Śāntā’s Parentage

Summary

Asoke Chatterjee investigates the contradictory traditions regarding Śāntā, the wife of the sage Ṛśyaśṛṅga and a prominent character in the Rāmāyaṇa. In the South Indian recension of the epic, the king Daśaratha of Ayodhyā is described as childless, and Śāntā is the daughter of his friend Lomapāda, king of Aṅga; Daśaratha brings Śāntā and Ṛśyaśṛṅga to Ayodhyā to perform the pūtreṣṭi sacrificefile:///home/oai/share/split/santas_parentage.pdf#:~:text=Santa%E2%80%99s%20Parentage%20All%20critical%20students,Indian%20recension%20of%20the%20Ramayana. In contrast, the North Indian recension states that Śāntā was the daughter of Daśaratha who was given in adoption to Lomapādafile:///home/oai/share/split/santas_parentage.pdf#:~:text=%24inta%20was%20the%20daughter%20of,of%20performing%20the%20putresti%20sacrifice. The article surveys Puranic literature and later retellings to trace how these variants evolved. Several major works—including the Viṣṇupurāṇa, Skanda‑purāṇa and the Pañcāla‑khaṇḍa of the Padma‑purāṇa—support the northern tradition that Daśaratha gave his daughter to Lomapādafile:///home/oai/share/split/santas_parentage.pdf#:~:text=For%20instance%2C%20%E0%AA%9B%E0%AB%8B%E0%AA%9F%20Visnupurina%20says,is%20of%20the%20same%20opinion. Later authors such as Bhavabhūti in his Uttararāmacarita and Kṛttivāsa in his Bengali Rāmāyaṇa follow this versionfile:///home/oai/share/split/santas_parentage.pdf#:~:text=Bhavabhiiti%20is%20of%20the%20same,A%20similar%20story%20of%20%E0%AA%9F%E0%AA%A3. Scholars like S.K. Belvalkar have also inclined towards the northern viewfile:///home/oai/share/split/santas_parentage.pdf#:~:text=that%20even%20Nanda%20Pandita%20quotes,support%20the%20North%20Indian%20cradition. Chatterjee critiques this tradition by pointing out anomalies: the northern recensions call Śāntā the “dearest daughter” of Daśaratha but never mention her mother or the time of her birthfile:///home/oai/share/split/santas_parentage.pdf#:~:text=Santa%27s%20Parentage%20%281%29%20,anapatya%20and%20not. Moreover, all recensions agree that Daśaratha sought Lomapāda’s permission to bring Ṛśyaśṛṅga to Ayodhyāfile:///home/oai/share/split/santas_parentage.pdf#:~:text=,he%20came%206%E0%AB%A6%20the%20capital—behaviour more consistent with a father‑in‑law than with a mere recipient of a foster daughter. The South Indian tradition describes Daśaratha as “anapatya” (childless) rather than “aputra” (without sons), suggesting he had no children at all at the timefile:///home/oai/share/split/santas_parentage.pdf#:~:text=1,anapatya%20and%20not%20aputra. Chatterjee therefore concludes that Śāntā was originally Lomapāda’s daughter. He proposes that the adoption story was a later interpolation intended to link the royal houses of Kosala and Aṅga and to provide Daśaratha with a daughter for narrative symmetry. By disentangling these textual layers, the article underscores the need to distinguish between early and late strata within the Rāmāyaṇa tradition.