Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

The History of Bengal (Vol. I: Hindu Period; Vol. II: Muslim Period 1200–1757) v1.c19: Chapter XVI. Economic Conditions

The History of Bengal (Vol. I: Hindu Period; Vol. II: Muslim Period 1200–1757) v1.c19

Language
English

Contents

Chapter XVI. Economic Conditions

I. Sources

v1.c19.s1.1

The materials available for the reconstruction of the economic history of Bengal in ancient times are extremely meagre. There are no such documents as the Domesday Book, the court rolls, the guild rolls, the pipe rolls and the craft ordnances and statutes, on which a student of the early economic history of England depends for his study. Yet it will be wrong to suggest that nothing like these ever existed in ancient Bengal. A large number of inscriptions, belonging to the Gupta and post-Gupta periods, reveal that during the 5th and 6th centuries A.D. there existed in this province a class of officers called *pustapālas* or record-keepers, who were attached both to the villages and district head-quarters, and whose obvious business was to maintain records of lands with their boundaries, demarcations and titles. It is a misfortune that not a fragment of these valuable records, written perhaps on palmyra-leaves, has come down to us. But this may not be the only loss that posterity has suffered. A careful study of the inscriptions of the Sena kings seems to suggest that by the beginning of the twelfth century A.D. Bengal had something like authoritative field-to-field, or cadastral, surveys and their accompanying record of holdings and rentals. There are reasons for believing that these surveys were not confined merely to lands and villages gifted away in pious endowments and thus rendered revenue-free, but extended to others from which the kings continued to derive the bulk of their revenue. What a wealth of materials we would have had to work upon, if the records of the *pustapālas* and the land-surveys of the Sena kings had been preserved! In their absence, all that we can do is to glean a few isolated facts concerning the economic condition of the people from such fragmentary sources of information as archaeology, occasional notices contained in literature, and the accounts of foreign travellers and historians.

II. Rural Settlements

v1.c19.s2.1

The most noteworthy fact concerning the economic life of ancient Bengal is the preponderance of rural settlements. From the commencement of the historical period, these seem to have always dominated the landscape of this province. The people established themselves in villages, and organised their lands—the fields, meadow and wood-lands—to serve their essential needs. A large number of these villages (grāmas) are mentioned in contemporary inscriptions, and although they varied considerably in size,¹ they seem to have been all alike in their close dependence on the utilization of the soil on which they stood. Broadly speaking, they appear also to have been of one uniform pattern. For, as far as available evidence indicates, they were usually of the ‘nucleated,’ not of the ‘single farm’ type. That is to say, the rural population lived in compact groups, and not in widely scattered habitations. Why it was so, it is difficult to say. It may be suggested, however, that the nucleated village is best adapted to an agrarian system in which cultivation prominently figures, whereas scattered settlements have their raison d'etre in an economic scheme where the emphasis is on pasture.

v1.c19.s2.2

¹ Cf. the areas of the villages in the Naihāṭi Plate of Vallālasena and the Govindapur and Tarpandighi Plates of Lakshmaṇasena (IB. 78, 97, 100). Particularly small villages appear to have borne the appellation of pāṭaka, from which perhaps the modern term pāḍā has been derived. Cf. the Mādhāinagar Plate of Lakshmaṇasena, which mentions two such pāṭakas, viz. Chaḍaspasā-pāṭaka and Guṇḍisthirā-pāṭaka (ibid. 115). Similarly the Madhyapāḍā Grant of Viśvarūpasena refers to Ajikulā-pāṭaka and Ghāghara-kāṭṭi-pāṭaka (ibid. 178-79)

v1.c19.s2.3

Inscriptions further reveal that the villages usually consisted of certain well defined parts, viz., village settlement or habitat (vāstu), arable land (kshetra), and natural meadow-land (go-chara), which provided pasture for live-stock. The expression trina-pūti-go-chara-paryantah, mentioned in most of the Pāla and Sena land-grants, suggests that the pasture-ground produced various kinds of grass, and was usually located in a corner of the village or along the village boundaries. Apart from these, most of the villages also contained pits and canals (garta and nāla), which might have served the purpose of drainage, barren tracts (ushara), tanks, reservoirs and temples, besides cattle-tracks (go-patha or go-mārga) and ordinary roads and paths. A few villages are also stated to have been in possession of woodlands or jungles,² where the common folk probably went to gather their fire-wood and litter. It is thus clear that the various types of land, attached to the village, were not only distinguished and classified from the point of view of their usefulness to man, but were organised for exploitation according to certain systems and customary practices so as best to satisfy human needs.

v1.c19.s2.4

² EI. II. 357; IB. 63 (sa-vana), 74, 87 (sa-jhāṭa-viṭapa).

III. Urban Settlements or Towns

v1.c19.s3.1

Although Bengal was primarily a land of villages, towns or urban settlements were by no means rare. Reference has already been made to a large number of these towns as known from epigraphic and literary evidence.¹ The factors which contributed to the growth of these towns were various. It is possible, for instance, to trace the growth of Puṇḍravardhana to three principal causes: first, it was a place of pilgrimage; secondly, it was the seat of a court or the capital of a province; and finally, it was advantageously situated along the main trade-route of North Bengal. Tāmralipti, again, seems to have owed its long-continued prosperity to its strategical location in relation to the contemporary routes of trade,² and the accessibility of a productive hinterland. It is not impossible that a few towns might have been primarily brought into being by administrative or political reasons; but contemporary evidence proves that they were often emporiums of trade besides being political centres. Further, an analysis of the sites and positions occupied by the ancient towns of Bengal shows that they were of such a geographical character that they could be utilised as ‘nodes’ or ‘centres of routes’ by land or by water.

v1.c19.s3.2

¹ Supra pp. 29 ff.

v1.c19.s3.3

² Hiuen Tsang, who visited this town, says that it lay near an inlet of the sea, “where land and water communications met” (Watters, II. 189-90).

v1.c19.s3.4

The chief features which distinguished urban from rural settlements seem to have been much the same in Bengal as elsewhere in the ancient or mediaeval world. Both literary and epigraphic evidences make it clear that whereas the rural population was mainly dependent on the soil and its produce, the towns, although not perhaps wholly divorced from agricultural activity, tended to serve some or all of a wide variety of functions, commercial, industrial, political, judicial and military. But in contemporary estimation the most distinctive characteristic of the towns was their comparative richness and luxury. The *Rāmacarita* (III. 31-32) refers to Rāmāvatī, founded by Rāmapāla, as “a city of rows of palaces” and as possessing “an immense mass of gems.” The *Rājatarangiṇī* (IV. 422) speaks of the “wealth of the citizens” of Puṇḍravardhana. The Deopārā inscription of Vijayasena draws pointed attention to the simplicity of the (village-dwelling) Brāhmaṇas in contradistinction to the luxury of the townsfolk. “Through the grace of Vijayasena,” runs the epigraph, “the Brāhmaṇas versed in the Vedas have become the possessors of so much wealth that their wives have to be trained by the wives of the townspeople (to recognise) pearls, pieces of emerald, silver coins,¹ jewels and gold from their similarity respectively with seeds of cotton, leaves of *śāka*, bottle-gourd flowers, the developed seeds of pomegranates and the blooming flowers of the creepers of pumpkin-gourd.”

v1.c19.s3.5

¹ The word here in the original in *rūpya*. N. G. Majumdar translates it as ‘silver coins’ (*IB*. 54). But as *rūpya* is contrasted with the white flower of bottle-gourd, I presume the author meant no coin, but plain silver.

IV. Land Tenures

v1.c19.s4.1

Land was the bed-rock of ancient Bengal’s political economy. It was the main source of wealth and the chief support of life. Even so, our knowledge of the system or systems of land-tenure, as they obtained in this province in ancient times, is extremely vague and incomplete. Most of the early copper-plate grants refer to the sale or gift of waste lands for pious purposes. The right of the state over these lands and the procedure by which they were sold or alienated to private individuals have been discussed in a preceding chapter.² It may be added here that the estates thus created either by sale or by gift were marked off from the neighbouring holdings. The copper-plate Grants often give us the details of these boundary-marks. Where, however, no natural boundary-marks existed, the new holdings were delimited by such artificial devices as chaff and charcoal (*chira-kāla-sthāyi-tush-aṅgār-ādīnāṁ chihnaiḥ*)³ or pegs (*kīlaka*) ‘bearing the impress of a string of lotus seeds’ (*kamal-āksha-māl-āṅkitā*).⁴ The holdings themselves were governed by a law described in contemporary documents as *nīvī-dharma* (Dāmodarpur Plate. No. 1),⁵ *akshaya-nīvī-dharma* (Baigrām and Pāhārpur Plates)⁶ or *apradā-dharma* (Dāmodarpur Plate, No. 5).⁷ It was a peculiar kind of tenure by which the purchaser, or the person or institution on whose behalf the land was transferred after purchase, obtained the right of perpetual enjoyment,⁸ but not of further alienation by sale or mortgage. In other words, the state, although it sold away plots of land out of the unappropriated waste, still reserved to itself certain rights over the property, and the purchaser or the donee was allowed only the usufructuary right over the land. Whether all holdings in the country were regulated by the law of *nīvi-dharma*, we have no means to ascertain; the probability, however, is that it applied only to estates created for pious purposes.¹ It is also not definitely known whether lands alienated by sale or gift under this form of tenure were rent-free, or “became liable,” as Dr. Ghoshal suggests, “to a progressive enhancement of the revenue till the normal rate was reached.”² There are good reasons to think, however, that immunity from taxation was one of the privileges enjoyed by the assignee in such cases. It is necessary to emphasise that the holdings under discussion were, without exception, created for pious purposes; and the age-old tradition of this country has been to regard pious endowments as rent-free.³ The Baigrām Plate definitely states that the alienation of three and a half *kulyavāpas* of fallow field (*khila-kshetra*) and homestead land (*vāstu*) was effected “in accordance with the principle of perpetual endowment (*akshaya-nīvi*) ... free from (the liability of payment of) any kind of taxes” (*a-kiñchit-pratikarāṇām*). The Nidhanpur Plate of Bhāskaravarman⁴ shows that rent-free pious endowments were not unknown in Bengal in the sixth and seventh centuries A.D. It further proves that the loss of the copper-plate, which registered such an endowment, involved the loss of this immunity from taxation, unless, of course, a fresh charter was granted renewing the privilege.

v1.c19.s4.2

² *Supra* pp. 266-71.

v1.c19.s4.3

³ Baigrām CP. (*EI*. XXI. 82).

v1.c19.s4.4

⁴ Mallasārul CP. (*EI*. XXIII. 160).

v1.c19.s4.5

⁵ *EI*. XV. 130.

v1.c19.s4.6

⁶ *Ibid*. XXI. 82; XX. 63.

v1.c19.s4.7

⁷ *Ibid*. XV. 143.

v1.c19.s4.8

⁸ This is clearly indicated by the expressions “*putra-pauttra-kramena*” and “*chandra-tār-ārkka-sthiti-kāla-sambhogyam*” used in the copper-plates of Gopachandra and Dharmāditya (*IA*. XXXIX. 204, 196).

v1.c19.s4.9

¹ That the law of *nīvi-dharma* applied not merely to estates created out of waste lands, but extended to pious grants of settled villages, is shown by the Vappaghoshavāṭa Grant of Jayanāga, which records how an entire village was given away by a Sāmanta to a Brāhmaṇa under the conditions of *akshaya-nīvi* (*EI.* XVIII. 63).

v1.c19.s4.10

² U. N. Ghoshal, *Agrarian System in Ancient India* (1930), p. 41.

v1.c19.s4.11

³ Cf. *Kauṭilīya Arthaśāstra*—Bk. II, Ch. 1; *Yājñavalkya Smṛti*, I. 318.

v1.c19.s4.12

⁴ *Kam. Sas.* 17.

v1.c19.s4.13

Inscriptions ranging from the eighth to the twelfth century, and belonging to Pāla, Sena, and other contemporary dynasties, introduce us to pious endowments of a somewhat different character. These were, with rare exceptions, made by kings in favour of temples and religious foundations, of individuals like priests and learned Brāhmaṇas, and sometimes of institutions and persons combined. The conditions and immunities attaching to these grants are found enumerated in the copper-plate charters which registered them. For instance, the Khālimpur Plate of Dharmapāla, the earliest of these charters, records the grant of four villages ‘with the (immunity from) penalties for the ten offences’ (*sa-daśāpachārāḥ*), ‘with the immunity from all burdens’ (*parihṛita-sarva-pīḍāḥ*)¹, ‘with the immunity from all taxes’ (*akiñchit-pragrāhyāḥ*), ‘according to the maxim of the uncultivable land’ (*bhūmi-chchhidra-nyāyena*), and ‘to last as long as the sun, moon and earth shall endure’ (*ā-chandr-ārka-kṣiti-sama-kālam*). In addition, the donee was to receive all those taxes in kind and in cash which the cultivators in the alienated villages had hitherto paid to the sovereign.² In some of the subsequent grants this list of immunities and privileges is further supplemented by the addition of other concessions such as ‘the rent of temporary tenants’ (*? s-oparikaraḥ*) and ‘the prohibition of entrance by regular and irregular troops’ (*a-chāṭa-bhaṭa-praveśaḥ*; infra p. 648).

v1.c19.s4.14

¹ I have followed Dr. U. N. Ghoshal's translation of these technical terms. See Ghoshal, *Hindu Revenue System* (1929), pp. 244-46.

v1.c19.s4.15

² *Cf. supra* pp. 277-78.

v1.c19.s4.16

It is obvious that these were grants in perpetuity, rent-free, and accompanied with the assignment of all revenues (*pratyāyaḥ*) accruing to the crown. What is not obvious, however, is whether they made over to the donee merely the state-share of the produce and other state-rights in the land alienated, or conveyed to him the proprietorship of the land as well, that is, an out and out gift of soil and revenue both.³ If the latter was the case, it would involve either of the two assumptions — that the king was regarded as the ultimate owner of the soil or that he made the grants out of what may be called the royal demesne. It is probable, however, that the bulk of these grants transferred to the grantees merely the right to receive the royal share of the produce; they were not intended to deprive any existing land-holder of his right; in other words, they did not convey a title to the land itself. Sometimes the land donated already belonged by right of purchase to the donee, for whose support revenue charges were remitted. In such cases, the land became what may be described as “free-hold.”⁴

v1.c19.s4.17

³ That some of the grants belonged to this category may be inferred from the statement in the Edilpur Plate of Keśavasena that the grantee was to enjoy the land “having (thereon) erected temples, excavated tanks and so on, and planted betelnut, cocoanut and other trees” (*IB. 130*). The same clause occurs in the Madhyapāḍā Plate of Viśvarūpasena (*IB. 147*), but in this instance a portion of the land donated had been previously purchased by the donee.

v1.c19.s4.18

⁴ Two instances of this kind are mentioned in the Madhyapāḍā Plate of Viśvarūpasena (*IB. 140 ff.*).

v1.c19.s4.19

It should be noted that these beneficial tenures, called *śāsanas* and *agrahāras* in contemporary documents, never covered more than a fraction of the agricultural land; they did not touch the mass of the cultivators in the country. What rights the bulk of the cultivators possessed in the soil they tilled we do not know. That some of them, at any rate, were non-proprietary or exproprietary tenants may be inferred from the copper-plate charters.¹ That all or most of them had to pay various kinds of taxes and local cesses is also certain. But besides the payment of taxes and cesses, the holding of land seems to have entailed various other obligations. This is shown by the express provision in the land-grants exempting religious endowments from certain burdens, enumerated in general terms as *sarva-pīḍā.* What these consisted of is nowhere clearly explained, but specific mention is made of the right of entry of *cāṭa* and *bhaṭa.* The latter seems to refer to certain services which the cultivators had occasionally to render to an army such as provision of quarters and supply of provisions or labour. The exact purport of the other term is not known, but it was evidently of the same nature and might have included the provision of food on the occasion of a king or high official visiting the locality and 'milk-money' *i.e.* the perquisite paid on the occasion of the birth of a prince, marriage of a princess, *etc.* These were not regular taxes, but customary dues paid on specific occasions. On the other hand, the land-grants indicate that the possession of land carried with it certain inherent privileges. These included the right to everything under the ground and above it, such as mines, salt, wood, bush and trees including fruits. The right may have extended to the use of adjoining water, *i.e.* tanks or rivers and fishing therein.

v1.c19.s4.20

¹ For instance, the Ashrafpur Plate of Devakhadga (*supra* pp. 86 ff.) mentions a pāṭaka of land which was 'enjoyed by Śarvāntara but cultivated by Mahattara Śikhara and others' (MASB. I. 88, 90).

V. Agriculture

v1.c19.s5.1

The beginnings of agriculture in Bengal, as in the rest of India, have to be traced back to the pre-historic past (*supra* p. 562). Even so, it seems very probable that in the initial stage both settlement and agriculture followed the courses of the great river-systems of the province, which acted as powerful fertilising agents of the soil in their neighbourhood. With the growth of population, however, (owing partly perhaps to an increase in birth-rate, partly to immigration) there came about a steady increase in the cultivated area. One can discern indications of this extension of cultivation in the copper-plate inscriptions of the fifth, sixth and seventh centuries. As stated above (p. 265), most of these interesting documents (*supra* pp. 49, 51) relate to the purchase of land. Curiously enough, however, the character of the land purchased is, in most cases, described as *aprada*, *aprahata* and *khila* (unsettled, uncultivated and fallow). One particular plate (Gunaighar Grant of Vainyagupta)¹ describes five plots of land donated to a Buddhist monastery as *śūnya-pratikara-hajjika-khila-bhūmi* (water-logged, waste land, paying no requital or tax). Another (Tippera Plate) records how a community of Brāhmaṇas were settled and given lands for cultivation within a forest region, “where deer, buffaloes, boars, tigers, serpents, etc., enjoy, according to their will, all pleasures of home life.”² These instances suggest the inference that the three centuries, to which these inscriptions relate, witnessed a steady extension of cultivation and rural settlement. It is possible, though we have no positive evidence to prove it, that this movement of agricultural extension commenced much earlier, and continued with intermittent force and varying effect from century to century, and from region to region. The pressure of a growing population, the growing desire of priests for material prosperity, and the religious zeal of kings, — all served in various ways to organise a widespread attack on some of the ‘negative’ lands of the province, which settlement and agriculture had at first avoided.

v1.c19.s5.2

¹ *IHQ.* VI. 56, 59-60.

v1.c19.s5.3

² *EI.* XV. 307, 311.

v1.c19.s5.4

But whatever might have been the cause of this extension of cultivation, there is no doubt that by the seventh century A.D. the bulk of the people had taken to it as the chief means of livelihood. The Chinese pilgrim Hiuen Tsang bears testimony to the fact that in all parts of the province the countryside was regularly and assiduously cultivated, and produced grains, flowers and fruits in abundance.³ The description of Varendrī in the *Rāmacharita* (III. 2 ff) confirms the testimony of the Chinese pilgrim. And so do the copper-plate inscriptions ranging from the 8th to the 13th century, which, moreover, mention the cultivators (*kshetra-karāḥ* or *karshakāḥ*) as an important class apart from the officials, Brāhmaṇas and others, and in various ways convey an idea of the important rôle they played in the economic life of the community.

v1.c19.s5.5

³ *Beal-Records.* II. 191, 194, 199, 200-201.

v1.c19.s5.6

Concerning agricultural practice as it obtained in ancient Bengal, it is not possible to draw any comprehensive picture. It seems certain, however, that paddy (*dhānya*) was cultivated from a remote antiquity as the staple food-crop of the people. The Mahāsthān Brāhmī inscription probably refers to a rice granary located at Puḍanagala (*Puṇḍranagara*).⁴ The *Rāmacharita* (III. 17) mentions “paddy plants of various kinds” grown in Varendrī. The inscriptions of the Sena kings mention “smooth fields growing excellent paddy,”¹ and “myriads of villages, consisting of land growing paddy in excessive quantities.”² Kālidāsa’s *Raghuvamśa* (iv. 37) affords us a glimpse into the method of rice cultivation. Describing Raghu’s conquest of the Vangas, the poet remarks that Raghu uprooted and replanted them (*utkhāta-pratiropita*) like rice plants. Rice, as is well known, is sown in three different ways—broadcast, by drill, and by transplantation from a seed-bed where it has been broadcast sown. Of these the third method is, as a rule, the least risky and the most profitable. That it was known and practised in this province at least as early as the fifth century A.D. seems clear from the aforesaid statement of the great Sanskrit poet. The different processes of reaping and threshing also appear to have been similar to those prevailing at present.³

v1.c19.s5.7

⁴ For different interpretations, *cf.* *EI.* XXI. 83 ff; *IHQ.* X. 57 ff.

v1.c19.s5.8

¹ IB. 129.

v1.c19.s5.9

² Ibid. 89-90.

v1.c19.s5.10

³ RC. (Kavi-praśasti, v. 13) refers to the threshing floor where the reaped crops were spread out and threshed by means of bullocks which went round and round over them.

v1.c19.s5.11

Another food-crop cultivated was probably sugar-cane. The classical author, Aelian, speaks of a kind of honey expressed from reeds which grew among the Prasioi. Lucan says that the Indians near the Ganges used to quaff sweet juices from tender reeds.⁴ Suśruta (45, 138-40) mentions a variety of sugar-cane called *pauṇḍraka*; and most commentators of Sanskrit lexicons agree that it was so named because it was grown in the Pauṇḍra country (North Bengal). These statements, taken together, naturally suggest the inference that certain species of sugar-cane were cultivated in Bengal from very early times. It is not improbable, as a recent writer has pointed out, that from the term *pauṇḍraka* have been derived such modern vernacular names as *pauṇḍiā*, *pauṇḍā*, *puṇḍi*, etc.—a celebrated variety of sugar-cane cultivated in almost all parts of India.⁵

v1.c19.s5.12

⁴ McCrindle, Ancient India, p. 122, f.n. 3.

v1.c19.s5.13

⁵ JBORS. iv. 437. The Rāmacarita (iii. 17) also seems to refer to the cultivation of “sugar-cane plants” in Varendrī.

v1.c19.s5.14

Besides the above, contemporary records mention a variety of other crops grown in different parts of Bengal. These include malabathrum and spikenard, mentioned in the *Periplus of the Erythraean Sea* among the exports of this province.⁶ These were obviously of an excellent quality, and were grown on an extensive scale in the Eastern Himalayas. Another cultivated crop appears to have been mustard. The Vappaghoshavāṭa Grant of Jayanāga (7th century A.D.) mentions the existence of a *sarshapa-yānaka* (mustard-channel) in the Audambarika-*vishaya* of Karṇasuvarṇa.¹ Further, epigraphic records, ranging from the eighth to the thirteenth century, tell us that betel-nut palm (*guvāka*) and cocoanut (*nārikela*) were extensively grown up and down the land.² Betel-vines were also cultivated in the form of plantations (*barajas*) and formed, under the Sena kings, a source of revenue to the state.³ Cotton was also cultivated to feed an important industry of the province.⁴ Fruits like mango (*āmra*), bread-fruit (*panasa*), pomegranate (*dālimva*), plantain, *bassia latifolia* (*madhūka*), date (*kharjura*), citron (*vīja*) and figs (*parkaṭi*) were also widely cultivated.⁵

v1.c19.s5.15

⁶ Schoff, Periplus. p. 47.

v1.c19.s5.16

¹ For references cf. *supra* p. 80 f.n. 1.

v1.c19.s5.17

² The Ashrafpur Grant of Devakhaḍga (*supra* pp. 86 ff.) specifically states that the donee should enjoy the donated land by the cultivation of betel-nut palms and cocoanuts (*MASB.* I. 90). The *Rāmacarita* (III. 19) refers to Varendrī as "the congenial soil for cocoanut trees in the world."

v1.c19.s5.18

³ *IB.* 141, 178, 180, *etc.*

v1.c19.s5.19

⁴ Kautilya (Bk. II. Ch. 11) mentions *kārpāsika* or cotton fabrics manufactured in Vaṅga. According to the inscription of Vijayasena (v. 23), ordinary rural folk were familiar with seeds of cotton. The early *Charyā-padas* also refer to cotton cultivation (*BGD.* 41). Referring to the people of Bengal, Marco Polo says, "They grow cotton, in which they derive a great trade" (Yule, *Marco Polo*, II. 115).

v1.c19.s5.20

⁵ The cultivation of mango and bread-fruit is mentioned in a large number of Pāla and Sena inscriptions. Hiuen Tsang refers to the abundant growth of *panasa* in Puṇḍravardhana and gives a detailed account of this fruit which was 'highly esteemed' (*Beal-Records*, II. 194). The Govindapur Plate refers to an "orchard of pomegranates" (*dālimva-kshetra*) (*IB.* 97). The plantain tree is frequently depicted in the Pāhārpur terra-cotta plaques (Paharpur. 70). It also occurs among the sculptures, for instance, in the Chaṇḍi images of the Rajshahi Museum (*supra* p. 451). *Vīja* (citron) and *kharjura* (date) are mentioned in the Khālimpur Plate of Dharmapāla, *parkaṭi* (fig) in the Koṭālipāḍā Plate of Dharmāditya, and *bassia latifolia* (*madhūka*) in the Rāmgañj Plate of Īśvaraghosha (*IB.* 154, 156), and probably also in the *Rāmacarita* (III. 21).

VI. Measures of Land

v1.c19.s6.1

We have no knowledge regarding the measures of land as used in Bengal earlier than the 5th century A.D. The land-grants of the Gupta period usually mention two technical terms, viz. *kulyavāpa* and *droṇavāpa* in connection with land measurement; but in the absence of adequate data, their equivalents in modern measures cannot be determined.⁶ A *kulyavāpa* is usually taken to mean an area of land which could be sown with a *kulya* measure of seed;

v1.c19.s6.2

⁶ For a full discussion of this point cf. *Bhāratavarsha*, 1349-1350 B.S. Part I pp. 263 ff., 384.

v1.c19.s6.3

while a *droṇavāpa*, according to various ancient lexicons, was equivalent to one-eighth of a *kulyavāpa* in area. This equation of 1:8 between a *kulyavāpa* and *droṇavāpa* is confirmed by the Pāhārpur Plate, according to which four plots of land measuring respectively 4, 4, 2½ and 1½ (=12) *droṇavāpas* corresponded to an area measuring 1½ *kulyavāpas*.

v1.c19.s6.4

The actual work of measurement during the Gupta period was done by means of *nalas* (reeds). In some of the Gupta copper-plates, however, the term *nala* is qualified by the figures 8 and 9 (*aṣṭaka-navaka-nalena* or *aṣṭaka-navaka-nalābhyām*. Kotālipāḍā-Plates and Baigrām Plate). Mr. F. E. Pargiter has taken the view that these figures relate to the number of reeds used in measuring the breadth and length respectively of a *kulyavāpa*, and on the basis of this supposition has calculated the area of a *kulyavāpa* as “a little larger than an acre.”¹ But two considerations seem to militate against this hypothesis: The Pāhārpur Plate, instead of giving two different figures (8 and 9), mentions only one figure, *viz.* 6 (*ṣaṭka-naḍair-apaviñchchhya*). This can only mean that in measuring the land alienated by this particular deed a *nala* measuring six cubits was used. Secondly, in some of the inscriptions where the figures 8 and 9 are given, we get the additional information that the *nala* used was measured by the hand of a particular individual (*e.g.* *Darvvīkarma-hastena*, Baigrām Plate; *Śivachandra-hastena*, Kotālipāḍā Plates). These facts seem to lead to two conclusions—first, that the figures 6, 8 and 9 “stood for the corresponding numbers of cubits representing the measurements” of the *nalas*; and second, that *nalas* of different measurements in cubits were used in different regions of the province. The simultaneous mention of the two figures 8 and 9 in the Faridpur and Baigrām Plates is not easy to explain. It is probable, however, that two different *nalas* were employed, one for measuring the length and the other for measuring the width, of the area disposed of.² Mr. Pargiter’s view about the area of a *kulyavāpa* cannot, therefore, be accepted.³

v1.c19.s6.5

¹ IA. 1910, pp. 214-16. Dr. R. G. Basak also interprets the expression *aṣṭaka-navaka* in the same way as Pargiter (Cf. AJV. II. 494).

v1.c19.s6.6

² IC. VI. 176.

v1.c19.s6.7

³ *Kulyavāpa* seems to be equivalent to several acres. According to some, *kulyavāpa* still survives in the modified form *kulyavāya* in Cachar district, and as the latter is equivalent to 14 *bighās*, the same must also be the area of the former (*Bhāratavarsha*, 1349. Part I, p. 384). But this is hardly convincing.

v1.c19.s6.8

As time passed, the word *kulyavāpa* fell out of use, and other technical terms of land-measure gradually came into vogue. Of these the one denoting the largest unit of measure was the term pāṭaka or bhū-pāṭaka, which is frequently mentioned in the inscriptions of the Khaḍga, Chandra, Varman and Sena kings. Its earliest mention, however, occurs in the Gunaighar Grant of Vainyagupta (dated 507 A.D.). The same plate also contains conclusive evidence to prove that a pāṭaka was equivalent to forty droṇas or droṇavāpas in area. Assuming that a droṇa of the early sixth century (Gunaighar Plate) was the same as the droṇa of the fifth (Baigrām and Pāhārpur Plates), one must conclude that the pāṭaka was five times as big as the kulyavāpa. Besides pāṭaka and droṇa, other terms used in post-Gupta records to indicate measurement of land, are āḍhaka or āḍhavāpa, unmāna or udāna, kāka or kākinika, all these being inter-linked by an unknown equation.¹

v1.c19.s6.9

¹ The only information we get in contemporary inscriptions is that 12 angulas (digits) were equivalent to 1 cubit, and 32 cubits were equivalent to 1 unmāna (Sundarban Plate of Lakshmaṇasena). The relationship of unmāna with āḍhaka is not clear, but most ancient texts agree that 4 āḍhakas or āḍhavāpas were equivalent to 1 droṇa [Cf. L. D. Barnett, Antiquities of India, p. 208; Kautilya's Arthaśāstra, tr. by R. Shamasastri (1923), p. 126], and this is supported by the Pāhārpur Plate, where 2½ droṇavāpas (l. 9) are again referred to as 2 droṇavāpas and 2 āḍhavāpas (l. 15).

v1.c19.s6.10

As in the earlier Gupta, so in the later Sena period, the actual work of measurement was done by means of nalas or reeds, varying in length from region to region. The land-grants of Sena kings reveal that there were at least four varieties of nalas in use within their kingdom. These were the Samaṭaṭīya-nala, which was used as a standard of land-measure not merely in Samaṭaṭa but also in the Khāḍī-vishaya of the Puṇḍravardhana-bhukti (Barrackpur Plate of Vijayasena); the vṛishabha-śaṅkara-nala, probably introduced by king Vijayasena (vṛishabha-śaṅkara being one of his appellations), and employed to measure land in Uttara-Rāḍhā of the Vardhamāna-bhukti (Naihāṭi Plate of Vallālasena) and Vyāghraṭaṭī situated within Puṇḍravardhana-bhukti (Ānuliā Plate of Lakshmaṇasena); the nala current in Varendrī (tatratya-deśa-vyavahāra-nalena, Tarpandighi Plate of Lakshmaṇasena); and lastly the nala of 56 cubits said to have been in vogue at Vetaḍḍa-chaturaka in Paśchima-khāṭikā belonging to the Vardhamāna-bhukti (Govindapur Plate of Lakshmaṇasena).²

v1.c19.s6.11

² The Bhowal cp. of Lakshmaṇasena seems to refer to the use of a nala measuring 22 hastas (cubits) in the north-eastern parts of Dacca district (El. xxvi. 13).

v1.c19.s6.12

Besides the above, a few other technical names of land-measure are available from later land records such as bhū-khāḍī, khāḍikā.³ hala, droṇa,¹ bhū-hala, kedāra or bhū-kedāra.² Neither the equation between bhū-khāḍī and khāḍikā, nor that between hala and droṇa is, however, known. But in some districts of Eastern Bengal (e.g. Sylhet) hala and kedāra are still used as units of land-measure, and the relation between the two is 12 kedāras=1 hala. In all probability a hala originally meant the extent of land that could be turned with a plough. According to Buchanan, “the usual extent which can be cultivated by one plough is 10 large bighās, or 15 Calcutta bighās, or 5 acres.”³ In the district of Sylhet, however, a hala or hāla corresponds to about 10½ bighās, or about 3½ acres.⁴

v1.c19.s6.13

³ Cf. Mādhāinagar Plate of Lakshmaṇasena (IB. 112).

v1.c19.s6.14

¹ Cf. Dhullā Plate of Śrīchandra (IB. 166).

v1.c19.s6.15

² Cf. Bhāṭerā Plate of Govindakeśava (EI. XIX. 285). The word vāṭī in this inscription, taken to mean ‘house,’ probably also denotes a measure of land.

v1.c19.s6.16

³ Buchanan, Dinājpur (1832), p. 234.

v1.c19.s6.17

⁴ EI. XIX. 279.

v1.c19.s6.18

Here we may notice a significant fact about some of the units of land-measure mentioned above. As already suggested, the term hala or hāla originally meant an area of land which could be cultivated by one plough. It has also been suggested that the term kulyavāpa originally signified an extent of land which could be sown with seeds contained in a kulya (winnowing basket). Other terms such as droṇavāpa (or its shorter form, droṇa) and āḍhavāpa (or āḍhaka) may be etymologically explained along similar lines. These terms of land-measure, therefore, seem to originate from the practical methods used in cultivation, and bear witness to the important fact that the rural economy of ancient Bengal was essentially agricultural, not pastoral.

VII. Crafts and Industries

v1.c19.s7.1

Although agriculture formed the predominant feature of Bengal’s economy, a number of crafts and industries were developed at a very early age and played important parts in the life of the people. The most noteworthy among these seem to have been textiles, sugar, metal-work, stone-work, wood-work and pottery.

v1.c19.s7.2

The history of textile manufacture in Bengal goes back to the remotest antiquity. At the time when the Arthaśāstra of Kauṭilya was composed, it was already a well-established industry with a wide reputation in the country.⁵ The author mentions four varieties of textile commodities which were produced in Bengal in his time, viz. kshauma, dukūla, patrorṇa and kārpāsika. Kshauma¹ was linen, but of a coarse variety, being mixed with cotton. Its chief seats of manufacture were Puṇḍravardhana (North Bengal) and Benares. A pure and finer form of linen was called dukūla. It was of three varieties; the first, produced in Lower Bengal (Vaṅgaka), was white and soft; the second, produced in North Bengal (Pauṇḍraka), was black and “as soft as the surface of a gem;” while the third, manufactured at Suvarṇakuḍya in Kāmarūpa, had the “colour of rising sun.” Patrorṇa appears to have been wild silk. Amara (II. vi, 3, 14) defines it as “a bleached or white kausheya,” while the commentator says that it was a fibre produced by the saliva of a worm on the leaves of certain trees. According to Kauṭilya, nāga tree, likucha (artocarpus lakoocha), vakula (mimusops elengi) and vaṭa (ficus bengalensis) were the sources of these fibres. The author adds that patrorṇa was produced in three regions, viz. Magadha, Puṇḍra and Suvarṇakuḍya. It is significant that wild silk of the best quality is still produced in these districts. Kārpāsika obviously meant cotton fabrics. These were manufactured in various parts of India, but Vaṅga and six other regions, as Kauṭilya affirms, produced the best variety.

v1.c19.s7.3

⁵ Arthaśāstra, Bk. II. Ch. XI.

v1.c19.s7.4

¹ Kshīrasvāmin, commenting on Amara-kośa (II. 6. 113), explains kshauma as made of the fibre of kshuma. This is explained as Atasī both in Amara-kośa (II. 9. 20) and the commentary on Manu (II. 41) by Nandana. Atasī (or Atasī) is a synonym for common flax, hemp, linseed etc.

v1.c19.s7.5

It is thus evident that as early as the time of Kauṭilya Bengal had attained to great eminence as a seat of textile manufacture. The records of the succeeding ages tend to show that she retained this eminence down almost to the beginning of the nineteenth century. It may be noted that the Periplus of the Erythraean Sea, written in the first century A.D., includes “muslins of the finest sorts” among the exports of Bengal.² Referring to Ruhmī (which Elliot identifies with Bengal),³ the Arab merchant Sulaiman wrote in the ninth century A.D. that there was “a stuff made in this country which is not to be found elsewhere; so fine and delicate is this material that a dress made of it may be passed through a signet-ring.” Sulaiman adds that it was made of cotton, and that he was not speaking from hearsay, but had himself seen a piece of it.⁴ Marco Polo, who visited India in the thirteenth century, states that in his time Bengal still plied a lucrative trade in cotton goods.⁵ In the fifteenth century Ma Huan, the Chinese traveller, witnessed five or six varieties of textile goods being manufactured in this province.¹

v1.c19.s7.6

² Schoff, Periplus. p. 47.

v1.c19.s7.7

³ E & D. I. 361.

v1.c19.s7.8

⁴ Ibid. I. 5. Another Arab writer, Ibn Khurdadba (10th century A.D.) says that the country produced “cotton cloths and aloe wood” (ibid. I. 14).

v1.c19.s7.9

⁵ Yule, Marco Polo, II. 115. Marco Polo mentions cotton, but obviously he meant cotton goods.

v1.c19.s7.10

¹ *JRAS.* 1895, pp. 531-32.

v1.c19.s7.11

Another industry which seems to have made considerable headway in our period was sugar. We have already (*supra* p. 650) cited evidence to show that Bengal was probably one of the earliest homes of sugar-cane cultivation. Suśruta mentions that the *pauṇḍraka* canes (which grew in the Pauṇḍra country) were noted for the large quantity of sugar which they yielded. In the thirteenth century Marco Polo noticed that sugar was one of the important commodities of export from Bengal.² Early in the sixteenth century the Portuguese traveller, Barbosa, found Bengal competing with South India in the supply of sugar to different parts of India, Ceylon, Arabia and Persia.³

v1.c19.s7.12

² Yule, *Marco Polo*, II. 115.

v1.c19.s7.13

³ The book of Duarte Barbosa (Hakluyt Society, London), II. 112, 146.

v1.c19.s7.14

The manufacture of salt by means of evaporation either from infiltrated sea-water or from subsoil brine was also probably known and practised in certain areas. The Irdā Plate (*supra* p. 133) of the tenth century A.D. records the grant of a village in the Daṇḍabhukti-*maṇḍala* (*supra* p. 27) of the Vardhamāna-*bhukti*, along with its salt pits (*lavaṇākaraḥ*).⁴ Similarly, the Rāmapāl Plate of Śrīcandra⁵ (eleventh century A.D.) and the Belāva Plate of Bhojavarman⁶ (twelfth century A.D.) mention the grant of villages, located in the Pauṇḍra-*bhukti*, “along with salt” (*sa-lavaṇaḥ*). On the other hand, it should be noted that salt is not mentioned in any of the land-grants of the Pāla and Sena kings. It is, therefore, permissible to infer that although the manufacture of salt was known and practised in certain places, at any rate from the tenth century onwards, it had not developed into any considerable industry. The dampness of the climate and the large amount of fresh water discharged into the sea by the Ganges and the Brahmaputra might have hampered the growth of any large-scale salt manufacture.

v1.c19.s7.15

⁴ *EI.* XXII. 155, 158.

v1.c19.s7.16

⁵ *IB.* 5.

v1.c19.s7.17

⁶ *Ibid.* 21.

v1.c19.s7.18

Among other crafts, pottery appears to have been practised on an extensive scale. A large number of specimens of the pottery used by the monks of Pāhārpur, and dating back probably to the eighth or ninth century A.D., have been recovered in recent years. These include large storage jars, spotted vases or *loṭās*, cooking utensils, dishes, saucers, inkpots and lamps of various designs. The potter's art is also exemplified by the immense variety of terracotta plaques discovered at Mahāsthān (Bogra), Sābhār (Dacca), Pāhārpur and other places. Some contemporary inscriptions refer to potters (*kumbhakāra*)¹ and potter's ditch (*kumbhakāra-garta*)²; and the context in which these are mentioned seems to show that pottery as an industry was conducted from rural settlements for the most part.

v1.c19.s7.19

¹ Kamauli cp. (GL. 135).

v1.c19.s7.20

² Nidhanpur cp. (Kam. Sas. 26).

v1.c19.s7.21

Along with pottery, metal-work of various kinds must have been known from very early times. No settled agricultural community could get on without blacksmiths, whose services were required in the manufacture and repair of agricultural implements; and contemporary evidence proves that apart from agricultural implements, the blacksmiths manufactured other articles of general use like water-vessels of iron,³ and weapons of war such as arrow-heads, spear-heads and swords.⁴ Besides working in iron, the metal-workers practised the art of bronze-casting with considerable skill. This is shown by the discovery in different parts of Bengal of a large number of bronze or octo-alloy images, dating from the Gupta period onwards (*cf.* Chs. XIII, XIV). Jewellery, too, provided occupation to a considerable group of metal-workers, for it was the fashion of the rich to use gold and silver dishes and ornaments made of pearls and precious stones and metals (*supra* pp. 613, 618) for personal adornment. The Deopārā inscription of Vijayasena mentions “flowers made of precious stones, necklaces, ear-rings, anklets, garlands and golden bracelets,” worn by the wives of the king’s servants.⁵ The same epigraph speaks of temple girls “the charms of whose body were enhanced by (the wearing of) jewellery.”⁶ The Naihāṭi Plate of Vallālasena refers to necklaces of pearls worn by ladies of royal blood.⁷ The *Rāmacarita* (III. 33-34) mentions “jewelled anklet-bells,” “charming ornaments set with diamonds, lapis lazuli, pearls, emeralds, rubies and sapphires,” and “necklaces with central gems and pure pearls of round and big shape.” The *Tabaqāt-i-Nāsirī* casually alludes to the use of “golden and silver dishes” in the place of Lakshmaṇasena.⁸

v1.c19.s7.22

³ The Edilpur Plate of Keśavasena mentions “water-vessels of iron” (IB. 128).

v1.c19.s7.23

⁴ Some arrow-heads and spear-heads have been discovered at Pāhārpur The Agni Purāṇa (245. 21 ff.) refers to Aṅga and Vaṅga as important centres of sword-manufacture. The swords manufactured in Vaṅga, we are assured, “were characterised both by keenness and their power of standing blows” (*Cf.* P C. Chakravarti, The Art of War in Ancient India, pp. 163-64).

v1.c19.s7.24

⁵ IB. 52.

v1.c19.s7.25

⁶ Ibid. 55.

v1.c19.s7.26

⁷ Ibid. 77.

v1.c19.s7.27

⁸ E & D. II. 309. The Periplus of the Erythraean Sea mentions the existence of a gold mine near the mouth of the Ganges (*supra* p. 45).

v1.c19.s7.28

Two other categories of craftsmen were the workers in stone and wood. The numerous pre-Muhammadan stone images discovered in Bengal (cf. Chs. XIII, XIV) and the beautifully engraved inscriptions on stone slabs bear eloquent testimony both to the volume and skill of the stone-carvers' profession. It has been suggested that the black chlorite stone, out of which most of these images were carved, was probably obtained from the Rajmahal Hills and carried in boats to the different centres of the sculptor's art in the province.¹ Incidentally, this throws light on an important article of internal trade. Alongside stone-carving, wood-carving and carpentry also appear to have been practised on an extensive scale, although owing to the perishable nature of wood only a few architectural specimens of wood-carving of the pre-Muhammadan period have come down to us (supra p. 515). It seems evident, however, that the wood-workers built houses and temples and also manufactured house-hold furniture,² boats, ships, and wheeled carriages (supra pp. 615-16).

v1.c19.s7.29

¹ Bhatt.-Cat. xviii.

v1.c19.s7.30

² Ibid. pp. xxxv-xxxvi. Cf. also supra p. 615.

v1.c19.s7.31

Another important industry was ivory-carving. The Bhāṭerā Plate of Govinda-Keśava mentions an ivory-worker (dantakāra) by name,³ while the Edilpur Plate of Keśavasena refers to “palanquins supported by staffs made of elephant’s tusk.”⁴ Among minor arts, crafts, professions and industries may be mentioned those of scribes, florists, garland-makers, conchshell-workers, braziers, goldsmiths, painters, masons, oilmen, fishermen, washermen, barbers, butchers, distillers of wine etc. who formed so many distinct castes (cf. Ch. xv). As regards fishery, we get additional evidence from the land-grants, some of which refer to the right of fishing as included in the grant.⁵

v1.c19.s7.32

³ EI. XIX, 286.

v1.c19.s7.33

⁴ IB. 127.

v1.c19.s7.34

⁵ Pāla Ins. No. 6.

v1.c19.s7.35

Concerning the nature and organisation of industrial labour, we hardly know anything definite. There are certain statements, however, occurring here and there in the inscriptions, which suggest the inference that the workers in various trades and industries were organised in some kind of corporate groups. Reference has already been made (supra p. 266) to the trade and craft-guilds in Bengal in the fifth and sixth centuries A.D., and the important position occupied by the nagara-śreṣṭhī (guild-president), prathama-sārthavāha (chief merchant) and prathama-kulika (the chief artisan) in the local administration. Similarly, the Deopārā inscription of Vijayasena refers to Rāṇaka Śūlapāṇi, who engraved the stone, as Vārendra-śilpi-goṣṭhī-cūḍāmaṇi (“crest-jewel of the guild of Vārendra artists”). The exact meaning of goṣṭhī may be a matter of doubt,¹ but the possibility of its connoting a guild can never be altogether ruled out.

v1.c19.s7.36

¹ *IB.* 45-46.

VIII. Trade—Inland and Foreign

v1.c19.s8.1

The high antiquity of Bengal's inland and foreign trade is proved by the Jātaka stories, the accounts of Strabo and Pliny, and the *Periplus of the Erythraean Sea*. Two factors seem to have promoted this early growth of commerce,—first, the qualitative and quantitative development of Bengal's industries, and secondly, the unrivalled facilities for movement afforded by the sea-coast and river-systems of the province.

1. Internal Trade

v1.c19.s8.t1.1

Oddly enough, we know much less about the inland commerce of ancient Bengal than about her foreign trade. The reason for this is that inscriptions, which form the most important source of our information concerning the early economic life of the people, do not, and cannot by their nature be expected to, deal with internal traffic. Nor do foreign travellers and historians help us in the matter, for their chief interest lay in the foreign trade of the province.² Yet the early development of a considerable foreign trade, to which reference will be made later, presupposes the existence of a certain amount of internal commerce. Occasional reference in later inscriptions also confirm this view. The mention of *haṭṭa-pati* (supra p. 282), *śaulkika* (p. 278) and *tarika* (p. 278) (officers in charge of markets, customs, tolls and ferries) in the land-grants indirectly testifies to the brisk nature of internal trade, and shows that the state derived from it a considerable revenue. The principal centres of inland trade were obviously the towns. The Koṭālipāḍā Plates (supra p. 51) bear witness to the fact that Navyāvakāśikā was a rendezvous of merchants and businessmen.³ The Dāmodarpur Plates (*supra* p. 49) tell the same tale in regard to Koṭivarsha.

v1.c19.s8.t1.2

² Compare, for instance, the accounts contained in the *Periplus of the Erythraean Sea* and Marco Polo's *Travels*.

v1.c19.s8.t1.3

³ We have references to ships and dock-yards and to customs-officers called *vyāpāra-kāraṇḍaya* or *vyāpārandya* in the two grants of the time of Dharmāditya, and *vyāpārāya-viniyukta* in the Grant of Gopachandra. These were, as Pargiter points out, obviously officials "charged with the duty of looking after trade" (*IA.* 1910, p. 212).

v1.c19.s8.t1.4

We learn from the *Kathā-sarit-sāgara*¹ that Puṇḍravardhana had a great market-place and streets lined with shops. Besides the towns, a certain amount of business was probably done in the villages also. The Dāmodarpur Plate No. 2 mentions a *haṭṭa* or market in connection with the purchase of a plot of land.² The Khālimpur Plate of Dharmapāla records the grant of four villages along with their *haṭṭikā*, which, according to Kielhorn, means “market dues.”³ The Irḍā Plate similarly mentions the grant of a village “along with its market-place” (*sa-haṭṭa*),⁴ while the Bhāṭerā Plate speaks of shops (*haṭṭiya-gṛiha*) and big markets (*haṭṭa-vara*) in some of the donated villages.⁵

v1.c19.s8.t1.5

¹ Tawney's tr., ii. 86.

v1.c19.s8.t1.6

² *Ibid.* iv. 254.

v1.c19.s8.t1.7

³ *EI.* xv. 153-54.

v1.c19.s8.t1.8

⁴ *Ibid.* xxii. 155, 158.

v1.c19.s8.t1.9

⁵ *Ibid.* xix. 282.

v1.c19.s8.t1.10

The chief routes of internal trade were probably the waterways of the province, in proximity to which stood the principal towns. The rôle of the rivers in the economic geography of Bengal cannot be over-estimated. They fertilised the soil by the silt which they carried; they eliminated, to a large extent, the need for artificial irrigation; and being navigable far inland throughout the year, they served as ‘corridors’ or ‘natural routes’ for long-distance traffic. It is probable enough, although statistical data are lacking, that throughout the ancient and mediaeval periods they bore the greater part of the inland traffic of the province. Apart from the rivers, a certain amount of trade probably passed along land-routes. The itineraries of Fa-hien and Hiuen Tsang point to the existence of such land-routes connecting some of the important cities of the province. The Chittagong Plate of Dāmodara (*supra* p. 253) mentions a public road (*rāja-patha*), passing by the side of a village. In recent years Mr. K. N. Dikshit has discovered the remains of two ancient embanked roads in the neighbourhood of Dhanora.⁶

v1.c19.s8.t1.11

⁶ *ASI.* 1922-23, p. 109.

2. Foreign Trade

v1.c19.s8.t2.1

The history of Bengal's foreign trade may be traced back to at least four or five centuries before the birth of Christ. Strabo refers to the “ascent of vessels from the sea by the Ganges to Palibothra,”⁷ and his information is probably derived from Megasthenes’ account. Conversely, a number of Jātaka stories mention merchants and businessmen taking ships at Benares,¹ or lower down at Champā (modern Bhagalpur),² and then either coasting to Ceylon or adventuring many days without sight of land to Suvarṇabhūmi.³ The *Periplus of the Erythraean Sea* proves that Bengal maintained an active overseas trade with South India and Ceylon in the first century A.D. The commodities exported are said to have consisted of malabathrum, Gangetic spikenard, pearls, and muslins of the finest sorts. They were all shipped from a ‘market-town’ called Gange (probably the same as Tāmralipti), and carried in vessels described in the *Periplus* as ‘colandia.’⁴

First 117 of 280 passages. Read on

Cites (50)