History of Technology in India, Vol. I: From Antiquity to c. 1200 A.D. v1.c26.s3: Large-scale Operations

History of Technology in India, Vol. I: From Antiquity to c. 1200 A.D. v1.c26.s3

Language: English

v1.c26.s3.t1 Food storage — 8 parts
v1.c26.s3.t2 Alcoholic Drinks — 15 parts
v1.c26.s3.t3 Parched, puffed and parboiled rice — 6 parts
v1.c26.s3.t4 Oilseed processing — 6 parts
v1.c26.s3.t5 Sugarcane processing — 7 parts
v1.c26.s3.t6 Honey — 4 parts
v1.c26.s3.t7 Salt — 115 parts

Large-scale Operations

Food storage

v1.c26.s3.t1.1

Granaries for grain storage of surprising sophistication and size have been found at Mohenjodaro, Harappa and Lothal. On a high brick-built base at Mohenjodaro were set some 27 storage blocks of wood arranged crosswise, with vents on the sides to ensure air circulation by convection (Wheeler, 1976, p. 86).

v1.c26.s3.t1.2

Half-way up the structure was an unloading platform; this could be approached by carts carrying grain, which probably arrived along the river. Adjoining the granary were a row of brick-lined pounding platforms with a central hole, still carrying fragments of burnt wheat and husked barley. At Harappa, the mud platform, situated again by the river, was 52 by 42 metres, and 1.2 metres high, and on it stood two identical granary blocks about 7 metres apart (Vats, 1940, I, p. 15 & II, Pl. 6). Each block had six chambers, with corridors between them opening outside and approached by a short flight of steps. The floor was raised off the ground to permit air to circulate, and small triangular vents sucked in this air to pass through the chambers. Some form of state authority was clearly involved in the procurement and distribution of grain on a large scale. At Lothal, the granary, or perhaps warehouse, overlooked the dock (Rao, 1962, pp. 14-30). It was 51 by 45 metres and stood on a platform 3.5 metres high. The vanished wooden granary, probably destroyed by fire, appears to have rested on palettes or blocks 3.7 metres square and a little over a metre high. Never in Indian history till recent times was grain to be stored on this scale.

v1.c26.s3.t1.3

*Professional cooking and dining*

v1.c26.s3.t1.4

*Royal cooking* : The royal kitchen was called *rasavati* or *mahānasa* (Auboyer, 1965, p.265). That of king Sandāsa is depicted as merely an open thatched hut in Cave 17 at Ajanta (Schlingloff 1987, p.109). The cook is seated on the floor, pointing to a cooking pot with one hand, while looking at the back of the hut, where a dog is seen that has made off with the meat destined for the royal table. Among a king’s morning tasks was a consultation with the cook. The cook’s duties were not only to keep away marauding crows and dogs, but to ensure food variety and freedom from poison for which an official food-taster was always around (Auboyer, 1965, p.259). The cook was called the *ālāraka* or *sūpakāra* (Law, 1934, p. 68), and there were specialists like the *avalika* (for use of condiments and spices), *apupika* (for baking) and *kandavika* (for frying) (Deshmukh, 1981, pp.99-110). Buddhist literature has *odanika* for a cook, the *Arthaśāstra* *bhojanadātṛ*, and the *Viṣṇu Purāṇa* *sudas* for a king’s cook (Dayal, 1983, p. 157). In pre-Aryan south India, lavish hospitality was expected of royalty; one poet was fed with the “soft boiled legs of sheep fed on sweet grass, and large chops of hot meat roasted on the points of spits... (besides) sweets of excellent taste in varied shapes”, and of course strong liquor, sometimes scented and flavoured.

v1.c26.s3.t1.5

*Public dining* : The austere Vedic and Brahmin injunctions on food purity and ritual precluded their eating in public, but the rest of the population had no such inhibitions. In the commercial districts of the city were shops (Auboyer, 1965, p.121) piled with “cooked rice and prepared food ready for eating, whose pungent odours assailed the nostrils”. Early European visitors to north India describe Lahore’s “brilliantly lighted bazaars which had a great number of occupied tents or cookshops exhaling the aroma of spicy dishes” and displaying “large spits bearing the flesh of winged creatures... nor did these bazaars lack the simple foods of the native, (to meet whose taste) many tents hold different dishes made of rice, herbs and vegetables (besides) the ubiquitous flat bread”.

v1.c26.s3.t1.6

In Agra (Sebastian, 1982, p. 263) “entire streets are wholly occupied by skilled sweetmeat makers (with) dainties of all sorts in the innumerable bazaars”.

v1.c26.s3.t1.7

Early south India had few dining taboos, and eating in hotels must have been a common practice. One work of about the 3rd century AD, *Mathuraikkañcī*, describes (*Kanakasabhai*, 1904, pp. 125-135) thus the market place of Madurai; “the hotels and restaurants are now, in the cool of the evening, crowded with visitors who feast upon luscious fruits such as the jackfruit, mango and plantain, and on sugar candies, tender greens, edible yams, sweetened rice and savoury preparations of meat”. In the heyday of Vijayanagar in the 16th century AD, visitors like Varthema, Barbosa and Paes describe the markets overflowing with meat and vegetables (Randhawa, 1982, II, pp. 113-114).

v1.c26.s3.t1.8

These large establishments catering to cooking and feeding large numbers would not have required special preparation technologies, as at present, domestic practices on a larger or more intensive scale would have sufficed.

Alcoholic Drinks

v1.c26.s3.t2.1

Usage of liquor : This may be reviewed as a preamble to reviewing the technology of production. The Harappans may even have drunk distilled liquor (as shown below). The *Ṛgveda*, while exalting *soma*, condemns the use of *surā*, a distilled liquor. In subsequent Vedic literature, Brahmins (and students in particular) are always rigorously prohibited from using liquor, while Kṣatriyas and Vaiśyas are permitted liquor made from honey, *mahuā* flowers and jaggery, but not spirits distilled from fermented flour (Prakash, Om, 1961, pp. 34-57). The Jataka tales suggest that drinking at feasts with friends was by no means uncommon, and that women and even hermits imbibed. Buddhist monks were not permitted wine except when ill. For Jain monks, the prohibition was strict; they could not even stay in a place where jars of wine were stored.

v1.c26.s3.t2.2

Drinking was common among Kṣatriyas. Sītā promises the Ganga a thousand jars of wine if members of the party return safe from exile (Sharma, 1971, pp. 232-242). After they do so, Rāma feeds her with his own hands with *maireya*, a spiced wine. Outside the public indulge in a drunken orgy, and even the atmosphere of Ayodhya was said to reek of wine (Sharma, 1971, pp 232-242). In the *Mahābhārata*, Kṛṣṇa enjoys drinking freely with Arjuna, and the Yadavas are killed in a drinking brawl. Even a virtuous lady, Sudeṣṇā, is shown as drunk on wine. Drinking scenes are depicted in sculpture in the Sanchi stupa (Sharma, 1971, pp. 232-242), in Kuṣāṇa temples at Mathura (Dayal, 1983, pp. 96-104) and in Calukyan temples at Pattadakal (Kamat, 1978, p. 170). The *nagaraka* (man of town) of the *Kāmasūtra* sips drinks from a *casaka* while nibbling at sweet bitter and acidic snacks (chalakdar, 1976, p.17). In Kālidasa’s plays (Pathak, 1978, p. 58) citizen and constable both indulge in drinks (*Śakuntalā*), and in *Raghuvamśa*, the whole of Raghu’s army drinks coconut wine, and an intoxicated *Irāvathī* is not able to move about properly.

v1.c26.s3.t2.3

Public taverns or drinking areas are frequently depicted, and are called *saundikas* and *panabhūmis*. In Mauryan times (Auboyer, 1965, p, 259) “every village had at least one tavern, identifiable by the flag that it flew. The towns contained many taverns, grouped in the same district but sufficiently spaced out to prevent their being side by side. They were often decorated and furnished in style, and contained several courtyards, rooms filled with seats and couches, and also counters where perfumes, flowers and garlands could be brought. It was a lucrative business, for the sale of fermented and alcoholic drinks continued throughout the day and well into the night. The customers ate salt with their drinks to encourage their thirst”. Moderation in use of liquor is urged, for example in the *Bṛhatsamhitā* (early 6th cent. AD) (Shastri, 1969, pp. 209- 216) and in the *Caraka Saṃhitā* (Chakraborty, 1923 p. 573), which opines: “A stimulant taken in proper dose increases the strength and weight of the body, but taken in excess it reduces the body weight”. Elsewhere Caraka recommends a little wine only when the digestion is at its best, such as in winter and spring, and diluted wine in the rainy season and summer (Sengupta, 1919, p. 12).

v1.c26.s3.t2.4

Before the Aryan advent into south India, drinking was free of taint and indulged in at all levels. Even woman drank, especially in the company of their lovers. Toddy was made by fermenting palmyra sap, and was drunk, as in *Manimekhalai* (6th cent. AD) by the poorer classes (*Kanakasabhai*, 1904, pp, 125-135). Poets wrote of sturdy sailors living a dangerous life, who were fond of strong liquor (Srinivasa Iyengar 1932, pp, 253- 300). Wine brewed from germinated grains in pots is mentioned more than once, and is drunk by soldiers, for example (*Rasanayagam*, 1926, pp, 130-160). Liquor shops in Madurai floated gay streamers (*Kanakasabhai*, 1904, pp. 125-135), and a piece of raw ginger chewed while drinking was recommended to the heavy imbiber as an antidote (Nilakantha Sastri, 1964, pp.77-80). Kings had access (*Rasanayagam*, 1926, pp. 130-180), at least during the 1st and 2nd centuries AD when trading with Rome was at its peak, to “cool and fragrant wine in golden cups, held by bright-bangled women”. Even after the spread of the Aryans, Brahmins are sometimes shown as drinking toddy without reproach (Krishna Ayyar, 1966, p. 31). Kapilar, the famous Brahmin poet of the Sangam epoch, speaks with relish about both drink and meat (Pillay, 1975, pp. 224).

v1.c26.s3.t2.5

*Production and types of liquor*: Though it is made clear, by contrasting it with *sura*, that *soma*, was not an alcoholic liquor but an exhilarant (Prakash, Om, 1961, pp. 7-33, Sell, 1933, *Notes* pp. 152-170), its elaborately ritualistic production technology can conveniently be noted here (Vesci, 1985, pp.215, 69, 32, Sen, 1978, Three plates). The material, brought from a mountainous area, was first washed, and then either crushed between grinding stones (*grāvan*), or pounded in a mortar and pestle (*ulukhala and musala*) using both hands, while sprinking water and sometimes squeezing the material to assist extraction. The *grāvan* stones were placed above four holes connected underground; the resounding echo of the grinding was poetically compared to the lowing of bulls. The liquid was filtered through a strainer of sheep’s wool (*pavitra*) held above specified jars or wooden tubs. The amber, shining liquid was mixed with curds, ghee, milk, water, honey or grains before being drunk by the priests and the person making the sacrifice.

v1.c26.s3.t2.6

Was liquor made in the Indus valley? Perhaps not just brewed, but even distilled. Using clay objects found at all Harappan sites, a distillation unit has been assembled (Mahdi Hassan, 1979, p. 264). On the mouth of a water pot was placed a well-fitting circular basin with a wide circular hole at the bottom. In this was cradled a smaller basin with holes in its base. Alcohol boiled in the lower pot rose through the holes; was condensed on the underside of a handled receptacle holding cold water that was placed above the assembly, and then fell into the annular space of the fitted basin. The only special vessel required was the small perforated basin; this has repeatedly been found in excavations without a satisfactory use having been ascribed to it.

v1.c26.s3.t2.7

The *Rgveda* describes *surā* as an intoxicating liquor distilled after fermenting barley or wild paddy, and it may have had a connection with the hated asuras. Later Vedic literature (Prakash, Om, 1961, pp. 7-33) has *kilala* (a sweetened drink made from fermented cereals), *masana* (a filtered rice gruel liquor) and *pariśruta* (a product of fermentation of flowers and certain grasses). Subsequently numerous products find mention. The *Rāmāyaṇa* has four (Sharma, 1971, pp, 232-242), Kautilya names 12, and Caraka makes mention of no less than 84 kinds of alcoholic liquor. In Table 2, these alcoholic beverages are listed roughly in the order in which they are mentioned in Sanskrit literature.

v1.c26.s3.t2.8

Table 2 — Liquors Listed in Approximately Historical Order

v1.c26.s3.t2.9

v1.c26.s3.t2.10

v1.c26.s3.t2.11

Apart from these, the nobility right from *Sūtra* times were able to import two wines which are repeatedly mentioned. One was *kapisayani* from Kapisi (now Kafiristan, north of Kabul), and the other was *harahuraka*, from a town Harahura in the Arghanbad valley. Both were famed for their wine, made from white grapes in the former city and black grapes in the latter (Goswami, 1979, p. 27). Excavations at Begram in the area have brought to light a complete and artistic distillation assembly in the shape of a jar from whose mouth emerged a pressing shaft topped by a conical filter (Goswami, 1979, p. 37).

v1.c26.s3.t2.12

The raw materials employed for brewing were quite varied. The *Rāmāyaṇa* mentions four *āsavas* derived from flowers, fruits, honey and sugarcane. Caraka’s 84 varieties are derived from nine sources. Sugar-rich materials used for fermentation were sugarcane juice, guda, molasses, honey, coconut water, sweet palmyra sap and *mahua* flowers, while fruits included the grape, mango, wood-apple (kapittha), date palm, ber, banana, apricot, jack-fruit, pomegranate, kadamba, bilva, rajadana (chironji) and madanaphala (*Mimusops elengi*). Flavouring materials included fragrant flowers like the *kadamba*, *patala*, *jati* and *dhātākī*, and spices such as *haridrā* (haldi), black pepper and elaichi. Astringent materials like the betelnut (*pugaphila*), and barks of trees like *mesaśṛngī*, *kapittha* and *kadamba* were also employed in making liquor.

v1.c26.s3.t2.13

The production system is only briefly described. Patanjali has *asuti* for distillery, *asavya* for the fermented mix, and *viniya* for the sediment left after distillation, while the vintner (and apparently also the seller) was a *saundika* (Puri, 1957, pp. 89-115). The *Viṣṇu Purāṇa* calls the manufacturer of wine *maireyaka* and the seller *somavikrayī* (Dayal, 1982, pp. 93-104), and the *Amarakośa* has *svedanī* for an alcoholic still (Deshmukh, 1981, pp. 99-110). The *Arthaśāstra* has recipes for preparing various liquors, but the very terse language that is used makes their interpretation very subjective (Konow, 1975, pp. 60-63; Kangle, 1986, II, pp. 154-156; Agrawala, 1940, p. 291). It would appear that five elements could be varied. First was the raw material, which could be sugarcane juice, jaggery, honey, treacle, various sweet fruits, and cereals like rice and barley. Next, the period of fermentation is stated, in one instance, as being one month, six months or a year. Thirdly, the absence or use of distillation is frequently left unspecifed, except sometimes by inference through use of the adjective “strong” for the liquor. Fourthly, the liquor was frequently doctored with a sweetening agent, or with substances with either a distinctive fragrance, like flowers, or a distinctive flavour, like spices and astringent barks; confusion arises because these same materials could be used even before fermentation, or added before distillation. Fifthly, there is the nature of the ferment itself. In one fairly clear statement in the *Arthaśāstra*, this is stated to consist of a *droṇa* or mashed *māsa* pulse, a third (or three parts, in another interpretation) of rice, and a *karṣa* portion of morata. But other ferments could be used, and one of these is a decoction made from a mixture of *meṣaśṛṅgī* bark and long and black pappers; since such an extract is also a typical flavouring agent, there is room for uncertainty. Incidentally, a spice mixture is even now used in Punjab to make the spongy fermented snack, *warri*.

v1.c26.s3.t2.14

The actual recipes are therefore not unambiguous. *Praśannā* is made from twelve *āḍhakas* of flour with eight parts of water along with five *prasthas* of the ferment, to which could optimally be added the rind (another interpretation is bark) and fruit of *putraka* (alternative, *kramuka*). Medaka was made from half an *āḍhaka* of rice grains, one *droṇa* of water and three *prasthas* of ferment. An *āsava* in one reading employed one *tula* of woodapple fruit (*kapittha*), five *tulās* of treacle and a *prastha* of honey, all perhaps fermented together. In another, *āsava* is stated to be a mixture of “one *karṣa* each of cinnamon bark with *citraka*, *vilāṅgī* and *gajapippali*, and two *karṣas* each of *kramuka*, liquorice, *musta* and *lodhrā*; and one-tenth part of these is the formulation of the essence” which could mean that the larger quantities constituted the ferment, and the smaller the final flavouring. Maireya appears to have been a liquor disitilled from a spice-induced fermentation (a decoction of *meṣaśṛṅgī* bark, and two peppers); later the distillate was sweetened either using expensive honey or cheaper *guda* and *phanita* (Agrawala, 1949 p. 291), and flavoured with *triphala*, the well-known astringent ayurvedic mix of the chebulic myrobalan (*Terminalia Chebula*), the belleric myrobalan (*T.bellirica*) and the amla (*Emblica officianalis*). It was popular with royalty, and must have been an expensive drink.

v1.c26.s3.t2.15

Liquor in south India : Then as now, toddy was brewed in pots tied below incisions made in the spathes of palmyra palm fruits, to catch overnight the intensely sweet juice; this, by natural fermentation in the heat of the day, produced on alcoholic liquor with a strong odour. In the port town of Muziris, says the *Purāṇānūru* (Sreedhara Menon, 1979, pp. 121-126), “toddy flows like water”. The practice of smearing the pots with lime to prevent fermentation is also old, since such pots turn up in excavations. The sweetest toddy was claimed to be produced in Kuttanād (Krishna Ayyar, 1966, p 31), now in Kerala. *Arrack* or distilled strong liquor was also to be had, a favourite of sailors (Srinivasa Iyengar, 1932, pp. 253-300). Liquor was also brewed from paddy, from rice, and from germinated grains in pots, stated (*Rasanyagam*, 1926, pp. 130-160) to yield “after two days and two nights a high-flavoured wine”. The flavour of wine was stated to be improved by filling it in the hollows of stout bamboo stems, and burying them underground to mature (Srinivasa Iyengar, 1930, pp. 57-70). Toppi was the name of a home-brewed rice liquor (Ibid). Scented liquors were made for richer people by fermenting rice in the presence of fragrant flowers such as the *dhātakī* (Kanakasabhai, 1904, pp. 125-135). In mountain areas, wine was brewed from honey, and again matured underground before use . Italian wine was imported in the 1st and 2nd centuries AD for the use of royalty in characterisic two-handled amphorae; these have been found in large numbers at a Roman warehouse of the period excavated in Arikamedu near Pondicherry, with dregs of resinous material two thousand years old still adhering to the bottom. A favourite drink, especially of women, was munnir (“triple liquid”), a mixture of tender (perhaps unfermented) palmyra juice, sugarcane juice and coconut water (Sreedhara Menon, 1979, pp. 121-126; Nilakantha Sastri, 1964, pp. 77—80). As many as 60 pure Tamil names for liquor occur in the early literature, indicating its widespread use and popularity. Vendors of liquor were called tuvāsar, paduvar (padu is one name for liquor), palaiyār (pali is another), piliyar (pili is yet another) and saundiyār (clearly a Sanskrit borrowal) (Srinivasa Iyengar, 1930, pp. 57-70).

Parched, puffed and parboiled rice

v1.c26.s3.t3.1

Parching : Even the Rgveda mentions dhanāh, which is beaten or parched barley, as well as saktu (the present sattu), which is the gritty brokens derived initially from parched barley grains, and later from rice (Prakash, Om, 1961, pp. 7-33). In the early stages, these grits were eaten as a solid ball (pindi), or as a paste (avalehika), but by the time of Suśruta, saktus were being blended before consumption with acid fruits, grapes, ghee, sugar, guda and dilute honey (Prakash, Om, 1961, pp. 7-33). Parching of sprouted barley is recorded by Caraka, who also lists a variety of parched pulses (called ulumbah) like mung, masoor and mattar under the common name bhristadhanya. Other Sanskrit words for parching are lajah, prthuka and cipita (Gode, 1948, p. 43); the last of these persists in civda or cidva, the fried and spiced snack made from parched rice. Cūra is the current term for beaten rice.

v1.c26.s3.t3.2

In south India, aval is still the word for beaten rice. The Kuruntogai (of about the 6th century AD) describes its manufacture by beating flat wet paddy, using a pestle of black heart-wood (Srinivasa Iyengar, 1932, pp. 253-300) and the Perumpanurrupadai, one of the Ten Songs (Rasanayagam, 1926, pp. 130-160), mentions aval itself.

v1.c26.s3.t3.3

Even though beaten or parched rice was available commercially both in north and south, its production appears to have been effected in the same pounding device as the one used domestically, first moistening the grains with water before flattening, and then parching them slightly afterwards on hot sand.

v1.c26.s3.t3.4

Puffing : The terms missita and dhanidhaka have been suggested as the Sanskrit equivalents of puffing of grains, but are believed to be uncertain in the context in which they occur. The Tamil term pori occurs in the Sangam literature of the 6th century AD (Srinivasa Iyengar, 1930, pp. 57-20), and its production was probably effected by the simple technique (even now current) of throwing handfuls of rice on very hot sand. The cikpea or cana, especially the large Kabuli variety (after it arrived in India) was also subject to puffing to give a porous, crunchy product; this could be ground into besan flour, which is the batter of choice all over India for making a variety of deep-fried snacks. Again production in volume could be achieved by merely multiplying the domestic puffing operation.

v1.c26.s3.t3.5

In south India, the term pori, still used for puffed rice, finds mention in the early Sangam literature (Srinivasa Iyengar, 1930, pp. 57-70). In the Karuntogai, it is a favourite food eaten with milk or as a sweet (Arokiaswami, 1972, p. 92).

v1.c26.s3.t3.6

Parboiling : Parboiled rice is called *pulangalarisi* in Tamil. It first occurs in the *Sirupan-arruppudai* of slightly late Saṅgam literature (Srinivasa Iyengar, 1930, pp. 57-70), but the means of production is not described. Perhaps it was the same technique now followed of soaking paddy in cold water for a few days, then boiling the water till the grain is soft, drying the grains in the sun, and then dehusking them either by pounding in a mortar or grinding between stones.

Oilseed processing

v1.c26.s3.t4.1

*Oilseed crushing* : A charred lump of sesame seed was found in Harappa (Piggott, 1950, p.153), and carbonised *rai* (mustard) seeds in Chanhudaro (Visnu-Mittre, 1974, p. 3), so at least two oil- bearing seeds were known to the Harappans. They had copper frying pans with a lip (Mackay, 1938, II, Pl.71, Item 42, Plate 82, Item 11) and small stone querns for grinding spices. The body fat of various animals and fish, and that of milk, was likewise available. Since all the elements were present, it is quite probable that frying of food was practised. Animal fats would have risen to the top on boiling any flesh in water. Whether vegetable oils were also obtained in this way, or in any other, is not known.

v1.c26.s3.t4.2

The *Ṛgveda* has two devices for crushing *soma*, the grinding stones or *grāvan*, and the mortar-and-pestle, *ulūkhala-musala*. When the *soma* sacrifice enlarged to include 16 priests, the crushing mortar may have grown in size as well. Large wooden grain pounders were of course also known. From such reduction devices could the oil press have had its origin, to judge by the terms employed for it, as hereafter discussed.

v1.c26.s3.t4.3

Sanskrit has *tila* for sesame seed and *taila* for its oil. From the time of the *Bhaviṣya Purāṇa* onwards, the composite word *taila* (or *tila*)-*pesana-yantra* stands for an oil press (Monier Williams, 1851, p. 549). *Tailikas* or oil millers find mention in Panini (Monier Williams, 1899, p.448), in the *Mahābhārata*, and *Arthaśāstra* (Shyamasastry, 1923, pp. 112-113) and in early Buddhist literature. Some sort of a wheel or circle (*cakra*) seems to have been involved, and the oil miller is called a *cakrin* in the *Amarakośa* (Deshmukh, 1981, pp. 99-110). Did the *tailika* walk round in a circle operating the unit, or was there an edge-runner of some kind? The use of animal power is never mentioned, and indeed is believed by some authorities to have never been employed in India for such traction before the Christian era (Roy and Bagchi, 1983, (a), p.1). The *Arthaśāstra* has a list of oilseeds crushed (Shyamasastry, 1923, pp. 112-113), with their oil yields given as one-sixth, one-fifth and one-fourth; these are the sesame, linseed, safflower, *mahua*, *ingudi* (*Balanites aegyptiaca*), neem, *kapittha* and *kusamra* (identity uncertain). The oilcake is termed *ghanapinyaka*, the first-ever mention of the term *ghana* for an oilpress (Shyamasastry, 1923, pp. 112-113).

v1.c26.s3.t4.4

*Terms used for an oilpress* : Despite its lone use in the *Arthaśāstra*, all the evidence suggests that the word *ghana* moved from Prakrit into Sanskrit, when it next appears only in the *Ballalacarita* of 1510 AD (Bhaṭ, Ānanda). The words *ghranaka* appears once, and *ghanaka* several times, in inscriptions of the 5th century AD from Bengal (*Epigraphica Indica*, 1925/26, 18, 60), the 10th century AD from Gwalior (*Epigraphica Indica*, 1892, I, 162), and shortly thereafter in Nashik (*Epigraphica Indica*, 1927/28, 19, 69). A Veraval inscription from Gujarat of 1264 AD has *ghamcika* for oil miller (*Epigraphica Indica*, 1961/62, 34, 141). All these have a Prakrit connotation. The origin of the word *ghana* itself can only be guessed at by a number of associations. *Grāva* is the Sanskrit grinding stone, *ghavan* is a stone mortar in Marathi, *ghaṭāni* a mill in Gujarati (Turner, 1966, p. 241), and *ghaṭānika* is a Sanskrit word for a heavy club (pestle), used in the *Rāmāyaṇa* (Yuddhakāṇḍa, 6. 1053) and *Matsya Purāṇa* (177. 11). *Ghana* for the oil press may represent an amalgam of such usages.

v1.c26.s3.t4.5

The other term commonly used for an oil press is *kolhu*. This again appears to be a Prakrit word, and it occurs in a Gwalior inscription of 933 AD in the Sanskritised form *kolhuka* (*Epigraphica Indica*, 1892, I, 154). Again its origin may be a complex amalgam of *ulūkhalika* (meaning the act of grinding), *khali* (oilcake), and *ukhli* and *okhli* (small mortars) (Platt, 1899, p. 106). The Tamil term *cekku* for the oilpress is by way of the Pali *cakka* (for *cakra*), a word which also gave rise to the common present term *chakki* for any circular millstone or pulley. The term first occurs in Tamil in the *Nāladiyār* (374) and the *Nālayira Thivya Prabhandam* (Thiruvaimozhi-7, 1 and 5) of the 7th or 8th centuries AD. However a reference occurs in the slightly earlier *Purananuru* (Verse 50, lines 6-7) to the froth (*nurai*) on the surface of oil extracted from sesame seed. This is a striking characteristic of oil when it first appears in a press, and strongly suggests that the oil pres was in use.

v1.c26.s3.t4.6

*Actual oilpresses*: Few old oilpresses have survived, being frequently made of wood in the past. A series of old stone crushing units have been brought together in Dwarka (Gujarat) from surrounding areas; though labelled as soma crushers, their design almost certainly points to their being oil-crushing units. One authority is of opinion that these units go back the first two centuries of the Christian era (Rao, S.R., Personal Communications). The same authority has also excavated *ghānis* from 6th century AD surroundings in Aihole (Bijapur District, Karnataka). A stone oilmill set up in Karnataka state by one Asakka-gavunda in 1145 AD with an inscription to this effect is stated to still surive (Gururajachar, 1974, p. 75). Till about a century ago, all commercial oil extraction in the country was effected in *ghānis*, with only regional variations in size and design.

Sugarcane processing

v1.c26.s3.t5.1

*Crushing devices*: Sugarcane crushers of the barrel type closely resemble the oil press, and the two share a common ancestry. This is hardly surprising since grinding, to effect the expulsion of a liquid (though of different viscosities) is of course the basic operation in both. Sugarcane pressing, like that of oilseeds, may also have arisen as an offshoot of the soma pounding operation.

v1.c26.s3.t5.2

In 1885 Grierson notes the similarity (Grierson 1926, pp. 44-60), and a few years George Watt states (Watt, 1972, IV, p. 153) that “the oilpress is identical with that used for the sugarcane but smaller in size”. The Sanskrit word *ikṣu* for sugarcane gave rise to the later words *ikh* and *ukh*, as well as to *ukar* (a vessel for husking grain) and to *ukhli* or *okli*, a small mortar (Platt, 1899, p. 106). Both the terms *kolhu* and *ghāni* are used for the sugarcane press, except, as remarked by Grierson, that the sugarmill is larger, has sloping sides (in contrast to the bottle-shaped pit of an oilpress) and carries no reuti or stirrer (which some though not all oil-presses do). In Marathi the term khali or khalli is used to denote substances as dissimilar as oilcake and sugar (Watt, 1972, VI, p. 502).

v1.c26.s3.t5.3

Much of what has been said about the evolution of the oilpress also applies therefore to the sugarcane press. The Buddhist literature mentions sugarcane juice being extracted with a machine (Prakash, Om, 1961, pp. 7-53), and in the Kuṣāṇa-Śaka period (75-300 AD), machine-extracted juice is declared to be inferior, presumably to the hand-extracted product. A Jain manuscript copied at Palam near Delhi in 1540 AD features a drawing of two oxen crushing sugarcane in a typical barrel-shaped ghāni (Daniels and Daniels, 1988, Drawing on p. 502).

v1.c26.s3.t5.4

The other sugarcane-crushing device is the roller mill with rotating cylinders, which has now all but superseded the kolhu. This seems to have originated from a similar roller device for removing seeds from cotton (Daniels and Daniels, 1988, Drawing on p. 502). The latter had itself replaced the rocking pin device on a flat board, worked by the hands or the feet, which had long been used for deseeding cotton (Watt, 1972, IV, p. 153) and is depicted in the Ajanta paintings (Roy and Bagchi, 1986,(b),p.129). The sugarcane roller mill probably evolved only around 1500 AD, (Daniels and Daniels, 1988), and is therefore outside the period of the present article.

v1.c26.s3.t5.5

Sugar and its products : Harappan cities have yielded charcoal some Saccharum species, though whether this is the sugarcane is uncertain (Vishnu-Mittre, 1974, p. 3). The kusara of the Ṛgveda is thought to refer to it (Prakash, Om, 1961, pp.7-33). The chewing of ikṣu, which is certainly the sugarcane, is alluded to in Atharvaveda, while all the Saṃhitās of the Yajurveda mention the plant (Prakash, Om, 1961, pp. 7-33).

v1.c26.s3.t5.6

In the Sūtra literature, the thickening of sugarcane juice to give first phanita, and then guḍa, is noted. The next stage, that of rock sugar (kāṇḍ), finds mention in the writing of Alexander’s companions (Kosambi, 1975, p. 192), who describe “stones the colour of frankincense, sweeter than figs or honey”. From Pundra or north Bengal came the superior variety of sugarcane, pauṇḍraka, and it is possible that sugar technologies were developed in Bengal or Gauda, from which Caraka derives the word guḍa (Prakash Om, 1961, pp. 251-252). In early Buddhist literature (Ibid, pp. 58-86), guḍa is described as being made from sugarcane juice using sugarcane flour (possible ground bagasse) and ashes, perhaps used for clarification. Mention in the Jain cannon of the word matsyaṇḍikā is intriguing, since later this material is defined (Ibid, pp. 132-167) as “globular in shape, like fish eggs”; either it is crystal sugar, or a confection of similar shape. Kautilya mentions all forms of sugar, upto śarkara or granulated sugar, as does Patanjali in the mid-2nd century BC (Ibid, pp. 87-101). Śarkara derives from grit or gravel. and it has been remarked (Kosambi, 1975, p. 123) that the word does not have a “Sanskrit appearance”. China has claimed precedence in crystal sugar production, to which the use of the term chini for sugar would lend support. But the visit of a team from China to the emperor Harsa in the 7th century AD to learn the technique of sugar production is also on record.

v1.c26.s3.t5.7

South India obtained a large part of its jaggery from the fresh juice of the spathe of the palmyra palm (and Bengal from the trunk of the date palm), using slaked lime to prevent its fermentation (Rasanayagam, 1926, pp. 130-160). No crushing is involved, and the juice is simply boiled down and when thick poured into coconut halves to set to jaggery or vellam, a word mentioned in the earliest literature. Waving tassels of the sugarcane (“like spears”) are also frequently referred to, and sugarcane processing is mentioned (Gode, 1948, p. 43), but products of the sugarcane seem to have been of lesser importance in south India, even till recent times. Cane sugar crystals have an old name, ayir (also meaning gravel) (Srinivasa Iyengar, 1930, pp. 57-70), but are commonly called śakkarai, a word which is clearly of Sanskrit origin.

Honey

v1.c26.s3.t6.1

*Types and Usages* : The Bhimbetka prehistoric cave paintings show men dispoiling the hives of bees on rocks perhaps 6,000 years ago (Dave, 1954, 1955). The Ṛgveda considered that honey from small bees (śaragava) was superior to those from large ones (āraṅgara) (Prakash, Om, 1961, pp. 7-33). In later literature, three kinds of bees and honey are frequently referred to (Gopal, 1969, p. 255). The first is makṣika, used for both the common honey bee and its honey, which is by far the most important kind. Next is the bhramara, a large black bee giving a honey of the same name that was believed to be difficult to digest. The third was the small, black kṣudra bee giving ksaudra honey, the only one mentioned in the Arthaśāstra. The fourth one mentioned by Caraka is pauttika honey from the puṭṭika bee, which the Amarakośa defines as being a very small black bee resembling an ant. Suśruta has four more types of honey, termed catra, arghya, auddālika, and dala, which have all been identified in modern terms (Gopal, 1969, p. 255). A Kashmiri work of the 9th century AD has several words for bee clusters,like indindhira, dvivepa and bhṛṅga (Shastri,1975,p.204)

v1.c26.s3.t6.2

Honey was considered stimulating, and therefore frequently banned to students, widows, those under a restrictive vow, and the like (Prakash, Om 1961, pp. 132-167). It was always pure even when taken out from the bowl of a mleccha, and was a constituent of madhuparka used to welcome guests, and a recommended food item during the rainy season (Ibid). Jains were strictly forbidden the use of honey (one of the 22 “uneatables”) since its collection was believed to entail loss of bee life (Sanghave, 1980, p. 259; Kannoomal, 1916, p. 78).

v1.c26.s3.t6.3

*Production* : In Vedic times, the Rbhu brothers were stated to have built artificial hives of reeds and straw, secured honey sections from a natural hive, and fixed them in the prepared hive (Dave, 1954, 1955). When a swarm had settled in, a year was allowed to elapse before four combs only were removed and the rest left in. Knowledge of bee-keeping was kept secret, and the Vedic saint Dadhyang was beheaded when he taught the Asvins his skill. In later times hives were kept in logs or pots in a horizontal position, or on four-legged stools, or in a wall. In Kashmir the latter procedure is still in use, with detachable ends. When ready, both ends are removed, the bees are gently smoked away and a few combs removed; when the ends are replaced, the swarm soon returns.

v1.c26.s3.t6.4

The *Mahābhārata* has references to bee gardens, apiary keepers and pollen-yielding plants, suggesting some degree of commercialisation (Dave, 1954, 1955). The *Mahāvaṃśa* has a story of three brothers, two of whom collected honey for sale by the third (Gopal, 1969, p. 255). Generally collectors were forest dwellers, both in the north and south of India, who sold or bartered their valuable produce. The *Harṣacarita* mentions beeswax by the expressive term *madhucchiṣṭa* (Ibid).

Salt

v1.c26.s3.t7.1

*Types and uses:* Salt is not mentioned in the *Ṛgveda*, but thereafter many types are recorded. Five kinds, first mentioned in the *Vinaya Piṭaka* (Prakash, Om, 1961, pp. 58-86), and later by Caraka (Ibid), are the more important. These are rock salt, sea salt, *viḍa*, *audvida* (probably the same as the *udbhedaga* of Kauṭilya) and *sauvarcala*. Suśruta has nine others (Ibid), most of which appear to be other mineral salts of sodium and potassium. Kauṭilya mentions “salt from the Sindhu country”, but whether any of the other special regional salts now recognised were known cannot be ascertained. These include the *kurkutch* of Maharashtra and Gujarat, *kuppa* and *baragara* (in large cubes) from Gujarat, *paṅga* of West Bengal, the pink *kyar* and *resta* of Rajasthan, and the *mapi* or *vajni* of the east coast. These contain impurities in varying proportions which alter their taste and colour.

v1.c26.s3.t7.2

From *Sūtra* times, salty foods were not permitted to students, widows and newly-married couples for three days (Ibid). Use of *viḍa* and black salt was interdicted during a *śrāddha* (Ibid, pp. 102-131). Sea salt was always rated superior to other salts as a food (Ibid, pp. 132-167).

v1.c26.s3.t7.3

*Production and sale:* Details of production are lacking, especially for varieties other than sea salt. The latter was probably obtained, as it is now, by solar evaporation in long shallow beds along the shore, fed by the incoming tide; the crystallised salt was simply raked off. In Kauṭilya’s account, salt manufacture was scrutinised by a special superintendent, the *lavaṇādhyakṣa* and carried out under a system of licences for which either a fixed fee was paid, or a share of output retained (Monahan, 1924, p. 54). Salt that was received by government as its share was sold by the superintendent, profit being ensured by the difference of 5 percent between the royal measure and the common measure. One-sixth of all imported salt went to the king, and was sold by the superintendent to the public, with a profit made both in measuring the quantity and in selling it.

v1.c26.s3.t7.4

*Salt in south India:* The Sangam literature of the first six centuries AD is quite forthcoming. Activities of people living in different localities are set down, and this includes salt-making in the coastal littoral. Mention is made (*Rasanayagam*, 1926, pp. 130-160; Srinivasa Iyengar, 1932, pp. 253-300) of “hearths of stones left by the salt vendors”, and of “white salt manufactured in clayey beds”, certainly by evaporation. Salt must have been extensively made, and five names are recorded for salt beds, namely *nanuguppalam*, *alkkar*, *uvarkkalam*, *uvalagam* and *kazhi* (Srinivasa Iyengar, 1930, pp. 57-70). The more important places of manufacture were Markanam, Kanyakumari, Variyur, Aythurai and Bapatla (Ibid). No varieties other than sea salt seem to be recorded. Salt sellers went round villages with headloads crying out the price, (Rasanayagam, 1926, pp. 130-160), and salt was transported across the peninsula in carts by producers moving about with their families (Arokiaswami; 1972). Salt was exchanged for various other commodities like rice, and both salt and honey were principal measures of value (Pillay, 1975, p.284).

v1.c26.s3.t7.5

*Cold water and ice*

v1.c26.s3.t7.6

Evaporative cooling in really porous clay jars was a time-honoured technique of cooling water. The use of saltpetre for cooling water was apparently introduced by Akbar, according to Abul Fazl. A scene from the Harṣacarita, describing the ministrations to the dying father of the emperor in Kannauj (Upadhyaya, 1947, p. 216), refers to whey for a gargle being kept “in a new vessel besmeared with wet clay”. The same passage states that “buttermilk was freezing in pails packed with ice”. This could have been brought from the Himalayan heights by river and land in relays, as was later the practice of Mughal emperors. However the making of ice may not have been unknown in the area, to judge by a description recorded in Allahabad in 1775 by a resident English scientist (Dharampal, 1971, p. 219). During three months of winter when the temperature was close to, but never below, freezing point, boiled water was poured a couple of centimetres deep into small shallow porous vessels and the latter placed in long, shallow pits, well insulated at the bottom and sides, that were scooped out in quiet and windless surroundings. Overnight ice would form, sometimes all the way through, and this was collected and kept in insulated storage for use all the year round.

Linked texts (39)

Carakasaṃhitā — Agniveśa (Āyurveda) & Caraka, Sanskrit
Suśrutasaṃhitā — Suśruta & Nāgārjuna (siddha/alchemist), Sanskrit
Matsyapurāṇa — Vyāsa, Sanskrit
Kauṭilīya Arthaśāstra — Kauṭilya, Sanskrit
Maṇimēkalai — Cīttalaic Cāttaṉār, Tamil
Aṣṭādhyāyī — Pāṇini, Sanskrit
Bṛhatsaṃhitā — Varāhamihira, Sanskrit
நாலாயிர திவ்விய பிரபந்தம் — Poykai Āḻvār & Pūtattāḻvār, Tamil
Vallālacarita — Ānandabhaṭṭa 1510, Sanskrit
Bhaviṣyapurāṇa — Vyāsa, Sanskrit
Nālaṭiyār — Patumaṉār, Tamil
Puṟanāṉūṟu — Kapilar & Auvaiyār (Caṅkam), Tamil
Kuṟuntokai — Pūrikkō, Tamil
Harṣacarita — Bāṇabhaṭṭa, Sanskrit
Tibetan translation ('Chi med mdzod) — Classical Tibetan
Perumpāṇāṟṟuppaṭai — Kaṭiyalūr Uruttiraṅkaṇṇaṉār, Tamil
Ciṟupāṇāṟṟuppaṭai — Iṭaikkaḻināṭṭu Nallūr Nattattaṉār, Tamil
Vappaghosavata Grant of the time of Jayanāga — Sanskrit
Epigraphia Indica
Harappā
Mahābhārata — Vyāsa, Sanskrit
Raghuvaṃśa — Kālidāsa, Sanskrit
Vinayapiṭaka — Pāli
Kāmasūtra — Vātsyāyana Mallanāga, Sanskrit
Mahāvaṃsa — Pāli
Mohenjo-daro
Sūtra — Sanskrit
Ṛgvedasaṃhitā — Sanskrit
Lothal
Viṣṇupurāṇa — Vyāsa, Sanskrit
Atharvavedasaṃhitā — Atharvan & Aṅgiras, Sanskrit
Vālmīkirāmāyaṇa — Vālmīki, Sanskrit
Chanhu-daro
Saṃhitā
Abhijñānaśākuntala — Kālidāsa, Sanskrit
Aihole
Vaḍḍārādhane — Śivakoṭyācārya, Kannada
Second inscription of the Vāïllabhaṭṭasvāmin temple at Gwalior, year 933 — Sanskrit
Stone channel inscription — Prakrit