Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

Vastu-shastra (Vol. I: Hindu Science of Architecture; Vol. II: Hindu Canons of Iconography and Painting) v1.c50: Chapter 1: Antiquity of Town Planning in India and Origin and Growth of Indian Towns

Vāstu-śāstra (Vol. I: Hindu Science of Architecture; Vol. II: Hindu Canons of Iconography and Painting) v1.c50

Language
English

Contents

Chapter 1: Antiquity of Town Planning in India and Origin and Growth of Indian Towns

A. Antiquity of Town Planning

v1.c50.s1.1

We have already written something on the antiquity of the founders of the Vāstuśāstra which in its turn pre-supposes the antiquity of Town-Planning in ancient India, as Town-planning has invariably formed a principal topic of practically every important treatise of Vāstuśāstra. Moreover some of the most renowned excavations of ancient Indian sites like Harappa, Mohenjodaro etc., etc., have thrown a flood of light on this ancient Indian civic art and the most refined civic sense of our ancestors whether they were purely Aryan or purely non-Aryan or an admixture of both. Further again the earliest literary documents of the World,—our Vedas and especially the Ṛgveda also corroborates, as we presently see, this archæological evidence. It is therefore not very difficult to surmize that the town-planning in ancient India is of a hoary antiquity. Our primordial architects like, Viśvakarman and Maya are alluded to in the earliest datable literature like Mahābhārata and Rāmāyaṇa, not as builders of houses but builders of towns. Town-planning presupposes the building of the houses no doubt, but the first pre-requisite of any planning in relation to the habitations of men must start with the planning of town, in its broadest sense rather than with that of the houses in its most haphazard fashion as we find today in most of the existing Indian towns.

v1.c50.s1.2

Town-planning is a civic art and civil architecture, hence any mis-givings in relation to our secular architectural traditions and tendencies in our civilization must not stand. Rise of cities is synchronous with the rise of a civilization. Forest-hermitages and caves in the mountains so much made prominent in our ancient living modes must not give an impression that we were a race of foresteers or caverns. It was love of nature and love of the spiritual realization or more properly the self-denial that some of the greatest leaders, and of men thought, in ancient India, our Ṛṣis used to live in forests. The solitude, the perennial communion with nature, the purity and solemnity of the atomosphere were some of the considerations which must have weighed with our ancestors to choose these so called unostensious sites, otherwise side by side there were, the rise and growth of some of the most well-planned and perfectly laid out cities, for the Nāgarikas to live and cultivate the arts and refinements as Vātsyāyana would have them. Thus our civilization clearly had recognised both the ways of life, the spiritual realization and the material cultivation. It is in this way that the perfection of culture was laid down. Here it must be frankly admitted that they never gave lift to materialism on the spirit, their non-attachment to the material pursuits, their detached out-look really helped them to keep the banner of the spirit aloft, otherwise we would have lost in oblivion as others have lost

v1.c50.s1.3

Town-planning presupposes not only the regional planning but also site-planning, the latter of which is not only a partitioning of different plots of the towns but also a systemic graph, meticulously adhering to the correct orientation of the site. This systematised and scientific knowledge of the earliest Indian Aryans is corroborated with their sacrificial symbolism and Vedī-construction. 'The close connection of the geometrical system (denoted by the mystic figures Paramaśāyika, Svastika, 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 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 Sacrificial ground'—Havell. He further remarks confirming his foregoing observation: "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 Sūrya; 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 Ṛg Veda, but also a prolonged experience of the civic arts, including architecture."

v1.c50.s1.4

The plans of towns and their denominations based on or identical with those of the geometrical figures of the Vedic altars, have survived through out our history of town-planning in ancident India as is corroborated by the Śilpaśāstras which to some extent are based on the Sūtra works (especially the Śulba). In our review of the antiquity of the Vāstu lore, as represented by the various literary compositions like Saṁhitās, Brāhmaṇas and Sūtras etc. etc. we have already seen so many words suggestive of our architectural knowledge in that distant past. Certainly the people, who could construct iron forts, plan colonade edifices, lay out large villages, can certainly be credited with sound knowledge of civic arts. The observations of Macdonnel and Keith (vide Vedic Index. Pur, pp. 538-39) on the Vedic towns: “On the whole it is hardly likely that in early Vedic towns city life was much developed... ... ...” are really not only now untenable but are based on their pre-conceived view that early Indo-Aryan civilization was more a primitive than the advanced civilization. The contemporary Indus valley civilization and so many other notable archaeological evidences which have been established in the recent times, also prove the untenability of this proposition. Further, there are innumerable words (already referred to and taken notice of) in the Ṛgveda itself which suggest that the there were towns of different grades esp. pura, grāma, nagara and durga; they were spacious (cf. such epithets as Urvī and Pṛthvī) and they were fortified (cf. Āyasī etc.). S. C. Sarkar (Some Aspects of the Earliest Social History of India p. 19) also supports this conclusion. “The view of Zimmer and others after him (Vedic Index 1.538 to 540) that the Vedic India knew of nothing more solid and complex than the hamlet, like the early Germans and Slavs who had no castle structures and town-life, is an extreme one; for it now being realized more and more as a basic fact that the Vedic Indians, like the Iranians, Hellenes, and Italians, were superimposed upon an earlier civilization . . . . . Thus it becomes quite reasonable to find in pṛthvī, urvī, śatabhujī, aśmamayī or āyasī purs, or the massive, extensive, hundred-walled stone-built, or iron-protected forts, the vivid descriptions of new and wonderful things the Vedic heroes actually saw; and rather forced explanations discovering in them mysteries of myths and fancies of metaphor become unneccessary”—Sarkar (ibid). The archæological remains discovered at Harappa, Mohenjodaro, and other places in Sind fully corroborate this view.

v1.c50.s1.5

The excavations at Harappa, and Mohenjodaro further prove the antiquity of ancient Indian Town planning—cf. Marshall.

v1.c50.s1.6

It may be remarked that it would not be justified to view the antiquity of ancient Indian town-planning in regard to Indo-Aryan or the Vedic Indians alone. What about the bulk of the population of this great sub-continent, the aboriginals, who were definitely the founders of great cities and fortified towns as is fully evident from the excavations at Harappa, Mohenjodaro and at other ports in Sind. It may also be born in mind that according to our Śilpaśāstras or Vāsturśāstras the planning of a village or town does not make much difference. The canons are indentical, only the size may be varying. A town is a large village. Similar is the case with the forts. According to the Mānasāra as we have already seen, there is not much difference between a village, a town and a fort—all are fortified places intended for the residence of people. A town is the extension of a village. A fort is in many cases nothing more than a fortified town, with this difference, that a fort is principally meant for purpose of defence, while a village or town is mainly intended for habitation. This canon of the earliest of the Vāstuśāstras is only a tradition of the earliest of the literature, the Vedas, and the deniers of the Vedic city-life (cf. Macdonell and Keith), themselves prove our proposition—vide Vedic Index under Pur pp. 338-39 and grāma pp. 244-5 as is evident from their own observations, “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, one is called broad (pṛthvī) and wide (urvvī). 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 attack or against inundations caused by overflowing rivers. Forts ‘with a hundred walls’ (śatabhujī) are spoken of. It would probably be a mistake to regard these forts as permanently occupied fortified places like the fortresses of the medieval barony. They were probaly mere places of refuge against attack, ramparts of hardened earth with palisades and a dich (cf. dehi). Pischel and Geldner, however, think that they were towns with wooden walls and ditches like the Indian town of Pāṭaliputra known to Megasthenese and the Pali Texts”.

v1.c50.s1.7

“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 scatterd 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 occasions be built inside. Presumably they consisted of detached houses with enclosures, but no details are to be found in Vedic literature. Large villages (Mahāgrāmas) 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 oftén the case at the prėsent day.” Dr. Bhattacharya—Vide ‘A study on Vāstu-Vidyā or Canons of Indian Architecture’ p. 15-16, had very profoundly adduced, the existence of planned towns and laid out cities in the Ṛg-vedic times. Indra is said to have destroyed 99 cities of Asura Śambara. One single reference to the hundred cities made of stone (Aśmāyasā) occurs in Ṛg. VI 3 : 20. Similarly cities with hundred enclosures or fortifications (śatabhujī) are also referred to—I. 166 8.

v1.c50.s1.8

The common element of fortification in practically all the pricinciple habitations of men, the grāma, the nagara and the durga in that early epoch of Aryan life is further supoprted from such early words as ‘gotra’ (where cows where protected in an enclosure) or gopura (the grāmadvāras).

v1.c50.s1.9

Later Saṁhitās, Brāhmaṇas and Sūtras have ample evidence to our theory of an early civic sense and civic planning there of, among the early Aryans in this land. The Epics, the Rāmāyaṇa and the Mahābhārata contain abundant references and glorious descriptions thereof, from which it is safely said that the town-planning in ancient India had attained a stereotyped canon lasting for full thousand years as is evident from the description of any town or city, Nagara or Nagarī, in practically all the representative writers of the classicial age, Kālidāsa, Aśvaghoṣa, Kumāradāsa, Māgha, Bāṇa Śrīharṣa as well as the archaeological remains, from the earliest period to later medieval Indian history, when the Mughal forts and palaces were built on the same stereotyped canon—the palaces having several courts and towns fortified. In regard to the planning of the former (the palaces) we shall see, afterwards vide—Pt. IV palace-architecture. Hare let us dwell a little more on the towns.

v1.c50.s1.10

In the Rāmāyaṇa, towns and forts and even antaḥpuras were protected by strong walls and ramparts. Ditches were dug around to afford additional protection. “Four elaborate gate-ways (gopurams) were erected for entrance into the city and each was approached by crossing a bridge erected over a ditch and supported by many pillars and platforms. The entrance was protected by strong doors and bolts. Watch towers (aṭṭālaka) from which the movements of the enemies outside the city walls were watched, were also raised. These were the usual essential features of a town. This is apparent from the fact that they were not confined to Ayodhya alone but are also noticeale in the description of Sugrīva's capital in Kiṣkindhā and of Rāvaṇa's at Laṅka"

v1.c50.s1.11

The references to many-storeyed buildings, as we have seen and the fortification referred to above, and the well-planned high road (suvibhaktamahāpatha) of the town hold before. us a vivid picture of the very advanced town-planning in ancient India and it just be said to that high sense of civic sense and citizenship which must have developped at that time. 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. Sister Nivedita says (vide 'Civic and National Ideals' p. 6-7). "It is more than likely, indeed, that Vālmīki's poem sprang out of a deliberate wish to glorify the beloved city of Ayodhya 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 Ayodhya has developed in him. There is noting in all Indian literature, of greater significance for the modern Indian mind than the scene in which Hanūmān contends in the darkness with the woman who gaurds the gates saying in muffled tones: 'I am the city of Laṅka":

v1.c50.s1.12

"अहं हि नगरी लङ्का स्वयमेव प्लवङ्गम"

v1.c50.s1.13

As regards the Greater Epic, the Śānti Parva contains several chapters dealing with fortification of the cities at the time of danger (XII-62). The Classification of forts into six varieties found in the Mahābhārata (XII. 5), (XII. 86) is akin to those of the Śilpaśāstras. This classification of six-fold Durga is similar to those we find in Manu and Purāṇas. Other elaborations in regard to the forts may be seen in Bhattacharyas book p. 45—46. The Mahābhārata refers to a city having six walls, (ṣaṭpadam) forming as it were, concentric circles round it (XV. 5; 16). Mention of Gopuras of the town is a usual description. 'Mahārathyā', 'Mahāpatha' and 'Rājamārgas' indicate how the towns were divided and planned out on a sound scheme. "The streets ran in various directions and crossed one another, the place of junction being an object af worship by the people (V. 194. 58). The epithet "Devatāvādha-varjitam" applied to streets, reminds one of the injunction found in the Śilpaśāstras. On two sides of the Mahāpathas were the shops (III.

v1.c50.s1.14

206. 8) and sheds for supplying drinking water (Prapā). The Prāsādas, Toraņas, Yūpas, Caityas and gardens further beautified the cities. All these details of a town enable us to form an idea of the town-planning of the time. Besides the town, mention is also made of Grāma, Ghośa, Śākhānagara, Janapada and so on"

v1.c50.s1.15

After the Epic Age, comes the Budhhist Age which also gives fullest of details in regard to the Town-planning in ancient India. For the Buddhists the two most important sources are Jātakas and Pali canons. Rhys Devids (Buddhist India pp. 64-65) writes: "We are told of lofty walls, ramparts with buttresses and watch towers and great gates, the whole surrounded by a moat or even a double moat one of water and one of mud." This is corroborated by a story no. 518, where we find a description of a city with ditches and moats around. The streets were lined with houses and shops. Such descriptions of towns in the Jatakas are very similar of those found in the Epics cf. the original quotations appended in the end.

v1.c50.s1.16

It is also said that the hill fortress girivraja four and a half miles in circumsferene, is said to have been built by Maha Govind, architect. The stone walls of Girivajra are the oldest extant stone building in India. Percy Brown however keeping in view the early character of Indian architecture says: "Cities largely of wooden construction, therefore, began to appear in various parts of the country, and according to Dhammapāla, the great Buddhist commentator, they were planned by an architect of the name of Maha-Govinda who is stated to have been responsible for the lay-out of several of the capitals of Northern India in the fifth centruy B. C. This is the first mention of an architect in the annals of the country. In principle, these cities were rectangular in plan and divided into four quarters by two main thoroughfares intersecting at right angles, each leading to a city gate. One of these quarters contained the citadel and royal apartments another resolved itself into the residences of the upper classes, a third was for the less pretentous buildings of the middle class, and the fourth was for accommodation of traders with their workshops open to view as in the modern bazaar."

v1.c50.s1.17

This perhaps is based on Diggha-Nikāya XIX, 36—vide tabulations in the Appendix. Mention is also made of Ayodhyā, Varānasī, Kampillā, Kosāmbī, Mathurā, Mithilā, Sāgala, Sāketa, Sāvatthi. Ujjeni, Vesāli and other cities of which, however, few architectural details are given (Vimāna-Vatthu, Commentary, p. 82).

v1.c50.s1.18

After the Buddhist period of our history, it no more remains the antiquity of Town-planning in ancient India After this perio lit bes comes a stereotyped canon in Indian Civic life, a most scientific picture is the gift of the great Kauṭilya (cf. his Arthaśāstra) and the later works belonging to the classical sanskrit literature including some of the later Purāṇas and Āgamas which abound in town-planning-technique in its fullest of details. The poetical campositions like those of Kālidāsa and Aśvoghoṣa, Daṇḍī and Bāṇa, Kalhaṇa and Śrīharṣa and a host of others also accord to this heritage and a tabulation of these glorious descriptions are appended in the end. Hence this little introduction to this subject of the antiquity of town-planning in ancient India may do for our purpose. Now let us take up the other complementary topic of this chapter—the origin and growth of Indian Towns also.

B. Origin and Growth of Indian Towns

v1.c50.s2.1

The story of the origin and growth of towns is really very fascinating. The natural laws governing it are universal. Sometimes a village develops into a great town and sometimes simple shrine dedicated to a deity becomes not only the renowned centre of pilgrimage but also gets converted into a big temple city. An awkward fortress or citadel sometimes has resulted into a capital city and a market place into a big commercial town. Some of the biggest Indian towns had their beginning in a group of villages. Great cities like Bombay and Madras, Chittogong and Kaveripum-pattinam rose out of a necessity for a trading post through the sea. The sacred banks of the sacred rivers like Gaṅgā, Yamunā, Kāverī, Godāvarī, Rāvī, Sindhu, Brahmaputra, to mention only the sacred-most, gave rise to many a city in ancient India. The Pauranic, the Epic and the Buddhist—all the the three ancient traditions glorify the Sacred Seven Cities of India—Ayodhyā, Mathurā, Māyā, Kāñchī, Avantī etc. etc,

v1.c50.s2.2

Thus it is evident that the rise of towns in India or elsewhere is the fulfilment of the ideas as well as the necessities of life. It is a concrete expression of the motive forces governing the civilization and culture of man. It is the noblest monument of human art and concepts. Dutta says: ‘In its genesis is unwrapped upto a great measure the evolution of the civilization which built it. In Europe this is more true where cities were the making of civilization and history.”

v1.c50.s2.3

In India the evolution of towns presupposes two fundamental factors namely; whether they evolved consciously or unconciously, what may be termed as Svatah-pravṛtta or Para-pravṛtta. It is only a broadway characterization, and represents two extremes which is more true in Modern India rather than in its forerunner.

v1.c50.s2.4

The truth however lies midway between these two extreams. Accordingly in case of Svatah-pravṛtta category of towns the natural advantages and easy communications must be viewed as the contributory factors. A market or temple, facilities of easy access and conveyance, especially by water, that is, prominent trade routes, navigable rivers or seas, a satrapy or fortress, the sacred bank of a sacred river etc. may be deemed as some of the natural advantages which contributed to the growth of the towns.

v1.c50.s2.5

In the S. S. XVIII entitled ‘Nagarādisañjñā the following nine synonyms have been given which to my mind unfold in a way the origin and growth of towns:

v1.c50.s2.6

Nagara Puṣkara Sadana
Mandira Sāmparāyika Sadma
Durga Nivāsa Kṣaya & Kṣitilaya.

v1.c50.s2.7

The Sadana, Sadma, Kṣaya, etc. are synonyms of houses which also indicate that a group of houses develops into a village and with the aforesaid advantages it consequently emerges into a fullfledged town. Similarly Puṣkara indicates to the evolution of those towns which rise on the bank of rivers or develop on the sea-shore. Durga, as already indicated is nothing but a fortified town, the origin of which may be traced from a citedal or fortress and Mandira, the temple, as we shall see, in India, they have been the nucleus of the development of great towns—the temple-cities of India.

v1.c50.s2.8

This is also supported by the following synonyms of Pura or town in the “Śabda-kalpadruma” the famous lexicon:—

v1.c50.s2.9

1. Geham 2. Haṭṭādiviśiṣṭa-sthānam 3. Vahugrāmīyavyavahāra-sthānam 4. Purī 5. Nagara 6. Pattanam 7. Sthānīyam 8. Kaṭakam 9. Paṭṭam 10. Nigama and 11. Puṭabhedanam.

v1.c50.s2.10

A brief notice of these synonyms may be taken to bring home the implications of these words as to why they are all called towns or pura:

v1.c50.s2.11

1. Geham—a house, rather a patriarchal family is the nucleus round which developed villages of the type of ‘Eka-bhoga’ in the definition of Manuṣyālaya-candrikā appended in the end where a single patriarch with his family and retinue lives. Such types of villages are still found in Bengal, the Pārās of Duttas, Ghoṣas, Banerjees and Mukherjees. In ancient India such pārās were called gotras. Such petty villages combined themselves and rose to great towns.

v1.c50.s2.12

.2. & Haṭṭādiviśiṣṭasthānam and / 3. & Vahugrāmīya-vyavahārasthānam both these words signify that an Indo-Aryan city was a market-village grown to greatness. In the states like U. P. and Punjab, a village is only a hamlet round about which is the vast expanse of paddy fields. There must be a market to serve the needs. It is this, the market place, surrounded by so many hamlets that were the Indian towns in embryo. This is the significance of both these synonyms. B. B. Dutta's observation on the significance of the haṭṭādi-viśiṣṭasthānam, may be quoted: "Moreover, the sites of great cities have often been indicated by some nascent industry—viz., a mine, a bed of flint, a layer of clay useful for household utensils. In cases like these it is quite possible that villages which have specialised in any art, working upon local materials, have grown into towns. Who can say that the importance of the localities which once developed into the famous towns, of Dacca noted for its finest muslin, of Kṛshṇanagar renowned for clay modelling, of Murshidabad distinguished for its silk-clothings, of Golkunda famous for its dimonds, of Agra known for its perfumery and marble works, was not partially derived from their excellent local manufactures which commanded a respectable market beyond the limits of the manufactories and that they were not the market-places where the artisans brought their articles for sale? There can also be cited here many modern instances of such factory towns, to wit, Jheria and Jamshedpur."

v1.c50.s2.13

4 Pattanam & 5. Puṭabhedana—The former is also a commercial town. It is a sort of emporium. The S. S. however takes it differently as we shall see. Datta observes: "The necessity of a trading post led to the growth of many commercial towns in India, as also in other countries. From the very earliest times it has been customary for several tribes to share a common trysting place where they held their councils, and bartered their goods in the common markets." The definition of Pattanam (see ahead) as given in Mayamatam testifies to this nature. Mr. Venkatarama Ayyar, furnished us with an instance of such a commercial town: "Kaveripumpattinam is a very ancient city which was once a flourishing sea-port and a great centre of commerce. It is the Khabiros Emporion of the Greeks. It is also known as Pukar or the city at the mouth of the Kaveri. It had a splendid harbour and a light-house. This ancient sea-port which had an expensive commerce has ceased to be of importance owing to the silting up of the Kaveri"

v1.c50.s2.14

Moreover "River sites, Sea-coasts, especially, the mouths of rivers offer the best facilities for the origin and growth of cities, because a river is not only a means of communication with the interior of the country, a way of transport and locomotion, but it also offers an outlet unto the outer world, thus fostering and encouraging commerce. Rivers are national assets of no mean importance. Even in times of antiquity when the intinerant Aryans were spreading their civilisation and modern commercialism was out of the question, the great rivers of India offered the best routes for their spread and advance. Hence the first Indo-Aryan colonies were planted on the valleys of the Indus and the Ganges. Aryāvarta was the country where Aryan civilisation was promulgated first and this is the part of India which was watered by the above two great river systems, viz., the Indus and the Ganges. Besides, a coast belt, a river side, or a mountain valley is as easy defence in times of war as of access in times of peace. These have also a never-failing sanitary importance. To these reasons combined with local advantages we owe the evolution of a great many Indo-Aryan settlements in the shape of riparian towns. It should be observed here that the orthodox treatises make it a rule to establish towns on the right bank of a river. Consequently all Hindu towns in India that are situated on the river lie on its right side.—Dutta.” Accordingly such, riparian towns illustrate the type of Puṭabhedanam.

v1.c50.s2.15

6. Nigama: is also a commercial centre as well as a variety of fort as we shall see.

v1.c50.s2.16

7. and 8. Puri and Nagara: These need not be dwelt at length. They are too familiar to be expatiated upon. The seven ancient Indian sacred Puris are on every body’s lips. These were not only hallowed by their greatness but also famous for renowned imperial seats having beautiful palaces and other specialities of great town. The copious description of Ayodhyā in Vālmīki’s Rāmāyaṇa may be purviewed.

v1.c50.s2.17

As regards Nagara, though it has become too common and popoular a word, it signifies a very fascinating origin. We know that there is a very advanced architecurel style, the Nāgara style with especial reference to temple-architecture. Sanskrit ‘Nagara’ in this connection may be studied with Tamil Nakar. It is used variously in ancient Tamil literature to mean a house, a temple, a palace or a castle and a city. It is thus in a nutshell the chief dynamic principle of ancient town-planning that these separate items should be so co-ordinated and each assigned such an important place in the city that that the arrangement conduces to the efficiency of town life, The word ‘mandira’ in sanskrit also means a house and a town, as we have already seen. Accordingly looking through the hazes of the long-gone past, we shall find a holy shrine or temple in lieu of a good many Indian cities of today. In India it is a truism to say that a temple was a city in the making. Salubrious surrounding , perennial source of water like a large lake or tank leafy trees, plants full of flowers ,luxuriant vegetation, all connoting the fertility of the soil in the vicinity of temple ensure a rise of dwellings around it. Its sacredness, its renown, its priests and paṇḍitas famous for their scholarship and leadership of men, all taken together constitute the maxim that the temple was a city in making. Such temple-cities abound in India.

v1.c50.s2.18

Again in very many instances, a temple in ancient India constituted a university in miniature. Datta says. “In process of time the importance and reputation of the temple, its deity, and its sage extended beyond the local limits. Hindus, in their old age or when they renounce the world generally love to raise their humble cottages in places of pilgrimage and some pilgrims would therefore take their permanent abode there. With the increasing population shops were started; resting houses were erected. It may be, the place grew and grew until a king selected the site for establishing his castle. What was before a secluded place with a solitary shrine was at once made into a ful-fledged city.” Further more it is significant to note that the plan of temples especially in Southern India correspond to that of an Indo-Aryan village or town in its salient features.

v1.c50.s2.19

9, 10 and 11 :—Sthānīyam, Kaṭakam and Paṭṭam: All denote defence. It was an ancient custom both in India and elsewhere to plan fortresses for efficiency of administration and government in the midst of villages which were grouped under their jurisdiction and supervision. The celebrated author of Arthaśāstra, the great Kauṭilya prescribes such a canon of political planning: “There shall be a ‘Sthānīya’ (a fortress of that name) in the centre of eight hundred villages, a ‘Droṇamukha’ in the centre of four hundred villages, a ‘Kharvāṭikā’ in the centre of two hundred villages, and a ‘Saṅgrahaṇa’ in the midst of a collection of ten villages.”

v1.c50.s2.20

These out-posts favoured the growth of towns and sometimes capital cities about them. A good many old cities show this genesis. The names of Cuttack (Kaṭaka), Sialkot, Nagarkot, Mangalakot, justify this genesis in as much as ‘Kaṭaka’ or ‘Koṭa means a fort. The word ‘Gotra’ is full of geneological and defencive implication. It originally meant an enclosure for kine (गाः त्रायन्ते ऽस्मिन् तत्), the respective property and possession, the cows of a particular family of our old patriarchs, the Ṛṣis and therefore it applied to denote a family descended from one of the several patriarchs. This is what Max Muller also points out as the connection between the etymological and secondary meanings of Gotra. 'In ancient times, when most wars were carried on, not to maintain the balance of power of Asia or Europe, but to take possession of good pasture, or to appropriate large herds of cattle; the hurdles grew naturally into the walls of fortresses, the hedges became strongholds; an Anglo-Saxon *tun*, a close German (*zaun,*), a town; and those who lived behind the same walls were called a 'Gotra', a family, a tribe, a race"—Chips from a German Workshop.

v1.c50.s2.21

Thus the implication of Sthānīyam and ‘Kaṭakam’ is clear. As regards ‘Paṭṭam’, it is derived from ‘paṭṭa’ a slab which denotes a hill-fortress and hill-forts giving rise to towns is well known in history. Some of the towns in Rajasthana e. g. Chittorgarh is a very good example illustrative of this truth. B. B. Datta, however, takes it as a crossing of highways which also illustrates the same implication. These highways mean the highways on the out-skirts of mountains.

v1.c50.s2.22

Some notice is taken of practically all the ‘paryāyas’ having a considerable sense to formulate our theory that the origin and growth of Indian town is not only illustrative of them, but also revolves round them.

v1.c50.s2.23

Now remain two more questions. How these individually explain the dictum of svataḥ and para pravṛtta categories and how villages have contributed to the growth of Indian towns.

v1.c50.s2.24

The sthānīya, kaṭaka, paṭṭam types of towns explain the para-pṛvratta type and the rest of the svataḥ-pravṛtta one. The grouping of villages tantamount to the evolution of a big city or great town as is illlustrated in an ancient city, the famous Pataliputra. Havell rightly remarks: "The wonderful organisation of the Chandragupta's empire, of which Megasthenes gives us glimpses, was not the creation of the Mauryan statesmen, but the centralisation of the social and economic activities of the self-governing Indo-Aryan village communities. Pataliputra itself was only an aggregation of Indian villages joined together by spacious parks (the sacred groves) and stately avenues".

v1.c50.s2.25

Finally in ancient India or for the matter of any other country the military camps were also contributory to the rise of great towns or capital cities. This is the implication why ‘Śibira’ which is also a variety of Nagara and Durga. The un-settled condition of the political power in especially the early medieval and later medieval history of India fully speakes of this development. Datta also supports it, that is to say a king had to change his royal seat from place to place and where he settled for some years, there was built up the royal palace and the quarters of his entourage including the army and the military officers. The same circumstances operated to cause wealth and commerce, arts and literature, to follow thither and thus to develop the royal citadel into a magnificent metropolis. We all know how Udaya Singh, the Rana of Chitore, father of the great Pratap, defeated by Mohammadan arms under Akbar, took refuge in a sequestered mountain valley where he had already excavated a magnificent lake. Now he had his royal palace built on the embankment of this lake. The subjec.s followed their king and what followed was the gradual evolution of the noble town of Udayapur, extolled by all travellers for its splendid plan, architectural beauty, natural setting, and imposing grandeur.

v1.c50.s2.26

VILLAGES, TOWNS AND FORTS IN GENERAL

v1.c50.s2.27

With this very brief dessertation on the antiquity of town-planning in India and the origin and growth of Indian towns, we are now better equipped to treat this topic of the different and manifold types of towns including villages and forts. But before we do so, we may point out the discrepency and the non-correspondence of the section in this part with its companion in the Vāstulakṣaṇas. These first two chapters being introductory to start with canons, have been taken up, first though their counter-parts i.e. ‘Grāma-lakṣaṇa’, ‘Nagara-lakṣaṇa’ and ‘Durga-lakṣaṇa’ are introduced in the middle. Now let us begin with villages first.

Villages

v1.c50.s3.1

Village is a town in miniature and hence in India from the standpoint of planning there is no difference between a village and a town. A group of villages gives rise to a big town. Pataliputra is already cited as the most illustrious example.

v1.c50.s3.2

There is however a great gulf between the canons of village-planning as given in the ancient texts of architecture and town-planning like Mayamata, Mānasāra etc. and the universal practice in India in regard to the most fundamental of the canons of town-planning namely the fortification. All the Śilpa texts unanimously suggest the fortification of villages as well. This is a bit over-doing. Some of the most selected villages may have some kind of fortification around them, otherwise the general practice, as the history also bears to the testimony, is that the villages never had fortification. When M. M. Dr. Ganga Nath Jha wrote—“The points of difference between a town and a village were that the town was protected by a ditch and a wall while the village was not so protected, the town was inhabited mostly by trades-people, in addition to the king and his appertenances, while the village was inhabited by agricultural people”—House-building and Sanitation in Ancient India, J. B. O. R. S. Volume I—he was not only simply echoing the practical and historical truth; but also Bharata’s definition of a village which is an abode of many people such as Brāhmaṇas and others without any wall or ditch.

v1.c50.s3.3

Now the question is: How to reconcile the precepts of the ancient masters with the practice of the ages. These ancient masters do not take any vital difference between the planning of villages or towns. Naturally what holds good of a town just holds good of a village so far as the scientific and systematic planning goes, otherwise the law-givers have nothing to do with the haphazard growth when there is no body to guide the growth, supervise the plan or control the mal-planning.

v1.c50.s3.4

Secondly though we maintain that the village is a natural unit and had a natural growth; but we have a tradition—vide Kauṭilya's Artha-Śāstra, that as per the administrative efficiency and the control thereof, he (Kauṭilya) advises the establishment of villages throughout the kingdom: "Either by inducing foreigners to immigrate (paradeśāpavāhanena) or by causing the thickly populated centres of his own kingdom to send forth the excessive population (svadeśābhiṣyandavamanena vā) the kingdom may construct villages either on new sites or on old ruins (bhūtapūrvam abhūtapūrvam vā)".

v1.c50.s3.5

"Villages consisting each of not less than a hundred families and not more than five hundred families of agricultural people or Śūdra caste, with boundries extending as far as a krośa (2250 yds.) or two and capable of protecting each other shall be formed. Boundaries shall be denoted by a river, a mountain, forests, bulbous plants (gṛṣṭi), caves, artificial buildings (setubandha) or by trees such as Śālmalī (silk cotton tree), Śamī (acacia suma) and Kṣīra vṛkṣa (milky trees)"

v1.c50.s3.6

Thirdly the villages were also sometimes founded for military purposes—vide Ummagga Jataka translated by Yatawara p. 187, where we find that the Raja, previous to his starting on a military expedition gave orders to his ministers to build villages perhaps for the convinience of the routes of the expedition constituting the great highways of the country and also for trade and communication as well as for resting places of caravans.

v1.c50.s3.7

Fourthly, we see, Bhoja, the celebrated author of the Samarāṅgaṇa-Sūtradhāra, though, silent about the grāma-lakṣaṇa in any details, does give us a great canon of national town-planning policy which echoes to some extent the ancient tradition of the Imperial Mauryas when Kauṭilya, the renowned Prime-minister was also doing the same thing. Bhoja from the stand point of National Planning in particular context to the laying out of the villages, towns etc. devides as we presently see, the whole country into Nagara and Janapada and takes the village as the Unit of National-planning.

v1.c50.s3.8

The village as a unit of Town Planning in National Planning in ancient India.

v1.c50.s3.9

This simple classification of the S. S. also hints at a very broad fact of the then outlook on the planning character of the town as a whole. It is in relation to the National Planning of a country and a big country like India—which as a large continent—has so many diversities, but happily so integreted on account of its cultural and religious background that it always was one unit to both the sovereigns like Pṛthu and the Sthapatis, like Viśvakarmā. From the point of view of the national planning of a country like India—a sub-continent, the whole country was divided into three Rāṣṭras—the large, the middle and the small.

v1.c50.s3.10

The unit of the national planning, according to this text is a village (the smallest category of a town). The territory of a larger unit of the country called the Superior Rāṣṭra consisted of nine thousand one hundred and fifty four villages, while that of the middle Rāṣṭra contained in its dominion five thousond three hundred and eighty four villages and lastly, the small type of the Rāṣṭra had only one thousand five hundred forty eight villages of its territory. Thus the whole land consisting of these three sizes of Rāṣṭras having been laid out in villages; the town planning starts with the division of only the half the number of the villages into nine equal parts in all these types of the Rāṣṭras. This being done—in every part seven towns should be established (10. 83-87). This, in my opinion, was the selection of some large villages having all the qualifications for the natural development into a town. In this way (as per rough calculation) the superior Rāṣṭra would be having five hundred towns, the middle one having three hundred and the inferior one, eighty six only. This points out to one of the basic origins of towns—the large majority of the Indian towns had their origin in villages.

v1.c50.s3.11

What is the idea underlying this canon of establishing towns only among half the number of each of the three types of Rāṣṭras? Perhaps it was in order to keep in tact the agricultural life going on and not to disturb the rural character of the country—the main characteristic of this ancient land. The urban civilisation has its virtues ahd drawbacks too; perhaps the town-planner of the S.S. does not want to get those evil characteristic of the city life penetrated among the simple folks of villages. Nothing can be said authoritatively, it is only my surmise. The text is not very specific. It gives only a broad hint.

v1.c50.s3.12

Here two points emerge which need critical exmination. Firstly, has this kind of planning any remnant in modern India? Secondly, is there any other treatise in which such canons of town planning are equally laid down? The first problem is upto the sociologists to work out. We may only point out that but for the Railway lines introduced in the modern times, the country was consisted predominantly of villages and it is not difficult to find a parralel to the large number of villages which emerge in these three types of Rāṣtras. We do find larger number of villages in existence even upto this time.

v1.c50.s3.13

Now as regards the second problem, in Kauṭilya's Artha-śāstra, though we can not strictly speaking find a corroboration of the above principle; yet it gives a hint which is important in this respect. For defensive purposes, Artha-śāstra inculcates the necessity of laying out fortresses scattered among the villages, viz. the Sthānīya in the centre of eight hundred villages, a Droṇamukha, in the centre of four hundred villages, a Kharvāṭika in the centre of two hundred villages and a Saṁgrahaṇa in the midst of a group of ten villages. This, in my opinion, is a military planning in contrast to the civic planning as advocated by the S. S. Kauṭilya, the powerful Prime-minister of Emperor Chandra Gupta Maurya, being more absorbed in his imperialistic views, did propound the germs of the civic planning, because in ancient India in the character of planning, there was not much difference between a village, a town or a fort. All were fortified residences.

v1.c50.s3.14

With this general introduction to the grāmas, it is not difficult to surmize that the villages were really the detached human habitations principally occupied by the agriculturists. The upper class people especially the Brāhmaṇas also used to live in villages—vide Bāṇa's description of the Prītikūṭa village, the 'Brāhmaṇādhivāsa". Accordingly in the Mayamata—vide Vāstu-Lakṣaṇa, there is a detailed classification of the Brāhmaṇa villages in accordance with the numerical strength of their population. Similarly villages are classified on so many other bases—a village of learned Brāhmaṇas is called ‘Maṅgala’ while that of noble ones ‘Agrahāram’ etc. There are detailed descriptions of villages of various sorts in the Mayamata and Mānasāra—vide V. Lakṣaṇa. Their planning is the scientific planning of a town, having all the salient features like shape, size, site-planning, street-planning, laying of highways, folk-planning, the planning of the centre, the chalking out the plots for temples, tanks etc. etc. and laying the rules of fortification as well as all other requirements. It is therefore needless to go into their details as the chapters ahead alloted to all these topics, conviniently may be taken to be applicable to the villages also. Let us therefore tabulate the different varieties of the villages as per the different authorities—vide the Vāstu-lakṣaṇa.

v1.c50.s3.15

**Viśvakarma-Vāstuśāstra.** It describes as many as 12 types of villages:

v1.c50.s3.16

| 1. | Maṇḍaka | 5. | Caturmukha | 9. | Devarāṭ |
| 2. | Prastara | 6. | Pūrva-mukha | 10. | Viśveśa |
| 3. | Bāhulika | 7. | Maṅgala | 11. | Kailāśa and |
| 4. | Parāka | 8. | Viśvakarmaka | 12. | Nitya-Maṅgala |

v1.c50.s3.17

Avoiding the details of these villages, a few remarks may be made. There is no hard and fast prescription about the fortification of the first three types. The streets are more important features which provide the laying out of the habitations. The next four are surrounded by ramparts and may be deemd as special habitations according to ancient canons of folk-planning. The Viśvakarma-grāma is a very large village and may be called a town. Its site is laid on the bank of a river. Here there is a provision for a palace of the king. The ninth variety is a temple-village as the name indicates. The tenth types is the commercial village and the eleventh is directed to be laid out on the sea-coast or on the slopes of a hill and it is also protected by ramparts. Lastly the Nityamaṅgala is as good as a big town having a population of about 6000 people.

v1.c50.s3.18

Like the Samarāṅgaṇa, the Aparājitapṛcchā also does not treat the villages in any details. Both these texts being contemporary show the medieval tendencies of urbanisation when big cities especially the capital cities were more prominent in the minds of the authors who were mostly courtiers and naturally were biased with the imperial set ups.

v1.c50.s3.19

Mānasāra. According to Dr. Acharya's notice there is not much difference between a village, a town and a fort. All are fortified places intended for the residence of people. A town is the extension of a village. A fort is in many cases nothing more than a fortified town, with this difference, that a fort is principally meant for purposes of defence, while a village or a town is mainly intended for habitation.

v1.c50.s3.20

"Villages are divided according to their shapes into eight classes, called daṇḍaka, sarvato-bhadra, nandyāvarta, padmaka, svastika, prastara, kārmuka, and catur-mukha.

v1.c50.s3.21

Each village is surrounded by a wall made of brick or stone; beyond this wall there is a ditch broad and deep enough to cause serious obstruction in the event of an attack on the village. There are generally four main gates at the middle of the four sides, and as many at the four corners. Inside the wall there is a large street running alround the village. Besides, there are two other large streets, each of which connects two opposite main gatés. They intersect each other at the centre of the village where a temple or a hall is generally built for the meeting of the villagers. The village is thus divided into four main blocks, eack of which is again subdivided into may blocks, by-streets which are always straight and run from one end to the other of a main block. The two main streets crossing at the centre have houses and footpaths on one side of the street. The ground-floor of these houses on the main streets consists of shops. The street, which runs round the village, has also houses and footpaths only on one side. These are mainly public buildings, such as libraries, guest-houses, etc. All other streets generally have residential buildings on both sides. The houses, high or low, are always uniform in make. Drains (jaladvāra, lit. waterpassage) follow the slope of ground. Tanks and ponds are dug in all the inhabited parts, and located where they can conveniently be reached by a large number of inhabitants. The temples of public worship, as well as the public commons, gardens, and parks are similarly located. People of the same caste or profession are generally housed in the same quarter.

v1.c50.s3.22

The partition of the quarters among the various sects cannot be said to be quite impartial. The best quarters are generally reserved for the Brāhmaṇas and the architects. Such partiality to the artists is not met elsewhere in Sanskrit literature. The quarters of the Buddhist and the Jains are described in a few lines. The habitations of the Cāṇḍālas, as well as the place for cremation, are located outside the village wall, in the north-west in praticular. The temples of fearful deities such as Cāmuṇḍā, are also placed outside the wall”.

v1.c50.s3.23

Mayamata and Śilparatna. The above description of villages in the Mānasāra is base on the respective shapes, the method of street planning, folk-planning and temple-dedication which, as we shall see, is the stereo-typed canon of town planning in ancient India. Hence our previous statement that according to the Mānasāra there is not much difference between a village, a town and a fort, gets supported. The detailed description of the Nandyāvarta, as reproduced in the Vāstūlaksaṇas is evidently very copious.

v1.c50.s3.24

The author of the Mayamata and Śilparatna however, base their classification of the villages mainly upon planning of streets into:—

v1.c50.s3.25

| 1. | Daṇḍaka | 5. | Nandyāvarta |
| 2. | Svastika | 6. | Parāga |
| 3. | Prastara | 7. | Padma, and |
| 4. | Prakīrṇaka | 8. | Śrīpatiṣṭhita, |

v1.c50.s3.26

*N. B.*—Kāmikāgama divides villages into fifteen classe and after enumerating all the verieties named by the Mānasāra and Mayamuni cites four more, to wit, Sampatkara, Kumbhaka, Śrīvatsa and Vaidika. Thus as many as 15 types emerge.

First 71 of 141 passages. Read on

Linked texts (31)