Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

Town Planning in Ancient India c5: Chapter I: Introductory

Town Planning in Ancient India c5

Language
English

Chapter I: Introductory

c5.2

THE subject of Indo-Aryan town-planning is treated particularly in the Śilpa Śāstras and incidentally in the Purāṇas, the two great Epics of India, treatises on Astronomy and Astrology, the Nīti Śāstras and Smṛti Śāstras, i.e., works of Sociology in its widest sense. The Śilpa Śāstras that have survived the ravages of time and vandalism of tyrants, leaving out the not inconsiderable number of the extinct ones that live only in references in the extant treatises, may be computed at hundreds. Vāstu Vidyā or Vāstu Śāstra—the science of residence or abode, strictly speaking,—forms a subdivision of the Śilpa Śāstra. The radical connotation of the word ‘vāstu’ is very wide and the range of discourses in the Vāstu Śāstra is so comprehensive that Vāstu Vidyā is almost coextensive with the Śilpa Śāstra. Mānasāra defines: “The place where men and gods reside is called Vāstu” (from the Sanskrit root, ‘vas’, to reside, to sit). This includes ground (dharā), building (harmya), conveyance (yāna), and couch (paryaṅka). Of these, the ground is the principal subject; for, nothing can be built without ground as a support. The building (harmya) includes ‘prāsāda’, ‘maṇḍapa’, ‘sabhā’, ‘śālā’, ‘prapā’, and ‘araṅga’.¹ That is to say, Vāstu Vidyā contains within its category the science of civil and military engineering, architecture, building, construction of carriages, cots, chairs, and couches, and sometimes sculpture and iconography too. Notwithstanding the absence of direct reference to town-planning in the above list, since town-planning concerns only ‘dharā’, and ‘harmya’, it certainly falls under Vāstu Vidyā. But the universal importance of building architecture is so great that domestic engineering formed a distinct subject by itself

c5.3

¹ Mānasāra, Ch. III. *Vide* Dr. P. K. Acharyya’s ‘A Summary of the Mānasāra’. The existing manuscripts of the Mānasāra retain the word ‘araṅga’ which, in my opinion, should be ‘raṅga’. *Cf.* the Mayamata Ch. II :—

c5.4

अमंत्त्राद्यं व मन्त्राद्यं यत्र यत्र वसन्ति हि।
तदस्ति मतं तज्ज्ञै स्रष्टं च वदाम्यहम् ।। १ ।।
भूमिप्रासादनानि शयनं च चतुर्विधम्।
भूरेव मुख्यवस्तु स्यात् तव जातानि यानि हि ।। २ ।।
प्रासादादीनि वस्तूनि वस्तुत्वात् वस्तुसंश्रयात्।
वस्त्व्येव हि तान्येव प्रोक्ताव्यस्मिन् पुरातनैः ।। ३ ।।
. . . . .
ग्रामादीन्ये व गौणानि भवत्यङ्गे मही मता।
सभा शाला प्रपा रङ्गमण्डपं मन्दिरं तथा ।। ६ ।।
प्रासाद इति विख्यातं . . . . .

c5.5

treated in separate treatises called Vāstu Śāstras. Thus the domain of Vāstu Vidyā narrowed down, and the existing Vāstu Śāstras seldom digress into discussions, except in a casual and sporadic way, on other topics contemplated in the definition. These and other cognate technics form the province of the generic subject, Śilpa Śāstra, which also has to undergo a corresponding restriction in application and significance. But, in the present work, our immediate object being a dissertation on town-planning, we are called upon only to deal with what is technically designated above as ‘dharā’ (ground) and incidentally with ‘harmya’ (building).

c5.6

In India town-planning is a very ancient science Indo-Aryan traditions trace its origin to Brahmā, the Creator-Aspect of God. The sage Mānasāra (the author of the treatise of the same name) gives the following mythical genealogy of the artists. “From the four faces of the Brahmā, the creator of the universe, originated, in order, the heavenly architect Viśvakarmā, Maya, Tvaṣṭar, and Manu. Their four sons are called respectively Sthapati, Sūtragrāhī, Vardhakī, and Takshaka”.¹ These four seem to be the apotheosized ancestors of the four classes of artists on earth. The Mayamata also ascribes the origination of the science to Pitāmaha or Brahmā and the sages that followed him. Maya only compiled and expounded the principles exactly as he got them from his predecessors including those mentioned above.¹ The treatise Viśvakarmaprakāśa is attributed in origin to the renowned divine architect Viśvakarmā.² The author only reproduces what was explained by Viśvakarmā for the benefit of the world. In that treatise the genesis of the science is traced to Svayambhū or Brahmā who taught it in the days of yore to the wise sage Garga. Parāśara derived it from Garga; and Parāśara told it to Vṛhadratha who taught it to Viśvakarmā, and the latter gave it to Vasudeva and to the world.¹ Beneath this mythological genealogy lie hidden certain truths: the science is so ancient in this ancient land that its origin is lost in hoary antiquity; the traditional lore was handed down from generation to generation. Caste-guildism never allowed its extinction and saved it from oblivion. It is retained to this day, especially in Southern India where the masons and craftsmen very carefully preserve the manuscripts on the subject and are quite familiar with the principles and technical terms used in the treatises.

c5.7

¹ Dr. Acharyya's Summary of the Mānasāra (Ch. II.). For the rank and qualifications of the engineers enumerated in the end, see Ch. 2.

c5.8

¹ Mayamatam, Ch. I, verse 12.

c5.9

² Viśvakarmā :—Traditionally he is known as the divine architect. He is the son of Prabhāsa, one of the eight Vasus, and the creator of arts. In the matter of palaces, pleasure-gardens, orchards, houses, images and ornaments, tanks, and reservoirs, he is remembered as the engineer and the architect of the gods (Amaravardhaki) (Matsya Purāṇam, Ch. 5, ll. 54-6). In the Viṣṇu Purāṇa (Pt. I, Ch. 15) we have: “Viśvakarmā is the inventor of thousands of crafts and arts; he is the ‘vardhaki’ or engineer (literally joiner) of the gods; maker of all ornaments, he is the greatest of artists or artisans. He used to construct the aerial mansions and cars (vimānas) of the gods. Men live by his arts”. There is another divine architect under the name of Tvaṣṭar. In the Garuḍa Purāṇa he is described as the son of Viśvakarmā. But in the Vahni Purāṇa both Maya (generally known as the engineer of the Daityas) and Tvaṣṭar are said to be two Viśvakarmās. Again in the extracts from the Viśvakarmaprakāśa, it is evident that Viśvakarmā is a sage, a disciple of the sage Vṛhadratha, and, in the Mayamata, Maya the author is undoubtedly a sage. All these considerations make the conclusion irresistible that Viśvakarmā is a patronymic. Later on, he was deified; even to-day he is worshipped by the artisans. In Southern India, there is a class of people known as Viśvakarmās.

c5.10

¹ Cf.

c5.11

Of the ancient character of the science, Mr. E. B. Havell writes:—"The close connection of the geometrical system (denoted by the mystic figures Paramaśāyika, Swastika, Sarvatobhadra, etc.) with the Vedic sacrificial lore, and the position of the master-builder as a high priest or sacrificial expert, are indirect proofs of the great antiquity of

c5.12

यदुक्तं शम्भुना पूर्वं वास्तुशास्त्रं पुरातनम् ॥ ३ ॥
पराशरः प्राह इन्द्राय इन्द्रयः प्राह विश्वकर्मणे ।
स विश्वकर्मा जगतां हिताय प्रोवाच शास्त्रं बहुभेदयुक्तम् ॥ ४ ॥
Viśvakarmāprakāśa, Ch. I.

c5.13

Again, at the end of the book, a colophon reads thus:—

c5.14

इति प्रोक्तं वास्तुशास्त्रं पूर्वं गर्गाय धीमते ॥ १०८ ॥
गर्गात् पराशरः प्राप्तस्तस्मात् प्राप्तोऽहमिन्द्रयः ।

c5.15

and so on.

c5.16

the Indian science of town-planning; for, geometry as a science was an Indo-Aryan invention and had its origin in the complicated system of Vedic sacrifices in which it became necessary to resolve geometrical problems such as constructing a circle equal in area to a square or vice versa. The laying out of the Indo-Aryan village is treated in the Śilpa Śāstras as the preparation of scarificial ground. I have therefore considered it justifiable to refer it historically to the Vedic period and to connect it with the camp or fortified settlement of the early Aryan invaders. There are direct references to it in Buddha’s teaching.”¹

c5.17

¹ E. B. Havell, History of the Aryan Rule in India, p. 25.

c5.18

In a later volume,² Mr. Havell writes that subsequent investigations confirm his foregoing observations. He says: “If it be true—as the Russian scholar, Sheftdovich, asserts—that the Kassites, who took Babylon in 1766 B.C., and established a dynasty there which lasted for 600 years, were Aryans speaking Vedic Sanskrit whose chief god was Sūryya, Babylon must be regarded as a halfway house of the Aryan race in its march towards the Indus valley and some at least of the early Aryan tribes must have acquired, before they entered India, not only the high spiritual culture which is reached in the Rig Veda, but a prolonged experience of the civic arts, including architecture.

c5.19

² Ancient and Mediæval Architecture, p. 3.

c5.20

“Recent German excavations on the site of Babylon show that the science of building in Vedic times had advanced much further than has hitherto been suspected.”

c5.21

Without assuming the somewhat suppositional assertions of the Russian scholar and launching upon disquisitions on those premises about the antiquity of Indo-Aryan town-planning, it may be safely taken that the Vedic Aryans had certainly developed a far more advanced knowledge in the science of building than a mere inchoate and crude sciolism. The plan of the towns and their denominations were identical with those of the geometrical figures that had to be, and are even now, drawn on the sacrificial altars. These figures suggested the plans and the names. It is sure that the Vedic civilisation had long ago immensely outgrown the primitive stage and still glows with innumerable and irrefragable evidences of its high water-mark. Certainly the people who could construct iron forts, plan colonnaded edifices, lay out large villages, can be credited with some scientific knowledge of the civic arts. Mr. Havell puts down the composition of the oldest of the extant Śilpa Śāstras to the 5th or 6th century A.D.¹

c5.22

¹ Ancient and Mediæval Architecture, p. 3.

c5.23

But there must have been earlier compositions as is evident from the science of town-planning dwelt upon in Kauṭilya’s Arthaśāstra, the date of which is generally asigned to the fourth century B.C. Moreover astronomy (including astrology) was known even to the Vedic Aryans. Astronomical works contain incidentally dissertations on Vāstu Vidyā, for the simple reason that the auspicious months, days, and moments for the foundation of a ‘vāstu’ are to be determined with the aid of astrology.

c5.24

Macdonell and Keith give in their Vedic Index a summary of what can be culled from the Vedas about the Vedic towns (Pur, pp. 538-39) and villages (Grāma, pp. 244-5) as follows :—" Pur is a word of frequent occurrence in the Rig Veda and later, meaning ‘rampart’, ‘fort’ or ‘stronghold’. Such fortifications must have been occasionally of considerable size, as one is called broad (pṛthvī) and wide (ūrvvī). Elsewhere a fort made of stone (aśmamayī) is mentioned. Sometimes strongholds of iron (āyasī) are referred to, but these are probably only metaphorical. A fort ‘full of kine’ (gomatī) is mentioned showing that strongholds were used to hold cattle. ‘Autumnal’ forts (śāradī) are named, apparently as belonging to the Dāsas; this may refer to the forts in that season being occupied against Aryan attacks or against inundations caused by overflowing rivers. Forts ‘with a hundred walls’ (śatabhūji) are spoken of.

c5.25

“It would probably be a mistake to regard these forts as permanently occupied fortified places like the fortresses of the mediæval barony. They were probably mere places of refuge against attack, ramparts of hardened earth with palisades and a ditch (cf. dehi). Pischel and Geldner, however, think that they were towns with wooden walls and ditches like the Indian town of Pāṭaliputra known to Megasthenes and the Pāli texts (Mahāparinibbānasutta, p. 12). This is reasonable but hardly susceptible of proof, and it is not without significance that the word ‘nagar’ is of later occurrence. On the whole it is hardly likely that in early Vedic times city life was much developed. In the Epic, according to Hopkins, there are found the ‘nagara’ (city); ‘grāma’ (village); and ‘ghosha’ (ranch). Vedic literature hardly seems to go beyond the village; no doubt, with modifications in its later period.

c5.26

“The seige of forts is mentioned in the Samhitās and Brāhmaṇas. According to the Rig Veda, fire was used.

c5.27

‘The primitive use of this word ‘grāma’ which occurs frequently from the Rig Veda onwards, appears to have been ‘village’. The Vedic Indians must have dwelt in villages which were scattered over the country, some close together, some far apart, and were connected by roads. The village is regularly contrasted with the forest (araṇya) and its animals and plants with those that lived or grew wild in the woods. The villages contained cattle, horses and other domestic animals as well as men. Grain was also stored in them. In the evening the cattle regularly returned thither from the forest. The villages were probably open, though perhaps a fort (pur) might on occasion be built inside. Presumably they consisted of detached houses with enclosures, but no details are to be found in Vedic literature. Large villages (mahāgrāma) were known. The ‘grāma’ may be regarded as an aggregate of several families, not necessarily forming a clan but only part of a clan (viś), as is often the case at the present day.”

c5.28

A glance at the ancient Indian treatises on architecture shows how scientifically the Hindus, even in such early ages, studied the problems of town-planning. One may not have faith in the civic value of the mystic ceremonials and superstitious rituals, and the denominations of the interlineal chambers; one may, if he lists, even expurgate the rules and regulations which seem to him to smack more of witchcraft and ignorant faith than of knowledge and conscious utility; and after all these excisions and deletions, modern architect though he may be, yet he cannot but be impressed with the scientific knowledge, methodical treatment, detailed but systematised study displayed by Indo-Aryans in the planning of their towns and villages. The fairly high standard which the Hindus reached in the science redounds to the glory of their culture and civilisation. "The most advanced science of Europe has not yet improved upon the principles of the planning of garden cities of India based upon the Indian village plan as a unit."¹ The traditional and hereditary character of the science did not prejudice its evolution and progress. The Śilpa Śāstras lay down that every town-planning transaction should be performed with reagrd to its suitability, i.e., with reasons (yuktyā). A great freedom of scope was always allowed to individual character and imagination. A due regard and veneration for the past, so characteristic of Indians in all matters, served as an effective antidote to that sort of egoism which engenders the iconoclastic spirit to level down everything it cannot understand or appreciate.

c5.29

¹ E. B. Havell, Ancient and Mediæval Architecture, p. 8.

c5.30

Knowledge of town-planning was as extensive as it was intensive. Even the layman seems to have known something of the subject, as is evident from the descriptions of the towns that are met with in the various literatures of India. This is further corroborated by the special treatment of the science that one frequently meets with in the Purāṇas and the astrological treatises. The Śilpa Śāstras were also written in the vernaculars of Southern India and they are still extant.

c5.31

In consonance with the great attention devoted to the science and its diffusion among the people, the ancient Hindus developed a high tone of civic consciousness. Every poet seems to take pride in his beloved city and in glorifying it. The Tamil poets' enthusiasm over the elaborate descriptions of their cities, historical and architectural, proves that they were conscious of their magnificence.¹ The spirit which animated the authors of the Purāṇas to hyperbolise the dimensions, overcolour the grandeur and brilliancy, to outdecorate the ornate and florid decorations, to eulogise the lions of their cities and the actions of their heroes, after due allowance is made for the overdrawing aptitudes peculiar to old æons when imagination was not blurred by a dissecting science, can at once be recognised as the spirit of civic consciousness. "Of our two great Epics it may be said that while the pervading interests of the Mahābhārata are heroic and national, those of the Rāmāyaṇa are mainly personal and civic. It is more than likely, indeed, that Vālmīki’s poem sprang out of a deliberate wish to glorify the beloved city of Ayodhyā by painting the mythic history of its earliest sovereigns. The city, and every thing in it, fill the poet with delight. He spends himself in descriptions of its beauty on great festivals. He loses himself in the thought of its palaces, its arches, and its towers. But it is when he comes to paint Laṅkā, that we reap the finest fruit of that civic sense which Ayodhyā has developed in him. There is nothing in all Indian literature, of greater significance for the modern Indian mind than the scene in which Hanumān contends in the darkness with the woman who gaurds the gates saying in muffled tones, ‘I am the city of Laṅkā.’”¹ Such a civic sense is quite probable because the cities in ancient times were more than centres of trade and corporate life; they were the ultimate resorts of the people against hostile invasion. Settlements were scarcely possible in the open country remote from the walls of the towns or town-like villages.

c5.32

¹ Cf. Buddhadatta's fine descriptions of Cola country quoted in the introduction of Buddhadatta's Manuals (P. T. S.) ; also the description of Sāgala city in Trenckner's Milinda, p. 1-2.

c5.33

¹ Sister Niveditā, Civic and National Ideals, pp. 6-7. “अहं हि नगरी लङ्का स्वयमेव प्लवङ्गम।”

c5.34

The social status of the civic architect was not as low as their present descendants occupy. Viśvakarmā, the patronymic of an architect, is deified.

c5.35

The expounders of the Vāstu Śāstras were venerable sages. The qualifications required for the different classes of architects, including knowledge of the Vedas and all other Śāstras, were very high and could only be expected of men occupying the front rank of the society. From the Mānasāra we learn that, in the ceremony of the plough and in the worship of the patron deities, the master-builders himself presented the offerings but hired Śūdras for the ploughing of the ground. The hiring of the Śūdras clearly proves that he at least belonged to a higher caste than the Śūdras; the personal presentation of the offerings, invocation and worship of the deity without the aid of the sacerdotal class, testifies to nobility of his lineage in former times. Mayamatam plainly avers that blue blood ran in his veins (abhijātavān). It was in later times that he descended in social estimation and came to occupy a low status even among the Śūdras. This degradation must have commenced at least in the age of the Mahābhārata, for we find there Yudhishṭhira requisitioned the services of Maya, a Dānava, possibly a non-Aryan, for the construction of his council house. This could not have been possible unless the science of architecture had deteriorated among the Aryans and there was already an absence of competent experts among them. And the non-Aryans, learning the science from the Aryans must have improved upon it. It may be that Maya represents the Southern School of Architecture.

c5.36

The scope of Indian town-planning comprises descriptions of markets (āpaṇa), streets and lanes, ditches, temples (devālaya), royal palaces and other buildings, i.e., housing of citizens (sarvvajana-gṛhāvāsa), arched gateways with flags hoisted upon them, sheds for drinking water (prapā), pleasure gardens (ārāmagṛha), tanks, and women of the town.¹ Though no mention is made here of the ramparts, it is superfluous to remark that their construction was one of the important functions of the civic architect. The Mānasāra and the Mayamata discuss the following cognate topics of town-planning :—(1) examination of soil (bhū-parīkṣā); (2) selection of site (bhūmisamgraha); (3) determination of directions (dikpariccheda); (4) division of the grounds into squares (padavinyāsa); (5) the offerings (balikarmavidhāna); (6) the planning of villages and towns (grāmavinyāsa, nagaravinyāsa); (7) buildings and their different storeys (bhūmividhāna); (8) cons-

c5.37

¹ Kavikalpalatā; vide the word ‘puram’ in the Śavdakalpadruma. A special mention of the public women in the description of towns is an indirect stricture upon town-life where social bonds are in the melting pot.

c5.38

पुरे वर्णौयानि यथा ।
पुरे इष्टप्रतोलीच परिखातोरणध्वजाः ।
प्रासादाश्चप्रारामवापोवेश्याः सतो लरो ॥ इति कविकल्पलता ।

c5.39

truction of gateways (gopuravidhāna); (9) construction of temples (maṇḍapavidhāna); (10) construction of royal palaces (rājaveśmavidhāna). The directions given by Kṛṣṇa about the planning of his capital Dvārāvatī furnish us with a list of the subjects in town-planning and the order which was followed in their constructions.¹ “Temples were to be erected. Let there be selection of building plots and the placing and spacing of buildings. Create triangular and quadrangular ‘places’ at the junction of roads, or at any suitable spot. Measure up the royal roads. Ascertain the orientation of buildings. Thus ordered the Yādavas engaged for the purpose began in right earnest; selected the site; measured up the boundary lines; carried out the divisions of plots; and on an auspicious day made offerings to the presiding deities of the ‘vāstu’ or site. When they were thus ready to commence their work, Kṛṣṇa reiterated his instructions and laid special stress upon the establishment of divine edifices. They

c5.40

¹ Devī Purāṇam, Viṣṇu Parva, Ch. 58. Cf. Viśvakarmaprakāśa Ch. 2, ll. 26—

c5.41

प्राकारं विम्यसेदादौ वास्तुस्थानं पूजयेत्ततः ।।
परिघाय ततः कृत्वा तन्मध्ये च ततः पुनः ।
सव्यापसव्यमार्गेण मार्गे तस्य प्रकल्पयेत् ।।
गृहणि वास्तुसंस्थानि कोष्ठे कोष्ठेषु विन्यसेत् ।
कोष्ठस्थान् वास्ततो गेहान् विषमान् कारयेत्ततः ।।
समे प्रदेशे मध्येतु मण्डपगृहाणि विन्यसेत् ।।

c5.42

carried out the orders, reserving special sites for trees.”

c5.43

In this volume the leading idea has been to deal with Indian town-planning from the standpoint of Indian conception of the subject. Hence the order and method of treatment adopted by indigenous traditional authorities have been followed as far as possible. It is for this reason that in some topics I have gone into details or have entered into disquisitions which the western town-planner will not be able to appreciate.¹

c5.44

¹ There are many authorities on the Vāstu Vidyā. The most renowned among them are said to number eighteen (Matsya Purāṇam, Ch. 226). Their names are :—Bhṛgu, Atri, Vaśiṣṭha, Viśvakarmā, Yama, Nārada, Nagnajit, Viśālākṣa, Purandara, Brahmā, Kumāra, Nandīśa Śaunaka, Garga, Vāstudeva, Aniruddha, Śukra, and Vṛhashpati. Let me supplement this list with additional names taken from the Toḍarānḍa, attributed to the great Toḍarmal; the names are Varāhamihira, Chyavana, Kaśyapa, Vṛddhagarga, Utpala, Māṇḍavya, Bharadvāja, Vṛddhavaśiṣṭha, and Lalla. Mānasāra gives the following list of the sages who are experts in architecture : Viśvakarmā, Viśa, Viśvasāra, Prabodhaka, Vṛtra, Maya, Tvaṣṭar, Mānabodha, Viśvabodha, Mahātantra, Vāstu vidyāpati, Ādisāra, Naya, Viśāla, Viśvakaśyapa Vāstubodha, Parāśarīyaka, Kālayūpa, Chaitya, Chitraka, Avarya, Sādhakasāra, Saṃhita, Bhānu, Indra, Lokajña, and Saura. Other notabilities in the field are Vātsyāyana, and the authors of the Purāṇas and the Tantras. But it cannot be definitely asserted that all the above personages ever dealt with town-planning; many of them must have only expounded domestic architecture. The works of many of them are missing. A regular investigation for the manuscripts should be instituted in Southern and Western India where they are still believed to be extant.

Linked texts (15)