CHAPTER VI DURGA ( FORT OR CAPITAL)
Manu IX, 294 places the capital (pura) even before rastra. Medhātithi (on IX. 295 ) and Kullūka explain that the loss of the capital is a more serious danger than even the loss of some territory, because if the capital, which possesses all the stocks of food, in which are centred the principal elements and the army, is saved, then it is possible to retrieve even lost territory and to protect the country. It is as it were the pivot of the whole machinery of government. Other writers (and even Manu in VII. 69-70) place the capital or fort after the rastra. It is probably due to the geographical situation in North India and the nature of the fighting in ancient times that made the capi tal and forts of great importance in the several elements of the State. The capital mirrored the prosperity of the country and if properly walled also provided security. Yāj. I. 321 says that forts are meant for the safety of the king, the people and the treasury (janakośātmaguptaye). The reason for the construction of forts is well put by Manu VII. 74 viz. that a single archer under the shelter of the fort-wall can fight a hundred of the enemy and a hundred can fight ten thousand. The Pañcatantra (I. 229 and II. 14 ) has a similar verse. Bphaspati quoted by the Rājanītiprakāśa 288 p. 202 states that the king should con struct a fort with walls and a gate for the protection of himself, his wives, the people and the ( wealth ) collected by him. Kaut. (II. 3 and 4) deals at length with the construction of durgas and the laying out of the capital in one of them. He says that in the four quarters of the boundaries of the kingdom forts should be built for offering resistance (to the enemy) on ground naturally fitted for the purpose. He speaks of four kinds of forts viz. ‘audaka’ (water-protected, which is on an island burrounded by water or on a plain surrounded by low ground), pārvata (mountain one, such as a rocky hill or a cave ), dhūnvana (desert fort, on a waterless tract full of thickets or waste land ), a forest fort full of wagtails and water and
- trefarrei S arratera efsaniat unti PRETTĀYTTI TUTT. . p. 202 and prove p. 28,
: FREE
II )
Kinds of durgus or forts,
179
thickets of reed. He says that the first two are suited for the protection of populous places and the last two for the protection of foresters. Vayu 8. 108 • refers to four kinds of durgas. Manu VII. 70, Sānti 56. 35 and 86. 4-5, Viṣṇudharmasūtra III. 6, Matsya 217. 6-7, Agnipurāṇa 222. 4-5, Viṣṇudhar mottara II. 26. 6-9, III. 323. 16-21, Sukra IV. 6 speak of six kinds of forts viz. dhanvadurga ( which is waterless five yojanas round a raised plain), mahidurga (a land fort, which is surrounded by a wall built of stones or burnt bricks, that is at least twelve feet high and twice as high as it is broad), jaladurga ( water fort, surrounded on all sides by deep water), vārksa durga (fort that is surrounded for one yojana on all sides with thorny and tall trees and thorny creepers and bushes), nṛdurga (fort that is guarded by a numerous army of four sections on all sides ), giridurga (mountain fortress, difficult to climb and with only one narrow access). Manu VII. 71 says that the mountain fortress is the best of all, while śānti 56. 35 states that nrdurga is the most difficult to conquer. The Mānasollāsa (II. 5 p. 78) speaks of nine kinds of durgas (adding those built with stones, bricks and mud). The Parasurama- pratāpa enumerates eight kinds of durgas (Rāja vallabhakānda, folio 1) and states that the wall of a fort may be of stones or of baked bricks or of mud. Manu VII. 75 Sabhā 5. 36 ( =Ayodhyā 100, 53), Matsya 217. 8, Kām. IV, 60, Mānasollasa III. 5 (verses 550-555), Sukra IV, 6. 12-13, Vigpu’ dharmottara II. 26. 20-88 prescribe that forts should possess plenty of arms, grain, drugs and other materials, wealth, horses, elephants, beasts of burden, brahmaṇas, artisans, machines (called Sataghnis acc. to Matsya, that kill a hundred), water and fodder. The Nitivākyāmṛta ( durga-samuddesa p. 199) says that there must be means of leaving it secretly, otherwise it will be a prison and that no one should be allowed to enter it or leave it without a pass or without being searched. Kaut. ( II. 3) gives detailed instructions for the construction of fort walls, towers, ditches, pillars, lotus ponds and buildings inside the fort, which are all passed over for want of space. Vide the Rājadharmakānda pp. 28-36 and the Rājadharmakaustubha pp. 115-117 for numerous quotations from the Dhanurveda of Uganas, the Mahābhārata, the Matsya, the Viṣṇudharmottara and other works on durya.
In the Rgyeda we have frequent mention of cities. In I 63.7 Indra is said to have shattered seven cities for Purukutsa
180
[ Vol.
and in II. 20.8 it is narrated that Indra killed the dasyus and destroyed their cities of ayas (copper, huvi dasyūn pura āyasir ni tārit ). This shows that walled cities were known even at that distant date. There is difference of opinion as to whether the walls were of mud and wood or of stones and bricks. Vide Hopkins in J. A. O. S. XIII. pp. 174-176. The Tai. S. VI. 2. 3. 1 speaks of the three cities of asuras constructed with ayas, silver and gold (hariṇi). In the agni cayana as described in the Sat. Br. thousands of baked bricks were required. The excavations at Mohenjo-daro show that walls were built of burnt bricks ( Marshall, vol. I. pp. 15–26 ), There is no reason to assume that houses, palaces and city walls could not have been built of bricks, simply because no purely Hindu ruins anterior to Alexander have yet been discovered or because Megasthenes describes that Pataliputra had a wall of wooden palisades. One must demur to the remarks of Hopkins on pp. 174-175 of J. A. O. S. vol. XIII. Walls ( prākāra ), toranas (arched gates) and upper stories (attālakas), moats are very often spoken of in connection with capitals in both epics. The gates were sometimes called after cities e. g. in Vanaparva I. 9-10 the Pandavas are said to have gone out of Hastinapura from the gate called Vardhamanapura.229 Vide also Asramavāsi. parva 16. 3. The Mahābhārata states that palaces had dancing halls (nartanāgāra ) attached to them ( Virāṭa-parva 22. 16 and 25-26). Sānti 69.60 states that the capital was rendered gay by natas (players ) and dancers and Sānti 86 ( 4-15) describes how cities were to be founded in durgas, how they were to be full of music, festivals and merry gatherings (samājot sava) and what stores they should contain. In the Rāmāyaṇa (V.2.50-53 ) Lankā is described as having palaces of seven or eight stories and mosaic pavements. The Bșhatsamhitā (chap. 53) contains in 125 verses very accurate directions and measure ments about palaces, houses &c. (i. e. on vāstuśāstra ). It states that the best kind of royal palace was to be 108 cubits broad, that palaces of 100, 92, 84, 76 cubits may be built, that the length in each case was to be one-fourth as much more as the breadth. It speaks of the dimensions of mansions for the commander-in-chief, ministers, the queen, crown prince, purohita, physician &c. In v. 23 it states that the walls may be of baked bricks or of wood.
229, SATAISTETTTTTromso M101TT: 1 39AT. FURYOU FOTOT* Tak 1. 10; narator for WATETIK STRAUT 16. 3, **
II 1
The Capital
181
The king was to have his capital inside a fort or in dependent of it. Manu VII. 70, 76, Aśramavāsi 5. 16-17, Sānti 86.6-10, Kām. IV. 57, Matsya 217. 9ff, Sukra I. 213-217 describe where and how a capital was to be built. Kautilya ( in II. 4) describes at great length how the capital was to be laid out viz. the extent should be demarcated by three royal roads from west to east and three from south to north, the capital should have twelve gates, provided with concealed land and water exits : the chariot roads, the royal roads and roads loading to drona-mukha, sthāniya, the rāstra and pastures should be four daṇdas ( 16 cubits) in width. He then prescribes the width of roads for various other purposes. Occupying one-ninth of the whole area of the capital, but to the north from the centre of the capital and in the midst of people of all castes the king’s own palace should be built facing the east or north. To the north-east of the palace should be the residences of the king’s teacher (ācārya ), purohita, ministers and the sacrificial place and water reservoir. He then assigns appropriate places round about the palace for the offices of the several superintendents, to merchants, principal artisans, brāhmaṇas, kṣatriyas, vaisyas, prostitutes, wool workers, śūdras &c. In the centre of the capital were to be constructed apartments for the images of Aparajita, Apratihata, Jayanta and Vaijayanta and the temples of Siya, Kubera, the Aśvins, Lakṣmi and Madira (Durgā?). The principal gates named after Brahmā, Yama, Indra and Kārtikeya were to be constructed. At a distance of 100 bows (400 cubits) beyond the ditch, platforms for holy trees, groves and embankments should be built. The cemetery should be to the east or north but to the south for the higher varṇas. Heretics and cāṇḍālas should have a place of residence beyond the cemetery. For each group of ten families there must be a well; oil, grain, sugar, salt, medicines, dried vegetables, fire-wood, arms, and other essential commodities should be stored in such large quantities that they might last for several years in case of a siege or invasion. The Matsyapurana ( 217. 9-87) differs from the above description in many ways. It prescribes four wide roads, at the ends of which a temple, the royal palace, the court of justice and the principal gate are to be respectively constructed. Almost the whole of the description in the Matsya is quoted by the Rajanitiprakāśa (pp. 208-213) and also in the Rājadharmakanda pp. 28-36. The former also quotes (pp. 214-219) a long passage from the Devipurāpa with regard to the construction of a nagara,182
History of Dharmaśāstru
(Vol.
& pura, a tutta (market), a puri, a pattana €39 and the temples of several deities that are to be built in each, the rites to be observed in measuring out the ground for each and accurately finding out of the east and other directions. Pāṇini ( VII. 3. 14 prācām grāmanagarāṇām) distinguishes between grāma and nagara, while Patañjali thereon (vol. III. p. 321 ) explains that grāma, ghosa, nagara, and samvāha are the appellations of different groups or settlements of people. The Vāyupurāṇa ( 94. 40 ) separately mentions cities (purani) ghoṣas (hamlets of cowherds ), villages and pattanas. Vide Sukranitisāra I. 213-258 for provisions about the laying out of the capital, the palace, the court of justice, other state offices and public buildings, ditches &c. and Yuktikalpataru pp. 22 ff, Vāyu 8. 108 ff, Matsya 130. Sukra (I. 260-267) describes how four royal roads should start from the palace in four direc tions, how the best, middling and inferior royal roads should be 30, 20 and 15 cubits in breadth; he defines jxidyā (a foot-path), vithi (a lane ) and mārga as respectively equal tn 3, 5 and 10 cubits in breadth, that in the capital there should be no narrow street like a padyā or vithi, that even in villages the public road should be at least 10 cubits in width, that all roads should slope down from their middle and that all houses should face the royal road. For a description of Ayodhyā vide Rāmāyapa II. 100. 40-42, which says that it was full of valiant men, had strong gates, was full of elephants, horses, and chariots, was inhabited by energetic people of all castes that were devoted to their duties, that had mansions of various sizes, that it was prosperous and had many physicians. From the Rāmāyana (VI. 112. 42 siktarathyūn tarāpana ) and the Mahābhārata ( Adi. 221. 36) it appears that the roads of the capital were watered. In the Harṣacarita (III) Bāna gives a graphic description of Sthānvisvara ( inodern Thanesar ). For the local administration of the capital, vide the duties of the nagaraka described above (p. 149 ) from Kautilya (II. 36 ). From the Paharpur plates ( dated Gupta samvat 159 i. e. 478-9 A D.) it appears that a nagara-śreṣthin (the chief of the bankers and traders of the capital) was nominated (probably by the king ). Vide E. I. vol. 20 p. 59 at p. 61. There was probably a board of the elders of the city (pauramukhyas or pauravrddhas
- Compare TAT VEICETT: acara: AT HETTI TWA, दौगाण्योदकादीनि । खेटाः कर्षकग्रामाः । खटा: पर्वतमासंग्रामा इति। श्रीधर on भागवत IV. 18. 31 q. in trovanot. p. 102. The firta (chap, V) defines #ra,
af, e, f, 76, ort, 79, 110, GTT, urar, forate, farve, TUTA, ETT Tur in all 14 (Tri, ed.). The #THE (X. 92) speaks of tea of these and IX. 10 gives the extent of HTH, E, eta, ho, TTC
II )
Administration of the capitnl
183
as in Kautilya ) appointed to help the Governor of the capital (nāguraka) in administration. In the Damodarpur copper plates also a nagaraśreṣthin is mentioned along with others who were approached for consenting to a purchase of land (E. I. vol. XV at pp. 130, 133, dated Gupta saivat 129). Megasthenes ( in McCrindle’s Ancient India ‘, Fragment XXXIV p. 187) describes the city of Palibothra ( Pataliputra ) and its administration. He says that six committees of five each looked to the affairs of the city and were respectively in charge of (1) industrial arts, ( 2 ) entertainment and care of foreigners, (3) inquiries about births and deaths, ( 4 ) trade and commerce, weights and measures, (5) manufactured articles, ( 6 ) collection of the 10th of the prices of articles sold. Fragments XXV-XXVI (pp. 65-67) inform us that Palibothra was 80 stadiu in length and 15 in width, that in shape it was a parallelogram, that it was surround ed by a wooden wall with holes for discharging arrows and a ditch in front. Arrian states (pp. 209-210 of McCrindle’s ‘Ancient India’) that Palibothra had 570 towers and 64 gates. Patanjali in his Mahābhāṣya frequently brings in Pātaliputra (e. g. in vol. I p. 380 he states that Pātaliputra is alongside of the river Sona, on Pān. II. 1. 16 ), in vol. II. p. 311 ( vārtika 4 on Pān. IV. 3, 66 ) he refers to its walls and to its palaces, in vol. II. p. 321 ( on Pāṇ. IV. 3. 134 ). In Ha-Hien’s time (399-414 A. D.) the royal palace and halls in the midst of the city built of stone still existed and were so grand that they were then believed to have been the work of spirits ( vide Legge p. 77). Vide Rhys Davids’ ‘Buddhist India’ pp. 34-41 for the ancient Indian capitals in the 7th century BC.
In the Bhagavatapurāṇa (IV. 18. 30-32 ) it is narrated that Pṛthu, son of Vona, first levelled the earth, established human habitations in villages, towns, capitals, forts &c., and that before Pșthu people resided where they liked and there were no such groups as villages or towns. Bhrgu quoted by Sridhara accord ing to Rājaniti-kaustubha defines grāma as the habitation of brāhmaṇas, their hired labourers and sūdras, that kharvata is on the bank of a river and of a mixed character, one side being a village and the other a town. Saunaka quoted by the Rājansti-kaustubha ( pp. 103-4) defines kheta as a place where brahmanan, ksatriyas and vaisyas reside, that a place where all castes reside is called a town, that brāhmaṇa householders should be established on soil that is whitish and has sweet odour, kṣatriyas should be established in towns where the soil is reddish and wafts & sweet odour and vaiśyas on yellowish soil.