Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

India as Known to Panini: A Study of the Cultural Material in the Ashtadhyayi c8.s10: Section 10. Town-Planning

India as Known to Pāṇini: A Study of the Cultural Material in the Ashṭādhyāyī c8.s10

Language
English

Section 10. Town-Planning

c8.s10.1

Pāṇini refers to some important towns of his time. *e.g.* Kāpiśī, Takshaśilā, Śākala, Hāstinapura, Śāṁkāśya, and Kāśi. The *gaṇas* add other names. The existence of these cities shows progress in the art of town-planning (*nagara-māpana*) and architecture (*vāstuvidyā*). References to *vathuvijjāchariya* and *pāsāda-māpana* are known in the Jātakas (*Suruchi Jāt.* IV.323).

c8.s10.2

The most important parts of a city were its moat (*parikhā*), rampart (*prākāra*) and gates (*dvāra*), which served as the main defences. *Sūtras* V.1.17-18 envisage regular town-planning. For example, *Parikhāyā ḍhañ*, speaks of 'the space earmarked for a moat as *pārikheyī* (*bhūmi*).' The previous *sūtra*, *Tadasya tad-asmin syād-iti*, V.1.16, presupposes some sort of planning preceding the actual construction work. The marking out of the site of the moat, the rampart and the palace formed the preliminary part of such planning. The Vatthuvijjāchariyas or expert architects were requisitioned for testing sites (*Jāt.* I.297; IV.323), for the actual planning of cities (*cf.* *nagaraṁ Vedehena sumāpitaṁ*, *Mahāummaga Jāt.* VI.448). The *Arthaśāstra* mentions the construction of ditches (*parikhā*) as the first item in the construction of forts (*durga-vidhāna*). We read in the *Mahābhārata* that the site of Indraprastha was mapped out (*nagaraṁ māpayāmāsuḥ*) in the presence of Dvaipāyana Vyāsa and others and that work commenced with the digging of a series of moats (*parikhābhiḥ*), followed by the building of a high rampart (*prākāra*), numerous gateways (*dvāraiḥ*) and towers (*saudhaiḥ*) (Ādiparva., 209.29-32). Why the moat was built first can be understood from the fact that the earth so obtained was utilised for raising the mudrampart (*pāṁsu-prākāra*), or for moulding bricks for the city-wall (*prākārīyā ishṭakā*), or as Kauṭilya says, for ramming in the hollow masonry work (*pāṁsu-viśesheṇa vāstu-chhidraṁ vā pūrayet*, *Arth.* Text, II.3, p. 52).

c8.s10.3

The *Arthaśāstra* ordains the digging of three moats round the fort, having an intermediate space of one *daṇḍa* (6 ft.) between each other and being fourteen *daṇḍas* (84 ft.), twelve *daṇḍas* (72 ft.), and ten *daṇḍas* (60 ft.) respectively in width (*Arth.* II.23). Thus a total width of 38 *daṇḍas* (218 ft.) represented the *pārikheyī* land round the fort. We are indebted to the commentary on the *Udaya Jātaka* (IV.106) for names of the three moats, *viz.* *udaka*, *kaddama* and *sukkha*, a water moat, a mud moat, and a dry moat. These may be taken to have followed the width given in Kauṭilya. We have discussed in another chapter Pāṇini's *purusha* measure (V.2.38) which according to the *Arthaśāstra* was equal to 5 1/3 feet (*Arth.* Text, II.20, p. 106). Kauṭilya says that depth was measured in terms of this length called *khāta-paurusha*. The examples *dvi-purushī* and *tri-purushī* in the *Kāśikā* on *sūtra* V.2.38 (*Purusha-hastibhyām aṇ cha*) refer to the depth of ditches or moats.

c8.s10.4

PRĀKĀRA AND DEVAPATHA—There is no mention of *prākāra* in the *sūtras*. Kātyāyana mentions *prāsāda* and *prākāra* in a *vārttika* on *sūtra*, VI.3.122, and the trend of his discussion shows that the words were implied in Pāṇini's rule. The stock illustrations on V.1.16 (*Tadasya tadasmin syāditi*) include *prākārīya deśa* (the site for a rampart) and *prākārīya ishṭakā* (bricks for the city-wall), the latter agreeing with the direction of Kauṭilya that the ramparts should be made of bricks.

c8.s10.5

There is, however, one word in the *Ashṭādhyāyī*, which gives a definite clue to Pāṇini's acquaintance with the technical details of the building of ramparts and parapets. He mentions *devapatha* at the head of the *gaṇa Devapathādi*, (V.3.100), which again can be explained only in the light of Kauṭilya. This corroborative testimony from the *Arthaśāstra* is rather singular since no other work throws light on the meaning of the Pāṇinian word. According to Pāṇini the ‘passage’ which resembles a ‘celestial passage’ (*devapatha*) is called *devapatha* (V.3.100). What can such a passage or road possibly be so as to deserve the comparison involved? According to Kauṭilya the wide road on the top of the parapet built along the line of battlements (*indrakośas*) was called *devapatha* (*Arth.* Text, II.3, p. 52; Trans. p. 51). The height of the brick fort-wall (*prākāra*) above the mud-rampart (*vapra*) is there stated to be thirty-six feet rising from the ground level¹, and the battlements were built above it. The *deva-patha* extending along the city-wall should be understood with reference to its great height resembling the celestial passage (*devapatha*) in the heavens, justifying the comparison of the former with the latter (V.3.100).² The *Raghuvamśa* (XIII.19) also refers to *devapatha* (=*surapatha*) as an altitude in the stratospheric measurements. We learn from later literature that the walled town of Pāṭaliputra became noted for its fortifications (*Pāṭaliputrakāḥ prāsādāḥ*) including its city-walls or palisades (*Pāṭaliputrakāḥ prākarāḥ*), and we find Patañjali speaking of the guide-book called *Sukosalā* which gave a detailed (*avayavaśaḥ*) description of the wonderful city-walls of Pāṭaliputra (*Bhāshya*, IV.3.36. II.3.11; and IV.3.134; II.321).

c8.s10.6

¹ The *Mahākaṇha* (IV.182) and *Mahāsutasoma* (V.478) *Jātakas* mention the height of a *pākāra* to be 18 cubits (*aṭṭhārasahattha pākāram*) or 27 ft. While visiting the Alwar fort I was told that the fort-wall is still built 18 cubits high from the ground level.

c8.s10.7

² Vardhamāna misunderstands the point of comparison in the derivation of *devapatha*, when he says that the latter was so called from its possessing shady trees, supply of water and freedom from dangers in the manner of a divine road (*Gaṇaratna*. Verse 186).

c8.s10.8

*CITY-GATES*—The plan of the ancient walled cities was rectangular, usually square, pierced with four gates, one in the middle of each wall, facing the four quarters. (*Nagarassa chatusu dvāresu*, *Jāt.* I.262; III.414; cf. ‘Cities and City-Gates’, p. 213). Pāṇini describes the principle which governed the naming of these city-gates in the following *sūtra*:

c8.s10.9

*Abhiniṣhkrāmati dvāram* (IV.3.86).

c8.s10.10

*i.e.* 'the city-gate is named after the other city towards which it opens;' e.g. *Māthuraṁ Kānyakubja-dvāram*, a gate in Kānyakubja, opening towards Mathurā.

c8.s10.11

This principle of naming the city-gates originated at least in the fifth century B.C. and has continued throughout up to our own days. Hundreds of gates built in the Mughal period derive their names in this manner, e.g. *Ajmerī darwāzā*, a gate situated in Delhi but named after Ajmer.

c8.s10.12

The roads leading out of the city-gates also derived their names in the same manner as stated in the following *sūtra*:

c8.s10.13

*Tad gachchhati pathi dūtayoh* (IV.3.85).

c8.s10.14

'The names of roads and couriers are derived from their destination.' For example, all the roads which proceeded in the direction of Mathurā, even though they were situated in different towns, were labelled *Māthura* by the people of each locality. Thus the *Māthura* road of each city passed through its *Māthura* gate.

c8.s10.15

Patañjali knows of a wide net-work of roads punctuated by well-marked stages for purposes of halt and rest. He refers to the road leading from Sāketa towards Pāṭaliputra (*Bhāshya*, III.3.136; II.162), and again to the route leading towards Srughna (*Bhāshya*, I.3.25; I.281). Pāṇini also refers to the terminii of roads connecting cities. The terminus at its destination was called *maryādā* or limit, and the other cities on the way marked the intermediate stages at shorter (*avarasmin*) or longer distances of the journey (III.3.136). The *Kāśikā* adds the interesting fact that these halts were counted by the need of rest and meal on the way.

c8.s10.16

Pāṇini mentions the Grand Trunk Road of North India as *Uttarāpatha*, 'the Northern Road' (V.1.77), running from Gandhāra to the eastern country, of which the details are given by the Greek geographers.

c8.s10.17

*THE CITY*—We may thus picture a well laid-out city to have been equipped with a multitude of buildings, both for its defence and for the practical needs of residence and business. The fortification consisted of the moat, parapet wall and gateways, while the civil architecture had its residential buildings, business quarters (*āpaṇa*, III.3.119), intersected by streets (*saṁchara*, III.3.119), royal store-houses (ending in *agāra*, IV.4.70, as *koshṭhāgāra* and *bhāṇḍāgāra*), king's council-hall (*rājasabhā*) and a number of other buildings comprised under the general term *śālā*, e.g. places of dramatic performance (*prekshā*, IV.2.80), dancing, music, concerts and sports (*praharaṇa-krīḍā*), etc. Reference is also made to ferries (*nāvya*, IV.4.91).

c8.s10.18

*THE VILLAGE*—The villages were marked out by their natural boundaries, such as (1) forests (*vana*), (2) thickets (*kaṭhina*, IV.4.72), (3) rivulets, (4) hills (*giri*), (5) jungle (*jaṅgala*, VII.3.25) and *prastāra* (rocks, IV.4.72). The village proper consisted of houses, mostly peasant cottages (*kuṭīra*, V.3.88), covered with a roofing of reed and straw (*chhādisheya tṛiṇa*, V.1.13). An individual house (*kuṭī*, V.4.95) sheltering one family (*gārhapata*, VI.2.42) formed the unit of village-life. The entire settlement was called *vasati* (IV.4.104) and a multitude of villages by the name *grāmatā* (IV.2.43). The village depended for its watersupply on wells (*kūpa*, IV.2.73), to which were attached *nipānas* (III.3.74) or water troughs from which cattle would drink. Wells were cleaned by specially trained labourers who acted as dredgers called *udagāha* or *udakagāha* (VI.3.60).

c8.s10.19

The area surrounding the village settlement consisted of (1) arable land (*sītya*, IV.4.91), (2) pasture (*gochara*, III.3.119), (3) plantations of bamboo thickets (*vaṁśa-kaṭhina*, IV.4.72), and reeds like *śara* (VIII.4.5) and *muñja* (*Saccharum muñja*, III.1.117), (4) fruit-bearing trees (*phalegrahi*, III.2.

c8.s10.20

26), (5) reserves of herbs and plants (*aushadi-vanaspati vana*, VIII.4.6), (6) forests of timber as *śiṁśipā*, *śamī*, *plaksha* and mango (VIII.4.5), and (7) waste saline tracts or *ūshara* land (V.2.107).

c8.s10.21

Cultivated land was divided into a number of holdings (*kshetra*) which are specifically defined as plots where crops were grown (*dhānyānāṁ bhavane*, V.2.1). A systematic survey of agricultural land appears to have been undertaken by special officers called *kshetrakara* (III.2.21), who measured out each field and fixed its area (*kshetra-bhakti*) in terms of the *kāṇḍa* measure (IV.1.23); for example *dvikāṇḍā kshetra-bhaktiḥ*, a field having an area equal to two *kāṇḍa* measures. The estimated area of individual fields was further expressed in terms of the quantity of seed required for its sowing (*Tasya vāpaḥ*, V.1.45). The division of arable area into separate holdings (*kshetra*) shows that they were held under individual ownership. The term *kaidārya* (IV.2.40), 'a group of fields,' probably indicates some kind of consolidated holdings.

c8.s10.22

Pastures appear to have been held in common by the village for the grazing of its cattle (*grāmya-paśu-saṅgha*, I.2.73). The village also had its cattle ranches called *goshṭha* (V.2.18) or *vraja* (III.3.119). Settlements of cowherds (*gopāla*, VI. 2.78) were known as *ghosha* (VI.2.85).

c8.s10.23

The site of the ranches was subject to shifting owing to exigencies of fodder. According to Pāṇini: 'A place which had formerly been occupied by a *goshṭha* was called *gaushṭhīna*' (*Goshṭhāt khañ bhūtapūrve*, V.2.18). The entire village land was marked out, as today, for habitation, grazing, dumping of manure, and agriculture, the last three shifting after every twelve years. The plot for grazing was *goshṭha* when in use, and *gaushṭhīna* after it was abandoned.

c8.s10.24

The village land was distinct from a forest (*araṇya*), the abode of wild people (*āraṇyaka manushya*, IV.2.129) and wild animals (*āraṇya paśu*). The forests were also used for grazing of domestic animals (*grāmya-paśu-saṅgha*, I.2.73). When a particular range was denuded of its fodder supply, it was called *āśitaṅgavīna* (V.4.7), *i.e.*, 'the area where the cattle had eaten up all its fodder.' The herdsmen then moved the ranch to a different area which was called *goshpada deśa* (for the use of cattle, VI.1.145). In the same *sūtra* Pāṇini refers to forests not so used (*asevita*) by cattle (*agoshpada*, VI.1.145), as they were too dense and impenetrable (*mahāvana*, *Kāśikā*).

Linked texts (6)