than those at Prayag, which
drew 218,732 pilgrims for the entire year in 1812–13, and the 1812 fair had drawn
the largest numbers for 28 years (Hamilton 1.35). It was not until 1894 that the
crowd for the Kumbh day at Prayag was estimated at over a million people (Imperial
Gazetteer of India, hereafter IGI, a: 5.239).34
Hardwar’s significantly larger Kumbha Mela crowds were directly related to the
commercial importance of the annual fair. Both the Khulasatu and the Chahar Gulshan
describe Hardwar’s Kumbha Mela as an extension of the annual Baisakhi Mela, which
by the early 1800s was one of the largest commercial venues in India, and which drew
enormous crowds even in years without a Kumbha Mela. In the late 1800s the fair’s
economic importance rapidly declined, as trading patterns shifted because of the
growing rail network, and by 1903 the festival’s economic importance had virtually
vanished.35
This decline was clearly reflected in steadily diminishing Kumbha Mela attendance
– for which a strong contributing factor may have been the fear of cholera, after the
1867 Kumbha Mela spawned a cholera epidemic that swept through the entire coun-
try. Whereas Hardwar’s 1867 Kumbh day drew several million people, the crowds
were estimated at 600,000 in 1879, 500,000 in 1891, and 400,000 in 1903.36 After
the 1891 Mela, one of the presiding officials predicted its imminent demise:
... the number of wealthy pilgrims was much smaller than on former occasions.
... The higher classes were influenced by these warnings [of possible cholera],
and as a rule did not attend. No men of rank, except the Maharaja of Kashmir,
were present ... the fact that the warnings were so effective in preventing large
numbers of the better classes from attending is important as showing a gradual
spread of more enlightened views with regard to these great gatherings. Probably
at the next Kumbh (should there be reason to anticipate the outbreak of epidemic
disease), it would be possible, without exciting any general discontent, to adopt
stronger measures for the discouragement of the assemblage of a multitude of
pilgrims.
(HMI, January 1892: 50–1)
The connection between Hardwar’s declining commercial importance and its

declining festival attendance is eminently understandable, yet after 1903 the numbers
began to increase. Attendance for the 1915 Kumbh day was estimated at between five
and six hundred thousand, it was ‘at least’ 900,000 in 1927, and has increased for
every Kumbha Mela since then (Christie, 29). The 1927 Mela’s chief officer, Mr W.
Christie, listed three reasons why the authorities had been expecting a much larger
crowd: that 1915 had been during the war, and fewer people had been travelling, that
facilities for travel had improved, and finally, that ‘the communal tension which has
been very prominent in the last few years has resulted in an increase in religious
fervor’ (2). Similar sentiments were echoed by P.H.J. Measures, the Superintendent
of Police:
It had been estimated that the attendance at the Kumbh of 1927 would be greater
than it had been in 1915, when it was estimated that about 6 lakhs [i.e. 600,000]
of persons were present. The absence of famine for several years, the stimulus
given by Hindu Sangathan and other forms of religious awakening, and the lull in
serious political or quasi-political agitation were reason which led all concerned to
expect that the Kumbh of 1927 would attract a very large concourse to Haridwar
... (3).
Both of these officials explicitly cited political considerations as a significant factor

for the Kumbha Mela’s increasing attendance. Later in his report, Mr Measures
further observes:
As is always the case on an occasion of such magnitude, the Kumbha Mela drew
to Haridwar large numbers of political and quasi-political agitators, while various
organizations took the opportunity of this large gathering to hold conferences
and sessions. The Hindu Mahasabha, the All-India Sanatana Dharma Conference,
the Rishikul Anniversary, the Gurukul Silver Jubilee, with which was allied an
All-India Khadi Exhibition ... the Punjab Akali Dal, the Mahabir Dal, the JP
Mahavidyalaya Jubilee and many other meetings of less importance, were all held
in Haridwar in March and April (12).
A similar sentiment is noted in the Saharanpur District Gazeteer, which notes that
from 1900, Hardwar was a center for nationalistic activity (336). Such nationalistic
activity was often expressed through the medium of religious festivals, both as a way
to assert a Hindu identity in the public sphere, and because the colonial government
had shown itself very reluctant to restrict religious activity.37
Other important factors helped to promote the larger numbers in 1927. This was
the first Kumbha Mela since the 1916 Ganges ‘agitation’ in Hardwar, in which local
Hindu interests – under the leadership of Pandit Madan Mohan Malaviya, a noted
nationalist leader – had successfully blocked the construction of a dam across the
Ganges, which they had claimed would profane the sacred river (Parmanand 2.242–
63). Pandit Malaviya was not only a nationalist leader, but also a successful commu-
nity organiser. In 1914, he founded the All-India Sewa Samiti [‘Service Committee’],
Allahabad. The group’s name clearly shows that it was intended to knit together
people from different regions, and one of the Samiti’s first service projects was
volunteer work at the 1915 Hardwar Kumbha Mela, which it has continued since that
time.38 Another group that Malaviya founded was the Ganga Sabha. This organisation
represented Hardwar’s hereditary pilgrimage priests (purohits), and it was formed to
lobby on their behalf after the 1916 ‘agitation’. Through his leadership of these differ-
ing groups, Malaviya forged connections between Hindu groups in differing places,
and he was ready to use festival times to push for political goals. These festival times
provided a highly visible public stage, and they provided a certain degree of immunity
from colonial power. The British government had shown itself extremely reluctant to
interfere with religious celebrations in any way, and thus these festivals became one of
the few outlets for public dissent and resistance. One example of this came during the
1927 Kumbha Mela, when Malaviya played a gadfly role in his objections to a struc-
ture known as the ‘Officer’s Bridge’, which hung over the bathing pool at Hardwar.
The colonial authorities were clearly aware that these ‘religious’ issues had political
implications – in short, that this was a struggle to define areas of control:
Though the proceedings of the various sabhas were chiefly religious, yet Pandit
Madan Mohan Malviya, obviously acting under pressure from a local Sabha of very
low standing, formed as recently as 1922 (I refer to the Ganga Sabha), decided to
increase the difficulties of the authorities by an eleventh hour agitation against the
existence of a jetty, generally known as the Officer’s Bridge, from which traffic
through the pool is controlled. It is unnecessary here to discuss the merits of the
agitation as this has been fully done elsewhere. It is sufficient to say that the Pandit
left no stone unturned to work up popular feeling against the existence of the
Bridge, and to this agitation I attribute in part the element of turbulent disregard
of authority and truculence which was noticeable amongst certain portions of the
crowds on the Kumbh Day (Measures 12).
At least in Hardwar, the Kumbha Mela’s focus had sharply changed by 1927. In
the 19th century the focus was religious and mercantile, whereas in the early 20th
century the mercantile emphasis had been replaced by a stress on nationalism, in
which these festival venues served as arenas to contest for control with the colonial
government. Hardwar was a vibrant centre for such activity, and the larger support
for this movement can be seen in the flood of construction between 1927 and
1938 – indicating substantial patronage – as well as the substantial enlargements and
improvements to the central bathing ghat at Har-ki-Pairi.
As this sense of unified purpose emerged – as well as organisations such as the
All-India Sewa Samiti, which did volunteer work at different Kumbha Melas – it
would have been natural for people to begin to conceive of the Kumbha Mela festivals
not as four separate things, but as four examples of one thing, and for a unifying
charter myth to state this explicitly. The Gauda text, which gives the earliest
published charter for a unified set of four pilgrimage places, appears in 1947 (v.s.
2004).
Beginning in 1927, one also sees the significant changes in the bathing calendar at
Hardwar, and these changes clearly point to a festival in transition. One significant
change is an additional processional bath (shahi snan) for the sanyasi akharas on
Shivaratri, which first appears in 1927.39 From 1844–1915, the official records
mention only two bathing days: Chaitra Amavasya, and the Kumbh bath on Baisakhi
(at the sun’s transition into Aries). For these six festivals, the Mela’s British adminis-
trators did not arrive in Hardwar until late in March, long after Shivaratri. Given the
Kumbha Mela’s history of conflict, and the general suspicion toward sanyasis, it is
inconceivable that the authorities would have let the sanyasis bathe unsupervised. In
short, the absence of these officials means that there was no Shivaratri bath at those
festivals. Why was this third Shahi Snan added to the Hardwar Kumbha Mela? The
most likely reason is that with this addition, the Hardwar festival would mirror the
three established bathing days for the Prayag Melas (Magh and Kumbha), and thus
reinforce the Kumbha Mela’s uniformity as a single festival. In fact, each Kumbha
Mela now has three ‘Shahi Snans’, and the differing dates given for some of these
festivals (at every site except Hardwar) clearly show that this festival uniformity is an
artificial attribution.40
Another important shift has been the steadily growing role of government, which
has profoundly shaped the present Kumbha Melas. The colonial government’s initial
commitment was to safeguard life and property (beginning in 1808), after which it
took on progressively greater obligations: for bridges, for sanitary arrangements, and
finally financial responsibility, which it did with the UP Melas Act of 1932.41 Assum-
ing financial responsibility has made the government the single most powerful force in
the contemporary Kumbha Mela, in which it essentially gets to determine everything
– who gets the prime space in the Mela grounds, how much space an organization
gets, the traffic routes for the processions, who can go where and when, and the bath-
ing calendar. The most telling sign of this control came in Hardwar in 1998, when the
government banned all processions on the Kumbh day, based on concerns for public
safety.42 The ban was rescinded in time for the processions to occur, but the ability to
enforce this ban, backed up by heavily armed troops, clearly showed where the real
power lies. This is a far cry from the day when the sanyasis themselves ran the Kumbh.
Conclusion
Many contemporary sources ascribe the Kumbha Mela’s origin to the philosopher
Shankaracharya (780–812?). According to this story, Shankara established this festival
to combat the spread of Buddhism and to reinvigorate Hindu religious life, by initiat-
ing regular gatherings of learned and holy men. Despite its contemporary popular
appeal, this story is just that – a fiction. One problem is that the story does not
appear until the twentieth century, another is that it also presupposes the sort of
unified festival that the Kumbha Mela has only recently become. Yet another issue is
the incongruity between Shankara’s ascetic ‘style’ and that of the naga ascetics who
were and are the Kumbha Mela’s primary actors (Madhava-vidyaranya 67, 137–43,
176–9).43 The truth of the Shankara story lies not in its content, but its underlying
meaning – the language of struggle versus outsiders, and of worries about a threatened
Hindu identity. The concerns in the story show strong parallels with those of Hindus
in the early 20th century, who saw Hindu identity threatened politically by the colo-
nial government, threatened religiously by Christian missionaries, and who tried to
organize the community to struggle against it. As in the story of Shankara, using public
religious gatherings proved to be the perfect strategy, because such gatherings were
the sole venue for ‘nationalist’ sentiments with which the colonial government would
not interfere.
Although the Shankara story reflects the particular circumstances in the early
twentieth century, in a larger sense it has been ‘true’ throughout the Kumbha
Mela’s history. As a highly public religious affair, the Kumbha Mela is not merely
about individual spiritual goals; it is a theatre in which differing groups have contested
for power. As Sax notes, ‘public ritual performances are an especially powerful means
for creating (and sometimes undermining), selves, relationships, and communities ...’
(12). Control (or the attempt to control) the Mela’s ritual space reveals and reinforces
the power relationships between groups, in multiple and simultaneous dimensions.
Ascetics have been and clearly remain one such contesting group. British military
control ended the days when the akharas controlled the festival by force of arms, yet
this same control formalized the akharas’ privileged ritual status, and ascetics continue
to contest for power within the boundaries laid down by the state. At least in
Hardwar, one manifestation of this has been the Juna akhara’s struggle to raise its
status. In 1998, the Juna’s attempt to claim precedence as the largest akhara spurred
rioting on Hardwar’s second bathing day, and led to the climactic day’s processions
being temporarily cancelled.44 One also sees such contesting by ‘independent’ ascetics
(not affiliated with an akhara), for whom Kumbha Mela provides a national stage to
attract potential devotees through lectures, discourses (katha), religious drama (lila),
and often-dramatic public rituals.45 These ‘entrepreneurial’ ascetics are generally far
more accessible to the public than are those in the akharas, whose status is set and
protected, and the chance to meet such ascetics and take part in such events is an
important attraction for many visitors.
Beginning with Ranoji Shinde, the Kumbha Mela has also been an important stage
to demonstrate political authority. Shinde’s support for the Ujjain Kumbha Mela
bolstered his status as a pious Hindu king, and highlighted his renascent Hindu king-
dom. British efforts to preserve order and to uphold sanitary arrangements reinforced
their claim to govern for the benefit of the governed, and thus helped to justify the
colonial enterprise (Prior 38–9).46 These same tendencies have clearly been evident in
independent India. Although Nehru was not religious, he had a highly visible presence
at the 1954 Allahabad Kumbha Mela – the first in the newly formed republic –
because he recognized the festival’s high symbolic value, and successive governments
have claimed the status which comes with running the Mela. This status brings heavy
responsibilities, since the government is blamed for any breakdown in the arrange-
ments, especially those involving loss of life.47 For individual politicians, an appear-
ance at the Kumbha Mela is a way to demonstrate one’s piety, and to bolster one’s
political capital with the Hindu electorate. Political figures from throughout North
India regularly attend the Kumbha Mela, and these considerations were most likely
behind Sonia Gandhi’s highly publicised bath at Prayag in 2001.
The government-controlled exhibits also carry a ‘political’ agenda, by helping to
advance various goals. Such goals can include encouraging scientific agronomy and
pest control, highlighting health issues such as safe drinking water, childhood immuni-
zation, and AIDS awareness, promoting the state’s industry and tourism, and endors-
ing social goals such as population control, women’s literacy, opposition to child
marriage and untouchability, and ‘national integration’. The farming, health, and
development information is usually transmitted via displays in the exhibit halls, but
the social messages are more commonly conveyed through street theatre. This
medium presents these messages far more forcibly than a static display, and at the
same time engages the audience with everyday language and broad humour.
The government also provides a full spectrum of entertainment. The offerings in

the main festival area tend to stress Indian history and culture. The 1998 Kumbha
Mela had a visual exhibit of the Ramayana using images from traditional miniature
paintings, and also daily programs by traditional performing artists (musicians, sing-
ers, actors, and even acrobats) from all religious communities. Both promoted tradi-
tional Indian culture – the former also appealing to popular piety – and at the same
time provided free ‘cultural’ entertainment. Such highbrow entertainment contrasted
sharply with the more popular diversions in an adjacent area, for which patrons had to
pay admission. This latter area had amusement park rides, food, merchandise, games,
and a tent containing life-sized mechanical dinosaurs.48 Such attractions are completely
consistent with the Hindu festival tradition, which has always included popular enter-
tainments, but they also reinforced a subtle class divide. Audiences for the free cul-
tural performances came primarily from the poorer classes, whereas the admission
fees for the amusement park meant that its primary clients were wealthier people.
The government clearly wanted to promote cultural entertainment, but also worked
to satisfy the public’s wider tastes.
Just as the Kumbha Mela has been a theatre to buttress the ruling power, it has
also been used to voice opposition to these rulers. In the early 20th century, the
Kumbha Mela provided a highly visible stage for Indian nationalists, since religious
festivals were one of the few venues through which they could openly contest
the colonial state. Such opposition sharply intensified with the rise of Hindutva nation-
alism in the mid-1980s, in which the Vishva Hindu Parishad (VHP) and other
Hindutva organizations have used the Kumbha Mela as a stage to contest the secular
governments running the Mela.
The Hindutva challenge stems from a particular vision of what it means to
be Indian – its proponents stress a ‘cultural nationalism’ that sees Indian identity as
inextricably Hindu. The most extreme proponents are violently anti-Muslim and anti-
Christian, since these groups are identified as ‘outsiders’; more moderate people may
eschew such divisive language, yet still sincerely believe that Indian society is based on
Hindu values, and that public policy should reflect this reality. In seeking to construct
and consolidate Hindu identity, the VHP has carried out many successful campaigns,
which have usually involved mobilizing large numbers of people, skilfully using the
media to draw attention these events, and then directing these campaigns to political
ends. These campaigns have often involved very simple rituals that encourage mass
participation, such as mixing waters from India’s sacred rivers to symbolize national
unity, or taking bricks for the Ram Janam Bhumi temple in processions to Ayodhya.
Most of these rituals are also explicitly non-sectarian, to attract the greatest
participation by appealing to the lowest common denominator (Lochtefeld, 1996:
105–6).
The Kumbha Mela celebrations have multiple resonances with this pattern, and
these have allowed the VHP to claim it as their own. It is clearly a pan-Hindu religious
festival, it draws enormous crowds, the central religious act – bathing in a sacred river
– is clearly non-sectarian, and it generates immense media coverage. The VHP does
not control the Kumbha Mela, which is run by the state governments, but it has
effectively used it to heighten its public presence. One strategy has been to cultivate
ascetic support by giving patronage to individual ascetics. Such patronage can bring
considerable control over unaffiliated ascetics, who depend on this for their status,
and whose support lends their traditional authority to the VHP (Jaffrelot, 355–6). 49
The VHP has also cultivated support within the akharas, but their control here is far
more tenuous, since the akharas have power and resources of their own. Finally, the
VHP has regularly convened ‘religious parliaments’ (‘dharam sansads’) at the Kumbha
Mela, which have given pronouncements on various topics, most notably setting the
agenda for the construction of Ayodhya’s Ram Janam Bhumi temple. In doing so, it
has not only claimed the entitlement to speak for all Hindus, but also reinforced its
claim that India is a Hindu nation. When millions of people flock to the Kumbha
Mela, the VHP can claim that this is their vision in action, validated by the teeming
pilgrim crowds.
Yet this claim can be contested, and found seriously lacking. Most of the pilgrims
are indeed pious Hindus, for whom the Kumbha Mela is a holy time. Yet just because
the people come for some religious reasons does not entail that they support Hindutva
ideas of Indian national identity, or that they see the VHP as having the authority to
speak for Hindus. In its current state, the Kumbh is simply far too big for any pressure
group to control, or for any cultural group to influence. Most of these millions come
as individuals or small groups, and for their own reasons: to spend time with a guru,
to meet with the assembled ‘saints’, to bathe in the holy rivers, or simply to be a part
of this great human gathering. Although any group can claim to speak for these
people, making that claim stand up is another issue entirely. The attempts to claim
the Kumbh Mela will only intensify as the festival continues to develop into an
international event, which will transform it into an even more contested stage.
Notes
1 Prayag is the pilgrimage site at the junction of the Yamuna and Ganges Rivers;
Allahabad is the nearby city (named by Akbar) in which this pilgrimage site is found.
In this paper I will call the Kumbha Mela site Prayag, and the city Allahabad.
2 About once every century, the Kumbha Mela comes after eleven years rather than
twelve. Since each Jovian cycle is actually 11.86 years, and thus a bit shorter than the
twelve solar years used to mark it, after twelve full years Jupiter has moved a bit
further into that particular sign, until eventually it is about to move into the follow-
ing sign. This is forestalled by celebrating the Kumbh after 11 years, an adjustment
which moves Jupiter back to the beginning of the ‘correct’ sign, and ensures the
correct astrological phenomena.
3 The Mela is held at Hardwar when Jupiter is in Aquarius (Kumbha), at Prayag when
Jupiter is in Taurus, and at Ujjain and Nasik when Jupiter is in Leo.
4 Each site has three major bathing days, on which the sanyasi akharas take out
processions. For a list of the bathing days at each Kumbha Mela site, please see
Appendix A.
5 The word ‘akhara’ literally means a ‘wrestling-ground’, but in an extended sense, it
refers to organised groups of Hindu ascetics. Of the thirteen akharas connected with
the Kumbha Mela, seven are Shaiva sanyasis, three are Vaishnava bairagis, two are
Udasi ascetics (who worship various deities), and the Nirmalas are Sikhs. The histori-
cal roots of both the sanyasi and bairagi akharas lie in the militant ascetics known as
nagas, who in earlier times were mercenary soldiers, traders, landowners, and even
petty kings. This figure of the soldier-monk is well entrenched in Indian society,
however foreign it may seem to some outsiders. See Lochtefeld (1994) for further
sconsideration of this unusual combination.
6 Reports of armed conflict at the Kumbha Mela can be found in Lochtefeld (1994),
Burghart (1983), Hardwicke (1979), and Sarkar (n.d.).
7 For a detailed list of the sources for this story, see Bedekar (1967); the version of the
Kumbha Mela charter here is recounted (as one of many, many places) in Mule.
8 Of the twelve shahi snans, three are determined solely by the sun, so here myth and
practice diverge.
9 Kane himself notes (5.375) ‘It is surprising that hardly any medieval digest refers
either to the Mahamakham festival [at Kumbakonam] or the Kumbhamela’.
10 The Ujjain and Nasik Kumbha Melas are both called ‘Simhasth’, since they occur
when Jupiter is in Leo (Simha).
11 The jyotirlingas (‘lingas of light’) are twelve pilgrimage sites deemed particularly
sacred to Shiva, of which Tryambakeshvar is one. The Tryambakeshvar charter cen-
ters on the sage Gautama, who had accidentally killed a cow while driving it out of
a field: ‘Anxious to cleanse himself from the sin of cow-killing the sage began to per-
form ceremonies and to propitiate Mahadev. The god, pleased with his penance,
released Ganga from his matted hair and striking her against a stone gave her leave to
go down to earth.... As this happened when the sun was in the zodiacal sign of Leo,
a special fair is held once in every twelve years when the sun enters that sign’ (GBP
16. 652–3n.).
12 Mulchand (50–8) describes the events associated with various 19th century Kumbha
Melas, and gives a long description of the contemporary Mela, but mentions nothing
of the charter myth. Tara Chand Sharma’s Haridwara Darpana (1908) mentions the
Kumbha Mela only in its remarks about the arrangements for the 1891 and 1903
Kumbha Melas. Vaid (13, 23) mentions the bathing order for the Kumbha Mela and
the astrological conditions under which the Mela takes place, but no charter. See
also Pant, 1909.
13 Bhattacharya notes that ‘We regret to say that none of these verses refer, even in
the slightest way, to this [Kumbh] fair’ (4). The sole reference in the puranas is a
half-line in the Naradiya Purana’s Hardwar mahatmya (Brhannaradiya Purana,
Uttarakhandha 66 44–5).
14 Hsuan Tsang reports a great festival that took place every five years, which does
not match the Kumbha Mela timetable (1.233). Vallabhite literature describes
Vallabhacharya visiting Hardwar for a Kumbha Mela in samvat 1576 (1519 C.E.), but
this date does not correspond to a Kumbha Mela year (Gokulnath 179–80).
Chaitanya’s biographies – some written by contemporaries – mention visits to
Prayag, but say nothing about the Kumbha Mela (Tony Stewart, personal communi-
cation, many thanks). Finally, the details for Shankaracharya’s life are so sketchy that
this claim cannot be proved or disproved.
15 Sarkar notes (a: xi-xii) that several textual references point to dates between 1695
and 1699, but since two can be interpreted as pointing to 1695, this seems the most
likely date.
16 ‘Hardwar’ has many variant spellings (e.g. ‘Haridwar’, ‘Haridvar’, ‘Hurdwar’); I
have retained these variants in quotes and book titles.
17 With regard to Nasik, the Khulasatu notes ‘When the planet Jupiter enters the sing
[sic] of Leo, people come here from distances and form a large gathering, which is
famous in all parts of the kingdom (Sarkar a: 51)’. The Chahar Gulshan gives a similar
report: ‘The Gang Gotami, which is also called Ganga Godavari – its name Gotami
being due to its connection with the sage Gotam – issues from the Sahya hill near
Nassik. ... When Jupiter enters Leo, men having come from distant places worship
it” (Sarkar a: 144).
For Prayag, the Khulasatu reports that ‘In winter, when the Sun enters the sign of
Capricorn, (which they call Makar), crowds of people assemble here from all sides
of the world and, staying here for one month, daily engage in ceremonial ablutions
(Sarkar a: 27)’. The Chahar Gulshan does not mention any melas at Prayag.
18 The 1740 date is clearly an error – since Jupiter was in Taurus that year, and the
festival occurs when Jupiter is in Leo.
19 Iconoclasm peaked in 1235, when Sultan Ilutmish razed the Mahakaleshvar temple
(Vikrama-smrti-grantha 555). One sign of Ujjain’s diminished religious importance is
that neither the Khulasatu nor the Chahar Gulshan mentions any religious festival
there.
20 The relative timing of the Ujjain and Nasik Melas depends on when Jupiter enters
Leo. If this happens before Chaitra Amavasya (Ujjain’s first bathing day) then both
festivals fall in the same calendar year, with Ujjain first. If Jupiter enters Leo in the
time between the Ujjain and Nasik Melas, then the Nasik Mela comes first, with the
Ujjain Mela the following spring. The time between these festivals gives the sadhus
ample time to travel between the sites (about 300 miles).
21 One report comes from the British traveler Tom Coryat, who went to Hardwar in
spring in 1617 (Strachan 256). This could not have been a Kumbha Mela year, since
Jupiter was in Capricorn that year, and did not come to Aquarius until 1618. From
this, one infers that there was a bathing festival at Hardwar every year, perhaps the
Baisakhi festival that became so important in later centuries. According to Majumdar
(7.193), Coryat estimated that Hardwar drew 400,000 people.
The other principal source is the Ain-I-Akbari (3.335), which mentions that large
numbers bathed at Hardwar on the tenth day of Chaitra. This date is puzzling, since
no festival currently falls on that day.
22 Bathing at Prayag in Magh is prescribed in many of the puranas and extensively
discussed in the commentarial literature, particularly Narayana Bhatta’s Tristhalisetu
(mid-sixteenth century).
23 Many factors lie behind their declining influence. Their two traditional occupations,
mercenary soldiering and long-distance trade, were undercut by British political
control and the economic effects of the railroads. Changing patterns of asceticism
have also eroded their membership, as more ascetics set up independent ashrams and
seek independent patronage, free from akhara discipline and hierarchy. The akharas’
continuing influence – especially in Hardwar and Prayag – comes because they still
own substantial property there. As wealthy landed corporate entities, this also brings
political influence.
24 The fifteenth century romance Prthiviraj Rasau describes ascetics serving as royal
bodyguards (Ghurye 99–100); the early 16th century traveler Ludovico de
Varthema describes a ‘King of the Ioghe [Yogi]’ whose followers served as hired
assassins (46, 101).
25 Nizamuddin Ahmad Bakshi (5.318) and al-Badaoni (2.94–5) name the combatants as
Jogis and Sanyasis, whereas Abul Fazl’s Akbar-Nama (2.361) names these two groups
as Kurs and Puris. Even though Abul Fazl’s text was composed years after the actual
event, and thus is less reliable (thanks to Vijay Pinch for that judgment), his use of
these names shows that these groups existed.
26 Abul Fazl al-Allami (2 423) describes this the most specifically, saying the Kur
faction had usurped the Puris’ rightful place next to the tank. The other two sources
mention the riches given away at that time – gold, and silver, and jewels, and
valuables – and also that people cast valuables into the water.
27 The Chahar Gulshan, which was written in the late eighteenth century, reports that ‘If
any Faqirs of Prag ... come here, they are attacked by the Sanyasis’ (Sarkar a: 124).
If ‘Prag’ refers to the bairagis, as Sarkar speculates, then this supports the claim that
the bairagis were barred during this time. This ban was not absolute, since
Hardwicke’s account reports bairagis at the 1796 Kumbha Mela.
28 The most common religious pattern on festival days is usually described as
‘snan-dan’, that is, a ritual bath (snan), and giving alms and donations (dan).
29 According to Bayly, by 1750 sanyasis were the largest property owners in Benares,
Mirzapur, Nagpur, and Ujjain (126). All of these cities were connected to their
commercial interests, particularly with the textile markets.
30 Ghurye (160) points to a time after the 12th century (160); Dubey follows this
judgment (482). Krasa estimates a much later date, in the 17th–18th century (180).
31 Supporting evidence for a Moghul-era formation can be found in Kumbha Mela’s
ritual terms, especially ‘shahi snan’ (‘royal bath’) for the sanyasi bathing processions,
and ‘peshvai’ for the processions to welcome the akharas. In both cases, using
Persianate language arguably reflects contemporary royal imagery.
32 I take issue on two points. Most importantly, Maclean quotes the Magistrate of
Allahabad as saying that the 1864 ‘Ad Coombh’ had drawn ‘immense’ crowds, and
that the ‘Coomb’ would be coming in 1870 (886). This clearly indicates an already
established cycle, since an Ardha Kumbh Mela makes no sense without a Kumbha
Mela. The other point is that she seems to describe Allahabad’s sanyasi akharas as sim-
ply falling into the new status opportunity provided by the enterprising Prayagwals
(897). Given the akharas’ local standing – including economic influence – I think that
they probably played a much more significant role. It is also quite clear that the
akharas were ritually prominent at Prayag long before 1870. One tantalizing descrip-
tion (Sarkar b: 103–5) from an 1840 mela – most likely a Magh Mela – describes the
Nirvani akhara travelling in processions to bathe, bearing various symbols of royal
authority. It also notes that the Nirvani and Niranjani akharas came to Prayag only
once every six years, as part of a pilgrimage cycle in which they visited ‘Allahabad,
Gaya, Jagannath, Godavari, Rameshvar, Ganga Sagar, Hardwar and a few other
places’.
33 The Hardwar crowds were estimated at 2.5 million in 1796 (Hardwicke 312), 2
million in 1808 (Raper 453), 4 million in 1820 (OIOC 1823: 23), ‘millions’” in
1832 (Asiatic Journal X: 61), 2–3 million in 1844 (Northwest Provinces Judicial (Crimi-
nal) Proceedings, hereafter NWPJP, 1844: no. 156, section 2), 3 million in 1855
(NWPJP 1855: no. 2, section 8), and between 1.25 and 2.8 million in 1867 (Home
Ministry of India, hereafter HMI, January 1892: 50).
34 Amado notes an estimated crowd of 800,000 people for the Kumbh day at Prayag in
1882 (1117).
35 The 1885 Imperial Gazetteer (5.334), published one year before the railroad came to
Hardwar, mentions the Hardwar fair’s mercantile importance. Reports from the
1891 and 1903 Kumbha Melas clearly show the fair’s decline (HMI January 1892:
42, 57; HMI September 1903: 16). The 1908 Imperial Gazetteer refers to Hardwar
only as a pilgrimage site, and mentions nothing about the fair (which by that point
had completely disappeared).
36 The 1903 estimate comes from HMI (September 1903: 18). All other estimates
come from the Home Ministry Report for the 1891 Kumbha Mela (HMI January
1892: 50).
37 One of the best examples of this was the Ganapati Festival in Maharashtra, which
was religious in content, but carried strong political overtones.
38 Service during the 1915 Kumbh is attested by the Servants of India Society (1915)
tract; I am indebted to Carey Watt for sending this to me. According to Christie, the
Society did similar service in 1927 (13), and it has continued to serve at the Kumbha
Melas since then.
39 The Shivaratri bath means that the sanyasi akharas must make their ceremonial entries
to Hardwar before Shivaratri. In the 19th century, they often arrived much later in
the spring.
40 See Appendix A for a listing of these three days at each site, and note 3 below the
chart, which lists the discrepancies in bathing days. After the addition of the
Shivaratri bath, which was only for the sanyasi akharas, the Vaishnava akharas
responded by adding a third bath of their own; this bath has fallen on several
different dates in the past 50 years.
41 As the costs mounted through the late 1800s, it became more and more difficult for
the Hardwar municipality to pay for the Kumbh. The festival expenditure was Rs.
56,666 in 1867, Rs. 39,334 in 1879, Rs. 68,975 in 1891 (all from HMI January
1892: 36), and Rs. 73,166 in 1903 (HMI September 1903: 25). Even though the
British government did not bear these costs, which were charged to the Hardwar
Fair Fund, it was still responsible for overseeing them. This occasionally led to
financial hocus-pocus, such as the government lending several hundred thousand
rupees to the Fair Fund, so that the Fund could actually pay the bills for the festival.
As expenses steadily increased in the early 20th century, it became clear that the
Hardwar municipality could neither bear the costs of running the Mela, nor provide
for the ever-growing crowds of attendees. Costs have continued to increase since
then, with the estimated 1998 cost at 1.14 billion rupees.
42 On the second bathing day, Chaitra Amavasya, there had been a riot between the
Juna Akhara and the Niranjani Akhara, and conflict was still simmering between these
groups.
43 Shankara’s traditional biographies describe his major opponents as Pashupatas and
the Kapalikas – who seem far more like the naga ascetics. Whether or not these
accounts are historically reliable – about which there is considerable doubt – they do
reveal perceptions about ascetic style.
44 The Juna akhara traditionally processed as a subsidiary to the Niranjani akhara, which
reflected its status in the early 19th century. The Junas lobbied for separate bathing
privileges as early as 1891, but did not gain them until 1962. The Junas now have far
more members than any other akhara, and have sought a ritual status that reflects
this.
45 In 1998, Hardwar town was blanketed with posters and publicity for two such
ascetics, Asa Ram Bapu and Barfani Dada, for whom the Kumbha Mela was an
unparalleled opportunity for publicity.
46 The contemporary Mela preserves the colonial administrative model, and retains
some of these same tensions. Although the 1998 Hardwar Mela administrators
described their task as serving the akharas, their decision to cancel the main bathing
day temporarily clearly showed where the real power lay.
47 The sheer size of the Kumbha Mela crowds heightens the risk of death or injury.
More than 500 people died in a stampede at Allahabad in 1954, and more than 50 at
Hardwar in 1986. The 1998 Hardwar Mela commissioner’s single overriding goal
was to have no fatalities on the main bathing day; this led him to adopt draconian
crowd-control procedures.
48 One notable absence was any reference to Indian popular films (‘Bollywood’)
throughout the Kumbha Mela area. The amusement park stressed wholesome,
family-oriented entertainment, which runs counter to the tone of many current
films; Bollywood’s popular associations with materialism and frivolity are also
inconsistent with the Mela’s larger tone.
49 One of the VHP’s clients, Swami Vasudevanand, claims to be the Shankaracharya of
Jyotirmath, but his claim was disallowed in court. This claim gives him ascetic status,
but the court decision means that he lacks resources, and must depend on patronage.
Of course, patronage to ascetics runs across the political spectrum: at Hardwar in
1998 an ascetic who received one of the only booths in the coveted central exhibit
area was said to have gained this through the personal intervention of Inder Kumar
Gujral, who had been Prime Minister when the spaces were allotted.
Sources consulted
Oriental and India Office Collections (OIOC)
Judicial Bengal 10 April 1823. ‘Enlargement and Alterations to the Bathing Ghat at
Hurdwar, sanctioned in consequence of a fatal accident in April 1821 when more
than 400 persons were crushed to death by a sudden rush to the Ghat on the
declaration of the precise moment for bathing.’
North-West Provinces Judicial (Criminal) Proceedings (NWPJP)
‘Report on the 1844 Kumbha Mela’. May 1844, 156–8.
‘Report on the 1855 Kumbha Mela’. June 1855, 1–5.
Home Ministry of India, National Archives (HMI)
‘Report on the Cholera Epidemic of 1867 in Northern India’. 7 August 1869, Judicial
13–9 (A).
‘Report On The Hardwar Kumbha Mela of April 1891’. January 1892, Public 67–72 (B).
‘Report On Hardwar Kumbh Fair, 1903’. September 1903, Sanitary 264–5 (B).
References
Allami, Abu al-Fazl. The Akbar-Nama of Abu-al Fazl. Trans. H. Beveridge. Volume 2 of 3.
Delhi: Rare Books, 1972 [1907].
Amado, M. Pierre. ‘A Propos De La Kumbha Mela De 1977: Tradition et
Information’. Annuaire De L’E.P.H. E., IVe section (1978): 1113–8.
Asiatic Journal and Monthly Review, new series. Volume 9, November 1832.
Asiatic Journal and Monthly Review, new series. Volume 10, February 1833.
Al-Badaoni Abdu-l-Qadir Ibn-i-Muluk Shah. Muntakhab-ut-tawarikh. Volume 2 of 3. Trans.
W. H. Lowe. Karachi: Karimsons, 1976 [1884].
Bakshi, Nizamuddin Ahmad. Tabakat-I-Akbari, in The History of India, as told by its own
Historians. Volume 5 of 8, ‘The Muhammadan Period’ trans. Sir H. M. Elliot and
Professor John Dowson. Allahabad: Kitab Mahal, 1964 [1867].
Bayly, Christopher. Rulers, Townsmen, and Bazaars: North Indian Society in the Age of British
Expansion, 1770–1870. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983.
Bedekar, V. M. ‘The Legend of Churning the Ocean in the Epics and the Puranas: A
Comparative Study’. Purana 9.1 (1967): 7–61.
Bhattacharya, R. S. ‘The Kumbhaparvan’. Hindutva 7.9–10 (1977): 1–9.
Brhannaradiya Purana. Varanasi: Caukhamba Amarabharati Prakasan. 2 vols. Reprint of
Biblioteca Indica edition, 1975.
Burghart, Richard. ‘Wandering Ascetics of The Ramanandi Sect’. History of Religions 22.4
(1983): 361–80.
Christie, W., I.C.S. ‘Fair: Kumbha Mela at Hardwar, 1927’. General Administration
Department File 231, Serial 27 Box 462. Uttar Pradesh State Government Archives,
Lucknow, 1926.
Dubey, D. P. ‘Kumbha Mela: Origin and Historicity of India’s Greatest Pilgrimage Fair’.
The National Geographical Journal of India 33.4 (1986): 469–91.
Dubey, D. P. Prayaga: The Site of the Kumbha Mela. New Delhi: Aryan Books International,
2001.
Gauda, Venirama Sarma. Kumbha Parva Mahatmya. Kashi, 1947 (samvat 2004), as cited in
Giorgio Bonazzoli, ‘Prayaga and its Kumbha Mela’. Purana 19.1 (1977): 106n.
Gazetteer of the Bombay Presidency. Volume XVI, Nasik. Facsimile Reproduction. Pune:
Printed at The Government Photozinco Press, 1994 [1883].
Ghurye, G. S. Indian Sadhus. 2nd. edn. Bombay: Popular Prakashan, 1964 [1953].
Gokulnath. Caurasi Baithak Caritra. Mathura: Sri Govardhan Granthamala Karyalaya, 1967.
Hardwicke, Thomas. ‘Narrative of a Journey to Sirinagur’. Asiatick Researches 6.30 9–47.
New Delhi: Cosmo Publications, 1979 [1801].
Hsuan Tsang. Si-yu-ki: Buddhist Records of the Western World. Trans. Samuel Beal. Two
Volumes in 1 Book. New Delhi: Oriental Books Reprint Corporation, 1969 [1884].
Imperial Gazetteer of India. Second edn. London: Trubner and Co, 1885.
Imperial Gazetteer of India. New edition. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1908.
Jaffrelot, Christophe. The Hindu Nationalist Movement in India. New Delhi: Viking Penguin,
1996; first published as Les nationalists hindous by Presses del la Foundation National
des Sciences Politiques, Paris, 1993.
Kane, P. V. History of Dharmasastra: Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law. 5 volumes
in 8 books. Poona: Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, 1968–77 [1930–62].
Krasa, Miloslav. ‘Kumbha Mela: The Greatest Pilgrimage in the World’. New Orient 6
(1965): 180–5.
Lal Puri, Mahant. Kumbha Parva Aur Sri Pacayati Akhara Mahanirvani Ka Samksipt Aitihasik
Paricay. Moradabad: Ramesh Chandra Dube, 1971.
Lochtefeld, James. ‘The Vishva Hindu Parishad and the Roots of Hindu Militancy.’ Journal
of the American Academy of Religion 62.2 (1994): 587–602.
Lochtefeld, James. ‘New Wine, Old Skins: The Sangh Parivar and the Transformation of
Hinduism’. Religion 26 (1996): 101–18.
Maclean, Kama. ‘Making the Colonial State Work for You: The Modern Beginnings of the
Ancient Kumbha Mela in Allahabad’. Journal of Asian Studies 62.3 (2003): 873–905.
Madhava-vidyaranya. Sankara Dig-Vijaya. Trans. Swami Tapasyananda. Madras: Sri
Ramakrishna Math, 1978.
Madhya Pradesh District Gazetteer. Dr Rajendra Varma and S. D. Guru. Bhopal: District
Gazetteers Department, 1982.
Majumdar, R. C., gen. ed. The History and Culture of the Indian People. Volume 7 of 11,
‘The Moghul Empire’. Bombay: Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan, 1974.
Measures, P. H. J. 1927. ‘Report on the Kumbha Mela, 1927’. Police number 599, Uttar
Pradesh State Government Archives, Lucknow.
Mulchand, Master. Haridvar ka Itihas. Hardwar: Saddharma Prachar Press, 1904.
Mule, Gunakar. ‘Kumbh Mela: Kya kahte hai graha-naksatra’? Amar Ujala (Vatayan) 3
March 1998: 3.
Nasik Kumbha Mela Schedule, 2003. Accessed 28 May 2004. 2 pages. http://
www.kumbhamela.net/kumbha-mela-2003-schedule.html
Nigam, Shyamsundar. ‘Simhastha Archaeology, Ujjain’. Ujjain: The City Eternal. Ed. Kalyan
Kumar Chakravarty. New Delhi: Cross Section Publications, for Madhya Pradesh
Tourism, 1992. 50–2.
Pant, Durgadatta. Haridvara Mahima, Moradabad: Sanatan Dharma Press, 1909.
Parmanand, M. A. Mahamana Madan Mohan Malaviya. 2 volumes. Banaras: Malaviya
Adhyayan Sansthan, Banaras Hindu University, 1985.
Pillai, L. D. Swamikannu. An Indian Ephemeris, A.D. 1800 to A.D. 2000. New Delhi: Asian
Educational Services, 1987 [1915].
Prior, Katherine. ‘Angry Pandas: Hindu Priests and the Colonial Government in the
Dispersal of the Haridwar Mela in 1892’. South Asia 16.1 (1993): 25–52.
Raper, Felix V. ‘Narrative of a Survey for the Purpose of Discovering the Sources of the
Ganges’. Asiatic Researches 11 446–563. New Delhi: Cosmo Publications, 1979
[1812].
Saharanpur District Gazetteer. Uttar Pradesh District Gazetters, vol. 21. Ed. Dangli Prasad
Varun. Lucknow: Government Press, 1986.
Sarkar, Jadunath (a). Annot. and trans. The India of Aurangzib (Topography, Statistics, and
Roads) Compared with the India of Akbar; with extracts from the Khulasatu-t-Tawarikh and
the Chahar Gulshan. Calcutta: Bose Brothers, 1901.
Sarkar, Jadunath (b). A History of the Dasnami Naga Sannyasis. Allahabad: Sri Panchayati
Mahanirvani Akhara, n.d.
Sax, William S. Dancing The Self: Personhood and Performance in the Pandav Lila of Garwhal.
New York: Oxford University Press, 2002.
Servants of India Society. Social Service During the Hardwar Kumbha Mela by Seva Samiti,
Allahabad and Marwari Sahayak Samiti, Calcutta. Allahabad: Servants of India Society,
1915.
Sharma, Tara Chand. Haridvara Darpana. Lucknow: Naval Kishor Press, 1908.
Stewart, Tony. E-mail communication. 26 January 2000.
Vaid, Shiva Chandra. Haridvara Tirtha Darshana. Moradabad: Sanatan Dharma Press, 1907.
Vikrama-smrti-grantha. Gvaliyara-Rajya [Gwalior Princely State, India]: Vikrama Dvi-sahasrabdi
Samaroh Samiti, 1944 or 1945 (vikram samvat 2001).
James G. Lochtefeld is Associate Professor of Religion at Carthage College in

Kenosha, Wisconsin. His primary research has been on Hindu pilgrimage in Hardwar
and the Himalayas, and in both his research and his teaching, he seeks to
explore the intersection of religious history, tradition, and practice. [email:
jlochtefeld@carthage.edu]
Appendix A
Akhara Processional Days at the Four Kumbha Mela Sites
Site and Season First Bathing Day Second Day Third Day
Hardwar (Spring) Shivaratri 25 Feb. 1998 Chaitra Amavasya Mesh Sankranti
(new moon in Chaitra) (Sun’s transition into
28 March 1998 Aries, in mid-April).
April 14, 1998
Prayag (Winter) Makar Sankranti (sun’s Magh Amavasya (new Vasant Panchami (the 5th
transition into Capricorn, moon in Magh), when both day of Phalgun) 29 Jan.
in mid-January). sun and moon are in 2001
14 Jan. 2001 Capricorn. 24 January 2001
Ujjain (Spring) Chaitra Purnima (full Vaisakh Amavasya (new moon Vaisakh Purnima
moon in Chaitra) 5 April in Vaisakh) 19 April 2004 (Full moon in Vaisakh)
2004 16 May 2004
Nasik (Summer) Simha Sankranti (Sun’s Bhadrapada Amavasya Devotthayan Ekadashi
transition into Leo) (new moon in Bhadrapada) 4 November 2003
17 August 2003 27 August 2003
Bold-faced type indicates each site’s holiest day.
Dates indicate the most recent celebration.
Notes:
1 In Indian astrological reckoning, the sun moves into an astrological sign about three weeks later than
reckoned in western astrology.
2 The twelve lunar months are Chaitra (which usually begins sometime in March), Vaisakh, Jyesth, Asadh,
Shravan, Bhadrapada, Ashvin, Kartik, Margashirsha, Paush, Magh, and Phalgun.
3 This dates on this chart are drawn from Lal Puri (1971: 4–7), and differ from some of the others (e.g.
Vyas: 1992: 49) with regard to Ujjain, where the first bath is said to be on Chaitra Amavasya. Dubey
(2001: 132) notes the ‘alternative astronomical conjunctions’ for celebrating the Kumbha Mela at Prayag
(when Jupiter is in Aries), Nasik (when Jupiter is Cancer), and Ujjain (when Jupiter is in Libra). These
alternative conjunctions are completely different from those in chart above, which have become the most
commonly accepted dates). Note that there is no alternative conjunction for Hardwar. This supports the
claim that it is the original Kumbha Mela site, and the variances at the other sites are all evidence that the
Kumbha Mela is a later addition in those places.
4 The bathing dates listed for the 2003 Nasik Mela at http://kumbhamela.net/ were very different from
those above. The two primary bathing days were Shravan Purnima (12 August 2003), and Bhadrapada
Amavasya (27 August 2003).
Appendix B
Pilgrim (and Official) Assembly Patterns for the Hardwar Kumbha Mela*
Year Shiva Ratri People assembling Amavas Officials coming Day Chaitra Kumbh
1832 3/1† ‘Gosaees of the four Ukharas’ No mention. 4/1† 4/10†
set up camp the previous year.
Pilgrims began coming in This festival fell in the
February, and ‘on the day of heyday of the Hardwar
the horee [Holi?] 16 March that fair, and would have been
year, about a month before the a major market place.
purbee, 100,000 bathed and
departed to their homes.’
Mentions only the Kumbh
procession.
1844 2/17† Mentions Kumbh bathing only Commissioner 3/23 3/18† 4/10
1855 2/15† Pilgrims began to come 3/13 Magistrate 3/13 3/18† 4/12
1867 3/5† Fakirs and shop-keepers coming N/A 4/4 4/12
in mid-March. Fair began 3 April
1891 3/9† Fair began on 4/7 Dep. Sup. Police 3/6 4/8 4/12
Dep. Inspector General
(DIG) 3/26
1903 2/26† Bands of Faqirs had arrived early Sany Commr 3/18, 3/28 4/13
in March. Police 3/15-27
DIG 3/23
1915 2/13† Akharas began to arrive early in
February, up to 3/10. N/A 3/15 4/13
1927 3/2 Junas in procession 2/21, Measures (Police) arrived 4/2 4/13
Niranjanis 2/24, and Nirvanis 2/1. Christie (Mela chief)
2/27; ‘on Shivaratri the deputed since previous
Niranjani-cum-Juna and Nirbani year.
proceeded in procession to
the pool.’
*1832, Asiatic Journal and Monthly Register, (1832: 9 121); 1844, NWPJP May 1844; 1855, NWPJP June 1855: no.
6; 1867, HMI 7 August 1869: 3267; 1891, HMI January 1892: 44); 1903, HMI September 1903: 16; 1915,
Saharanpur District Gazetteer 1917: 27; 1927, Christie 1926: 27, 48.
†Festival dates beginning with this symbol were determined by consulting Swamikannu Pillai (1987).

Lochtedeld (Construction of The Kumbha Mela)

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Lochtedeld (Construction of The Kumbha Mela)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

James G.

THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE

A similar attestation is found in the Chahar Gulshan, a comparable gazetteer whose

Agents and origins

The connection between Hardwar’s declining commercial importance and its

Both of these officials explicitly cited political considerations as a significant factor

The government also provides a full spectrum of entertainment. The offerings in

James G. Lochtefeld is Associate Professor of Religion at Carthage College in

You might also like