391
CHAPTER X II
GUPTA PERIOD AKD ITS AFTERMATH
The age of the Imperial Guptas is rightly acclaimed as the Golden Age of Indian culture. In almost all walks of life immense progress and prosperity were attained. In science, literature and art, this period signifies the begin ning of a new era. One cannot forget that this great achieve ment waS immediately preceded by an urge to bring order to, an urge to better arrange and better understand the knowledge hitherto gathered. A.s such codification of practically every sdience and art is one of the most important achieve ments of this period. On this solid foundation newer strides were taken especially in the field of our immediate concern
— material culture and architecture. Literature of the period stands testimony to these developments. However, it is an unfortunate fact of life that barring a few ruined temples and sculptures, little )ts known of the houses and towns of the Guptas. There are few, if any, excavations that have been aimed at or have exposed large-scale remains of this period.
The same happens to be true of the important political centres of most of the important dynasties of the post-Gupta era like the Chalukya, Vakataks, Pallavas and Rashtrakutas. Many of the sites of this period are overlain with present day habitations, making any extensive inquiry impossible. At the 392
same time it is equally true that no concerted and determined effort has yet been made to go in search for and/or excavate on an extensive basis, sites of this period. The net result is that we knew very little of the towns, town-plans, forts and fortifications of this period.
There are two sources that would give us some informa tion regarding the subject. The first one is literary, con sisting of the Smrti works and texts on vastu-shastra, the science of architecture. The other is monumental — descrip tions of ruins and of excavated remains published so far.
The later Sanskrit treatises, mainly theoretical and technical in character only serve to elaborate on what, the principles laid down by earlier thinkers. Brahmanda Purana, describes that villages and towns should be defended by three types of fort viz., Parvata, Udaka and Dharvan^. (hill fort, water fot and desert fort respectively.) According to Manu
Samhita, the king should build a town, making for his safety a fortress, protected by a desert, or a fortress built of stone or earth or one protected by water or trees, or one
(formed) by an encampment of armed men or a hill- fort". The king should make every effort to secure a hill fort which is distinguished by many superior qualities. From the point of view of the king and the kingdom, Manu describes the impor tance of a fort to a great extent and finally he comes to describe the construction of the palace for the king in the 393
centre of the fort which should be well protected, spacious
and habitable in every season, resplendent with white-wash, 2 and supplied with water and trees in abundance ,
Mayamuni in his text Mayamata Chap. 10 describes seven
different types of forts as hill-fort, forest fort, water fort,
Pankadurga or the fort surrounded by marshy land, desert % fort, gods fort and mixed fort. In details he describes
a fort situated within the hill ranges, besides a rocky emi
nence or perched on the summit of a hill is known as G-iri
durga that surrounded by dense Jungle of tall trees and with
an undergrowth of inter-v/oven thorny plants is a forest fort,
while the combination of the above two forts is a mixed fort.
As the names suggest a fort surrounded by rivers or lakes — oiaiuvaX 3r€tkeis or a r t ific ia l, difficu lt of approach due to deep water^
is a water fort while the one surrounded by a marshy land
where the transport of chariots, elephants, horses and also
of heavy siege machinery is difficult is known as Panka fort.
The fort situated in a desert land where the soil has been
made barren by and saturated with salt or brine water is
called as Airina durga. The desert fort referred to in the
Manu Samhita is a little different from this fo rt, as the
desert fort of Manu is surrounded by a region, though desert but
free from any element of salt or brine water. Its barrenness
was only due to sand while the desert fort of Mayamuni con
tains the elements which make the environments sterile. And
lastly the fort which cannot be approached on account of its 394
very natural circumstances is a Devadurga^. From an extract given by Messers Ananthalwar and Raes, it is found to be a fort whose entrance and exit are guarded by gods, rakshasas, betals, ghosts and evil spirits, which had been made unacce- ssible by hail storki, constant typhoons and fraquent showers; 4 and which is protected by spells, charms, and incantations .
Manasara classifies forts in some other mode and accordingly there are eight kinds of forts v iz ., Sivira,
Vahnimukha, Sthaniya, Dronaka, Samviddha or Vardhaka, Kolaka,
Nigama and SMandhavara. But according to their locations they are further sub-divided and this sub-division corresponds to the types of forts described by Mayamxani except that the one type that is, the Panka durga is not included in the list of
Manasara, likewise here the types are only six as against the number seven of Mayamuni^.
Beside the classification of the forts Mayamuni des cribes that all the forts should possess ramparts and several gates. The rampart should be 12 hastas (5*^9 m.) in height surmounted by a parapet wall. The gate-leaves should be furnished with Indrakilas of the length of one hast (i.e . g 0.457 m) . Similarly Mansara also describes the height of n the brick rampart to 12 hastas (i.e . m)*^.
In consonance with the teachings of the previous lite rature like Eautilya,SArthasastra and the contemporary lite rature , the history of military architecture in the period , 395
under study shows that a tendency in preference to a hill-fort is more. A precipitous cliff was selected for the erection of a citadel^the cliff sides being naturally scarped or other wise done artificially. The rocky eminence selected was usually beside a river, in between two rivers or furnished with a natural spring within the enclosure itself.
Some of the fortified sites that are supposed to belong to Gupta and post-Gupta period are briefly described here.
Mahasthan-garh District Bogra in Bengal was surveyed by
Gen. Cunningham in 1879-80 who describes it to be an oblong plateau measuring 1.57 km ., in length and 1.22 tm., in breadth, rising to a general elevation of 4.57 m. above the surround ing low-land. It was originally surrounded by a broad ditch on the north, south and west while the eastern side is defended by river Kartoya. The corner bastions as seen by Cunningham, were rising to a height of 10.67 m. He also observed six traces of gates while there are only four gates known to the a. people as D(z k According to universal belief of the people, Mahast/an is identified as Paiindra-Vardhan or Bardhan-Kot of Mohammadan historians — the capital of Varendra country (Eastern Gauda Q or F. Bengal) . 390 In 1928-29 the excavation at the site brought to light the Parasuram palace, city walls and bastions on the mound locally known as Munir Ghon. The wall was 5*35 in thick ness and rising to an extant height of 3 It consisted of ■y 0.60 m. thick brick built face and the co;4e composed of brick-bats. 1'he floors of the semi-circular bastions were 0.6 m. higher than that of other portion of the wall which made the excavator to take the feature of the semi-circular bastions to be an addition of later period. A terracotta figure of Sunga period found at the site indicated the occupation as early as the second century B.C. In 1950-31 in addition to the identification of Mahasthan with Paundranagar or Pundra- vardha^a, the date of the site was pushed back to 4^^ century B.C. But at present no knowledge of the shape and appearance of Pundranagar in Mauryan or pre-Mauryan times could be deci ded, despite so many excavations carried out at Mahafithan, as the excavations could not reach the earlier levels. But no doubt there was a city in the Gupta period, and probably the later addition of the semi-circular bastions to the en closure, may indicate a moderation in Pala period to the existing fortifications of the Gupta period. Several coins of Ghandragupta II and Kumargupta I found, and a large Vishnu temple, exposed on the Govinda Bhita mound, ascribed to the Gupta period, attest the Allahabad prasati inscription that at the time "frontier" kings ruling in East Bengal were in 397 some sort of relationship with the great Gupta dynasty and shortly afterwards Eastern Bengal itself was absorbed into Q the Gupta empire^. At Champa District Bhagalpur in Bihar, excavation on the western end of the site, revealed a mud-rampart belong ing to the second occupational phase of the site, ascribable to Gupta period. The rampart had a basal width of 15 m. and stood to an extant height of 4,85 and it was built on the top of an earlier rampart. No other details regarding the rampart such as the ground-plan and positions of the gateways has been recorded^^. Dljring the course of exploration in district Jalpaiguri- 7/est Bengal, the site of Nalrajargarh situated in the dense jungle was found to have been fortified. The fortification bting rectangular on plan were girdled by a moat. The massive walls stand to an extant height of about 4 m. to 7*5 m. The opening on each side suggested the four gates of the fort. The structure is first of its kind in Bengal as the western and southern fortification walls contains a special feature of two arches with sub-angular apex and three marginal courses of headers, '-^'he other notable feature at Nalrajargarh is a chain of niches 0.44 m. broad at the base and 0.65 ni* high aligned on the southern buttress of the western ramparts, total fifteen in number, having sloping base and reclining chimney made of terracotta rings withAthe co]fie of the buttress, 39H ultimately opening on the top. These niches aligned immedia tely above a ledge or platform and having signs of burning, structurally appear to be a series of furnace for smelting purposes. A. similar is expected to be in the second imposing buttress on the western wall. The entrance on the northern flank was protected by a projecting enclosure, built of bricks and reinforced with sand stone slabs. North-east sector of fortification possess^i an^ L shaped acqueduct. This detached sector measuring I I 3. 8O m. long and 49.40 m. broad has a staircase with stepped balustrades descending to the bed of the moat on the southern flank, exactly like its corresponding stair case o& the outer side represented by the receding northern flank of the main fortification. While the western flank of the enclosure is plain, the walls on the opposite side of the moat or acqueduct recede and emerge back at right angles to form a buttress at the mouth of the northern opening of the inner channel. To cover-up the breaches or damages by floods or other agencies, the fort seem to have been repaired more than once, as indi cated by the patch works. The fortifications according to the explorer seems to have been built during the Gupta period^^. The fortified site of Manjhi or Manohigarh ,Bistrict Saran in Bihar, situated on the northern bank of the river Ganga, consists of a lofty mound, elliptical in shape, with 39!) traces of brick-built ramparts visible on the north-west side. The mound covers an area of about 457 x 565*04 m. The rampart rises to about 9*1^ m. above the surrounding fields and enclose an area 304,8 m. x 426.72 m. The rampart is faced^on both internal and external faces^with baked bricks. The brick size used here is 45 x 25 x 7-5 cm. Remains of two underground vaulted chambers, perhaps secret passages, are seen in the southern line of the rampart. During exploration red-ware and a few sherds of M .B .P . ware were obtained. A brick bearing the inscription ”sri Prathama- ditya” in the character of about 6^^ century A.D. was found on the site in 1915 A.D, and it is suggested that the name ins cribed on the brick may belong to some later Gupta \inknown pFince, and the protected site also flourished in that period 12 To 'f'he north-east of the isolated mountain spur of Giriyak in Bihar, at a distance of 42 k m ., stands a high rocky eminence and a place known as Behar. The place is identified by Gen. Cunningham as Bihar or Vihar,owing to its name to the famous Buddhist Vihar of Avalokiieshwar — which is also confirmed by multitude of sculptured stone lying there. Buchanan described the site as surrounded by a strong rampart built of stone, cut in rude large masses from the adjacent rocks. The rampart forms a very irregular shaped enclosure and the foundations of the entire enclosure were 400 noted by Buchanan. At all the salient angles the rampart is defended by bastions circular in plan. It was surrounded by a moat on the north and east and by the river Ganga towards south and west. The maximum width of the moat was 182 m. while it was 121 m. wide at its narrowest point. The entire area of moat is under cultivation expect a narrow canal siirroun- ding the fort. Including the area of the original moat with fort area, the total comes to 1.57 sq. km. In 1872 Broadley visited the fort and described the northern and southern walls. According to him they were pierced by one gate each. The northern gate which then/was in a good state of repair, was flanked on either side by bastions. About 91 m. inside the northern gate, there was a sand stone pillar bearing two separate inscriptions of the Gupta dynasty. The upper inscription is of Kumargupta (^13- 455 A.D.) while the lower inscription,of which only upper left corner and a few words in the bottom are left,can be assigned to Skandgupta*. owing to its similarity with Bhitari pillar inscription^^. The hill-fort at Kherhi^District Bhagalpur^ in Bihar, is described by Gen. Cunningham as belonging to Sasanka — the famous king of Bengal in post-Gupta period. There are two hills lying adjacent to each other in east-west direction. The tolerably level-top-plateau of the eastern hill is enclosed 4'n by a rough stone-wall, made of rough stone blocks, laid an each other without cement. A low pass connects the eastern hill with the western one which is crowned by a citadel. The citadel besides one main-gate on the east possesses one postern gate on the west without any regular approach-way or access to it. The outer fort (on eastern hill) has two gates on south and east sides approached by two paved approa ches, one for each gate. Along the ascent, the stones of the fort-wall, steps and paved approaches, contain as many as 22 different inscrip tions (as counted by Beglar) in what is known as ’’shell-charac ter". According to Beglar these characters "are evidently derived from the old Gupta characters, as the disguise of flourish is not in all cases sufficient to mask the charac ters". Of them one is, he says "clearly an old Gupta charac ter curiously flourished" and he reads the word "Dharma" in IZl one of the inscriptions Nagari or Tambavati nagari (District Chitorgarh in Rajasthan) was surveyed by Gen. Cunningham. It is situated on the right or eastern bank of the Birach or Bairis river. The ancient town as a whole seems to have consisted of two parts namely an enclosed citadel towards the south, fortified by broad ramparts on south and east, and defended by Birach river on the west. And an outer town towards the north which may or may not have been enclosed within a fortification wall 102 in ancient times. No traces of wall or rampart are seen except on the east there is a continuation of a somewhat detached outer rampart, defending the principal entrance to the citadel towards north east and also defending the entrance to a ravine. This ravine running east-west divides the site of the citadel from the site of the outer town. As such the citadel being defended by the river Birach on the west and the other stream on east and south, forms a peninsular position, rendering the deep moat outside the ram part totally imnecessary. This elevated peninsula is composed of entirely habitational deposits — a result of age old habi tation. And down to the bed of the river, soil is found full of ancient bricks, pottery and stones^^. The site was excavated in 1962-65» and a 5*00 m. deep occupational deposit was divided into three different occupa tional phases. The earlier two phases were pre-defence while the third phase, probably coinciding with the advent of impe rial Gupta^^witnessed the constructions of defensive ramparts at the site^^. Bayana — 48 km., from Bharatapur in Rajasthan is iden tified with the ancient fort of Santipur. The fortifications at Bayana include portions which have been built successively at various periods. First by the Hindus in Gupta period, second by another Hindu chief Yijayapal in 11^^ century A..D. 40 U a^rid thirdly by Muhammadan Pathans eS fourth by Jats. Situated on the left bank of the Gambhir river, the for tifications are perched on tv^o lofty hills running out east and west. And on the western spur is situated a sort of inner fort, somewhat divided-off from the other or the new and larger fortifications^ by a strong wall and also partly by a deep gorge which runs in a little way from the north, representing the real ancient fort of Santipur, which is said to have been built by Vishnuvardhana and renewed or repaired by Vijayapal in 11^^ century A.D. This separate, old, fortified enclosure constituting a fort in itself is about 652.27 m. in length from east to west and vary in breadth from 185 to 215 in north-south direction. Xt the south eastern corner of the fort, there is a gate and a causeway descending to the gorge. The mouth of the gorge is blocked-off by a strong-wall, leaving only a narrov/ passage below forming a southern lower gateway. Simi larly at north-western extremity of the fort is another outer gateway leading to an inner gateway, situated at a distance of 45 m. eastwards. This inner gateway gives access to the main body of the fort. And passing through thts, one faces a wall which is the remains of an old enclosure containing ruined buildihg. So as to pass round this wall, one turns towards south and sees the remains of an abutment of an ancient ruined inner gateway, placed obliquely and in all probabilities, it 401 may be the original gateway of the original ancient Santipur fort. In two inscriptions of 11^^ century A.D. the fort is also named as Sripatha, and a little later it was named as Vijayamandirgarh, after the name of its ruler Vijayapala, who added to the strength of the existing fortifications. A frag mentary inscription of 500 A.D. , of the Maharaja Mahasenapati, elected by the Yodheya tribe, iinder whom was Santipur tempo rarily that time, proves that it was an important centre of administration under the Yodheyas. An inscription of 372 A.D. record the erection of a sactificial post, on the/Sompletio© of Pundarika sacrifice by Vishnuvardhana, who was probably the 17 feudatory chief of the early Gupta king Samudragupta ^ . The small fortified town of Nagar also often known as Karkotakanagar (in District Jaipur in Rajasthan) commands the pass of Ghar. It is a deserted site covering an area of roughly six square km. Cunningham describes the town as mea suring 2.52 km ., from north to south and 2.80 km ., from east to west, and surrounded by a ditch. Besides there is some pe culiar kind of fortification or may be for some other purpose, and that is the square shaped, regularly rising, parallel terra ces on the eastern, southern and partly on the northern side of the town, and also along side an ancient road 14.02 m. broad and running for a distance of 75 m. southwards from the town. 405 The oldest coins found at ITagar bear the legend "jaya It Malavanam TA^ich oae- assigned by Carlleyle to C 200 B.C. Other coins are with Buddhist symbols principally Bodhi-tree, Buddhist railing and Cakra or the wheel sjrmbol. Some Indo- Scythuan coins are also found there. Nagar was a famous capital of Malavas upto 10^^ century A.D. who are said to have fought the Saka-Satrapas of western India and performed Eka- shashtriratra in 226 A.D. to celebrate their independence. An inscription of 264 A.D. relates regarding the of a scrificial pillar by Ahisarman who seems to fee a Malva Chief Mandor — the ancient c^^pital of Marwar in Rajasthan is situated at a distance of 8 km. from Jodhpur on the bank of Nagadri river. The place was variously known in ancient times as Maddodara, and Mandavyapura durga, and it was in exis tence in 4^^ century A.D. as two or three names of the persons of this place are engraved in Nahadarao cave, in the character of the early Gupta period. When the town was taken into posse ssion by the Pratiharas in 6^^ century A .D ., there was a fort existing in the town. According to some evidence such as the name of the river on which the place is situated, as Nagadri and also a tank known as Naga-Kunda or Ahi-Saila, it appears and also corroboratey the tradition that Mandor was first held by the Nagas. Rajjila son of Harishchandra — the founder of the Pratihara dynasty, added to the already existing fortifica 40G tions, as is seen from an inscription in Jodhpur city wall, re lating that Rajjila constructed the city walls of Mandavyapura durga. The inscription belongs to Bauka — a prince of the same line and the wall referred to may be the rampart of the fort. The castle at Mandor or Junagarh as it is popularly known, is surrounded by a moat. Tiie eastern and southern sides of the rock on which the castle stands are scarped steeply. The north and west side walls of the fort, built of massive blocks of stones are still of a considerable height. The thickness of the wall is nearly 7*62 m. The eastern and southern walls have fallen down which Cunningham guessed to be an effect of some earthquake. The large stone blocks, finished in the shape of a true square laid on each other, signify the superior masonry though Tod calls is a "Cyclopean" masonry. The walls were strengthened on outer side with square or rectan gular bastions but at north western corner, the bastion is circular on plan and likewise circular bastions can be guessed on the corners. The position of the gateway is difficult to ascertain, only the main entrance to the city and the castle as well is indicated. In the debris of gateway complex, the monalithsprotruding out of the mound seems to be the remains of the "Torana" and are datable to early Gupta period. A.lso it is probable that all the monuments concealed in the debris, may be of the same epoch, though a temple unearthed from the mound was datable to 6^^ and 7^^ centuries A.D.^^ 407 The famous rock fortress of Chitor in Chitorgarh, District, Raoasthan appears to have been in existence in Gupta period. According to a tradition, referred by Jain^ author Somadeva regarding the conquest of "chitrakuta" by the Huna Chief Michirkula who was ruling in 530 A.D. the existence of Chitor town is indicated. During the Huna invasion the old capital of the Mories was shifted from Madhjrmika to Chit or. And the fort of Chitor is said to have been built by Mori (Maurya) ruler Ghittrangada, as related in Kumarapala prabanda (3 0 .2 ) of Jinamanadana and Prabandha-Samgraha (p. 105). ^'he fortifications of this great fortress include portions which have been built and repaired successfully at various periods and what the original shape and plan of the fort was, is difficult to Another place in Rajasthan, the fortifications of which, may be pushed back in age to as early as the period under discussion is Chatsu, situated about 43 km., south of Jaipur. The ancient wall which is practically disi&esefe^-^®^®^' indicates the great antiquity of the town's fortifications. The wall contains the clear evidence of reconstruction probably in 14^^ centuiy A..D. If Champavati of the inscrip tions is correctly identified with present Chatsu, which of course seems to have derived from i t , the earliest epi- PP graphic record of Chatsu is from 6 century A.D. m The next famous fortress of Gwalior in Madhya Pradesh also seems to have existed in the Gupta period. Though the date of the foundation of fort and its early history in general are veiled in obscurity.the earliest epigraphical record which mentions the Gwalior fort is from the 15^^ regnal year of the Huna Chief Mihirkula, which corresponds » to C, 525 A.D. on a sun-temple erected on the Gwalior hill by one Matricheta. Like Chitor again what was the nucleus of the present fortifications of this rock-fortress cannot be determined due to several additions and modification during big span of time by the various ruling dynasties. Cunningham relates some other tradition regarding the cons truction of this fort by one Sura^j Sen in 275 A.D. But there is nothing knovm regarding the Suraj Sen except the tradi tion.^^ Thanesar in Punjab, was visited by Gen. Cunningham in 1863-64 and he described the place containing three old mounds occupying an area nearly 1.6 km ., in length from east to west and about 0,609 km ., in average breadth, thus making a circuit of about 4-.27 km. , corroborating the statement of the Chinese pilgrim Hwan-Tsang who described the place 5*6 km in circumference, who must have included some outer suburbs of the city also. The earthen rampart rising to a height of 18.25 m. on the west side, forms an enclosure, square on plan each side measuring 565*76 m. in length. The enclosure is said to possess 52 tov/ers/bastions. For water supply,besides the scared tank Cunningham observed three irells, within the vici nity, built of large bricks. Cunningham traces back the anti quity of the site to Pre-Mahabharata period and tov;n was said to have been founded by Raja Dilip of Kuru family five generations anterior to the Pandavas. According to him Thaneswar is most probably mentioned by Ptolemy in second century A.D. as Batan- Kaisara which can be transliterated as Satanaisara. ^’he huge mound known as Raoa-Karn-Ka-Kila is upwards 1 .6 km., to the south-west of the holy tank, which is about 152 m. square at the top and 2^5*8 m. square at the base, rising to a height of 9.14 m. The mound known as Harsh-Ka-Kila and traditionally be lieved to represent, the capital of king Harshavardhana, may very well be dated back to Gupta period on the basis of surface P4 finds there On the north-west frontier, in the district of Dera- Ismail-Khan, out of the two Kafir Kots (i.e. northern and southern), the northern one commands the gateway of the famous Kurram defile as it approaches the Indus valley and the Punjab plains. For the control of trade or invasion whether from the low-land or from the high land, the precipitous spur chosen by the builders of Kafir Kot was a key-position. A stone defensive wall built of dry masonary, enclosing 410 an area of 50 acres (0.22 sq. km.) runs along the contours of the spur, overlooking the Indus on the east. At close inter vals the wall is strengthened by round .and rectangular bastions, one of which still stands to a height of 12 m. On the western end of the enclosure is a citadel. Near the main gate v;hich is described by 'feeler as a dog-legged entrance, neatly cut C X 'T lL sand-stone asklar blocks measuring 0.91 x 0.60 m. ose- regular ly coursed while ih one bastion on south-v/estern end the lower part is built of large unsquared blocks interspersed with coarsed rubble, in fashion characteristic of later Kushana period datable from second to fourth century A.D. The walls and towers are battered and in some cases the walls are protec- ted by a revetted berm as;t3ircap. This feature along v/ith tv/o types of bastions and also the two variety of masonry, besides indicating the long use of defences, suggest the site as a sequel to Sircap and Sirsukh in the history of fortifica tion^^. The hill fort at Badami in Karnataka, perched on an abruptly rising rocky eminence is square in plan. The enclo sing wall are built of undressed stone blocks in dry-masonry. There the bas-relief depicting the life scenes from Krishna's life are of later period but that in the lintel of the guard rooms are datable to 6^^ or 7^^ century A.D.^^ Among a nximber of other places in the Deccan or south are to be noted Aihole and Alampur. The former was an impor- 411 tant religious centre under the Badami-Chalukyas and was probably an administrative centre as well. It was surrounded by a rampart built of rough undressed blocks of stone. The construction was in dry masonry. There were square ramparts at regular intervals. It probably has a gate surrounded by a torana. The walls taper upwards. A.lampur, in Andhra Pradesh was a famous religious centre and tovmship under the leader of Kalyani Chalukyas. It ab^utted on the Tungabhadra and on the other side was a nallah which could have served as a natural 'moat'. Inside the nallah was a rampart of stone, built in the same fashion as the one at A.lihole. The present township has expanded con siderably obliterating large sections of the wall and hence it is not possible to determine the extent of the perimeter. Warangal, the capital of the eastern Chalukyas is pro bably contemporary or slightly later to this place. A.s such it represents the last phase of indigenous military architec ture. Here the fort was occupied, renovated, added to and changed in a number of ways during the subsequent centuries. It appears that the Hindu kingdoms of North India in the centuries were also well served by forts and fortifi cations. The efficacy and strength of many of these are indi cated in the narrations of the siege they faced (and withstood) from the Islamic invaders. Of all these, the fortifications 4i2 i»wArt O F T h f« ? i^ Q H 41 :i of tlie Chandellas were reputed to be extremely strong, almost impregnable. The kingdom was defended by a chain of eight principal forts beside other royal empampments. The tradi tion says : ”Alha ke dam se, Khajuragarh hai 5th Kot Kalanjar gaon haio" that is on the strength of A.lha (a hero of Banafer clan) depends (the existence) of Khajurahagarh, of the eight (chief forts) and of Kalanjar. The traditional eight forts of the Chandellas one Vari-durga, identified with Barigarh or with Oharkhari, Kalanjara, Ajayagarh (also known as Nandipura or Jayapura) Maniagarh, I^arpha, Mandha, Kalpi and Garka. In some lists Kalpi is substituted by Mahiyar while the other lists include Kirttigiri durga (Deogarh) and Sondhi (Seondha fort now 27 known as Karihargarh). ' Beside these traditional 8 forts several other forts seem to have included in the kingdom of the Chandellas. As seen from the Mahoba plate of Parmardi Deva, the Chandella territory for some time extended beyond the river Kali 28 Sindh upto the hill fortress of Gopagiri (Gwalior) Among these forts, Kalanjar is the most important and believed to have been the military centre of the kingdom. K A RA 4.15 A?A CH/tNOOiTtAt^i cT JrlixW-jT / 1^ ^ */H yu % 410 The flat-topped hill — a spur of the Vindhyan range, upon which the fort is situated is about 24-4 m. high above the plains. The fort wall running along the edge of the top- plateau forms an oblong shape and makes the periimeter about 6.4 km., in length. The walled enclosure measures 1.6 km., from east to west and 0 .8 km ., from north to south. Addi tionally on the north side , overhanging the village is a large projecting spur roughly square in shape measuring in length nearly 400 m. and again in the middle of the southern face, a triangular spur is protruding out. The fort had two entrances. The main gate is approa ched from the village side defended by seven gateways. 4fter a tolerably easy ascent of about 51 m. the first gateway — a battlemented building, added in the reign of A.urangzeb is approached, known as Alangir gate. Above this there is a steep descent, chiefly by steps to the second gate, called the Ganesh-gate. A.t a short distance higher up in the bend of road stands the third gate named Chandi gate or also as Chauburji gate. According to Maisey, there was in fact a double gate with four towers, suggesting its name to be Chauburji gate. The fourth gate known as Budh-Bhadra dvar (or the gate of auspicious planet Budha (Mars)) also knov/n as Swarga-rohana, is approached by steps. And the fifth gate is knoTATi as Hanirman gate , named due to the neighbour hood of a water reservoir Hanuman Kund. All these five gate ways and the approach way through these are commanded from i •** 4 the walls above, surrounding the projecting spur on north side mentioned above and appear to be of Hindu origin. The sixth gate is known as Lai darwaza from its red-colour standing near the top of the ascent. To the west of this gate is the faussebraie immediately above the Bhairava Eund. Then a short distance leads to the seventh or the upper-most gate called as Bara-Darwaza or the Main gate — undoubtedly a modern construction confirmed by an inscrip tion on it of A.D. 165^. The other entrance to the fort was on south-east angle. The main gate this side is knoviTi as Panna gate or Ban-3akar gate, covered by an small outwork. This approach defended by 3 gateways is now blocked off. The great Lingam of Filakantha is situated in an outwork in the middle of the west side of the fort and the upper gate leading to the outwork is attributed to Raja Parmal^^. The Chandella fort next in importance to Kalanjar is the Ajayagarh fort situated just .32 km. , south-west of Kalanjar. It is of about same height as of Kalanjar or bet ween 215 m. to 244 m. above the plain. Similar to that of Kalanjar here the approach to the fort is first tolerably easy but the upper part consisting of a reddish sand-stone 4 : h is very abrupt and quite inaccessible. The fort is smaller in comparison to Kalanjar and the walls along the edges of the flat-top of the h ill forms a circuit of about 1 .6 m. The fort has two gates, the northern one without name is known as simply Darwaza while the one inscription there men tion a Kalianjar Darwaza and as it is opening towards Kalanjar, this must have been known as Kalanjar Darwaza. The other gate tov/ards south east is called the Tarhaoni gate as it leads tom'ards the village of Tarhowan, at the foot of the h il l . The approach to the main gate i.e. the Darwaza or Kalanjara darwaza is defended by five gateways. Near the main-gate two tanks known as Ganga-Jumna are excavated in the rock and inside the fort are two big tanks known as Ajayapal-Ka-Talao and Parmal-Tal. And the water supply seems to have been better here than that of 50 Kalanjar which have failed on many occasions of emergency^ . Most of the Chandell forts are perched on fairly inaccessable h ills and surroiinded by strong fortifications. The Palas were also well served by excellent forts. In Monghyr district as many as seven fortified settlement re lated to Pala period have been observed. According to district Gazetteer, the foundation of the town Manghyr is attributed to famous Gupta emperor Ghandragupta after whom is was called as Gupta-gadh, — this name is attested by an inscribed rock at Kashta-Harini-Ghat at the north-western corner of the present fort. An ins cribed Copper-plate found in fort area referred to king Deb Pal (flourished in 10^^ century A..D.) meeting his feudato ries there. A.n inscription of A..D. 837 of the Pratihara king Bauka refers to the* conquest of Kudgagiri (Monghyr) of the Gaudas by Kakka — father of Bauka. A.lso the Bhagal- iih pur Copper plate of the 1? regnal year of the Pala king Narayanpala Deva mentions Mudgagiri as the place of royal encampment. Though the present fort at Monghyr is believed to have been built by early Mohammadan kings of Bengal but on epigraphic evidences it seems that the place was forti fied earlier - that in the Pala period, which remained in use during Pala period also^^. At Jayanagar district Monghyr, to the south of the village are two parallel ridges of rocky hills running east to west and the valley between shows the traces of an ancient site of a township — locally ajjtributed to the last Pala king Indradynmna. The hill on both side is nearly 90 m. high and thus forms a natural and much stronger fortifi cation — especially the northern ridge is difficult of access. The western opening of the valley was once closed by a large earthen rampart while the eastern approach was defended by several massive works now represented by mounds. According to Buchanan the rivers of one of the ridge represent the residence of the king, consisting of small court 4 .5 7 m* 4':o square, and surrounded by chambers or ramparts. On the southern ridge a cavern is created to have given shelter to king Indradyumna for a while At Surajgarha district Monghyr, the fort has been washed away by the Ganga river but the suburbs still show the antiquities of Pala period^^. Indpe in the Jamni sub-division of Iv'onghyr district was surveyed by Buchanan who describes this as a fortified enclosure square in plan measuring each side 503 but Beglar's plan shows it a rectangle measuring 610 m. by 488 m. Two lines of wall one inside the other form two concentric enclosiires, wall are 3 thick and a 1.5 la. wide moat surrounds the enclosure. Buchanan found the ruins of a stupa there. The place is said to have been founded by Indradyumna-^ . North of the Ganges in the Monghyr district are situa- 35 ted fortress of Naulagarh, Jayamangalagarh and Alauligarh In Gaya district the various fortified sites of Pala period have been observed. A.t Karkihar, ruins of a brick- built fort, yielded a large number of Buddhist antiquities of Pala period. General Cunningham noticed a high mound south east of the village of Dharawat, while Beglar describes it as a fortress, Keur Aphsad and Amaima are the other forti- fied places of Palu period-^ i2l Several fortresses of Pala period are found in the Bhagalpur district. The western most being the Sultanganj where numerous Buddist images of Pala period have been found. According to Sharma, the site of Antichak where a fortifi cation wall was traced to a length of 4 km ., it appears that the Skandhavara of Vataparvataka would have covered the area of present Antichak. Now the same place seems to have been situated the hill fort of Patharghata associated with many antiquities of Pala period. A similar fortified settlement was the fort of Shahkund on a hill top, which also seems to have been a Pala site. The ancient town of Champanagar — a fortified site of Gupta period presently represented by the suburbs of the present tov/n of Bhagalpur, also should ZQ have continued a fortified place in the Pala period^ . 4':2 BSFBRBR0E3 1. Brahmanda Purana I. Ch.. 7 (Anusangikpad) 2. Manu SamMta Oh. ?. 70-76 5* Mayamata Ch. 10. 36-38 4. Architecture of the Hindus 5. Manasara Ch. 10 44-52 6. Mayamata Ch. 10 44; Ch. 10. 41 7. Manasara Ch. 10 53-54 8. k. Cunningham — A .S .I .E . 1879-80 (Vol. XV) pp. 104-117 9. Arch. Survey of India Report 1928-29 p. 89-97 ; Ibid 1930-34 p. 128; ViHieeler — Five Thousand years of Pakistan p. 97 ; 102-103 10. Indian Archaeology — a Review ( I .A .E .) 1970-71 P»4-5; I.A .R . 1971-72 p. 5 11. I.A..R. 1966-67 p. 45-46 12. Arch. Survey of India Report 1922-23 p . 31; I.A .R . 1961-62 p. 9; I.A .R . 1967-68 p. 9 ; Patil D.R. — ;Vntiquarian Remains in Bihar — ARB No.296 13. A. Cunningham A.S.I.R. : Journal of Francis Buchanan; Patil D.R. — A,.R.B.No.72 p .44-46 4.3 14. A. Cunningham, A .S .I .E . — 1872-75 (V o l.X III) p p.128- 129; I.A.R. 1953-54 p. 38; A.R.B. No.2^1 15. A. Cunningham A .S .I .E . 1871-75 (Vol. VI) pp. 196 ff. 16. I.A .R . 1962-65 p. 19 17. A. Cunningham A.S.I.R. — 1871-75 (Vol.VI) p. 54-75 ; Ibid, Vol. ^}D^ pp. 81-88 18. A. Cunningham A .3 .I.E . 1871-75 (Vol. VI) pp. 162-195 19. Jain K.C. — Ancient Cities & Tovvtis of Rajasthan pp. 105- 107 20. Arch. Survey of India Reports 1909-10 pp. 95-100 ; Jain K.C. Op. cit. 168-169; A. Cunningham A.S.I.R. 1883-84 (Vol.XXIII) pp. 75-85 21. Jain K.C. — Op. cit. p. 224-225 ; A. Cunningham A .S .I.R . 1885-84 (Vol. XXIII) p. 101-125 22. A. Cunningham — A.S.I.R. 1871-75 (Vol. VI) pp. 106-120; Jain K.B. Op. cit. pp. 203-204 25. A. Cunningham — A .S .I .R . 1864-65 (V o l.II) pp. 550 f f .; Garde M.B. — Directory of Forts in Gwalior State p. 55. 24. Arch. Survey of India Reports 1922-23 p. 90; A.Cunning ham A .S .I.R . 1865-64 (V o l.II) p. 212 ff. ; Ibid. 1878- 79 (Vol.XIV) p. 96; I.A .R . 1957-58 p. 68 4.4 25. Wheeler A.3.M . — Five Thousand Years of Pakistan pp.59- 60 25. Arch. Survey of India Report 1928-29 pp.167-169 27. A. Cunningham — A.S.I.R. 1871-72 (Vol.VII) p.21 28. Sharma R.S. — Indian Feudalism (Appendix II) p.290; Mitra S.K. — The early Eulers of Khajuraho pp. 6-7 29. A. Cunningham — A.S.I.R. 1883-84 (Vol. 1X1) p p .20, 28; Arch. Survey of India Report 1927-28 pp. 11-12; Indian Antiquary Vol. XXXVII p .131 50. A. Cunningham — A.S.I.R. 1871-72 (Vol.VIII) pp.46-4-9; A .S .I.R . 1885-84 (Vol. XXI) pp. 46-48 51. A. Cunningham A.S.I.R. (Vol. XV) pp. 15-16; District Gazetteer Monghyr pp. 252-238 ; Patil D.R. — Antiquarian Remains in Bihar (A .R .B .) No.505 p. 278 to 289 ; Arch. Survey of India Reports 1922-25 p. 34 32. A. Cunningham — 1971-72 (V o l.Ill) pp. 153-159 ; Patil op. cit. No.210 p. 185 ; Sharma R.S. Cp. cit. p. 288 35. Sharma R.S. Op. cit. p. 288; Patil op. cit. No.427 p. 558 34. Sharma R.S. — Op. cit. p. 288 ; Patil Op. cit. No.190 p. 173 4 o 35* Sharma R.S. — Op. Cit p. 288 36. Ibid. p. 289; Patil — Op. cit. No.262 p. 221 37. Sharma R.S. — op. cit. p. 289-290 38. Ibid. p. 289