Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

History of Technology in India, Vol. I: From Antiquity to c. 1200 A.D. v1.c29: Town Planning, Building And Building Materials

History of Technology in India, Vol. I: From Antiquity to c. 1200 A.D. v1.c29

Language
English

Contents

Town Planning, Building And Building Materials

I. Town Planning

v1.c29.s1.1

Town is the symbol of the social organization. Its planning mainly depends on the ingenuity of a particular culture to systematise the township in accordance with the topography and ecology of the land, needs of the society and the governing agency.

v1.c29.s1.2

In India, there is evidence of the conscious planning of cities from the days of its earliest civilization viz. Indus civilization which prospered in a large part of Indian subcontinent, with an area of about half a million square miles during 2300-1750 B.C.

v1.c29.s1.3

There is ample evidence to show that Indus Valley town planning was not inspired by any contemporary civilization including that of Sumerians. It was an indigenous development that the genius of Indus culture can be rightly proud of and which did not appear in Athens even 2000 years later.

v1.c29.s1.4

After the demise of Indus civilization there is hardly any evidence of city life for about a thousand years and it is only around 600 B.C that there is a second phase of town planning. The study reveals that this second phase was neither earlier survival nor revival and the least an import. It is believed to be *sui generis* (Ghosh, 1973).

v1.c29.s1.5

While there is no literary evidence of the town planning during Indus culture, there are a large number of literary passages and accounts which bear testimony to the second phase of town planning which continued staggeringly till it merged with the present through its chequered history.

v1.c29.s1.6

For both first and the second phase of town planning, archaeological evidence is more reliable. The literary accounts give an exaggerated picture and the dates of these works are not always reliable. Nevertheless, the latter do help in supplementing the archaeological skeleton.

Indus Civilization

v1.c29.s1.t1.1

Indus Civilization had a vast expanse with its northern boundary at Rupar in Haryana, and the southern at Bhagatrav (Gujarat) eastern and western boundaries being Alamgirpur in U.P. and Sutkagendor(Makran) respectively, occupying an area equal to 1.25 million sq km; larger than the present Pakistan.

v1.c29.s1.t1.2

A large number of cities of this civilization have been excavated which reveal uniformity in the lay-out of the cities. Mention may be made of Mohenjo-daro, Harappa, Lothal, Kalibangan etc. The examination of the lay-out of these cities reveals that they consciously planned their cities and kept in mind the following factors :

v1.c29.s1.t1.3

1. The topography and the ecology of the area, (being riverine civilization) they selected long river fronts.

v1.c29.s1.t1.4

2. They chose rectangular area, kept proper orientation and followed the cardinal points.

v1.c29.s1.t1.5

3. The need for defence and prevention from floods made them to improvise the system of fortification and ramparts.

v1.c29.s1.t1.6

4. The division of the city according to the dictates of the society, building important quarters on the citadel and ordinary houses at the ground level.

v1.c29.s1.t1.7

5. They followed grid-iron system of laying out the streets, cutting each other at right angles.

v1.c29.s1.t1.8

6. High level of sanitation system and underground drainage.

v1.c29.s1.t1.9

7. Adequate means and regular system of water supply, through wells and tanks.

v1.c29.s1.t1.10

City planning takes effect largely through some governing agency and requires understanding of the ecology (in this case, the riverine ecology) and the means to exploit it. This would require adequate organization to execute large scale works of elaborate fortification and layout of the city and construction requiring experienced architect, masons, carpenters, with facilities of surveying, analysis and designing.

v1.c29.s1.t1.11

Excavations at Mohenjo-daro and Lothal etc have brought to light geometrical and surveying instruments for precise measurements and fixing cardinal points.

v1.c29.s1.t1.12

A brief mention may be made of some of the salient features of Harappa, Mohenjo-daro, Kalibangan and Lothal towns of the Indus civilization.

v1.c29.s1.t1.13

All the towns, big or small show regular orientation. The towns of Harappa, Mohenjo-daro and Kalibangan depict two distinct features, namely, on the west there is a distinct citadel mound which is artificially built on a high podium by use of mud bricks. From the center of the citadel branch out long axis running north-south and to the east. The citadel outstands the lower city which houses the main residential area. Either both the citadel and the lower city or at least the citadel were surrounded by massive fortification wall.

v1.c29.s1.t1.14

Harappa: The town extended over a circuit of 6 km on the left bank of Ravi. The site is now in Punjab province of Pakistan. It has been identified with Rgvedic Hari-Yupiya by Wheeler. There is a lower town and a citadel in the shape of a parallelogram (Vats, 1941).

v1.c29.s1.t1.15

Mohenjo-daro: Situated on the right bank of the Indus in Larkana district (Sindh: Pakistan). The city has a parallelogram shaped citadel 50 feet high and the lower town. The city had 12 blocks extending over 1.5 km. Granary and Great Bath are situated on the citadel. Great Bath measures 17×7×2.5m. It has the distinction of remarkable water proofing device using bitumen. Bricks are set on edge in gypsum, below the bricks was a damp-proof course of bitumen held by further wall of bricks. Sanitation methods are mentioned separately. (Marshall, 1931).

v1.c29.s1.t1.16

Kalibangan (Dt. Ganganagar; Rajasthan): Both the citadel (240 m N-S×120m E-W) and the lower town (240 m E- W×360 m N-S) are parallelogram in shape and are surrounded separately by a massive defence wall which is 3.5 to 9 meter thick made of mud bricks of 40×20×10 cm size in its earlier phase and 30×15×7.5 cm in its later phase. The fortification wall is mud plastered and is reinforced with rectangular salients and bastions.

v1.c29.s1.t1.17

There are four arterial thoroughfares in north-south direction and three or four in east side. Street corners are provided with fender posts to avoid damage from vehicular traffic. Roads are unmetalled except in the last phase. House drains discharged themselves into soakage jars, buried under the street floor. Streets were laid in perfect alignment.

v1.c29.s1.t1.18

Widest streets run across the lower city from north-south. Roads are twice as broad as the street and the latter are twice as broad as the lanes. The city shows regard to the cardinal points.

v1.c29.s1.t1.19

The citadel town had important buildings, civic, religious, administrative and also the granaries. General population lived in lower town (Lal, 1978).

v1.c29.s1.t1.20

Lothal (Dt. Ahmedabad, Gujrat): Situated at the head of gulf of Cambay, north-west of the junction of Sabarmati and Bhagavo rivers. Being a port town it had a somewhat different lay-out. The city is rectangular. The longer side, 300 meter had a north- south orientation and the shorter side 225 meter had east-west expanse. There was a massive mud-brick defence wall surrounding the city as a protection against the flood.

v1.c29.s1.t1.21

Port town is situated on a low ground by the side of a tributary of Sabarmati river. On the eastern side of the township is a dock-yard (detailed separately). The citadel, 7 meter high, constructed of mud brick, situated on the south eastern flank of the city, houses all the important establishments of the city - the acropolis. It measured 119×127m with longer axis north- south. All important buildings: public and private houses, and the warehouse, were built in of 12 cubical blocks with air ducts and passages running in between. Mention may be made of a series of rooms with a brick paved bath having remarkable system of underground drainage with silting chambers and cess pools -these might have been the ruler's residence.

v1.c29.s1.t1.22

Streets were four to six meter wide and narrow lanes two to three feet broad. Main street ran north to south (Rao, 1973).

Sanitary and drainage system

v1.c29.s1.t2.1

It can be safely inferred that the Indus civilisation had some central authority which asserted for the development and maintenance of the roads. Care was often given to paving of streets, and drainage. Regard for traffic and hygiene were advanced.

v1.c29.s1.t2.2

The Indus Civilization had exemplary right angled plans. It is clear that the authorities exercised their control to prevent the rise of tortuous alley characteristic of later cities.

v1.c29.s1.t2.3

The houses had a pronounced batter or slope and never encroached on the streets as is found at present. All houses had latrines and bath rooms disposing their waste into street drains. Houses had rubbish chutes, at the foot of which were some bins at street level. The rubbish bins stood at convenient places in the streets. The waste water entered the drains from tightly closed brick lined pits which had outlets to the drains about three quarters of the way up. These may be taken as forerunners of our septic tanks and grit chambers.

v1.c29.s1.t2.4

Each street or lane had one or two drainage channels about 18"-24", below street level and an area of 9"-12" or 18"-24" of the drainage channel was either covered with stone slabs or was roofed.

v1.c29.s1.t2.5

The streets usually ran from east to west or from south to north. Some important streets were 15 to 33 feet wide. Average roads were 9ft to 12ft wide. Most were unpaved, though some having burnt bricks pavements were found with joints grouted with gypsum mortar or bitumen.

Literary Evidence

v1.c29.s1.t3.1

Literature fails to give a realistic picture of town planning. Such descriptions are exaggerated and conventional, yet repetitive mention of high defense walls, deep ditches and moats, wide streets, large portals, busy markets, flowering trees, gardens and ponds needs to be critically examined.

v1.c29.s1.t3.2

Aryans were not city dwellers but were known as destroyers of cities and were called Purāndara. But building activity must have been there and growth of ‘pattanas’, the port town. Rgvedic architects were pre-eminently carpenters and built houses with wood, bamboo, thatch etc.

v1.c29.s1.t3.3

Panini mentions two divisions of town: Udicyagrāma and prācyagrāma viz. Kauśāmbi, Taksaśilā, etc. according to him most important parts of the town were; moat (parikhā), rampart (prākāra) and gate (dvār); the latter were named after the cities towards which they opened.

v1.c29.s1.t3.4

Buddhist texts and Jataka stories mention pattana (port-town) nigamas (market town), dūrga (forts) etc which show urban development which needed some systematisation and thus planning. Milindā pānho mentions the architect (Veddahi/Vardhaki) searching:

v1.c29.s1.t3.5

1. Faultless pleasant spot free from rocks, hills, gullies and not open to danger of attack.

v1.c29.s1.t3.6

2. The city is then laid out in regular measured quarters, with excavated moats and ramparts on all sides. With high towers and strong gate houses, with cross roads, street corners, market places, public squares, with clean and even roads, lined by shops, parks, lakes and gardens etc.(Milinda-panho 1928)

v1.c29.s1.t3.7

The Jain canonical text *Aupapatika-Sūtra* enumerates the important parts of the township as, 1. moat (*parikhā*) broad at the top and cut deep down, 2. solidly built rampart bent like a bow and provided with buttresses, bastions (*aṭṭālayas*), with gates (*toraṇa*) towers (*gopura*) and high roads (*Rājamārga*) etc. It also provided with junctions of 3. 4 or 6 roads.

v1.c29.s1.t3.8

Pānini mentions moat (*Parikhā*) gate (*dvār*) and rampart (*Prākāra*) as the most important parts of the city.

v1.c29.s1.t3.9

In *Arthaśāstra* a *grāma* was 1 or 2 *Krośas* in length. In the center of 800 villages was a *Sthānīya* (district town), of 400 villages, a *droṇamukha* (big town) of 200 villages a *Khārvaṭika* (town) and amongst 10 villages was a *saṅgrahana* (small township).

v1.c29.s1.t3.10

The *Sthānīya* could be circular, oblong or square in plan. The city was divided by three streets, running eastwards and three towards north. Each extremity of the street was to have a gate thus making up 12 gates in all. The main roads had the width of 4 *daṇḍas* or 24 feet. To avoid congestion roads were allotted for different purpose. *Arthaśāstra* mentions five kind of roads: *Rājapatha*, *Devapatha*, *Mahāpatha*, *Rathya* and *Caryā*.

v1.c29.s1.t3.11

The city had fixed position for various classes of people. The palace was in the center facing north or east. Temples of Gods also occupied central position. Surrounding the place were the houses of Brāhmins. The Ksatriyas, the Vaiśyas and Sudras occupied north, east and south parts respectively.

v1.c29.s1.t3.12

The corners were set apart for the guilds. Intermediate portion was marked for market, the houses of the royal priests and officers and so on.

v1.c29.s1.t3.13

Kautilya describes many kinds of roads classifying them according to their use and destination. Each road had a specified width varying from 4 feet for pedestrians and 32 feet to 64 feet for royal roads and trade routes. Roads were made with a convex surface (like the back of the tortoise) and were provided with drains on either side, water flowed down through these drains.

v1.c29.s1.t3.14

Further there are detailed passages on town planning in *Bṛhat Saṃhitā*, *Silpaśāstra* compositions: like *Mayamata*, *Mānasāra*, *Yukitkalpataru*, *Samarāṅgana-sūtradhāra* and *Nītisāra* of *Śukrācārya*. Mention may be made at *Mānasara* on town planning.

v1.c29.s1.t3.15

According to *Mānasāra* a work of c. 11th century A.D. smallest town unit was 100×200×4 cubits and largest was 7200×14,000×4 cubits. *Mānasāra* suggests that the cities should be built near the sea, a river or a mountain and should have facilities for trade and commerce and should be laid either from east to west or from North to South, according to the site.

v1.c29.s1.t3.16

*Mānasāra* divides town into eight classes: (*Rājadhāni*, *Nagar*, *Pura*, *Nagarī*, *Kheta*, *Khārvaṭa*, *Kubjaka* and *Paṭṭana*) and mentions the plan of a city (nagar). It had high, perhaps concentric walls about it in which were watch towers, massive gates, strong doors, protected chiefly by wide bridge moat, latter filled with crocodiles and armed with paling, guarded the walls. The city was laid in several squares. The streets were lighted with torches. The principles of Indian Town Planning have some striking similarity to those of early European cities and it is interesting to compare *Mānasāra* with the work of Vitruvius (a work of c. 25 B.C.).

v1.c29.s1.t3.17

The important subjects considered by *Manasara* and *Mayamata* are:

v1.c29.s1.t3.18

1. *Bhū-parīksā* - (examination the land)

v1.c29.s1.t3.19

2. *Bhumi-samgraha* (selection of the town site)

v1.c29.s1.t3.20

3. *Dikpariccheda* (determination of the cardinal points)

v1.c29.s1.t3.21

4. *Padavinyāsa* (surveying and mapping the area and marking into squares).

v1.c29.s1.t3.22

5. *Balikarma vidhāna* (sacrificial offering).

v1.c29.s1.t3.23

6. *Grāma Vinyāsa*, *Nagara Vinyāsa* (planning of villages and towns).

v1.c29.s1.t3.24

7. *Bhūmi Vinyāsa* (construction of storeyed buildings).

v1.c29.s1.t3.25

8. *Gopura Vidhāna* (construction of gate-ways).

v1.c29.s1.t3.26

9. *Rajaveśma Vidhāna* (construction of palaces).

v1.c29.s1.t3.27

10. *Mandapa Vidhāna* (construction of temples)

v1.c29.s1.t3.28

*Śukranītisāra* depicts city planning in an elaborate manner headed by *Grhadhyāpati* - the minister of town planning and in order of hierarchy stood *Sthāpati* (master architect), *Sūtragrāhik* (Surveyor) and *Takṣaka* and *Vardhaki*. In this text the central place is given to the *Sabhā* and areas are allocated to others depending upon their status and occupational classes. Wealth and cast were the main criterion. Regarding cardinal points of the lay-out of the city, he follows *Arthaśāstra* tradition viz. city buildings should face either the north or the east. It lays great importance on the selection of a site for the capital of the kingdom. The place should abound in natural wealth of flora and fauna, rich source of water and be navigable up to the sea and be even plain and picturesque and, not, far from the hills.

Second Civilization

v1.c29.s1.t4.1

Around 6th century B.C emerges the second civilization in India and we find the coming up of the capital cities of the sixteen *Mahājanapadas* (great kingdoms) like those of Kauśāmbi, Rājgir, Campā, Vaiśāli, Kāsī, Śrāvasti, Ahicchatra, Hastināpura, Mathura, Ujjain, Taxila etc. This civilization brings with it the fortified cities, kiln burnt bricks, highways which promoted long distance trade and communication and introduction of coinage and meaningful use of iron.

v1.c29.s1.t4.2

During the period of 6th century B.C. to early centuries of Christian era we get planned cities, with fortification wall, gates, bastions and towers (made of mud, unbaked bricks, baked bricks, wood and stone) some cities have moats, well laid and planned roads, streets and properly aligned houses with cardinal points in mind, reasonable systems of drainage, sanitary provisions, and system of water supply.

v1.c29.s1.t4.3

Fortifications have been brought to light by archaeological excavations at Eran, Kausambi, Rajghat (Kāsī), Ujjain, Old Rajgir, New Rajgir, Campā, Śrāvasti, Ahicchatra, Vaiśāli, Śiśupālgarh, Pātaliputra (here wooden defensive wall has been partly traced) and Taxila etc. The fortification walls have a large circuit: 6.5 km at Kauśāmbi, 5 km at New Rajgir (old Rajgir has a circuit of 40 km stone fortification but its date is not confirmed, it ought to be of the days of Bimbisāra). These fortification are not strictly planned. However the fortification of Śiśupālgarh, Sirkap and Taxila are well planned. At Rajgir and Mathura there were inner protection enclosures. Śiśupālgarh has later fortification. Most mud fortifications have partial or fully baked brick revetment.

v1.c29.s1.t4.4

Moats: At Sanghol there is evidence of three moats, first outside the rampart and the other two inside. But this is of late 5th century A.D.

v1.c29.s1.t4.5

The moat at Ujjain 8.1 meter deep is lined by a brick wall. It belongs to Pd I around 6th century B.C. Moat has been reported from Vijayapuri (Nagarjunakonda) from historical levels.

v1.c29.s1.t4.6

Kausāmbi (Dt. Allahabad, U.P) Earliest evidence of town planning in early historical period comes from Kausāmbi. The excavations in the area near Aśokan pillar revealed a planned city. The road excavated in the area controlled the plan of this city. Every house had access to this road either directly or through the lanes or by-lanes. The road joined one of the principal thoroughfares of the city connecting the Aśokan pillar area with various parts of the city and eastern gateway. Aśokan pillar stood at the junction of this road and principal thoroughfares. This plan continued from 4th century B.C to A.D. 400. The lay-out of the excavated city reveals the existence of a number of cross walls provided with doors which could be closed for protection and security.

v1.c29.s1.t4.7

Alignment of houses: Houses were aligned with roads and lanes and generally maintained correct orientation with cardinal points.

v1.c29.s1.t4.8

Sanitation System: The city shows well developed hygiene. The drainage devices include: ring wells, soakage jars, terr-cotta pipes, open brick drains, covered brick drains and brick tanks. These provisions served well for draining off water from houses and disposal of sewage.

v1.c29.s1.t4.9

Śiśupālgarh (Orissa): It is the best planned city of the 3rd century B.C. Its defensive wall was constructed in the first quarter of 2nd century B.C. There is evidence of large scale use of laterite blocks of massive size for gateways and monoliths and was reinforced by the brick ‘boxes’ filled with earth in next century. From the regular disposition of the eight gates: two on each of the 4 sides of the wall. The excavated remains reveal grid-pattern lay out. (Details of the fort city are given separately in another chapter)

v1.c29.s1.t4.10

Sirkap: It is new city of Taxila, founded by Indo-Greeks. It was extended and fortified by masonry wall and fully planned with spinal streets running from north gate throughout the length of the city, with smaller lanes meeting it at right angles. Houses are well defined. Sirkap is not a representative city of indigenous planning.

v1.c29.s1.t4.11

Vijayapuri: Excavations at Nagarjunakonda have laid bare the remains of the ancient city of Vijayapuri of historical period which displayed a well thought out plan with a citadel and residential area. The citadel was fortified complex with a moat. A tank with an elaborate drainage system has been brought to light. Structures show linear pattern in their arrangements with roads. Amongst the excavated secular remains is an amphitheatre with gallery on all sides and a bathing ghat.

v1.c29.s1.t4.12

*Arikamedu*: It is located on the eastern bank of a lagoon formed by Ariyankuppam river, about 3 km south of Pondicherry. Excavations have revealed a planned port city of Indo-Roman period datable to 1st-2nd century A.D.

v1.c29.s1.t4.13

Most important architectural remain is the 150 ft. long, oblong brick structures of a ware house, near the water level. Mention may be made of two tanks each with an adjacent room, extensively paved. It shows elaborate series of conduits and drains and pavements of large stones. Such an elaborate drainage system, some of the drains being constructed by means of corbelled wall, floored and roofed with horizontal bricks is quite unique in early cities of ancient India. The city continued to be occupied till 11-12th century A.D.

v1.c29.s1.t4.14

*Delhi*: Excavations at Purana Qila (Thapar, 1985) in Delhi has brought to light the remains of the old city of Indraprastha associated with Pāṇḍavas. The excavations have revealed continuous occupation from Pre-Mauryan days - through Mauryan, Sunga-Saka, Kusana, Gupta, Post Gupta and Rajput periods, finally giving way to Delhi Sultanate and Mughal period. Details of town plans and structural activity is being worked out to throw light specially on Post -Gupta and Rajput period.

v1.c29.s1.t4.15

*Warangal* (Andhra Pradesh): This is a unique circular city dating back to 12th century, when it was founded by Gaṇapatideva a prominent Kākatīya ruler. The city is defined by three concentric circles of fortifications. The outer two are of earthen rampart, protected by a moat. Four arched stone gateways are positioned at cardinal points. The inner circle is entirely limit of stone. The four gateways in these walls have large double-bent entrances; door frames and balustrades are typical features of the Kākatīya period. The four roads of the city converge on a ruined temple in the middle. Four free- standing portals leading into the temple still stand.

v1.c29.s1.t4.16

Medieval fortifications have been reported from Lal Kot (Delhi) from Deogiri (Dt. Aurangabad) and Dabhoi (Dt. Vadodara) These fortification were elaborate and built as fortresses and cities with moats and gateways.

v1.c29.s1.t4.17

For forming some idea of an ancient Hindu city one may mention Vijayanagar which remains the best preserved medieval Hindu capital town in India. An archaeological investigation of its urban lay-out and the chief monuments so far exposed, reveal sufficient information regarding the plan of the city as well as the form of individual elements viz. walls, roads, gateways, hydraulic works, residential quarters, palaces, civic buildings temples, shrines. It is situated on the bank of Tungabhadra river, regularly fortified having spectacular setting with granite landscape on the north, dominated by a gorge through which Tungabhadra river flows, to the south and west there to an extensive plain, on the South bank are the sacred shrines (around the village of Hampi). There is an irrigated valley to the south through which ancient canals still run. This separates the fortified urban core which is enclosed by a ring of massive fortification defining an elliptical zone about 4 km along its axis. Within the urban core there is an abundant evidence of habitation, temples, gateways, tanks and wells. At the south western end of the urban core, a cluster of enclosures encircled by high granite walls constitutes the royal center of the capital containing : palaces, temples, columned halls, treasury, watch towers, tanks and wells etc. Gateways are located along the roads leading into the urban core.

II. Building and Building Materials

v1.c29.s2.1

The existence of great variety of useful stones and wood and employment of bricks, mortars and plasters have greatly contributed to the magnificent achievements of India in the field of architectural engineering.

Stone and Rock Architecture

v1.c29.s2.t1.1

Choice of stone for large structures depends upon its hardness, toughness, porosity, strength and its internal structure (property on which depends the ease or difficulty in quarrying and dressing).

v1.c29.s2.t1.2

*Harappan:* Though man came in contact with stone in pre-historic times its earliest systematic use in India came around Harappan times when massive rough stone walls of unhewn stone were raised. Sometimes these are ten to fifteen feet high. These were built across the course of seasonal streams apparently as a crude effort intended to conserve an intermittently abundant flood water.

v1.c29.s2.t1.3

Exclusive use of stone and rubble was made for raising fortification at Surkotda, an Harappan site in Kutch, dating to 2100-1600 B.C.

v1.c29.s2.t1.4

Use of certain pieces of worked stone at Harappan sites suggest as if these were segments of pillars, but it is not clear whether these were employed structurally. However hammer dressed lime stone slabs were occasionally found covering brick drains. Probably such blocks were quarried with copper - bronze chisels and hammers of stone. Transport of such blocks would have required exacting team work.

v1.c29.s2.t1.5

Iron age megaliths (datable to c. 1000 B.C.) have a large expanse from the extreme south, throughout most part of peninsula. This culture worked with various rocks in which granite and gneiss predominate. In the Malabar coastal laterites, small rocks cut chambers are found. Some times these chambers are approached by an entrance from above and covered with a cap stone. Some of these chambers have vaulted roofs.

v1.c29.s2.t1.6

Some megalithic graves show stone alignment, comprising carefully oriented rows of standing stones, set in a square or diagonal plan. The standing stones are generally 1.5 to 2.4 meter in height, but occasionally examples of over 6 meter height are recorded. Small alignments have been reported with as few as three rows of three stones, four rows of four stones, five rows of five stones etc. But sometimes large diagonal alignments with many hundreds of standing stones are reported from Gulbarga district. These monuments are mainly distributed in Central Deccan and in the districts South Hyderabad.

v1.c29.s2.t1.7

*Rajgir :* On the top of the Vaibhara hill at Rajgir, there is a remarkable stone structure locally known as *masān* (watch tower) called *Jarāsandha-kī-Baithak*, a monument noticed by Huien-Tsang. It is usually identified as the residence of Pippala and Mahākṣapa of Buddhist tradition: this monument is the earliest structure of stone in India. These are watch towers - providing shelter for the guards. It is in the form of a large rectangular platform 85 ft.x81 ft at the base and 22 to 28 feet high.

v1.c29.s2.t1.8

It is built of large unhewn blocks of stone set in the rock without any mortar and contains near the base several small irregularly shaped cells on all sides. Its walls, like those of rectangular bastions of the outer city walls of old Rajgir have a slight batter.

v1.c29.s2.t1.9

*Śiśupālgarh*: There has been massive use of laterite blocks and pillars at Śiśupālgarh. Laterite blocks of an average size 6x2x1 feet have been recovered from Western Gateway (SP IV). Further towards the centre of the fort, there is group of sixteen pillars of laterite, some still intact. The average height of the pillars above the ground is 14-15 feet.

Maurya Architecture

v1.c29.s2.t2.1

Mauryas made a remarkable contribution to stone architecture. They introduced stone masonry on a wide scale. Magasthenes states that Maurya palace at Pataliputra was as splendid as that in the capital of Iran. Fragments of stone pillars and stumps indicate the existence of eighty-pillared hall, discovered at Kumrahar on the out-skirts of modern city of Patna. This attests to the technical skill attained by the Maurya craftsmen in polishing the stone pillars, which have maintained their polish even to-day.

v1.c29.s2.t2.2

Some new methods and techniques were developed to carry the huge blocks of stone from quarries, to polish and embellish them and for placing them erect. These stone pillars and columns are monolithic (made of a single piece of sand stone. Only their capitals which contain beautiful sculptures in the form of lions, elephants, horses and bulls are joined with pillars on the top. All this seems to be a great engineering feat.

v1.c29.s2.t2.3

These polished pillars of sand stone were set up throughout the country, this points out to the development of transport technology. Mention may be made of some of the Aśokan pillars:

v1.c29.s2.t2.4

1. Most celebrated of the pillars is the one of Sarnath (near Varanasi). This lion capital now serves as emblem of modern India.
2. Laurīya - Nandangarh pillar of Orissa.
3. Bull capital of Rāmpurvā pillar in U.P.
4. Pillars of Allahabad (U.P.) and Sanchi Pillar (M.P.) with lion capital.

v1.c29.s2.t2.5

Maurya artisans also started the practice of carving out caves from rocks for monks (*see under ‘Rock-Architecture’*)

v1.c29.s2.t2.6

*Stone and Rock-cut Architecture*: Earth is made up of layers of rocks, one above the other. Indian sub-continent is endowed with various landforms, varying in height and slope and may be classified into there major types : mountains, plateaus and plains, and is provided with rock shelters, caves and stone quarries.

v1.c29.s2.t2.7

*Natural Caves and Rock-Shelters*: Early man in India inhabited the natural rock shelters and caves from lower palaeolithic time onwards. Mention may be made of the rock shelters of Bhimbetka and Adamgarh in Madhya Pradesh, those of Gudium ( a few miles from Madras), Chenchu group of rock shelters in Andhra Pradesh and the rock-shelters near Mirzapur in U.P. etc. These early people were acquainted with stone quarrying and tool making.

v1.c29.s2.t2.8

From Mauryan times onwards there is development of a specific Indian architecture known as rock-cut architecture. It is also known as monolithic (single upright block of stone), that is to say that shrines were excavated in solid rock, either by hollowing out the necessary sanctuaries (chambers): the caves, the caityas and vihāras or by cutting away the exterior rock so as to leave an entire temple of solid rock.

v1.c29.s2.t2.9

Of the former, some of the earliest examples of rock-cut architecture are found in the granite outcrops of twin Barabar and Nagarjuni hills of Bihar where seven cave temples date from 3rd century B.C. There are Mauryan period inscriptions which indicate that these caves served as retreats for Jain monks. The interiors are remarkable for their mirror-like polished surface as seen at Sudama and Lomaś Ṛṣi Cave.

v1.c29.s2.t2.10

The beginning of monumental architecture in the Deccan is also of rock-cut sanctuaries and monasteries belonging to Śātavāhana period (2nd century B.C. - 2nd century A.D.). These monuments are excavated into basalt out-crop of western Deccan at numerous Buddhist sites including those of Ajanta, Bedsa, Bhaja, Junnar, Karli, Pitalakhora. During later phase (Śātavāhana- Kṣatrapa transition, first-second century A.D. the caitya halls of Kanhere and Nasik show more evolved arched motifs and decorative reliefs on the facades. Ajanta was provided with superb series of caitaya halls under the Vākāṭaka (5th - 6th century A.D). Under the patronage of the Kalacuri and Early Cālukyas (5th - 7th century A.D.) rock-cut caves and temples developed further as seen at Elephanta, Jageshwar, Ellora, Aihole, Badami etc.

v1.c29.s2.t2.11

There is another resurgence under the Rāṣṭrakuta rulers in rock- cut architecture, most important being that of Ellora. In south, during Pallava period (7th century A.D.) rock-cut caves and temples were executed into granite as witnessed at Mamallapuram, Mandagapallu and Tiruchirappalli.

v1.c29.s2.t2.12

In western India, under Kṣatrapa rulers of Junagarh (3rd/4th century. A.D.) monasteries for Buddhist and Jains were cut into the rock at Girnar. There is a group of 16 Jain sanctuaries on a rocky cliff at a height of 2100 feet, datable to Solanki period.

v1.c29.s2.t2.13

In central India a series of 20 cave temples assigned to Gupta period are reported from Udaigiri near Vidisa in Madhya Pradesh. These are excavated into sandstone ridge.

v1.c29.s2.t2.14

Earlier 35 cave temples were excavated into sandstone out-crops of Udayagiri and Khandagiri near Bhubaneshwar (Orissa). These were excavated under the patronage of Chedi Kings of first century B.C.

v1.c29.s2.t2.15

Some later examples of rock-cut architecture imitated free standing buildings. At Mamallapuram in Southern India, granite boulders were cut into monolithic copies of temples during 7th century A.D. The most impressive monolithic monument is the Kailas temple at Ellora, also datable to this period. Here, a great ditch was excavated into a cliff exposing a solid mass of rock, this was then hewn into a free standing monolithic temple, complete in all of its architectural details; from the mouldings of the basement to the dome like roof of the tower.

v1.c29.s2.t2.16

Monolithic solid rock architecture is also known from north India. One such representation is the fifteen towered temple datable to 9-10th century A.D. at Masrur near Kangra (Himachal Pradesh).

v1.c29.s2.t2.17

Rock-Cut Cave temples : Beginning with Maurya period rock-cut caves and temples my be taken as an achievement of Maurya Period. They scooped into hard and refractory quartzose-gneiss outcrops at Sitamarhi near Gaya district the caves of the Barabar and Nagarjuni hills. The technology developed further during Gupta period. The rock-cut caves included scooping out of the laterite, sandstone, granite, gneiss, charnockite and bed rock. Pallavas alone chose the hardest rocks like granite and gneiss.

v1.c29.s2.t2.18

Techniques of Scooping : Some of the unfinished caves give an idea and clue of scooping, chiselling and polishing practices adopted by the ancients.

v1.c29.s2.t2.19

First of all, the outline of the facade was incised by driving a tunnel into the rock, beneath the place where the ceiling would be. For this, small and closely spaced cubical holes were drilled along the selected line for breaking. Dry wooden cubes were forced into these holes and then wetted, their swelling caused the stone to crack and break. Bronze and iron chisels and mallets were the main cutting tools.

v1.c29.s2.t2.20

Considering the present day traditional craftsman it is likely that during Gupta period high quality steel chisels having a width between 1 to 2 cm, with two functional ends one pointed and another with broad cutting edge were used.

v1.c29.s2.t2.21

Sometimes, the rock-face was divided into 2 to 3 feet square blocks and deep grooves were cut between these blocks, which were then hewn off. This process was repeated until required depth was achieved. The concussions of the heavy hammer helped to remove sizeable pieces of the rock.

v1.c29.s2.t2.22

For reaching appropriate height metallic footholds were provided. The work of scooping, and chiselling off the projecting squares was done by vertical, lateral and centripetal strokes.

v1.c29.s2.t2.23

Carving, Dressing, Pecking, Grinding and Polishing : For carving out monolithic columns, brackets, doorways and windows, position of the facade pillars, cornices, beams and doorjams etc. the portions requiring carving were first marked and then carved out. These were finished by more careful and light strokes of chisel by experienced and trained artisans. After blocking, scooping and carving out different architectural members, the dressing of surfaces were made even by parallel straight chiselling as can be noticed in Lomas Rsi cave. The ridges produced by the above mentioned chiselling were removed. In this process of thinning called as pecking one chisel mark overlaps the other and prepares flat surface ready for grinding and polishing. Grinding is done (after even surface is produced by pecking) with the help of coarse grained stone, coarse sand and wetting the surface throughout the process. In this process a vigorous rubbing of the surface was carried out, removing all ridges, pitts, moles and chisel marks. Pillars and all other members were also given this treatment before polishing. For polishing some shining agent was supposed to be added during polishing, but this is not supported by factual evidence. The shine is the result of extensive burnishing with fine stone and fine grained sand. It brings out polished surface which in some cases glistens rather than shinning. The final shining surface also depends upon the quality of the stone.

Bricks

v1.c29.s2.t3.1

Bricks both unbaked and baked are standard building material since Pre-historic times. Their use has been attested from Pre- Harappan levels. Bricks are made of clay which is easily available in plenty in alluvial lands and was economical for use. It could be moulded in desired shapes, dried in the sun and used in unbaked form. Sun dried bricks were baked for use in structure to withstand weathering and resist wear-and-tear to last longer.

v1.c29.s2.t3.2

Unbaked mud bricks or adobe was used extensively in Pre- Harappan and Harappan times and upto historic period. Even to day unbaked bricks are used in undeveloped rural areas specially in arid and semi-arid regions.

v1.c29.s2.t3.3

*Nature of clay:* The soil used for fabrication of bricks consists mainly of clay along with natural impurities of the soil as quartz, mica, feldspar, calcite, kaolinite, depending upon the basic material from which the soil is formed. Main criterion for the mud to be useful for moulding bricks is its plasticity. Pure clay is very plastic and natural impurities affect its plasticity. The nature of the minerals, shape and size of the grains, presence of soluble salts and organic material influence the suitability of the soil for bricks. Plasticity can be increased by adding selected clay and can be decreased by adding quartz, sand, slag, organic material like husk of rice, or chopped straw. The composition of the brick varies according to the region.

v1.c29.s2.t3.4

In *Yajurveda-Saṃhitā* and *Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa* hair of goat, very fine sand, pounded rock and iron filings are mentioned as degressant material. These materials help in holding the non- plastic ingredients of the clay together. Use of *Ukhya-bhasma* is mentioned as an additive to mud for making bricks in *Baudhāyana Śulba Sūtra*. Most of the bricks are rectangular, yet bricks in various shapes and types: square, wedge shaped, L Shaped, decorated and inscribed have been used according to their specified use.

v1.c29.s2.t3.5

Wedge shaped bricks are found for steening wells, and are reported from Harappan period onwards. These are also used for construction of circular structures in early historic period. e.g.. at Lauriya Nandangarh, Kaundinyapura for stupas.

v1.c29.s2.t3.6

Square bricks have been reported from a large number of sites (vide infra).

v1.c29.s2.t3.7

*Round and cubical bricks are also known*

v1.c29.s2.t3.8

*L-Shaped bricks* - the Ksatrapas, Guptas and later rulers used decorative pieces by moulding. This is attested from Bhitargaon, Nibiakhera, Sirpur, Nalanda, Vikramsila etc. Such bricks were used in eastern India till medieval times.

v1.c29.s2.t3.9

*Light weight bricks* - these were made specifically where heavy bricks could not be used. These were made by adding to the clay such material which will be partially burnt out releasing carbon dioxide. For this the clay was mixed with limestone, organic matter like saw dust etc. At the Ramappa temple at Palampet (Andhra Pradesh) the use of light bricks is noted. The *Śikhara* there is made of such bricks. These bricks have low density and can even float in-water.

v1.c29.s2.t3.10

*Bricks used in Śyena-citi (Altars)* - Bricks of typical shapes and sizes are noted from Kausambi and Jagatgram. These are also inscribed.

v1.c29.s2.t3.11

*Size of bricks*: On the basis of measurement of bricks from various Harappan sites and structures the range of the size in cm is: 50 to 25 (length) × 25 to 12.5 (width) × 12.5 to 6.35 (thickness); keeping the general ratio of 4:2:1. The most common size is 28 × 14 × 7cm. A few examples may be necessary - earliest use of bricks (unbaked and baked) is attested for the first time from Pre-Harappan levels at Kalibangan (Dt. Ganganagar, Rajasthan)

v1.c29.s2.t3.12

*Kalibangan*: 30 × 20 × 10 cm (laid in English Bond) and the ratio of length: breadth: thickness is 3:2:1. (Pre-Harappan level). A large number of Harappan sites have been excavated and there is a great variety of structures and hence despite the standardization there is bound to be different sizes and shapes. Kalibangan Harappan levels reveal two sizes of bricks 40 × 20 × 10 cm in the earlier phase and 30 × 15 × 7.5 cm in later structural phase, both have the same ratio e.g. 4:2:1. (Harappan level).

v1.c29.s2.t3.13

*Banawali* (Dt.Hissar, Haryana): Pre-Harappan levels reveal unbaked bricks and following sizes in the ratio of 3:2:1 (as that at Kalibangan) are recorded: 30 × 20 × 10 cm, 36 × 24 × 12 cm, 39 × 26 × 13 cm an aberrant size square in nature is also reported e.g. 24 × 24 × 12 cm.

v1.c29.s2.t3.14

*Mitathal* (Dt. Haryana): Here also Pd I the size of the brick is 30 × 20 × 10 cm and in PD IIA the size is either 40 × 20 × 10 cm or 36 × 18 × 9 cm. (4:2:1).

v1.c29.s2.t3.15

*Surkotda* (Dt Kutch, Gujrat) Some structures show 40 × 20 × 10 cm size (4:2:1).

v1.c29.s2.t3.16

*Daimabad* (Dt Ahmadnagar, Maharashtra): Here too in Period II (Late Harappan) the size is 32 × 16 × 8 cm 28 × 14 × 7 cm (4:2:1).

v1.c29.s2.t3.17

*Post-Harappan Chalcolithic context*: At Gilund (Ahar culture) mud bricks of the size 40 × 22 × 7 cm and 33 × 13 × 10 cm and baked bricks of 35 × 15 × 12 cm have been reported. These look to have no resemblance with Harappan size.

v1.c29.s2.t3.18

*O.C.P. and P.G.W. Cultures*: Some old bricks and brick fragments have no doubt been reported from O.C.P. culture for example from Lal Qila, Saipai, Bhagwanapura and Hastinapura. Their number is limited, there are no structural remains nor any intact brick.

v1.c29.s2.t3.19

From Kausambi large sized bricks have been reported in very large number, from 9 feet thick rampart dated to c. 1000 B.C. their size is 48 × 33 × 7 cm.

v1.c29.s2.t3.20

At Hastinapura some bricks have been reported from P.G.W. level but these are fragmentary and only their thickness is known to be 5.6 cm.

v1.c29.s2.t3.21

*N.B.P.W. Culture*: There are regular brick structures during this phase datable to 600 B.C. to 200 B.C. and have been reported from a large number of sites but these do not fall in any fixed dimension. A few examples are given below:

v1.c29.s2.t3.22

Hastinapura itself has three sizes 45 × 25 × 7 cm. 30 × 23 × 6.5 cm and 37 × 23 × 6.5 cm.

v1.c29.s2.t3.23

Bricks from Mathura measure 40 × 24 × 5 cm and those from Kausambi show a range with 48 to 35 L × 30 to 18 B × 7.6 to 5.6 Th. Rajghat (ancient Varanasi) again has range of bricks 50 to 48 L × 31-29 B × 7 to 6 cm Th. Most common size taking all the N.B.P. sites is 45 × 24 × 7 cm.

v1.c29.s2.t3.24

Mathura (Kankali Tila tank) has three sizes 40 × 25 × 5 cm. 30 × 26 × 4 cm and 30 × 17 × 5 cm; Hastinapura bricks of this period measure 37 × 22 × 6.5 cm and 28 × 28 × 10 cm (the latter are square). Eran bricks measure 43 × 23 × 7.5 Sringverpura bricks range 41.5 to 44 × 27 to 28.5 × 5.5 to 7 cm.

v1.c29.s2.t3.25

Gupta Period: Brick size during the Gupta period also shows a wide variation. Large bricks like 61 × 31 × 9 cm and small bricks 19 × 19 × 16 (square) are found. A few examples giving range of length × breadth × thickness in cm will illustrate the point:

v1.c29.s2.t3.26

1. Sārnāth : 41.91 to 22.86 × 29.21 to 17.78 × 13.97 to 5.08 cm Square 22.86 × 22.86 × 5.08

v1.c29.s2.t3.27

2. Rājghat : Unbaked 48:26 × 22.86 × 9.27, baked 40 × 24.76 × 9.72

v1.c29.s2.t3.28

3. Kusīnagar : 39.37 to 20.32 × 24.13 to 12.7 × 6.98 to 4.44

v1.c29.s2.t3.29

4. Śrāvastī : 60.96 to 24.13 × 30.48 to 20.32 × 8.89 to 5.08

v1.c29.s2.t3.30

5. Bhita : 4.72 × 15.24 × 7.62

v1.c29.s2.t3.31

6. Kumrahār : 45.72 to 30.48 × 33.02 to 22.86 × 17.78 to 3.98

v1.c29.s2.t3.32

7. Vaiśālī : 41.26 to 13.97 × 27.94 to 13.97 × 6.35 to 5.08

v1.c29.s2.t3.33

8. Bodhagayā : 18.58 to 11.43 × 18.58 to 11.43 × 15.54 to 11.43 (Square bricks)

v1.c29.s2.t3.34

9. Bhītargaon : 45.72 to 33.02 × 26.67 to 22.67 × 7.62 to 5.08

v1.c29.s2.t3.35

10. Ahicchatra : 45.72 to 25.4 × 26.67 to 21.59 × 8.4 to 5.08

v1.c29.s2.t3.36

11. Candraketugarh : 33.02 to 30.48 × 22.86 × 5.04 to 4.44

v1.c29.s2.t3.37

12. Ratnagiri : 45.72 × 22.86 × 7.62

v1.c29.s2.t3.38

13. Eran (Pd III) 38.10 × 27.94 × 10.16

v1.c29.s2.t3.39

14. Devnimori : 48.26 to 40.64 × 33.02 to 15.24 × 24.76 to 6.35

v1.c29.s2.t3.40

15. Taxila : 45.72 to 25.40 × 35.56 to 17.78 × 6.35 to 5.08

v1.c29.s2.t3.41

16. Kaveripattanam : 41.91 × 24.13 × 10.16

v1.c29.s2.t3.42

17. Paharpur (Bangladesh) Round bricks of 16.0 cm, 13, 10.5 cm diameter and cubical bricks 7.62 × 7.62 × 7.62

v1.c29.s2.t3.43

18. Bharauch : 7th century A.D. 40.64 to 30.48 × 27.94 to 20.32 × 7.62

v1.c29.s2.t3.44

19. Thaneshwar (Harsha’s time) 35.56 × 21.59 × 6.35

v1.c29.s2.t3.45

20. Burogoan (Dt. Jhansi A.D. 10th century) 35.0 × 23.76 × 6.35 445; 0×29.84×6.35.

v1.c29.s2.t3.46

The above description of the size of the bricks from N.B.P.W. phase to Gupta period and onwards brings out the fact that bricks though made in moulds do not show any standardization as prevalent during Harappan period. This is mainly due to the fact that no scale was prevalent (none has been reported from any site after the Harappans). The measurements were taken from human body, length of the brick was based on hasta (forearm e.g. cubit), breadth on vitasti (stretched hand or span) and the thickness was based on four *angulas* (fingers). As this varied from person to person, the variation in the size of bricks can be explained as done by Lal (1983).

Mortars and Plasters

v1.c29.s2.t4.1

Amongst the building materials mortars and plasters are important ingredients. mortar may be defined as a material used for building or cementing the building materials e.g. bricks or stones. Plaster is the material used for coating walls etc. Some times the same material may be used as a mortar as well as for plaster. In ancient period mud was almost exclusively used as mortar and plaster. Though gypsum and lime plaster/mortar have been used during antiquity. The earliest use of lime and gypsum comes from Indus civilization.

v1.c29.s2.t4.2

At Harappa, gypsum cement of light grey colour was used in certain buildings. It consists of variable mixture of sand (20 to 40%), gypsum (45 to 75%) and lime (2 to 25%). Lime mortar with sizeable percentage of magnesium is also used in Indus Civilization. It contains calcium carbonate (26 to 57%), magnesium carbonate (4 to 11%) and sand clay (34 to 61%). The high percentage of sand and clay in lime plaster suggests that it was prepared by burning *Kankar* (calcarious nodules). The use of lime was restricted to drains and floors. *(See Table 1)*.

v1.c29.s2.t4.3

From the analysis of various samples of mortars and plasters from Mohenjo-daro, it may be concluded that gypsum mortar/plaster was quite common. Lime plaster was generally mixed with gypsum, but lime plaster free from gypsum has also been reported both from Harappa and Mohenjo-daro. The use of lime and gypsum mortar was confined to drains or floors where mud mortar was of no use. Gypsum and lime mortar are stronger and resistant to water.

v1.c29.s2.t4.4

Lime mortars have been used at Kausambi. These date from 600 B.C. to A.D. 100. But it may be emphasized that by and large only mud mortar and plaster were used. The results of the chemical analysis (*Tables 2* and *3*) show that the content of sand in the mortar, was slightly higher than that in plasters. The average ratio of sand : lime Ca(OH)₂ is about 1:1, whereas in the case of mortars the average is 2:1. For mortars, probably 2 parts of sand were mixed with one part of slaked lime.

v1.c29.s2.t4.5

Lime Plaster from Karwan (Dt. Vadodara, Gujrat) from pre- Gupta levels : From the analysis (*Table 4*) it is clear that two types of plaster was used. Samples 1 to 4 represent the upper coat of the plaster and 5 to 8 represent lower rough plaster. The former has higher content of lime as compared to the latter. Fine layer was laid and burnished to make it smooth and elegant.

v1.c29.s2.t4.6

Lime Plaster from Bhitari (Dt. Gazipur. U.P) (Gupta Period) : shows low grade lime plaster (*Table 5*) was used at the brick temple of Gupta period. It has sand and lime ratio of 6:1. The red colour of the plaster/mortar is due to the use of ferruginous *kankar* for preparation of lime.

v1.c29.s2.t4.7

Lime Plaster from excavations at Nalanda (7th-10th century A.D) (*Table 6*) shows 3 parts of lime (calcium carbonate) and 2 parts of sand. Some of the monasteries are thickly plastered. Jars with dried up mortar and a cell used as a cistern in monastery No 11 are indicative of the preparation of concrete.

v1.c29.s2.t4.8

Lime Plaster from Lingaraj temple at Bhubhaneshwar (Orissa - 10th century A.D) (Table 7) shows that lime:silica ratio was 3:1.

v1.c29.s2.t4.9

Cola and Nayaka Plasters show two types of plasters used : rough and fine, it has a ratio of 1:1 of lime : sand in rough plaster, and 9:1 in case of fine plaster. Nayaka rough plaster 1:3 lime : sand ratio, while fine plaster has 4:1 ratio.

v1.c29.s2.t4.10

Lumps of finely made lime in the shape of balls have been found mostly from late Jorwe levels at Inamgaon (datable to first millenium B.C.). Sometimes these have been carefully stored in pots. In one house of late Jorwe phase a large number of lime balls were found. This indicates some people were engaged in the manufacture of lime. Significantly a heap of shell, was noticed near the house, but no kiln.

v1.c29.s2.t4.11

Lime kiln for manufacturing Lime : Kilns were rudely constructed of stone blocks and usually located in a cavity. In charging the kiln large pieces of limestones were formed into a dome like arch with large open joints and kiln was filled with fragments of lime stones. The larger pieces of lime stone were placed above the arch and kiln was topped with fragments of small size. Kiln was charged with alternate layer of lime stone and fuel (wood). Bright heat was maintained for three or four days at a temperature of about 95°C, lime stone, kankar modules, sea shells are converted into quick lime (CaO) and CO2 gas is evolved. Before using it is slaked by mixing it with mater and slaked lime is mixed with sand or bajari for masonry work.

v1.c29.s2.t4.12

In addition to the above, mention may be made of use of clay, lime, gravel and hydraulic lime from post-chalcolithic levels at Navasa.

v1.c29.s2.t4.13

At Taxila, lime is used extensively during Parthian levels. Though at Bhir mound there is no evidence of the use of lime plaster. At Sirkap lime was used for finishing both internal and external surfaces. Floors at Julian (Takile) were covered with bajari-lime concrete.

v1.c29.s2.t4.14

At Arikamedu lime mortar is reported from historical period. Use of lime is also attested from Hullas Khera (Dt. Lucknow) from Kuṣāṇ-Gupta levels and from Banagarh (Dt. Dinajpur) where use of lime and Surkhi is known from Gupta and Pala levels. At Purana Quila lime plastered gutter connected with house drains is reported from levels datable to 8th-9th century A.D.

Wood

v1.c29.s2.t5.1

Wood and the vegetable world supplied the first building materials and wood was amongst the first constructional material for buildings. Post holes supporting wooden posts or bamboos have been identified from prehistoric settlements right from neolithic times. Sanskrit (*Mārkaṇḍeya Purāṇa*) and Pali literature (*Jātakas*) *Arthaśāstra* and *Rāmāyaṇa* show that buildings were generally made of wood. That wooden architecture prevailed in India for a long time is attested by the fact that when other material was used the buildings were made after their wooden models. The pillars, the arch, the door and the mouldings of the early caves all disclose their indebtedness to buildings made of wood. From the use of bamboos came the

v1.c29.s2.t5.2

Table 1—Percentage Composition of Gypsum and Lime Plasters and Mortars from Harappa and Mohenjodaro

First 173 of 270 passages. Read on

Linked texts (72)