With reference to the cultural history of India, the memorizing of chronicles, dynastic histories and epic tales was the profession of who of the following?

States that the Vedic system emphasized pronunciation, oral transmission and memorization as part of formal training.

A student could contrast this explicit Vedic/military memorization role with records of who performed similar tasks in non‑Vedic (Shramana) communities to see if the practice was exclusive to Brahmanical schools.

Lists Buddhist literary works (Theragatha/Therigatha, Jatakas, Milinda Panha, Mahavamsa/Culavamsa) produced within the Buddhist tradition.

A student could infer that Buddhist monastics (Shramana) composed and transmitted such texts, so investigate whether they also had institutional roles in memorizing chronicles and epics.

Explicitly names 'Buddhist Chronicles such as Mahavamsa' among important literary sources.

Use this to check whether composition/maintenance of dynastic chronicles was an activity of Buddhist monastic communities (Shramana) rather than a separate professional class.

Identifies epics, dharmashastras and Buddhist/Jaina texts as the key literary sources for the period, implying multiple traditions preserved narratives.

A student could use this pattern to assess which social groups (Brahmins, Buddhist/Jaina monks, bards) were responsible for preserving different kinds of narratives through memorization.

Describes the Mahabharata's growth via oral and written transmission across communities, showing that epic preservation was a communal and performative practice.

Combine this with knowledge of who performed oral recitation (bards, priests, monks) regionally to judge whether Shramana typically held the memorization role.

Describes the Vedic system's emphasis on pronunciation, oral transmission and memorization as an organised educational practice.

A student could use this to ask whether custodians of oral memorization were specifically Vedic brahmana schools rather than wandering ascetics (parivraajaka) by comparing institutional roles in Vedic literature.

Explains that the Mahabharata grew through oral/performative transmission across regions, with episodes retold in various media and by different social agents.

One could extend this by examining who traditionally performed or narrated such epics (court poets, bards, temple performers, monastic reciters) to see if parivraajakas are listed among them.

Gives the definition of itihasa ('thus it was') and frames epics as remembered narratives whose historicity is debated, implying roles for specialised memory-keepers.

A student might compare known categories of memory-keepers (e.g., grihyakas, brahmins, bards) in textual sources to test whether parivraajaka appears among them.

Lists Buddhist chronicles (Mahavamsa, Dipavamsa) and Jataka tales, indicating that monastic communities produced and preserved dynastic/chronicle literature.

Use this to contrast monastic chroniclers' role with that of wandering ascetics: if monastics kept chronicles, a student could investigate whether parivraajakas (wandering mendicants) had a parallel archival/mnemonic function.

Notes the tradition of medieval chroniclers (e.g., Abu'l Fazl) who were court-based writers recording dynastic events, implying chronicling often had institutional/courtly anchors.

A student could extend this by checking whether dynastic chronicling was predominantly a court/monastic activity rather than the province of itinerant ascetics like parivraajakas.

States that Brahmins functioned as learned scholars in literature, astronomy, law and teaching — implying certain social groups had custodial roles over learning and texts.

A student could check whether Agrahaarikas were Brahmin grantees or associated with similar learned roles and so plausibly charged with memorization of chronicles.

Describes the Mahabharata being retold across languages, communities and performed in narrations, linking epic transmission to oral/performative custodians.

A student could compare the social identity of traditional performers/narrators with the Agrahaarika designation to see if memorization was their duty.

Explains the term itihasa literally means 'thus it was' and is treated as history, indicating a long-standing cultural category of 'chronicle/history' that required transmission.

Use this definition plus knowledge of who maintained 'itihasa' (priests, bards, chroniclers) to test whether Agrahaarikas belonged to that group.

Lists Buddhist chronicles (Mahavamsa, Dipavamsa) as important textual traditions, showing multiple communities maintained dynastic chronicles.

A student could investigate whether Agrahaarikas appear in contexts of Buddhist or other chronicle-making communities or were limited to Brahmanical roles.

Notes the medieval tradition of chroniclers writing about political events and dynastic affairs, indicating a recognized role/profession of chronicling in premodern India.

Combine this pattern with local records of land grants or titles to see if 'Agrahaarika' was an occupational title tied to chronicling/memorization.

Defines the Sanskrit category itihasa as 'thus it was' and generally translated as 'history', showing that certain texts were thought of and transmitted as historical narrative.

A student could check whether Magadha (Maagadha) sources or traditions are specifically labeled as itihasa or associated with professional itihasa-makers.

Describes a medieval chronicling tradition that systematically recorded political events, dynastic turmoil, and quantitative information—indicating that writing/recording dynastic history was an identifiable activity.

One could investigate whether Magadha had known chroniclers or bureaucratic offices doing similar record-keeping in medieval/earlier periods.

Lists named chronicles (Dipavamsa, Mahavamsa, Culavamsa) as examples of regional/dynastic chronicles, showing that specific communities produced formal dynastic histories.

A student might trace the regional origins of such chronicles to see if any are authored in or attributed to Magadha/Maagadha traditions.

Notes phases in composition of the Mahabharata tied to emerging kingdoms and changing social values, suggesting that royal/political centres influenced the production and preservation of epic/itihasa material.

One could ask whether Magadha, as a rising kingdom, sponsored or institutionalized memorization/recording of epics and histories.

Identifies a range of literary sources (epics, Dharmashastras, Buddhist and Jaina texts, Greek accounts) used as historical evidence, implying multiple social groups recorded the past.

A student could compare which social or regional groups (e.g., Magadha-based authors or courts) are represented among these literary sources.