252

CHAPTER X Section 1 EARLY HISTORIC PERIOD : LITERARY EVIDENCE

The most prominent event', which, not only influenced

the destiny of India, bu^ in the proper sense of the world, was responsible for the formation of India, as seen to-day, was the invasion of the Aryans, dating some-time^ during the

second millennium B.C. — probably the middle of the mille­

nnium.

Whatever may be the reasons for the destruction of the

Harappans, whether the invasion of these Aryan speaking € peoples of the land of the seven rivers and its invirons

under the leadership of their war-god Indra — the Purandhara

or the natural causes like the water-logging in the regions,

one thing can definitely be said that the efficacy of the defensive architecture possessed by the Indus people, could not prove itself. It was no match for the weapons and the

tactics whether of the Iryans or any other foe, equally

strong and determined. The remains of skeletons in the upper levels at Mohenjodaro^, indicate a deliberate destruc­

tion and sudden death of the individuals. There was appa­

rently neither the time nor the will to undertake a proper ,? 5 :j

diepoBition of dead-bodies, according to the prevailing customs of the civilization of the site by the original in- -flix. cUvo‘S>hk(pY\ habit an ts^^was sudden and complete. It also shows that the site was considered to be unfit for habitation by the con­ querors. As such the adjectives like status-symbol, concomi­ tants of town-planning invented from West-Asian sources; measures to stave-off ill-equipped nomades from north western h ills, used to describe the Indus fortifications, seem to be justified to a reasonable extent.

Prom the Indus basin, accompanying the invading Aryans, if one travels east-wards, one would witness, king Sudasa, after defeating the confederacy of the ten kings in the

Rgvedic famous battle of "Ten Kings", rushing to the eastern boundaries of his kingdom to face in battle and defeat his 2 non-Aryan adversary king Bheda, on the banks of river Yamuna .

And this evidence indicates the entrance or rather first foot-hold of theAryans in the Ganga-Yamuna doab — the heart­ land of India.

Coming to the point of defensive architecture of the

Aryans themselves, the first literary source is the Rgveda, the period of the composition of its hymns is supposed to be JtUb 1600-1500 B.C. and this with the last'^cent\iries of the Indus valley civilization. Herein Indra — the war-god of r s i

vedic Aryans goes on "from fight to fight intrepidly destroy­ ing forts after forts with strength^. He overthrows the non-Aryan kings and rends their forts *'as age consiimes 4 the garments" . He is described as a great leveller of the towns of the Dasyus, Sambhara — a formidable foe of the Aryans is said to have possessed as many as ninety

(R. Veda I . 1 5 0 .7 ), ninety-nine (R. Veda I I . 1 9 .6 ) or a hundred (R. Veda I I . 1 4 .6 ) forts which were all destroyed by indra to assist his Aryan protege, Divodasa.

The walled enclosure or fortifications are denoted with the words "Pura" "Mahapura" and "durga" in Rgveda.

These are described as of considerable size and propor­ tions, as broad (prithvi), wide (Urvi)^ and strong (Sasvata).

They are described as made of stone (asmamayi)^ or some ^ rj times of iron (ayasi)' e .g . Rgveda I I . 2 0 ,8 . says ’’when they placed the thimderbolt in his (indra's) hand, he slew the Dasyus and overthrew their iron castles” . The epithet ama may refer to unbaked brick-walls (Rg.veda 11.55*6). P4r ramparts and defensive walls with palisades and a ditch

Q the word used in Rgveda is "Dehi” . Some times a fort of

100 wall is also mentioned^. Among the royal officers Rgveda mentions "Purapati" as the lord of fort (R.veda 1 .1 7 5 .1 0 ), who might have been a commander of the permanent garrison and the custodian of the fort defence. ^55

Regarding the reduction of the forts, Rgveda men­

tions two methods. One is fire^®. Agni helped Indra to

reduce ninety castes of the Dasas^^. At another place

Indra is described as killing a demon to free the pent-up

waters which can be interpreted as the destruction of

the dams on the rivers constructed by the Indus people.

The stagnated waters t\irned against the Indus people12 13 If "Pur-Charisnu” of the Rgveda can be shown to have

been a kind of battering ram used against the fort-walls

while assaulting, a clear indication of siege warfare can be obtained. Fire, no doubt played an important role in

the operations of assault (R.veda 7 1 1 .5 *3 )• Arrows tipped with flame must have been used to set fire to enemy strong­

holds (R.veda 1.66.4.).

If as Sir Mortimer Wheeler felt, the Rgvedic Aryans destroyed the "Puras" or forts of the Harappans, the next

question that arises is, whether they themselves felt the need for and whether they constructed structural defences of their own? The answer to both the questions seems to

be in the affirmative.

According to Fergussion, the Aryans, when they

entered in India, had not emerged from a primitive stage

of cultiare and Indian architecture was largely a creation 14 of the non-Aryan races with whom they came into contact r-5G

But as it is more than probable that some of the Aryan

immigrants were an overflow from the great cities of

Mesopotamia and Persia, there is no reason to suppose that they were unskilled in the arts of city life . The building craft has always been closely associated with the science of warfare and the Aryan fighting clans woTild hardly have prevailed in the large struggles against the war-like non Aryan races of India, had they not been at- least as well equipped in the means of offence and de­ fence as their adversaries. Indeed every conquest of

India has been a story of the success of a superior tech- nicall^quipment that the invading forces/tribes possessed.

That all the fprts referred to in the vedic litera­ ture were not the strongholds of the Dasgus alone is proved by the internal evidence of the Rgveda. There are repeated prayers to Agni, in the text, to preserve the faithful with "forts of ayas’'^^ and to "be unto us a wide, broad ample castle"^^.

How much is the future reflected in the past, while the various words and terms are interpreted is anybody»s guess. Unfortunately in the case of the Rgveda, dangers of this happening seem to be great — Puras, Mahapuras,

"Puras of ayas" or that of battering ram are likely to appear to be the fruits of imagination, as there is no o f.'>57

archaeological evidence to support these interpretations.

However this lacuna might be condoned in view of the

fact that there is no archaeological evidence regarding

anything^connected with the Aryans.

Before proceeding to the later vedic literature

it is advisable to note before-hand that a failixre to

distinguish between the nomadic invading Aryans and the

settled Aryan inhabitants of northern India would give a

distorted picture. The later vedic literature is the

product of the settled Aryans of northern India — a far

cry from the Rgvedic Aryans while the early Aryans inva­

ders were economically and culturally nomadic barbarians,

had little use for or perhaps did not know the fortifica­

tions, their descendents in the later period began to lead

a settled life comparatively much more affluent and com­

fortable than of their forefathers, they gathered around

themselves, the paraphernalia like forts and towns.

The word "Pura” occurs here very frequently.

Atharva veda refers to "Puras" full of cattles (G-amate)

perhaps indicating the use of these fortifications to hold

cattles (A.V. VIII 6.23)* The word used to denote a ram- 17 part here is ’’Vapra” . The term Mahapura occurs in the 18 Yajur veda Samhitas and also in the Brahmanas, which

were according to Pischel and Geldner the towns with r.■58

wooden walls and ditches in the Vedic period, like Patali- ' 19 putra of a later day known to Megasthenes and Pali texts , 20 Forts were reduced by siege (Upasad) and effective d blockade, and some times finally captured by breaching the walls (prabhia) and assault. Fire no doubt continued to play an important part in siege operations. The sacri­ fice portion of Aitereya Brahmana mentions three Agni’ s as three forts (A.B. II . 2; V I I .1 .) Atharva veda mentions about the tongues of fire and tufts of smoke left in the 21 trail of a conquering army . The Kausitaka Brahmana men­ tions upasada (blockage) of the citadels of Asuras (K.B.

Y III.8 )

The later vedic literature such as Atharva veda,

Taittiriya Sa&hita and the Brahmanas, thus mentions the following items relevant to the science of fortification, v i z . ,

1. Durga, Pura, ffehapura — forts (small & big)

2. Vapra — rampart

3. Upasada — siege or blockade

4. Prabhid — Breaching of ramparts

5. Dvara — Gates, Zathaka Upanishad (II.5»l)

Uses Ekadasa dvara as an epithet of

Pura; Svetasvatara Upanisad (III.18)

mentions Navadvara pura. rS:)

6. Parikha — Moat

7. Arrows with flaming tips to set fire to the

vitals of the enemy strongholds.

The following cites are named in the later vedic

texts.

1. Asandivant — Vedic Index I p.72

2* Kamplla — Taittiriya Samhita V II. 4.19;

Maitrayani Samhita I I I . 1 2 .2 0 .

3. Ayodhya — Aitereya Brahmana V I I .3 .1 .

4. Kausambi — Satapatha Brahmana X I I .2 .2 ,1 5 ;

Gopatha Brahmana 1 .2 .2 4 ; Aitereya

Brahmana VI11.14. I

The literature next to be considered in connection

with the art of fortification, is that of the two great

epics of India i .e . Ramayana and Mahabharata. The date of

Mahabharata-war according to various scholars is approxi­

mately between C. 1000 B.C. to C. 900 B.C. Though both

the epics came into the existence as popular poems between

C 600 B.C. to 400 B.C., they cont^ned a military tradi­

tion that harks back to the vedic period according to

Dr. SinghT22 Jfehabharata prescribes that the king with his

ministers and army thoroughly loyal to him, should reside

in the city which is defended by a citadel and contains an red

abundant sto£k of rice and weapons, protected with impe­ rishable walls and a trench; a team of elephants, steeds and chariots and is inhabited by men possessed of learning and versed in mechanical arts and where provisions of every kind have been stored (Shanti Parva Ch.75 p .277 f f ) .

Vana Parva Chap, XV gives a general outline of a

fort. It should be surrounded by three ditches, each longer than the one succeeding it. The sides of the dit­

ches should be lined with stones or bricks. It should be

constantly filled with water, with crocodiles and lotus 77^ plants imbedded in it. It should have a pere^ial source uickii'y of .matter-. Near the inner-most ditch a rampart of mud of very high proportions should be constructed. The space

between the ditch and the rampart must be stewn with

thJ^ny plants. At the top of the rampart is to be built n the parapet with towers at intervals. In the ^lahabharata

Narada asks Yudhisthira regarding his forts and a similar

question is asked in Ramayana by Rama to Bharata,

Aranyaka Parva furnishes an account of defensive

operations against a siege, and also regarding gateways

and pennons, walls and watch-towers, as characterised to

the town Dvarvati (ffehabharata 3 .1 6 ,3 f t .) .

The word ”(ropuram" is used in Ramayana denoting a town-gate-way corrobarating the statement of Havell noted 2G1

above. Beside the description of some minor cities both the epics give a vivid description of the flefensive system of the capital cities like Ayodhya (Ayodhya Kanda 5.10 f f ) ;

Lanka (Lanka Kanda 3.5.11- 17); Indraprastha (Adi Parva 307.

30 ff) and Girivraja — the capital of the kingdom of

Magadha.

The city-walls of Ayodhya are described in Ramayana as 12 in length with high and strong ramparts encircled by a deep and wide moat. Balakanda Chap. V also describes Ayodhya as a city with defence.vand garrisoned by

soldiers of all arms. The gates of the city sec\ired by cross-bar (Argala)^are also mentioned (Bala-Kanda 6.28 c f.)

Ayodhya-Kanda 1 0 0 .4 0 ). Kiskindha — the capital of the

Vanara chief Bali is described as having golden gates, moat and a citadel (Kiskindha Kanda 14.5; 31.27).

While describing the fortifications of Lanka to

Rama, Hanumana says "Filled with rutting elephants Lanka ever rejoices. It is great, thronged with rathas and in­ habited by Rakshasas. Its gates are firmly established and o furnished with massive b^lts. And it has four wide and giant gates. (At those gates) there are powerfiil and large arms, stones and engines, whereby an approaching hostile host is opposed. At the entrance huge rocks arei T62

heaped and the bands of heroic Rakshasas are arrayed with dreadful iron sataghnis. It has a mighty impassible golden wall having its sides emblazoned in the centre with costly stones, corals, lapises and pearls. Round about, there is a moat exceedingly dreadful with cool water, fathomless, containing ferocious aquatic creatures, and inhabited by fish. At the gates there are four iron draw-bridges, furnished with powerful machines and they are thrown on the ditch. One among these bridges is immovable, strong and fast established; adorned with golden pillars and daises. And this dreadful Lanka, resembling a celestial citadel, cannot be ascended by means of any support. It has fortresses composed of streams, those of h ills, artificial ones and of (sea) waters. And 0 Raghava, it is situated on the other shore of the sea having its limits far away. And way, there is none, even for vessels.

That citadel is built on a mountain's brow, and resembling the metropolis of the immortals, the exceedingly unvincible

Lanka is filled with horses and elephants. And a moat and sataghnis and various engines adorn the city of Lanka belong­ ing to the wicked Havana. An Ayut of Rakshasas, dart handed, hard to subdue and all fighting in the very front line, protect the eastern gate. A padma of experienced Rakshasas, holding swords, Ian and bow, are stationed at the northern r e a

gate. An arbuda of Rakshas, car-warriors and horsemen, persons honoured and sprung from noble lines, holding swords and javelines, great heroes and fighting with all missiles protect the western gate. A niyuta of Rakshasas are stationed at the southern gate. Hundreds and thousands of foot-soldiers and car-warriors, irrepressible and mighty warriors protect the garrison”

Indraprastha — the capital city founded by the

Pandavas is severally identified with a suburb of modern

Delhi. It is described as surrounded by lofty walls and a very wide moat. It had numerous gates. The city posse­ ssed an abundant stock of weapons and food-grains. The battlements of the city wall bristled with sharp hooks and sataghnis as well, and other machines of war (Yantras) were installed on them. The city walls were always guarded by sentinels. The ditches of Indraprasha are also des­ cribed in Adi Parva (Ch. 134 verse 30) as resembling the sea by their width. The same text speaks of the lett­ ing off of the crocodiles and sharks and the embedment of lotus plants in the moat. (Santi Pai*va Ch. 59 line 8 6).

Girivraja — the capital of king Jarasanetha of Maga- dha which is identified with present Old Rajgir in Bihar is mentioned as a place fortified with natxire and art, in the Mahabharata. (2.18.30; 2.19.2 ff). Krishna, Arj\ma ?G4

and Bhima saw the city from the Gorathgiri h ill. They found it to be protected by the hills of Vaihara, Varaha

Vrsabha, Rsigiri and Caityagiri connected with one another beside fortifications. The fortifications of Rajagriha according to some scholars may perhaps afford an example of the stone fortifications and also the example of selec­ tion of a site for a city so strong strategically, con­ tinuous from Chalcolithic to the period of Ramayana and

Mahabharata. According to Buddhist annals, king Bimbsara left the old city and commenced a new town at the foot of the h ill. If the old city given up by this king is taken as old Rajagriha, it can be ascribed at least to 6 or

7"*^^ century B.C.^^

Valmiki divides the forts into four classes accord­ ing to their situations. These are river fort (Nadeya), the hill fort (Parvata), the forest fort (Vanya) and the pC artificial fort (Kritrima durga) . But Mahabharata suggests that cities should be established, supported and protected by one of the six types of forts, (Santi Parva

Chap. 86 line 5) and these six types are enumerated as

1. Dhanva durga (fort surroianded by a desert) 2. Mahi durga

(earth fort) 3. Manusya durga (fort made of elephants, horses and infantry etc.) 4. I^id durga (artificial fort)

5 . Vanadurga (fort surrounded by thorny plants) 6. Giri durga (hill fort). The classification however differs in some respects from that found in later texts. Here water fort is not included while the Mrid durga and Mahi durga have hardly any distinction. According to Dutt

B .B ., Mrid-durga may be a fort either of some variety of

Panka durga (a fort defended by a tract full of slime) of later classification or it may be a fort with a girth 26 of mud-wall like that of Bharatpur fort

BesideJ-so many other words denoting a fort Valmiki has mentioned a word "b ila” though the literary meaning of the word is a hole, in this case the purpose served seems to be that of a fort or at least a defensive struc- t\ire of last resort. The infrequent use of the word (only two times) indicate a rare variety and also the reference show that the variety was almost unknown to the civic - - 2 7 - - population. Kiskindha Kanda relates the chase of Mayavi

— an Asura by Bali — the Vanara chief, and finally the admittance of Ifeyavi into a "b i l a ", a capacious and impre­ gnable aperture in the earth covered with grass on the surface. Bali also enters the "bila” leaving Stigriva to guard the entrance, who goes on waiting for a lapse of a

Samvatsara, and finally hearing the roars of Asuras, con­ siders Bali to have been slain, runs away to Kiskindha after blocking-off the entrance by a huge stone block. 2GG

The description gives a clue that the ”bila” must have been as large as to accommodate so many of ffeyavi’ s followers and relatives and also Sugriva while guarding the entrance could listen nothing except the noise of the Asuras in their final slaughter by Bali. The "b ila” had an entrance which could be closed with stone slab beside its grass camoflaging. The second time it occurs as "bila d\irga” narrating the adventures of the vanara party sent to southern side by Sugriva. Somewhere in Vindhya ranges the

Vanara party enters a cavity and roamed in darkness until led by Svayamprabha — a female ascetic, only on the con­ dition that all of them should cover their eyes, who also told them that this fort of Riksha vila was constructed by

Maya — the master architect of Asuras. Sharma traces in this bila some artificial defence in the nature of an elementary labyrinth, which baffled the Vanara party while 28 in search of an exit and light . Angada likes the place as it was incapable of being approached and abounded in 29 viands, meats and drinks and also water; supply * Valmiki somewhere uses the synonym "Guha” to denote the place and also to denote the palace of Bali, frequently. Also 30 once he used the word Gxiha for Zidikindha its e lf, which was undoubtedly a fortified town or fort.

While describing the city planning both the epics mention the "Prakara" Torana" and "Towers". Even stone 267

and Iron ramparts like those of the Rgveda are mentioned though not frequently.

Regarding the pitching of a royal camp in the epic period, we are told that first a suitable site was selec-r ted. Santi Parva considers the regions near to a forest, to be the best for camping^^.

In Ramayana the word used for a camp is skandha- - 32 vara . Here Bharata encamped imder an auspicious star on the banks of the Ganga on a spot having a rich supply ■33 - of tasteful fruit . Likewise Rama selected a spotipot on the sea-shore” abounding in fruits, roots, and water'.«54

Bharata’ s camp was suruounded by an entrenchment, and was 35 furnished with ditches and watch towers while Rama's camp was defended by natural features of the spot, the sea on the one hand and the mountain suvela on the other.

Elsewhere Rama directed Satrughna to carry along with him a regular bazar with shop^elling various merchandise and also to include dancers and songsters in his troop.

Though the MsJiabharata is a story of open battle unlike the Ramayana relating mainly with the siege of

Ranka fort, sporadic mentions give an idea of siege-warfare.

The defence of the city of Dvaraka by Ahuka or Ugrasena in case of a siege are described in Vana Parva (Chap. 16-20). ri68

"Salva — lord of Saubha (king of ?fertikavat) came to the city of Dvaravati. And 0 son of Pandu, the wicked king stationing his forces in array, invested that city around and above"(Chap. 15)-

And stationing himself in the upper regions, the king began his assault on that city. The city at that time was well furnished on all sides according to the science

(of fortification) with pennons and arches and combatants, and walls and turrets, and engines and mines, and streets barricaded with spiked wood-works and towers and edifices on gateways well filled with provisions. And all the bridges over the rivers were destroyed and boats forbidden to ply, and the trenches around the city were spiked with poles at the bottom. And the lands around the city for two miles were rendered uneven, and holes and pits were dug there on, 36 and combustibles were secreted below the surface”^ . Santi

Parva (69.47) prescribes all the thatch — covered houses to be plastered with mud as a precaution against fire in case 37 of a siege .

In Ramayana, Janaka-father of Sita, was reduced to a sad state by the disappointed suitors of Sita, who besieged the city of Mithila for a period of one year*^ . Likewise in the Lanka-war when Nila effectively cut-down the inter­ course of Lanka with the outside world Havana complained to Kiimbhakarna that all his treasures have been exhausted^^.

Beside the method of effective blockade of the city/ fort and compelling the enemy to surrender, Ramayana also gives the a,^e old way of reducing a fort by means of sett­ ing it on fire. Hanumana set fire to Lanka with the speci­ fic motive of destroying its fortifications and to make the 40 - task easy for Rama . Even in the course of war, the Vanara host attempted to set fire to Lanka fort by means of fire­ brands. A forced entry through the gates,for which elephants were employed in later times^is seen to have^attempted by the Vanaras, who tried to break down the gates arches and bastions and filled the deep ditches with earth grass, wood and stone, despite being attacked with javelins and 'bhindi- 41 palas' by the Rakshasas from the turrets ,

The Jataka stories depict the political and socio­ economic conditions of India, when the country became more thickly settled and the tendency to surround towns and cities with defensive works for protection against enemies appears to have become more marked. Cities furnished with fortified walls and ramparts with buttresses, watch-towers and massive gates are very frequently mentioned in the

Jataka stories. According to Ekapanna Jataka, the city of

Vaisali is said to have been encompassed by a system of "70

tripple walls with gates and watch-towers, each wall a league distant from the next and then were three gates with 4.2 watch-towers on each one of them . The city of Mithila had

"its walls, gates and battlements” besides being surro\m- €k ed by a rampart with water-towers at the gate. It also had three moats encompassing the city within the rampart, of the three moats one was filled with water, the other with mire and the third one was dry, according to the Maha-

Ummagga Jataka^^. The city of Banares was fortified with walls, gates, towers and battlements, the dimensions of these city walls being 12 leagues in the perimeter^^. Similarly the city of Champa — the capital of the Anga kingdom is stated to have been surrounded with walls, gates and watch- 45 towers according to Maha-Ummaga Jataka, and so also had the city of Potali.

It is possible to hold that even small towns situated in less important areas were surroxinded by walls or ramparts of hardened earth, wood or bamboo etc. In one Jataka stoiy

(Cowell-439) mention is made of an Iron town indicating perhaps that Iron (ayasam) was used in some form to strengthen the particular points of the rampart or it coTild be on hyper­ bolic regarding the strong nature of the rampart. A similar city of Iron walls' is mentioned in Samyutta Nikaya perhaps implying the strength the city fortifications. n C?71

Some times in the discourses of Buddha such walled and battlemented towns are referred to Digha Nikaya mentions a border city surrounded by strong ramparts and towers and provided with a single gate wherein a watchman (dovarika) 46 was posted by the king to check the entrance .

Anguttara Nikaya specifies the seven requisites of a fortress and four kinds of supply for its maintenance viz.

A pillar aloft in a king's citadel symbolises strength and stability; a road and a moat around the citadel make it more unassailable s till; while an armoury of swords and spears ensures the supply of weapons to the garrison, including elephants-drivers, horseman, charioteers, bowmen, standard- bearers, billeting officers, soldiers of supply corps, princes, storm-troopers, warriors in cuirasses and home-born slaves; an intelligent and resourceful gatekeeper keeps out all strangers; the rampart is high and wide and cavered with a coat of plaster. And great storeiof grass, wood and water, rice and corn, sesame, beans, vetches, and cereals, and medicines, including ghee, fresh-butter, oil, honey, sugar and salt are vital to withstand the rigours of siege^'^.

Siege-warfare was according to these texts the usual practice. The aggressor king, after besieging the neighbour­ ing states would give a call of "either surrender or battle" and the fortifications i.e. the walls (pakara) generally built of bricks (itihika) usually of 18 cubit (8.25 metre)» height; gates (dvara) with towers (attalakthaka); battlements ?72

(gopura) and the moats or trenches (parikha) immediately-

surrounding the walls offered a strong resistance. During •e the siege operations, the first stjjp was directed against

the ditches. Prom the walls and gate towers the mighty

warriors, from the defenders, roused up and armed with all

types of weapons like red-hot missiles, showers of arrows,

mud and stones, faced the besiegers. While the later were

busy with the trenches, the men in the gate and on the towers

created havoc with arrows^ javelins and spears. >/hen such

attempts ia^storming failed other means to force the surrender

were sought v i z ., cutting off the supplies to the besieged as 48 seen in Asatarupa Jataka

A regular system of espionage was another feature of

such siege war-fare. Lines of action were determined as per the btst.cr'r\ reports from the spies (Uparikkhitta purusha). The

gate (Cula d v ^ a ) was the usual way through which the ingress or

egress of these spies was possible. Spies mixed with the enemy

people and used to know the secrets, they also spread internal

dissensions and disaffections by "so representing the facts”

(musavadam) as to create an impression that the whole army

had been corrupt by taking bribe from the another party.

Kunika employed the hermit Kulavalaya to cause the citizens

of Vaisali to destroy the mound and secured victory over 4.Q Cedaka, as depicted in the Jaina literature. Sending and

receiving messages were mostly effected by fastening letters 27U

to the arrows and throwing them in the desired directions^®.

The long-standing custom of not hurting the messengers and ambassadors was followed. Sometimes the siege used to be prolonged for a considerable time. "Kunika is said to have besieged the city of Vaisali for a long period^^. King Sali- vahana used to lay siege Bharuyakaccha every year^^. Strategy and diplomacy played an important part in this type of battles.

The main aim was to make the enemy surrender. The burying of counterfeit coins in the enemy camp by Abhaya Kumara, created a suspicion in the mind of Pajjoya — king of Avanti, regard­ ing the fidelity of his own soldiers and thus his attack on 53 Rajagriha was frustrated

Nowhere perhaps are the ancient Hindu ideas of forti­ fication better delineated, than in the Artha-sastra of Kautilya.

According to Kautilya, fort was one of the seven limbs of the body-politic. Though not the most important it was more important than the treasury and the army itself. For it is in the fort that the treasury and the army are safely kept and it is from the fort that secret war (intrigue),

f e > r 'i eeittPftl-one ’ s partisans, the upkeep of the army, the recep­ tion of the allies and the driving out of enemies, are successfully practised. In the absence of forts, the treasury becomes enemy property. He adds fiirther, that

”the heaven of the king and of his army is a strong fort,” 274

and that is why he prescribes that the king must possess forts "on all the four quarters of the boundaries of the kingdom" on grounds naturally best fitted for the purpose.

(Bk II Ch.3 . 1 . ) ; and "in the centre of the country he should lay out a sthaniya — the headquarters

^ revenue, on a site recommended by experts in the science of building, it may be situated at the confluence of rivers, on the bank of a lake that never dries up, either a natural or man-made. The Sthaniya may be round, rectan­ gular or square or in accordance with the nature of the building site, with water flowing from left to right, and it should also be a market-town served by a land route and/ or a water route (Bk II Ch.3 .3 )

For a country-wide distribution of the defensive system he asks the king to establish a sthaniya in the middle of

800 villages, a drona-muklia in the middle of 400 villages, a Earvatika in the middle of 200 villages and a Samgrahana in a group of 10 villages. Beside these the fortresses of the frontier chiefs shoiild be caused to be erected on the fron- « tiers so as to guard the entrances to the country and the intervening regions between them. (Bk.II Ch.l 4.5)

The military genius of Kautilya is most marked in the structural details of a fort. Starting from the outside he recommends "three moats to be dug round it (fort) at a :7o

distance of one danda (1.82 metre) from each other, 14, 12 and 10 dandas (i.e. 25*60, 21.95 and 18.29 metres) broad, three quarter or a half of the breadth deep, one third (of the top breadth) at the bottom or square with the bottom, paved with stones or (only) with the sides built of stone or bricks, reaching down to (natural spring of) water or filled with water coming from elsewhere, with (arrangements for) draining excess water and stocked with lotus and crocodiles’'^^.

At a distance of 4 dandas (7.31 Metre) from the (inner most) moat he should cause a rampart to be made out of the earth dug-out, 6 dandas (10»97 Metre) high, made compact, twice that in breadth, piled upward with a platform like

(flat) surface (at the top) or with a jug-like side, pounded by elephants and bullocks and having (on two sides) clusters of thorny bushes and poison^ous creepers. On top of the rampart, he should cause a parapet to be built, double the breadth in height, built of bricks from 12 hastas upwards upto 24 hastas either odd or even (number of hastas) in height (5.48 m. to 10.97 m.) with a passage for movement of the chariot (evidently on the top of the rampart) shaped like a palm-stem (tappering up-wards) and with the top decked with drums and monkey-heads” or he should cause it to be made of stones, close-knit big slabs". And here he hastens to say that "under no circumstances (should he have it) made ?7G

of wood for fire remains liirking in it. (Bk. II Ch.5 7-9).

He should cause turrets to be made, square with the breadth, pravided with steps for going down (of the) same

(length) as the height, and at a distance of 30 dandas

(54.86 metre) from each other. Midway between every two turrets he should cause a (Pratoli) tower to be built, with two storeys inclusive of a hall (and) one and half times in length. Between each turret and tower in the centre, he should cause to be executed a board, compact vrith planks having holes with coverings, as a place (from which to fight) for 3 archers. In the intervening space, he should cause a

"God-way" to b« made, two hastas din breadth and four times that in length at the side, which is recognised as Indra- kosha by Dutt. As the Devapatha is intended to protect the base of the parapet on the outside, it should be protruding on the outer side of the parapet top. It should be of strong wood fixed with copper strips with opening for shooting arrows but otherwise covered on all sides. Then*'he should cause tracks (steps to Devapatha) to be made of a width of one danda(1.82 metre) or two dandas and in an inaccessailable • • place a run-way and an exit-door". According to the commen- tory of Nitinirniti of Yogghama this is a runway protected by a small zig-zag wall of the h e i ^ t of a man, extend­

ing from the prakara to the moat, intended as a cover for the fighters. Outside (the fort i .e . in between the rampart and 277

the inner most moat), he should cause a covered-road to be made, that is stewn with knee-breakers, a mass of pikes,

pits, concealed traps, barbed*; wires, serpent-backs,

palm-leaves, three peaks, dog-jaws, bars, jumping sandals, frying pans and ponds^^.

In addition to this Kautilya speaks of the construc­ tion of canals (Kulya) to hold weapons. "In these canals there shall be collected stones, spades (Kuddala), axes

(Kuthari), Varieties of staffs, cudgels (Msrnthi), hammers • • • (Mudgara) clubs, discus, machines (Yantra) and such weapons as can destroy a h\indred persons at once (Sataghni) toge­ ther with spears,tridents, bamboo-sticks, with printed edges made of iron, cajnel-necks, explosives (agni-samyogas) and whatever can be devised and formed from available materials. Pie gives a list of various immovable machines

(sthira-yantra) specially stored to repulse assault on the fort. Further the articles of food, fodder and fuel should be stored in the fort "in such quantities as can be enjoyed for years together without feeling any want, with an 56 arrangement of replacing old stock with the new one

Based on the character of their natural environ­ ment, Kautilya classifies the forts under four principal heads, v i z ., Parvata durga (Hill fort), Audaka (water fort), Dhanvana (desert fort) and vana durga (forest fort).

All the four classes are again sub-divided into two type 27H

each, T i z ., a hill fort may be a one perched on a rocky precipice (Prastarain) or built in a valley in the midst of an encircling range of hills (guha). A water fort may be one situated on an island in the midst of a river (antar- dvipam) or on a plain surrounded by low ground or morass in which water is stagnated (mimnavar-uddham sthalam).

Similarly a forest fort can be either encompassed by many logs and fens inter-spersed with trees and bushes (Khanjano- dakam) or is girt by thickly-set tall trees with an under­ growth (stambagaham). Like^wise a desert fort is sub­ divided as either the one located in the centre of wild tract devoid of water or even of thickets (Nirudaka-stambam) or in a region sterilised by desert salt (irina)^*^.

Out of these four divisions while comparing the defensive capabilities, Kautilya adds that "Of two kings, one who has his forts on a plain, is more easily reduced than the other having a fort in the centre of a river, for a fort in a plain can be easily assailed, destroyed or cap­ tured along with the army in it, whereas a fort surrounded by a river requires twice as much effort to capture and supplies the defendants with water and other necessities of l if e ” . Again "of two kings, one having a fort surrounded by a river, and another having mo\mtaineous fortifications, seizing the former's land is better, for a fort in the centre of a river can be assailed by a bridge formed of ?7')

elephants made to stand in a row in the river, or by wooden bridges or by means of boats; and the river will not always be deep and can be emptied of its water, whereas a fort on

a mountain is of a self-defensive nature and not easy to

besiege or to ascend; and where if one portion of the army defending it^ is routed out, the other portion can escape unhurt, and such a fort is of immense service, as it affords facilities to throw down heaps of stones and trees over the CO enemy . And giving this comparative analysis the author declares, a hill-fort to be the best as it is the most un­ assailable .

In the leap-frog race between defence and offence during this period of India, the science of defence seems to have won. The fortresses^as is almost evident from the descriptions, could usually withstand the most powerful siege weapons known to the age. Regarding the knowledge of the irfibruments used in the siege operations very little is known. Use of scaling ladder was known and that of batter­ ing rams can only be conjectured on the basis of a passage

in Arthasastra (Bk. XIII Chap. 4). The same book mentions the use of funnels that the besieging king "may assail the rampart and parapets by making use of underground tunnels

and iron-rods” . But as all the ancient Indian thinkers on

statecraft have described a hill-fort as the best and as

also the rulers preferred, whether due to the teachings of ? 8 0

these authors or on accoiint of their own experience, most of these forts to be located on the hills, the use of mining does not seem to have come into general vogue. But for reducing the other types of forts, the use of mining as a tool of siege-craft is attested by the military impli­ cations of the word "Suranga” , and also the anti-mining devices described by Kautilya. Regarding counter-mining

(prati-Suranga) he says "when the enen^ attempts to dig an underground tunnel for the capture of the fort, the besieged should dig a ditch inside the walls, so deep as to make water come out of the earth. If the digging of the ditch is considered impracticable, a nuinber of wftlls may be cons­ tructed along the walls. In spacious places along the parapet, empty pots or Bronze vessels may be placed in order to find out the direction in which a tunnel is being dug by the enemy. When the direction of the tunnel is discovered, a counter-tTinnel should be constructed; or having made a hollow passage in the tunnel, it may be filled with poiso- 59 nous smoke or water .

The age-old method of reducing a fort by the use of fire, continued still though in some improved forms. In the words of Kautilya "Having captured the birds, such as vult\ire, crow, naptr, bhasa, parrot, maina, and pigeon, which have their nests in the fort-walls, and having tied to ‘81

their tails inflamable powders (Agniyoga), he may let them

fly to the fort; if the camp is situated at a distance from

the fort and is provided with an elevated post for the

archers and their flags, then the enemy's fort may be set

on fire (by means of flaming torches thrown by archers);

spies living as watchmen of the fort, may tie inflamable

powder to the tails of Mongooses, monkeys, cats, and dogs

and let them go over the thatched roofs of the houses; a

splinter of fire kept in the body of a dried fish may be

caused to be carried off by a monkey or a crow or any

other bird” (to the thatched roofs of the houses). He has

also given three recipes of the inflamable powders. But

finally he advises that the use of fire for the reduction

of a fort or fortified-town should be restricted only in

cases where no other method is of any avail, as fire cannot

be trusted, and as it destroys people, grains, cattle,

gold, raw-materials and the like. And also the acquisition

of a fort with its property all destroyed is a further loss.

As a precaution against siege Kautilya advises the

king to place all possible impediment*^before the enemy to

prevent a close investment. The grass and fire wood around

the fortress should be set on fire and destroyed, as far as

a yojana. All water channels and pools outside the fort o 8 2

are to be either destroyed or vitiated. And as already € noted, a system of secret WifcLls, hidden pitg'and barbed

Iron cords should be devised around the fort^^. He should instruct his Head of armoury (Ayudhagaradhyaksa) to install heavy immobile machines, worked by mechanical power on the gates and walls of the fort, and to be kept in readiness for projecting large shafts at the foe or dumping rocks upon them.

While describing the comparative superiority of a hill fort over the other types of forts, Kautilya takes into account the availability of large number of stones in the vicinity which can very easily be rolled down from the eminence upon the attackers. The enormous advantage of this method of defence becomes quite apparent in Indian histoiy through descriptions of various siege-wars by the classical writers during the Alexander's expeditions against the various hill-forts in the north-west frontier regions of India. Q. Curtius while narrating the siege of hill fort of Aornos says, **as the barbarisjis rolled down massive stones upon them, while they climbed, such as were struck fell h^tdlong from their insecure and slippery posi­ tions.

Whether it was to enhance the military genius of their king Alexander or it was a fact, but the most graphic description of Indian fortification system specially of 28y

north-west frontier regions and lower Indus regions, from the pen of various classical writers, who either accom­ panied Alexander in his Indian expedition or the later writers describing according to the fadts collected from the earlier writers or some other sources. Curtius des­ cribes the rock fort of Aornis (Aornos of other writers) to have been situated on a rock having all sides steep and rugged. And even Alexander himself with his superior tactical ability was at a loss to know to how to proceed.

He describes the rock rising up straight like a "Meta” (a tall wooden conical shaped cylinder used in Roman circus) and the river Indus, here very deep and enclosed between rugged banks, as washing the foot of the rock, while there were swamp and craggy ravines in other quarters. Arrian, though not a writer contemporary to Alexander but writing in second century A.D. and drawing informations mainly from Megasthenes and the Journal maintained by Nearchus, describes the same rock, crowned with the fort, to have had a circuit of 200 stadia and a height of 11 stadia at its lowest levels, ascended by a single path cut by hand of man with a provision of supply of pure water from a copious spring and arable land required to be cultivated^y the labour of a thousand men.

While describing the siege of Massaga, Arrian men­ tions the shooting of arrows from the battlements of the 4* 81

City one of which wounded Alexander in the ankle, and also the employment of military engines by Alexander for batter­ ing down the walls of the city and the vrooden towers from vrhich his archers could shoot at the defenders. But the stout resistance put up by the defenders, forced Alexander to cause a bridge ;\thrown from an engine over the battered down part of the wall to lead his hypaspists over the breach. Though he captured Tyre previously with this tac­ tics and the same force owing to the breakage of the bridge and also the bravery of the defenders on the top of the battlements, assisted by their fellow-beings who sallied out h. of a postern to fight the Macdonians,;could not take ffessaga, as long as the chief of the city remained alive. Similarly the hill-fort of Bazira is described to have been besieged by Koinos under the order of Alexander, which cotild not be stormed by the Greeks due to its immensely lofty situa­ tion, and strong fortifications. The fortifications of

Pushkalavati identified with present day Charsada withstood the siege by the troops under Hepaistion for 50 days. The besieging forces consisted of three brigades of infantry, half of the companion cavalry (the horse guards) and the whale of the cavalry under the most trusted general of

Alexander. But finally Alexander himself had to come down to receive the surrender of the city. m

It would not be out of place to mention here the battle of KatMans against Alexander, before the siege of

Sangala. In this battle they used a strange type of forti­ fication to defend their camp. Anticipating the advance of

Alexander against Sangala, the Kathaians lay encamped behind their wagons, which by encircling the low h ill, in three rows protected the camp with a triple barricade. These wagons according to Curitus were fastened together — a point which Arrian is silent.

Curtius says "this mode of fighting being quite new to the Maedonians, at first alarmed them, since they were wounded by enemies beyond their reach” . While in the narra­ tion given by Arrian it seems that one of the top-most strategists like Alexander committed a mistake in the selec­ tion of proper force to attack the situation. He rectified the mistake within time by sending infantry realising that it was not the job of cavalry. And finally the Kathaians were compelled to shut themselves up within the walls of the city of Sangala. Arrian says the walls surrounding the city were so great in extent that the besieging army could not surround it for a complete and effective blockade. How­ ever he posted cavalry towards the lake.

The chief stronghold of Sudracae, according to

Curtius's description was as strong that people running 28G

into the city, certainly trusted the strength of the forti­ fications for their safety. The fortificatory system of the particular spot where Alexander alone scaled up the ram­ part with a ladder is described by him. According to which

"the parapet which ran round the rampart was narrow, and was not marked out along the coping with battlements and embrasures, but was built in an unbroken line of breast­ work which obstructed assailants in attempting to get over.

The king (Alexander who stood on the rampart) then was clinging to the edge of the parapet, rather than standing upon it, warding off with his shield the darts that fell upon him from every side, for he was assailed by missiles from all the surrounding towers. For were the soldiers able to scale the wall under the storm of arrows, discharged against them from above". According Arrian, Strabo and Plutarch the above city belonged to the Malloi instead of Sudracae. The city has not so far been identified and it may b e l o ^ to any of the tribes but the above description of Gurtius, gives an example of an Indian city defence of that period.

The description of the city defences of Pataliputra by Megasthenes — the ambassador of Sileukos Nikator to the court of Chandragupta Maurya, who left the following account,

"it is in the shape of a parallelogram and is girdled with a wooden wall, pierced with loop holes, for the discharge of arrows. It has a ditch in front for defence, for receiv­ 287

ing the sewage of the city . . . The ditch was 181 m. in

“breadth and 20 m. in depth . . . The wall had 570 towers and 64 gates" . In later literattire this walled town became noted for its fortifications including its city-walls or palisade. And Patanjali speaking of the called Sukosala gives a detailed idea of the wonderful city-walls of Patala- putra. (Bhasya IV 5.66; II.5-11 ; IV.5.154; 11.521.)

Panini — the Sanskrit grammarian, in later period describes moat (parikha), rampart (prakara) and gategfere some of the most important parts of the city defences.

Sutra (V.1.17-18) of Ashtadhyayl envisage regular town- planning. For example "Parikhayadhan” , speaks of the space earmarked for a moat as "Parikheyi (Bhumi)” indicating the marking out of the site for the various parts of the town/ city/fort such as the moat, the rampart and the palaces etc., including in the preliminary portion of planning. The men­ tion of the word "Devapatha" in the Ashtadhyayl, gives a definite clue to Panini’s acquaintance with the technical details of the building of ramparts and parapets etc. He mentions "Devapatha" at the head of the "G-ana Devapathadi”

(V.3.100) which can be explained in the light of Arthasastra of Kautilya. According to Panini the passage resembling the

'•Celestial passage” with reference to its great height, is called "Devapatha". And according to Kautilya also, at the top of the parapet, in the intervening space between a turret or a tower and the Indrakosa, a passage was to be constructed. As it is projecting outward and situated at a height it was to be known as '*Devapatha".

As stated earlier the plan of the city used to be square, rectangular or circiaar in shape and the city-walls usually pierced with four gates. Panini gives the principle governing the nomenclature of these gates. Abhinishkramati dvaram (sutra 17.3.86) means "the*city-gate is named after the other city towards which it opens". According to Agra- wala the principle of naming city-gates originated at least in the 5 century B.C. and has continued throughout upto our own days. The roads leading out of the city-gates also derived their names in the same manner". Tad gachchhati pathi dutayoh (IV .3 .85) that is "the names of roads and couriers are derived from their destinations". Likewise other parts of the city are named such as "Ipana" a name given for business quarters (III.3.119); "Samchara" for inter­ secting bye-streets ( I I I . 3*119). Royal stone-houses specia­ lly ending in sigara e.g. Koshthagara and Bhandagara (IV.

4.70);^ king's council hall as Rajasabha and a number of other buildings comprised under the general term sala e.g. places of dramatic performance, dancing and music.

Ptolemy has written that there were thirty fortified forms in the Deccan during the Satavahana period. Many of the towns from this period like Ter (ancient Tagara), Pathan, 28H

Bhokardhan, Nevasa etc., have iDeen subjected to large scale excavations. However none has revealed the existence of any four wall or rampart. This contradiction is d iffi­ cult to understand and can only be attributed to Ptolemy's imagination.

A In another direction this would be highly signifi­ cant. But more about it later. TOO

KEFEKENCES

1. Wheeler R.E.M. — The Indus Civilization, C.H.I. Suppl. Vol. 1968 p. 129

2. Rg. Veda III. 53 ; 53. 9-12

3. Rg. V. I. 53.7. cf. I. 33. 12 ; I. 61.5; I. 63.7 ; I. 130.7 ; 1.131.4; 1.174.2 ; II 20.7; III. 34.1 ; IV. 30.20

4. Rg. V. IV 16.13 ; cf. 1.53.8, 9 ; I. 54.6 ; II. 14.6

5. Rg. V. — I. 189.2.

6. Rg. V. — IV 30.20

7. Rg. V. — I . 58.8 ; X 101.8.

8. Rg. V. — VI 47.2; VII 6.5 ; Vedic Index I. pp.379, 539

9. Rg. V. . I. 166,8

10. Rg. V. — VI 16.39 ; VII. 6.2

11. Rg. V. — II I 12.6.

12. Piggot S. — Prehistoric India p. 262.

13. Vedic Index II p. 417

14. Havell E.B . — The History of Aryan Rule in India p. 20

15. Rg. V. — I. 58.8.

16. Rg. V — I . 189. 2 f f . Taittiriya Samhita 1 .1 .1 4 .4 ; VII 16.10.

17. Atharva V. — VII 71.1.

18. Tattiriya Samhita VII 2 .3 .1 ; Kathaka Samhita 24.10; ffeiitrayani Samhita 3 .8 .1 ; Aitareya Brahmana 1 .2 3 .2 ; G-opatha Brahmana 2 .2 .7 .

1 9 . Vedische Studien I. 22, 23

20. Taittiriya Samhita VI. 2.3-1 ; Satapatha Brahmana. I I I . 4.4.3-5 ; Aitereya Brahmana I . 23 ; Copath Brah-

mana I I . 2 .7 . ;9i

21. Atharva V. XI. 9 .1 9 . cf. Taittiriya Samhita 1 .4 .4 6 .

22. Singh S.D. — Ancient Indian Warfare with special reference to the Vedic period. Leiden 19. Table of Chronology.

23. Ramayana VI. 3.10-28 (Ninaya Sagar e d .);

Dutt M.N. — The Ramayana English tr. pp. 1109-1110

24. Chakravarti P.O. — Art of war in Ancient India p.129; Ray Amita — Villages, Towns & Secular building in Ancient India p.66.

25. Ramayana V 70.26.

26. Dutt B.B. — Town Planning in Ancient India pp. 79-80

27. Ramayana IV. 7.34-39 (N.S. ed.)

28. Sharma R. — Socio-Political Studies of the Valmiki Ramayana p. 414

29. Ramayana. IV. 45. 22-25

30. Ramayana. VI 4.48.

31. Majumdar B.K. — Military System in Ancient India p.34

32. Ramayana VI 23.21.

33. Ramayana II 91.18.

34. Ramayana VI 16.2 ♦ 35. Ramayana II 19.19.

36. Majumdar B.K. Op. cit. p.35

37. Chakravarti P.G. Op. cit. p. 147

38. Ramayana I. 62.19-20.

39. Ramayana VI 39. 34-36.

40. Ramayana V. .5 0 .4 .

41. Ramayana V I.17. 10-29 292

42. Cowell E.B. — The Jatakas 149

45. Ibid G. 546.

44. Rhys David — Buddhist India p.63 ; Cowell E.B. - op.cit.5

45. Cowell E.B. — op. cit. 559

46. Dighanikaya 11.146; Anguttara Nikaya V. 194; 195

47. Anguttara Nikaya IV 106-107

48. Mehta R.N. — Pre-Buddhist India p. 166; Jain J.C . Life in Ancient India p.fi 78.

49. Avasyaka Gurni II. p. 174

50. Cowell E.B. — The Jatakas II. p.90 ; VII. p.400

51. Avasyaka Curni I I . p. 175

52. Avasyaka Curni II p. 200 ff.

55. Ibid. p. 159.

54. Arthasastra of Kautilya. BK II Ch.5 .4 .(Translated by Kangle R.P. p.70.

55. Arthasastra BK.II Ch.5.10-15

56. Arthasastra BK.II Ch.55-55

57. Arthasastra BK. II Ch. 5. 1

58. Artha Sastra Bk. VII. Ch.10. 28-55

59. Arthasastra Bk.XII. Ch.5-17-20 Arthasastra BK XII. Ch.5.15-15 n 93

CHAPTER X Section II

EARLY HISTORIC PERIOD GANGA VALLEY MONUMENTS

The literary evidence as enumerated in Section I of of this Chapter, relates that by around 800-700 B.C., the whole of the northern India was, settled. The successive waves of Aryan invaders had now settled down to a life

"based on agriculture and to a certain extent on trade. As a result of these settled conditions, villages and towns located at various important parts flourished and grew wealthy. Some of them rose to the status of capital cities like Rajgir, Kausambi and Pataliputra. The material prosperity and consequent need for better economic and political cohesion, made possible, indeed, necessitated the formation either of close-knit oligarchies or strong- ly centralised monarchies. The race for pociallar power was now on and it was a matter of common sense policy for these towns to girdle themselves with defensive ramparts. The description of Pataliputra by Megasthenes, along with references in Jaina and Buddhist text; Chapters

on fortification foxmd in the Arthasastra of Kautilya; representations of ramparts and gate ways at Amaravati,

Ajanta, Mathura and Sanchi give one some idea aboljtt the nature of the town-walls and other fortificatory systems

of the period. 291

It now becomes necessary to examine how far these literary descriptions are corroborated by the extant material remains. For this one has to go through the ggag- cif pt«c3?#s and descriptions furnished by the various archaeo­ logical excavations in the Ganga valley and some other parts of India. Though the archaeology of the regions of G-anga valley is not in a stage as advanced as one would like it to b e, the fragmentary evidence regarding the art of forti­ fication, indicate to a reasonable extent that like so much else in the life of ancient India, the art of fortifica­ tion also was nurtured in its infancy by the Ganga valley on its rebirth. The first birth and bringing-jip having been done in the Indus valley. In other words the extant remains of fortifications, in the region, corroborate the literary descriptions to a satisfactory extent.

To begin with the descriptions of these remains

Kausambi — the earliest known site in the Ganga valley can be taken as the first instance. Kausambi (district

Allahabad in U .P .) has been identified with the present village of Kosam situated on the bank of river Yamuna.

The site was visited by Gen. Cunningham in 1862-63 who described it as being surro\inded by an earthern rampart

9 m. to 10.6 m. high, irregularly rectangular in plan north side measuring 1372 m. in length and the southern,

29G

eastern and western sides being 1828 m. 2286 m. and 1554 m. respectively. The earthern rampart was surmounted by a brick-parapet, and it was surrounded by a ditch too^.

Cunningham identified it as the capital of Vatsa kingdom before and after the time of the Buddha.

The excavations spread over a decade or so, revealed the traces of ancient habitation covering an area of about

20.48 sq.km. A part of this was defended by a complex system of fortification. The site is well defended on the southern side by the river Tamuna and the vertical scarp- ment of the hard earth caused by the erosion of water current, while the other three sides are defended by a strong rampart and a moat around i t , in a semi-circular plan, making a circuit of approximately six and half km.

The average extant height of the rampart is 10.50 m. to

12.20 m. According to the excavator, during Period I , da- table to 8 - 7 century B .C ., the defence consisted of a mud-rampart reinforced by baked-brick revetment on the 2 outer face . During the excavations the revetment was available to a height of 15^ courses of brick. The first

50 courses from the bottom showed a batter of about 15° from the vertical, while the upper course that of 40®. The bricks were laid in English-bond throughout. In the second sub-period. l / period I , weep-holes 1 .8 m. apart were cut into the rampart as a precaution against the bulging 97

out Of the revetment due to water-loging inside. In the fifth sub-period of period I I , the rampart was raised a little higher and the use of mud-bricks is seen for the first time in the core. All this building activity is assigned to G century B.C.^

In period II ascribed to C 500 B.C. a subsidiary rampart of hard rammed mud with 9.1^ m* basal width and

5.^8 m. maximum available height was added. It was placed at a distance of 7»51 from the base of the revetment of the main rampart of period. In the second sub-period of period I I , another subsidiary rampart was added rest­ ing partly on the outer face of the first subsidiary ram­ part and partly on the accumulations lying against it.

This was built of a yellowish mud. It had a basal width of

11.5 It was available to a height of 4.5 m. It was found containing a long number of N.B.P. ware sherds, some silver punch-marked coins and uninscribed cast coins of

Copper. These finds indicate that the building activity of this rampart in the period II of the main rampart could be assigned to C 500 B.C. The same period witnessed the en­ circling of the defences by a moat varying in width from

120 m. to 300 m. at places .

The most striking feature found in the excavations in 1958-59 was the presence of a road between the moat and the foot of the rampart^, which may throw some light on the n 98

presence of a covered road measuring 4 dandas described by

Kautilya to surround the rampart of a fort. Outside the moat some mounds have been recognised as watch towers by the excavator. Some earthern towers are surrounded by brick- towers, one such tower measuring 11.40 m. x 5*20 m. was pro­ vided with projecting platforms on two sides and guard­ rooms on the remaining two sides. These have been recorded as constructions of period I I . A curved brick-wall lying in a north-westerly direction, with a guard room at its northern end and a corbelled drain appeared to be ports of the defensive system but their actual purpose has not so far been identified. The structure on the southern end of the curved brick wall also could not be recognised due to disturbances.

The rampart on the southern side was found to have been built of mud, which according to the excavator served the dual J)urpose viz. , to defend the city in case of attack and save it from the annual floods of river Yamuna^. One more noteworthy feature of the Kausambi defences is the n presence of eleven gates as against the number twelve des­ cribed by Kautilya.

A stone palace was brought to light during the excavations in 1960-61. Situated on the bank of Yamuna in the south-western corner of the ancient walled city, the 29H

palace complex occupied an area of 315 x I50 metres. Towards the Yamuna, two small but prominent moxmds were also inclu­ ded within the palace complex. The western of these mounds incorporate a strongly built tower, which over looking the river has diameters of respectively 11 and 12 m. at the top O and bottom . Based on the corresponding phases of defence and other finds, the first phase of the palace was ascribed to C 8^^ century B.C. while the last one can be dated to Q C first-second century Excavations also revealed that the palace was defended by a massive wall on the side of the river. The 6 m. wide stone wall standing to an extant height of 2 m. yielded two structural phases, showing a construction of rubble in the earlier and ashlar-masonry in the later. The palace was defended by a dry-ditch only on the outer side of the northern boundary wall. The ditch seems to have been introduced in the subsequent period when the N.B.P. wane made its appearance. This ditch showed three structural phases with the width measuring 9*29 and 5»15 respectively in the three phases^^.

Another site which may prove to b e , probably of the same date as that of Kausambi is Unchadih, situated some

52 km ., east of Allahabad. Though the site still awaits a> systematic excavation clear traces of a fortified inhabi­ tation have been observed there. The defence-complex at

Unchadih measuring 51*82 x 55*55 m* with corner towers, is 300

a small scale replica of Kausambi defences in plan. The existing height of the rampart was found to be 9*1^ It is faced with brick revetment on the outer side. The rampart seems to have been surrounded with a moat about 7»62 wide, and the watch-towers are situated outside the moat. Some of the pottery types found here were id e n tic ^ with those associated with the early periods of the defences of Kausambi.

The identical pottery types and the similarity in plan of the defences to that of Kausambi except the dimensions seems to be somewhat meaningful^^.

Bitha or Bitbhayapattana — also in the Allahabad district where the moxind at present known as Gark is identi­ fied with Vichhi or Vichigrama of the early Buddhist period.

Gen. Cunningham, who visited the site in 1871-72 described it as being surro\inded by an earthen rampart 10.67 to 12.19 high with a basal width of 60.96 m. It was square in plan and measured 365.76 x 457,2 x 457*2 m. Further, it must have been surrounded by an outer-work forming a faussebraie

(raoni) at a distance of 7»62 to 9.14 m. beyond the main line. At all the corners and at few other points, earthen mounds attested the presence of twwers, while the two big mounds on the western side suggest the presence of the main gate there, flanked on either side by two big towers. The rampart is pierced on the north-eastern and south-eastern 301

sides "by two other gates, the road way running along the high flanking walls was probably defended by guard rooms .

The site was excavated in 1909-10 and 1911-12.

Excavations revealed the presence of a town-wall, 5.4 m. thick, raised on an eastern rampart with quadrangular bastions add­ ing to its strength. The bastions projected 4.57 from the outer face of the wall and measuring 9.45 m. along its face were standing to a height of 1.82 m* to 2.74 m. above its base which was found to be 5*96 m. below the surface of the mound.

The inner or earlier part of the rampart is built of bricks f measuring 50.8 x 34.5 x 7*62 cm. and 5^*6 x 55.5 x 8.2 cm.

The cane of the rampart to a height of 1.52 m. from the base is composed of unburnt bricks and above this point, solid burnt bricks have been used throughout. The wall appears to have been constructed in the pre-Mauryan or early Mauryan times and it was pierced by a gate way which was closed in the later Mauryan period. In the same period the wall was strengthened by the construction of a bastion which was later enlarged by encasing it to a thickness of 1.22 m.

According to the excavator, brick was probably unknown to the site upto 5^^ century B.C. and it is likely that the place was defended by a wooden wall in that period similar to the ones described by Megasthenes with regard to the capital of IX Chandragupta Maurya . 302

Garh-Kalika mound in the outskirts of UJJain, on the eastern hank of river Sipra, and probably representing the rivers of a substantial part of the anciently famous city at U;3oa^ini. A mud-rampart erected here in period I datable Q to C 700 B.C. to C 500 B.C. , enclosed a p(pilygonal area. It was built by dumping the dig-up yellow and black clays (from the moat) to form a thick wall, with a gentle slope on the inner side and a less pronounced one on the outer side. The rampart had a basal width of between 60 m. to 75 m. and its extant height is about 12 m. According to the plan of the earliest inhabitants of Ujjayin, the site w^s defended on the west and distantly on the north by the river Sipra, but a moat on the eastern side was found to be filled with greenish water-borne s^# e . It continued to the south side as well being apparently connected with the river and thus completing the circuit of a water-barrier. The moat was bet­ ween 23»70 m. to 45 m. broad with a minimum depth of 6.50 m.

Earthen filling with burnt-brick revetments were given to the rampart while repairing its damages caused by the floods. And in the river-ward extension of the rampart, a a reinforcement of stout timber-l^gs was provided to a length of 114 m. at the spo|ft where the river Sipra takes an in­ ward bend. In this area the basal width of the rampart is as much as 105 and corresponding to this length the moat was lined with a 1.00 m. thick wall on its outer edge to a

301

depth of 8.10 m. As an additional feature against the water

erosion, the rampart was provided with a hrick-platform over

its toe towards the moat. The rampart continued to guard the

city during the whole of period III after which it fell into

disuse. The main entrance to the city was through the north­

eastern wall but how the moat was crossed is not very clear.

The excavations revealed a continuity of occupation

on the site from 700 B.C. to the "beginning of Muslim rule

in Malwa in the fourteenth century A.D. Finds were available s from the times at the Sunga^ to those of the Paramaras in period I I I , and then a very thin deposits of Muslim period

when the town shifted away from the confines of the forti­

fied walls^^.

Rajgir — the capital of ancient Magadha or southern

Bihar is situated on the northern fringes of the Barabara hill range. There are two ranges of hills, running parallel

to each other but irregularly, from south-west to the north­

east. These ranges commencing at a short distance north of

Gaya, run almost continuously upto Rajgir and terminate at

Giriak 4.8 km., east of Rajgir. The valley formed out of

these is pierced by the Banganga river, making a south ward

opening. And in the northern side, is the other opening

near the hot-spring. Except these two, the valley forming an 305

y r 30 G

irregular quadrangle namely km. in length, is not at all easily accessible. And it is said that the ancient town of

Rajagriha or Kusa^^apura was situated within this quadrangle and well' projected by walls now known as inner-fortification walls. The hills enclosing the valley have been variously named in Jaina, Buddhist and Hindu literature as Vaibhara- giri, Vipulagiri, Ratnagiri and Chatagiri. The two hills flanking the opening formed by Banganga rivelet, are known as Udayafeiri and Suvarnagiri. On the top of these h ills, # except the Chhata h il l , traces of fortification walls were first noticed by Gen. Cunningham in 1861-62 and he described the perimeter of this wall to be 13.33 km., in length, all over the tops of the h ills. Wilson in 1905-6 observed that the walls are not in continuity, though their total length pa-rh as they exist in traces may be of the order of 19•2 to 20.8 km. In the words of Marshall ”the break in the line of for­ tifications to the east of Chhatagiri, is a considerable one, and it is possible that the fortifications were never com­ pleted over these high mountains".

The fortification wall is built of massive undressed stone measuring between 0 .9 m. to 1 .5 m. length carefully ejsy-e- fitted and bound together, while the is composed of smaller blocks, carefully cut and laid with chips or frag­ ments of stones packing the interstices between them. No mortar or cement is visible. The extant height is from 2.1 m. 307

to 2.44 m. and 5»35 to 5.65 near Banganga pass. According to Marshall this is the original height of the walls, as no fallen blocks of stones have been found lying there. The thickness of the walls varies from 4.26 to 5*18 m. A.long the wall rectangular bastions 16 in nuijber occur at irregular in­ tervals. The bastions measure from 14,52 to 18.28 m. along the wall and from 10.56 to 12,19 protmding out of the / face of the wall. Out of all the bastions, 7 are situated ■s® to defend the Banganga pass alone. The bastions have the same masonry and probably were of the same height as that of the walls. The most interesting feature of the outer fortifica­ tion will is the presence of stairs or ramps built in the thick­ ness of the wall along its inner face giving access to the top of the walls and occurring at irregular intervals.

In all, nine such stairs or ramps were cotinted by Marshall.

Another feature is represented by watch-towers erected at various vantage points of the hill. The natural gaps bet­ ween the hills have been used as the entrance to the for­ tified enclosure.

The valley was provided with an inner line of for­ tification also, though in different periods. This inner wall is generally built of heaped up earth with a pebble core and encloses a pentagonal area, with a perimeter of about 8 km., in length. In 1950 during one of his explo­ rations Ghosh noticed the outer fortifications as a high 30 H

rubble wall running at the top of all the hills with a circuit of about 40 km. In a small scale excavation at the inner defence wall a large number of N .B .P . sturds were obtained, beside some sherds of other pottery-types in earlier occupation levels. On the basis of these finds the earliest occupation of the site is dated to slightly interior to the fifth century B.C. and the fourth or the less one being of the first century A.D.^^

A little outside the valley of Rajgir, on the nor­ thern side, is situated the comparatively smaller forti­ fied site known as New Rajgir, supposed to have been foun­ ded by Ajatasatru — the Magadha king contemporary to

Buddha. The excavation revealed a mud-rampart ascribable to period II-A, resting directly over the burnt layer of period I. The latter seems to have been the result of a conflagration, that was perhaps responsible for the d|fs- truction of the site inhabited by people using N .B .P. ware.

The rampart had a basal width of 40,53 except on the north, where it is less by three metres, and its extant height was found to be as 7»31 ni. A retaining brick-wall I'n eft 1.21 m. A width at the top and 2,15 m hiight with a batt­ ering of 17*^ was added on the southern side of the rampart^

The top of the rampart was gardened by yellowish mud and brick-bats. Outside the rampart the traces of a moat were clear but its exact dimensions could not be ascertained. The 30 n

The rampart and the moat are both ascribable to period

II-A i .e . C century B.C.

Period II-B witnessed the addition of brick-wall to the extant top of the mud-rampart. Over the collap­ sed debris of this wall a 2.15 m. thick deposit of earth and ash was laid in period III-A and this layer was super­ imposed again in period III-B by a wall of brick-bats measuring 5.35 in width. A rubble rampart was suspec­ ted by the previous investigators \mt its existence could not be proved by the excavations. The charcoal samples from pre-rampart levels indicated a date 245 + 105 B.C. while tested by 0 14 method^^.

Pataliputra — the celebrated capital of Chandra- gupta Maurya is situated on the confluence of river son and the Ganga. It occupies a roughly rectangular area very narrow in width, measuring 15 km., in length and

2.15 km., in breadth. It could not be excavated on a large scale, as the present city (Patna) is located pra­ ctically om the debris of the ancient settlements. How­ ever, the structural remains found in the excavations at a number of places such as Bulandibagh and Gosain-Ehanda, corroborate the descriptions of Megasthenes— an ambassador 17 of Seleucos Nikator to the court of Chandragupta ' Maurya 310

at Pataliputra. At Bulandibagh, below some brick build­ ings of the Gupta period was found a unique wooden cons­ truction consisting of a series of 4.20 m. long wooden planks at the bottom, flanked by 4-.50 m. high wooden uprights which were spanned on the top by tennoned planks, the entire arrangement making a hollow passage.

This structure was uncovered to a length of 75 without reaching its end. And was identified as the wooden pali­ sade mentioned by Megasthenes. At Gosain-Khanda — a place about 3 quarters of a km., from Bulandibagh, a similar wooden structure without however the bottom 18 planks was again covered

Sravasti — District Bahraich in U.P. is represen­ ted by the present village of Mahet, situated on the southern bank of a sheet of water. Known as Naukhan

J h i l , Gen. Cunnigham who surveyed the site describes the crescent — shaped Jhil as the old bed of river Rapti or

Achiravati, which at present flowiabout 2 km., north of the mound of Mahet. And the site was according to him, defended by a rampart, erescent-shaped in plan and with an extant height of 10.6? to 12,19 m. in the west and from 7.62 to 9*14 m. on the other side, '^ i l e the site is defended on the north eastern side by the old bed of

Rapti, the south-western side was defended by a ditch. On 311 312

the basis of fragments of large sized bricks lying profusely there, Cunningham inferred that the earthen

rampart must have been crowned by a battlemented brick- parapet. A portion of the parapet wall discovered stand­

ing in the middle of the side facing the jhil was found to be 3.05 m. in thickness^^. A small scale excavation carried out in 1958-59 revealed that the habitation at the site

started a long time after the end of P.O. ware occupation

at Hastinapura, i.e. C 800 B.C. The structural details given by Gen. Cunningham were largely corraborated by the

excavation. During period II of occupation which is data­ ble to C 250 B .C .f the area was girdled with a mud-wall,

crescent shaped in ground plan and with a basal width of

29 m. forming a circuit of 5 km. The extant height of this muet-wall was found 3*50 m. In the second sub-period I I , on the top of the rampart a brick-structure, serving probab­ ly as a parapet was erected. In the next sub-period the height of the rampart was raised by mud-filling and again

a brick-structure was put over the mud filling in the last

sub-period. According to the excavator all this building activity of the defensive system is assigned to the period of C 250 B.C. to 50 B.C. i .e . in the Sunga and Kushana times^^. Beside the information furnished by the excava­

tion, two inscriptions of Kaniska I have been found there 21 indicating that the city was flourishing in 1st century A.D. Vaisali — the capital of the Lichhavis is identi­ fied with the modern village of Basarh in the Muzaffarpur district of Bihar. It is also known as RaJa-Vishal-Ka-garh.

During his survey in 1861-62 Gen. Cunningham described the site as a large brick-covered mound measuring 481.58 x

228.6 m. surrounded by a ditch full of water 60.91 m. in width. The ramparts as observed by Cunningham were higher than the mound with round tov/ers at the four corners, espe­ cially the N-W corner tower was more prominent 3.65 m. high from the plains and 4,5 from the ditch. Southern side of the site showed the sign of main entrance, while on the northern face was a postern gate 22 .

The excavation in 1958-59 revealed three struc­ tural phases of the defence. In period I a defence wall about 6.09 ni. in thickness was made of burnt-bricks. It rested on a deposit characterised by the N.B.P. ware and the other wares associated with it. But in period I I the defences consisted of a massive rampart with a basal width of 19.50 m ., and the width of the top was 6.40 m. The extant height of the rampart was found to \ye 3.96 m. The rampart was made of earth, and the digging of earlih for its d construction resulted in a moUt around it. A sealing of o A.grimitra found in the p^st-rampart layers with characters

of second century B.C. indicated the date of the erection of 3M

the rampart. In period I I I ascribable to late Kushana or

early Gupta periods a burnt brick wall 2,70 m. in width was

built on the top of this rampart^^.

Rajghat — situated on the north-east outskirts of

the city of Varanasi is an extensive table land rising

18 metres above the surrounding ground level. It is defen­

ded on the north-east by the river Bam a, on the west and

the north-west by a steep depression, said to be the old bed of the Barna and on the south-east by the Ganga. Based

on the discoveries during the excavation in 1 9 ^ » it was

proved that the site undoubtedly represented the ancient

Varanasi.

During the excavation in 1960-61, an enormous ram­

part , presumably built on natural soil, to the extant height

of 10 m. was revealed. It has a pronounced slope towards

the river. The earliest period, Period I, of the habita­

tion deposit was sub-divisible into three sub-periods and

in the first sub-period which is datable to C 800 B.C. to

500 B .C ., the rampart came into being. Later work made the

rampart to reveal two structural phases. In the earlier

phase, it was made of rammed compact brownish clay, with a

basal width of 19*80 m, and rising to an extant height of

5.10 m. with a pronounced outer slope. In the next phase

it was heightened by 1.1 m. thick mud-filling, and also the

inner face was patched with mud similarly. The existence of 310

a small channel 7*66 m. wide at the top and 2.55 ro. deep, cut through the natural soil was also proved. &.ccording to the excavator ”it is not unlikely that the inhabitants of mound

I , taking advantage of the proximity of the river Varxina, trained the workers of the river along the channel and with a gradient Joined it with river Ganga on the south-western end of the habitation, thus making an effective water- barrier or moat all round the main habitation” . Remains of a platform in the form of stout timber-logs and beams have been found near the toe of the rampart to a length of 5^ m.

Several deposits of sand and silt have been uncovered during the excavation and the excavator has clarified this situa­ tion as under, "it was at this stage that a massive clay em- a5 bankment was built at a defensive measure against the regu­ lar floods of the Ganga. Being merely a defensive measure against floods, it was not planned to be a regular fortifi­ cation or rampart, a fact which is corroborated by three 24 more cuttings laid in the same alignment

The early historic site of Ahichhatra is presently enclosed by a fort-wall with circular bastions 5^ in number according to Captain Hodgson and 52 according to Gen.

Cunningham, who visited the site in 1862-65• The wall and the bastions are not more than 500 years old, said to have been built by a Mughal officer. All Mohammad Khan. But

31-7

Cumiingham traces back the history of the place to C 1400

B.C. when it was the capital of North-Panchala kingdom and

the grand old fort is said to have been built by Raja A d i,

whose future elevation to sovereignity was fore-told by

Drona — the celebrated teacher of the Maharashtra heroes.

He also identified the place with Adisadra mentioned by

Ptolemy in 2nd century A.D.

At present the circuit of the ancient walls is 4.80

km., a figure exactly similar to that of description of Hwan

Tsang — the Chinese pilgrim. The ground plan is roughly

a triangular in shape, the side measuring 915 western

and 1.3 km ., and 1 .6 km ., the northern and south-eastern

respectively. It is guarded by Ramganga and Gangham rivers, which make access most difficult. On the eastern side is

Piriya Nala or Pairiya river having very steep banks and 25 numerous deep pools of water A considerable light was thrown on the remains of the ancient town below the late medieval fortifications by excavations during 1965-64.

According to these the rampart was built initially of mud

in the beginning of period III, that is the Kushana period,

as indicated by the sherds of P.G. Ware and N .B .P . ware and

its associate wares in the make up of the rampart. In the

second phase it was considerably damaged and was therefore

reinforced at the vertex by the construction of a brick-wall

4.98 m. bread and 2.59 m. high running throughout its length. 31H

To economise the use of bricks rectangular gaps measuring

2.13 X 1.32 m. were left in the ‘brick-wall at regular inter­ vals and these openings were filled with ruhble and clay.

In the third phase the brick-wall was given the protection of a mud-cover, as its first line of defence. It was buttressed in the 4^^ phase by another mud packing. A par­ tition wall to divide the fortified area into two parts has 26 also been referred to

Besnagar (district Vidisha in M.P.), a site famous for the pillar of Heliodoros, was first visited by Gen.

Cunningham. According to his description Besnagar is situa­ ted in the fork between two rivers Betwa and Bis, which run rarely parallel for about 2 km. , towards the east, when Betwa turns sharply to the north for a distance of nearly 800 metres, till it meets Bes. Besnagar is thus enclosed on three sides by both these rivers while the fourth side, the western one is defended by a huge rampart, marking the limits of the ancient city. The ancient city was 2 km., in length and 1,2 km ., in breadth within the walls making a circuit of 6 .4 km ., or 8 km ,, if the suburbs north of Bes river and to the west of the rampart are to be included. As both the rivers are fordable only at a place where the road from

Gwalior to Bhelsa crosses them, the site was undoubtedly a strong one. The extant average height of the rampart on the west as told by Cunninghajn is 9.14 m. , but the north-west 3:

bastion rises to a height of 13‘ VI to 15.24 m. which commands the reaches of the Bes river for upwards of a km. , over the city. On the west the rampart is stated to have been defended by a ditch» running across the neck of land between 27 the two rivers '.

The excavation in 1965-64 revealed 6 periods of habi­ tation, ranging in chronology from the period prior to the

N .B .P . ware to post-Gupta times. A massive wall originally built of dry rubble masonry,provided with passages and drains was also exposed to a length of 63 m. in the cutting

BSN-1. The wall was twice rebuilt in brick with supporting buttresses. The most noteworthy discovery was of more than half a dozen large-sized stone-balls, recovered from either

side of the wall. According to the excavator these balls were perhaps used as sling-stones and the function of the wall was some sort of defence wall (inner), besides one as enclo­

sure wall of a palace complex. On the basis of the other

finds in the cutting the wall served the city from Mauryan 28 period to Gupta period .

Chandraketugarh — a pre-Mauryan site in the 24 Pargana district of West Bengal, was explored in 1922-23 when only two

stretches of the rampart, one numbering southward from the neighboiirhood of the station for about 1 .2 km. , and the other meeting it at its southern end and extending to the east for 320

about 400 metres were found. The site represents one of the

earliest settlement in the lower Bengal region^^.

An excavation was made in 1956-57 which revealed remains

of a fortified township, with five successive periods, rang­

ing possibly from the pre-Mauryan to the Gupta period. A.n

interesting hut partially exposed structure was a ramp of

rammed concrete gradually sloping from the east to the west.

Over it was subsequently erected a rampart of earth obtained

from the neighbourhood. The core of the rampart yielded

cast copper coins and stamped pot-sherds. A cutting across

the rampart near the Itkhola area revealed that the rampart

was built of heaped up earth and had two structural phases,

the earlier one constructed in 0 century A.D. The moat

resulting out of digging of earth acted as an additional line

of defence. Below the rampart proper was found was found a

massive wooden structure built of vertical logs set in hori-

zontal planks — possibly a foundation constructed with some house complex of C second century B.C.^®

At Saradkel — a fortified site in district Ranchi

of Bihar, excavations revealed two occupational periods. In period I I , a massive wall consisting of baked-bricks 5size

41 X 26 x 7 cm.) was raised along the periphery of the mound

in alignment with the course of the river, apparently to protect the settlement as much from human onslaught as from 321

the ravages from floods. The defence wall at some places stands to a height of as many as fourteen courses of bricks laid in alternative rows of headers and stratchers. Although no datable find was recovered except the assemblage of pottery suggestive of the Kushan period the excavator infe­ rred that the culture might belong to the first and the ^1 second centuries of Christian era"^ .

Atrangikhera, district Etah in U.P. — a proto-his- toric site — revealed some traces of fortification during the excavation in 1968-69. The site possesses a long life characterised by Ochre coloured ware of the proto-historic period to the N .B .P. ware of Sunga-Kushana period. During the pre-N.B.P. period, the habitation was confined only to the eastern part of the mound and in the last phase of

P.G. ware a flood seems to have washed away the site with considerable losses. The post-flood phase which is chara­ cterised by the N .B .P, ware complex at the site , witnessed the town being fortified, as evidenced by a mud-brick bastion partly e3q>osed in the south-east corner of cutting ' C of the excavation of 1968-69. Attached to it were three succ­ essive pavements. The bastion seems to have been frequently reinforced in later periods. Stratigraphieally the struc­ ture seems to have built during the middle phase^^.

At Noh (District Bharatpura, Rajasthan) a mud-brick structure perhaps representing a rampart was noticed in i‘; 2

period lY which is ascrihable to the beginning of the first century B.C. or so. Though the inhabitation of the site begun from the proto-historic period as indicated by the presence of Ochre coloured ware, it continued down to the period of

N.B.P. ware. The middle strata yielded P.G. ware comparable to that found in period II at Hastinapura. No structural details have however, been furnished by the excavator^*^.

Balirajgarh (District Darbhanga, Bihar) was excava­ ted cn’a small scale in 1962-63. It revealed the structural details of the fortification there. The defence wall consis­ ted of a mud-brick cone with brick encasement, the outer one being four times the width of the inner. The wall had a batter, it had a basal width of 5*18 m. while the top was

5.65 m. Three phases of construction including repairs were recognized. The earliest phase consisted of a mud- brick core with battered brick revetment, of which the outer had approximately 3 times the width of the inner. In the second phase a brick-concrete ramp was built against the inner face. The third phase witnessed further reinforcement of the ramp in the shape of a 5 m. high platform of earth mixed with pot sherds, and built against the inner face of the fortification. The silt deposits indicate heavy floods in the habitation area. According to the excavator the fortifications seem to have been built somewhere in the second century B.C. as indicated by the presence of N .B.P. 3£!1

X m %

%

R i « ” i -

!?)• ' ^ i; " ' ^ ■. g ; ,.- NJ • J,t% »=.''; p s y ? Mi I . _ V

«i 3:4

ware in the pre-defence deposits, and it remained in use

till the Pala period^^.

7/hile 63cploring the various early historic sites in

the Azamgarh district of U .P ., the site locally known as

Kahusa-Ka-Tila was found to have been anciently fortified

with a mud-wall. Remains of gate ways were also located

on the northern, western and southern sides. Based on

the ceramic evidence found at the site v i z . , black and red

ware, both plain as well painted; N.B.P. ware including the painted variety; black slipped ware; plain grey ware and plain and red ware, an inferrence was made that the deser-

tion of the site should have occurred^ sSomewhere in^second- third century A.D. , as no antiquities later than those of the Kushana period were obtained. Details regarding the plan and other structural features of the defence are not

available for lack of a systematic excavation^^ of the place.

Carlleyle surveyed in 187^-76 the site of Sankara

fort (District Aligarh, U.®-.) located on the west bank of

the Ganga its mound measured about a kilometre east west and

half a km., north-south, rising to a height of 20 m. above

the river bed. According to Carlleyle, Sankara is an ancient,

extensive site, consisting of remains of an ancient fortress, 3‘::o

irregularly oval shaped in plan with, slight indentations.

The greatest breadth of the fort running backward from the

river from north-west to south-xeast is about 20? m ., while

the narrow front towards the river is about 157 The river side front rises about 25 m. in vertical above the river bed. Three large sloping hollow gaps on the east-

north-east; south-east and north-west angles of the fort,

indicate the position of the gates. Within the enclosure

on the northern most area, there are the remains of a small

upper fortifications, square in plan each side measuring 30 m. and near the western edge a rectangular earth-work measuring 21.54 x 15.76 m. In a cutting the walls of the

fort were found to be going down to a depth of from 4 .2 7 to

4 .5 7 below the surface of the upper edge and the wall

had a mean thickness of about 0.91 to 1.12 m.

The fortress is simply a high, steep sided, flat

topped earth work or a sort of lofty table-topped plateau

of eaxth-work, which perhaps never had any kind of raised

ramparts but seems to have depended principally on height and

steepness for its defence. The edges of the fort are not

raised above its inner face. In the words of Carlleyle

"this peculiarity of construction has been observed by me

in one or two other very ancient Hindu remains of fortresses,

which at once distinguish them from all modern Hindu or

Mohammadan forts. There may of course, in ancient times. 3~G

have been a low, brick-parapet-wall with bow shot loopholes, running roimd upon the upper edge of the fort but if so, that was all . . . Such a mode of construction, differs entirely from all our ideas of a fort and that it would only be well suited for those ancient times when bows and spears and swords were the only weapons in use” . Based on the brick-size the fortification is ascribed to ’very early historic* periods by Carlleyle^^.

The site was again explored in 1961-62 and in a ravine section the cultural sequence of the site was deter­ mined. Accordingly the occupation of the site may be infe­ rred from P.G. ware times to Gupta period and reoccupation from C century A.D. The latest occupation of the site was represented by the remains of a fort constructed of Lakhauri bricks in the eastern part of the mound, ascri- bable to C 15^^-16^^ centuiy A.D. This fort of Lakhauri bricks can be taken as the fort constructed by one of Akbar's son probably Daniel as Sankara was under the governorship 57 of one of Akbar's sons'^ .

Karra mound near Mathura in U.P. — which represents a large part of the urban settlement of ancient Mathura city was made to reveal by an exploratory survey, the existence of two rings of mud-ramparts. The first enclo­ sure is elliptical on plan while the second was quadrangular 3!J7

and comprised within the first, as if signifying a citadel.

The other details of the rampart had not been recorded but the availability of P.G. ware associated with the rampart, points to the period of the P.G. ware as its date of cons­ truction^®.

Near the confluence of the river Rambha vjith the river Ganga at Rishikesh (District Dehradun, U.P.) the remains of a massive brick fortification were noticed, wherein the brick used for the construction, corresponded in size exactly with that of group A of period IV of Hastinapura, ascribable to C third century A.D.^^

Overlooking the junction of the Ganga and the Tamuna, opposite Allahabad is the immense motind of Jhusi. The section of the site towards the river yields the sherds of

N .B .P. ware profusely. These probably are of the middle and second half of the first millennium B.C. The mound was ex­ plored in 1961-62, when the traces of a moat and a defence wall were noticed. The other finds obtained from the site 40 were ascribed mostly to the Sunga period

Sugh — a small village in District .Ajnbala (Punjab) situated on the high road leading from the Gangetic doab via

Meerut, Saharaapur and Ambala, to the upper Punjab aiid also commanding the passage of the river Yamuna is identified by

Gen. Cunningham with ancient Srughna — visited and mentioned by the Chinese pilgrim Hucin Tsang in 7^^ century A.D. Hwin Tsang described it as a strong place 5»6 km. in circuit,

iccording to Cunningham's description the place is situated

on a triangular projecting spur of high land and is surroun­

ded on three sides by the bed of the river Yamuna which has

at present been transformed as the western Yamuna Canal. On

its north and west faces it is further protected by two

deep ravines, turning it into a ready made stronghold covered

on all sides, save on west, by natural defences. Out of

three angles, the northern is crowned by the citadel of

Dyalgarh; the south-eastern one by that of Mandalpur, only the third i.e . the south-western one is unoccupied. Both the forts measure 457.2 m. in length and 304.8 m. in breadth individually, and each side of the triangle connecting the fort is almost 1 km., in length. And thus the total area makes a circuit of about 6.4 km., approximating the descrip­ tion of Hucin-Tsang.

The site yielded coins of all ages from the Dilials of Chauhans and Tomaras of Delhi to the square p-unch-marked coins of silver and copper — a common currency of north-

India as early as 1000 B.C. On this basis Cunningham in- 41 ferred that the site was as old as the coins . k small-

scale excavation was undertaken at the site in 1963-64 which revealed the use of N.B.P. v/are along with grey wp^re.

Besides, a single sherd of P.G. ware was also obtained from the lowest levels. The remains of a rectangular burnt-brick structure large in proportions, unearthed there was recog­ nised as a early historic fortress or a monastery by the ex- 42 cavator

The site Kiu-pi-Shwang-na of the Chinese pilgrim Hwan-

Tsang, was equated by Julian to Govisana, near Kashipur in

Nainital district of U.P. Cunningham identified the site with

the old fort of Ujain. According to him the plan of the

fort can be best compared to the body of a guitar, measuring

914 m. from west to east and 457 m. in breadth forming a

circuit of 2 km. 7^3 nu If the dimensions of a long mound

of rivers towards south, representing a suburb of the ancient

city are included, the circuit comes to be nearly 3 km, and

553 m. This approximates the measurements given by Huein

Tsang i .e . nearly 4 km. There are a number of lakes in the vicinity, the largest among these is the Drona Sagar, said

to have been excavated by the Pandavas for their teacher

Drona. They are also credited with the construction of the

fort.

The walls of the fort are built of large massive bricks (58.1 x 25 x 6.55 cm.) a sure indication of antiquity. The general height of the walls is 9»1^ m. above the surround­

ing fields but these are in a dilapidated condition. A

shallow ditch still exists on all sides except on the east.

The interior of the fort is very uneven, a dense Jungle, 330

rising to a height of 6.09 m. above the surrounding plains obviously as a result of accumulated debris. Two low open­ ings in the wall one to the north-west and the other to the south-west suggest the two gates of the old fort^^. Inside, near the northern wall of the fort is a mound crowned with rivers to a height of 15.84 m. above the plains or 6,70 m. above the extant height of the wall. It is known as Bhim-

Gaja or Bhim-Gada and has yielded a stone image of Tri^ik- 1/ rama, bearing the nai;e of the car)ier in Gupta script. A small-scale excavation at Bhim-Gaja unearthed a temple ^ Vi datable to the period between 6 and 8 century A.D. The mass of pottery recovered here is roughly comparable to

Ahichhatra strata III assigned to A.D. 550 to 750 along with a few sterds of P.G. ware in the lowest levels. Some gold- coins of the Kushana period along with a few sherds of N.B.P. 44 were collected from the site in 1960-61

The site of Indor-Khera or Indrapura (District Buland- shahr in U.P.) was excavated by Carlleyle in 1874-76.

According to him the ancient city of Indrapura must have been a fortified city or rather a great earth-work platform surroiinded by a parapet wall along the upper edges, and to which a lower outer faussebraie was added later on. A com­ pact and closely built town with a citadel and palaces was contained within it towards the eastern end. Of the original upper walls nothing however was obtained but in some exca­ vated trenches and rain gulleys, traces of an ancient wall, 331

composed of large bricks, generally without mortor, have been found.

At four points below the northern edge there were detached ruined fragments of a lower outer fortification wall — faussibrae, which was added to it at a much later period probably by Anuprai in the reign of Jahangir. A deep sloping hollow on the western side of the Khera mound indi­ cates the situation of the gate v/hile another gate is supp­ osed to be on the north-eastern side. The approaches to this second gateway were defended by an outwork consisting of a curtain wall and a bastion. Traces of a ruined gateway were visible on the eastern side and a fourth gate may be inferred from the depression on the southern side.

A Nala or ravine defends the mound on the north­ eastern side. On the eastern side of this Nala the walls of an ancient building, composed of very large-size bricks, were laid bare. As the main entrance to the city was pro­ bably on the north side, the building might have been the residence of a military official — custodian of the city defence on the north. In the ravine an inscription on a h copper plate, dated in, the reign of Skandgupta was fotmd.

Many Indo-Scythic coins and several coins of Buddhist satraps were found at the site. A remarkable coin with a legend in

Asokan Brahmi was also found. Besides some half a dozen 332

punch marked coins of the pre-Maurya period were found.

According to current tradition the town was fortified bj

Yen Chakravarti. But in the opinion of Carllyle the town

seems to have been fortified by the great Kushana king Wema

Kadaphises^^.

Sonkh — some 32 km ., south-west of Mathura city was excavated by a German team under the guidance of Prof.H.

Haertel. Presently the site contains a mud-brick fortifica­ tions of Jat Hari Singh commenced in the first half of the 18^^ century A.D. which is surrounded by a great ditch measuring

12 m. in width at the upper surface and narrowing down to­ wards the bottom.

The excavations revealed the presence of a small ditch 2 m. wide in the first phase along with the sherds of

P.G. ware associated with black and red, brown polished in­ cluding marble finish plain or grey ware, and red ware.

The site also yielded the presence of anoblique wall running from east to west perhaps indicating to be a part of a ram­ part, leading to an entrance on the west. The wall belongs to a complex of three other walls met with in the cutting.

This fragment of the rampart was found in phase VII of the site datable to the early Kushana period. From the pottery types and the other finds the site seems to have been inha­ bited right from Mauryan or even pre-Mauryan tiiies to the

Gupta period, when the site underwent a great conflagration 333

and after this event the mound was deserted for a few cen­ turies^^.

Sankisa (District Farrukhabad in U.P.) a site in famous

Buddhist annals was siirveyed by Gen. Cunningham in 1862-63.

According to him the central portion of the ancient city of Sankisa, is represented by the mound at present known as "Kilah" and the different mounds around the temple.

These at present measure 91^.^ x 609*6 m. The city was surrounded by an earthen rampart, a greater part of which still remains. Forming a dodecagon in plan the rampart was 5»76 km., in circuit. On three sidesj,that is the east, the north-east and the south-west, there are breaks in the line of rampart. These suggest the positions of the city gates. The south-western corner of the rampart is defended, though from a distance, by Kali nadi or Kalindri river.

The mound which is called 'Kilah’ and the village perched on it still preserves the name of Sankisa. It rises 12.50 m. above the surrounding plains and measures 457*20 from east to west in length and 304.8 m. north to south in breadth. The north and west sides of the mound are very 4.7 steep while the slope is much more easy on the other faces .

Excavations at Sanghal (District Ludhiana in Punjab) revealed a system of fortifications which finds literary corroboration in Kautilya's Arthasastra and in the commen­ tary on the Udaya Jataka to a reasonable extent. 334

The defence complex here belongs to period VI of the site datable from second half of the first century to 5^^ century A.D. It consists of a series of 3 moats, one out­ side the rampart and the two other inside it. The earth obtained by digging the moats was utilized in building the rampart and the berm. The sloping sides of the two major moats sustained erosion marks, while of the third, one sharp­ ly maintained with a horizontal base, indicating perhaps that the latter was never filled with water. The back of the fortification wall was found forming the sides of the inner moat I

Tusham — some 45 km ., south-west of Hansi in the state of Harayana, gives the distinct traces of ancient fortifications from the foot to the summit of the Tosham hill. The ancient ruined fort is perched on the summit of a most remarkably steep hill rising about 244 m. above the surrounding plains, and commands the route from Bhatinda to

Delhi. The entrance or access to this hill fortress appears to be from the west, where a rampart, built of large, par­ tially dressed stones with two tiers of steps|^is visible.

Garrick took it as an outpost, for nothing further exists till the outer circumvallation of the fortress is reached.

The ascent is difficult and dangerous. The construction of the fortress is partly of granite and enormously big­ sized baked bricks ( i .e . 83.82 x 6 $.5 x 6.35 cm .). For the storage and supply of water the fort contains seven reservoirs 33.~)

within it namely Pandu Tirtha, Surya Kund, Nasla Kund,

Kukar Sarovar, Giasa Kimd and the one largest in size with­ out any name. The fortifications were restored by Raja

Amar Singh of Patiala „ ^i/Cccording to local tradition, the fort concoidal in shape and the immense masonry causeway are both said to have been constructed in the reign of

PrithviraJ Chauhan. But according to Garrick these works are undoubtedly, still older than the period of that prince.

One noteworthy discovery here, was that of an ins­ cription, datable on the basis of the characters of the letter from 164 A.D. to 224 A.D. that is of Gupta period in the opinion of Cunningham. Though the inscription is 4 not a recordxany of the Gupta kings but it mentions the name of the Gupta prince Ghatotkacha and also his conqueror — the Tushara king Vishnu. This Tushara king Vishnu is iden­ tified by Garrich as the third prince of the Kanwa dynasty named Narayana (A.D. 57 to 69)» whose date corraborates with that of Ghatotkacha — the father of Chandragupta I

(A.D, 50 to 79)* And as the Kanwa dynasty also tnown as

"Tusharas of India” held sway in Mathura, Delhi and Punjab regions until 79 A.D. and also the name of the fortress

Tusham, appears to have been derived from these Tushara princes, most probably from the original ward Tushararama, it may reasonably be concluded that not only Tusham had 33G

been of the chief strongholds of the Indo-Scythian princes of northern India^^.

The ancient city of Kanauj has not received the attention of the archaeologists^ to the extent its histo­ ricity deserves, And that is because the extant remains are very few and unimportant. In 1015 A.D. when Mahmud of

Ghazni approached Kanauj, his historian relates that "he there saw a city which raised its head to the skies» and which in strength and structure might just boast to have no equal". At a still earlier date, Huein-Tsang describes

Kanauji as being 20 li (5*6 km.) in length and 4 to 5 li

(1 .2 km .,) in breadth and surrounded by strong walls and deep ditches and was washed by the Ganga along its eastern face. Still earlier the Chinese pilgrim Fa-Hian (400 A .D .) states that the river Ganga protected the city on the eastern side. The earliest mention of Kanauj (except the mention in Puranas) is by Ptolemy about 140 A.D. as Kano- giza.

Tifche modern town of KanauJ occupies only the northern end of the site of the old city, including the whole of what is known as "Eilah" or the citadel. The citadel occu­ pying the highest ground is triangular in shape, the three angles being marked by the shrine of Haji Harmayan at the 337

north, the temple of Ajaypal at south-west and the large bastian called Kshem Kali Burj in the south-eastern direc­

tion. Each side of the triangle measures about 1.22 km.,

It is protected on the north-west by a stream (N ala), on the

north-east by Chota-Ganga, while that to the south must

have been covered by a ditch, represented at present by the main road of the city. The mound rises from 18.28 to

21.5^ m. on the north-eastern face, in height above the river bed, 12.19 to 15.24 m. o© the north-west whole from

9.14 to 12.19 m. on the southern side. Before the use of

cannons this commanding height must have imparted Kanauji

a strong and important position. According to local belief

there were two gates to the city, one near the shrine of

Haji Harmayan and the other close to the Kshem Kali Burji.

But both these gates lead to the river and hence it seems that there must have been a third gate also, probably situa­

ted close to the temple of Ajaypal immediately under the walls of the Rang-Mahal^^.

A limited excavation was carried out at Kanauo in

1955-56 which revealed through its 12.2 m. thick deposit,

four cultural periods ranging from C 1000 B.C. to the late medieval period^, characterised by the presence of P.G;

N.B.P. and associated wares, Kushana terracotta figures,

ghazed ware and the lakhauri bricks used for construction^^. 33H

The site of Champa, district Bhagalpur in Bihar was made

to reveal the existence of a mud-rampart belonging to the

period I of occupation at the site. Period I is datable to

C second first century B.C. and characterised by the use of

N.B.P. ware and black ware of fine fabric; terracotta figures

and bone prints. The rampart of this phase was composed

of two different kinds of soils v iz., red and yellow, rpost holes weae(^not equally spaced),dug on the top of

this rampart,The remains of broken terracotta,

and charcoal found filled up in these post holes, suggested

that the rampart fell in disuse in the phase II of the site 1kt which is ascribed toi)Gupta period. During phase II i.e. the

Gupta period a new rampart with basal width 15 m. was cons­

tructed at the site. This phase II rampart stood to a extant

height of 4.85 m. No other details of the rampart such as

ground plan and position of the gateways have not been recor-

ded52. 33H

REFERENCES

1. A. Cunningham — A.S.I. reports Vol. I. p. 301; Imp. Gazzettear o f India Vol. XV p. 40?

2. I.A .R . 1958-59 .. p. 46

3. I.A .R . 1958-59 .. p. 46

4. I.A .R . 1958-59 . . p. 47

5. I.A .R . 1958-59 .. p. 4?

6. I.A .R . 1962-63 .. p. 33

7. Sharma G.R. — Excavations at Kausambi 1957-59 p. 27-40

8. I.A .R . 1960-61 .. p. 34

9. I.A .R . 1961-62 .. pp. 51-52

10. I.A .R . 1963-64 .. p. 40

11. I.A .R . 1959-60 .. p. 46

12. A. Cunningham — A.S.I. Reports Vol. Ill p. 46

13. Arch. Survey of India Reports 1909-10 p. 42; 1911-12 p p .30-40

14. I.A .R . 1955-56 to 1957-58

15. A. Ghosh — Ancient India No.7 PP- 70-71; Patil D.R. — Antiquarian Remains in Bihar p. 436; Arch. Survey of India Reports 1913-14 pp. 265-271; A. Cunningham A .S .I . Report Vol. I p .20

16. A. Cunningham — A .S .I . Report 1872-73 PP» 85-101; I.A .R . 1962-63 pp. 5-6; I .A .R . 1961-62 pp. 7-8 17. Me Crindle J.W. — Ancient India as described by Megas- thenes and Arrian 1926 p. 67

18. Sharma Y.D. — Ancient India No.9 p. 147 340

19. A. Cunningham — A.S.I.R.; An. Geo pp.5^3-547

20. I.A .R . 1958-59 pp. 47-50

21. Sharma R .S. — Indian History Congress 1972 p. 97

22. A. Cunningham — A.S.I.R. Vol. I p. 56

25. I.A .R . 1957-58 to 1961-62 ; 1958-59 p. 12 ;

K. Deva and V. Misra — Vaisali excavations I960

24. I.A .R . 1960-61 p. 37 ; 1961-62 pp. 57-58 25. A. Cunningham — A.S.I.R. Vol. I p. 255; Ancient Geography of India pp. 305-306

26. I.A .R . 1963-64 pp. 43-44

27. A. Cunningham A .S .I .R . Vol. X pp. 30-46 28. I.A .R . 1963-64 pp. 16-17 ; 1964-65 pp. 19-20

29. kTch. Survey of India Report 1922-23 p. 109 30. I.A .R . 1956-57 pp. 29-31 ; I.A .R . 1964-65 p. 52 31. I.A .R . 1964-65 p. 6 32. I.A .R . 1968-69 p. 37 33. I.A .R . 1963-64 p. 28 34. I.A .R . 1962-63 pp. 3-5 35. I.A .R . 1968-69 p. 35 36. A. Cuimingham A .S .I .R . Vol. XII pp. 15-24 37. I.A .R . 1960-61 .. p. 32 38. I.A.R. 1954-55 . . p. 15 39. I.A .R . 1963-64 .. p. 45 40. Wheeler — Early India and Pakistan p. 128 ; I.A .R . 1961-62 p. 52 41. A. C\inningham — Ancient Geography of India pp. 290-93

42. I.A .R . 1963-64 .. p. 27-28 341

43. A. Cunningliam A.S.I.R. Vol. p. ; Ancient Geography p p .300-502 I.A .R . 1960-61 p. 67 ; I.A .R . 1965-66 pp. 51-52

A.. Cunningham A .S .I .H . Vol. XII pp. 36-67

46. I.A .R . — 1966-67 pp. 41-42 47. A. Cunningham — A.S.I.R. Vol. I p. 270 ; Imp. Gazetteer of India Vol. XXII p. 59

48. I.A.R. 1970-71 pp. 30-31 49. A. Cunningham A.S.I.R. Vol. V pp. 136-140 ; Vol. XXIII pp. 19-24

50. A. Cunningham A.S.I.R. Vol. I pp. 279-293 51. I.A .R . 1955-56 pp. 19-20

5 2 . I.A .R . 1970-71 pp. ^-5 ; I.A.R. 1971-72 p. 5