Forts (Durga) in ancient Indian town-planning

As fortified cities, the eight-fold varieties of the Mānasāra text śibira etc., have already been taken notice of. For purely military purpose their classification varies with the various texts.

Viśvakarma-Vāstuśāstra.

It describes the following twelve types:—

1. Giridurga,
2. Vanagurga,
3. Jaladurga,
4. Īriṇadurga,
5. Daivadurga,
6. Ekamukhadurga,
7. Dvimukhadurga,
8. Caturmukhadurga,
9. Kūrmadurga,
10. Pārāvata,
11. Prabhu and
12. Yuddha.

[cf. Introduction to Viśvakarma-Vāstuśāstra]:—

“Forts are of 12 kinds according to the site chosen. The first is Hill fort. The second is protected by forests, Underground passage are provided for this class of forts. The third type is either in the midst of the sea or large rivers. The fourth is the fort in the desert country. Fifth is a natural fort i.e., a place in which formations like ramparts have been formed by nature. It is called Daivata fort. The next three types are built on the banks of rivers or at the sea-coast. They are provided either with a single gate, two gates or four gates as safety will allow. The ninth is called the tortoise fort. It is generally intended as a trap for the enemy. The site is either the middle of a forest or the foot of a hill. It is provided with concealed approaches and spring traps work by concealed machinery. Five or six ramparts protect the place and it is studded with concealed marshes and mire. This type of fort is generally constructed at short notice to entrap the enemy and is demolished soon after. The tenth is a well-defended place of safety for temporary rest in the midst of a fierce battle. The eleventh is a well-provided fort with strong defence in unapproachable ground either in the midst of a forest, a hill or other place with natural defence. It has but a single gate and is protected by a series of a dozen Prākārās (walled enclosures). There are structures in the walls for sounding the alarm when necessary. Such structures are known as Karaṇas (the ears of the fort). Gates within gates with double latches protect the place and the fort is well provided with all provisions for a long siege. The twelfth type is called War fort. It is especially intended as a place of safety from which to attack the enemy and it has all structures for offence and defence with various weapons. Hidden pathways, and underground passages with stair cases abound. It is sometimes allowed to be used by citizens for residence or cleared of them at the king’s pleasure”

The expatriations on Durga by the Samarāṅgaṇasūtradhāra have already been noticed vide the representative Vāstu texts. But Bhoja in his Yuktikalpataru, however has a better classification. He divides the forts under two main heads: (1) Natural (akṛtrima—literally not artificial) and (2) Artificial. The natural fort is one which is rendered inaccessible to hostile encroaches by its very situation. Secondly, the advantages of its natural defences are such as deserts, rivers and the like. A kingdom which lacks such defensive qualifications should make provision for artificial forts i.e., those which are protected by ramparts, surmounted by embattled parapets and girt round by large ditches. Practically all the Śilpa-texts do not adhere to this more rational classification. They classify Durga in a mixed way.

Mānasāra and Mayamata.

[A. H. I. & A. p. 104.]:—

“Forts are first divided into eight classes, called Śibira, Vāhinī-mukha, Sthānīya, Droṇaka, Saṃviddha or Vardha-ka, Kolaka, Nigama and Akandhāvāra. There is a further division of these forts according to their position. They are known as mountainfort (giridurga), chariot-fort (ratha-durga), divine-fort, (deva-durga), marsh fort (paṅka-durga), and mixed fort (miśra-durga). The mountain fort it subdivided into three classes, according as it is built on the top of the mountain, in the valley, or on the mountain slope. All these forts are surrounded with strong walls and ditches. The wall is made of brick, stone and similar materials. It is at least 12 cubits in height and its thickness at the base is at least 6 cubits. It is provided with watch-towers.”

Mayamata’s list corresponds to this as given in the Mānasāra.

Kauṭilya’s Arthaśātra and Śukranītisāra.

The accounts of fort-laying given in the two renowned treatises, is also worthy of notice-In the former, chapter XXIV. para 1, p. 51, lays down the indictment on establishing forts in the kingdom and of the contents of chaps. XXIV, XXV and XVII taken together can give you a very good account of fort-planning reminescent of the then State-policy under Imperial Mauryas, They provide a very interesting description of the plan and other architectural details. There are nine principal varieties of forts and if we add all the sub-varieties they come to as many as nineteen varieties according to the Śilpaśāstras.

Let us dwell a little more on these varieties:

1. Mountain fort. Its three sub-varieties are already referred to, they are called according to the Mayamata—Girimadhya, Giri-pārśvaka and Giri-śikharaka, the last is also called Prāntara and is most auspicious. The forts of Chitore and Lanka illustrate this type. The town of Bundi may be cited as an example of the second type, the Giñpārśvaka and the first is really a Guhā and Jaipur and Udaipur may be said to be its examples as Guhā type of mountain fort is situated in a valley secluded and made inapproachable by an encircling range of mountains with natural passes like a defile.

2. Water fort. It is rendered difficult of access by natural circumfluent water. It has also two sub-varieties—antardvīpa (island fort) which in the words of is Śukrācarya is a nadī-durga as on its both sides river flows. It may be built in the midst of a sea also. It is in a way an insular town or fort of which, in the opinion of Sri B. B. Dutta, modern Bombay, ancient Ceylone, Srirangam and Kaveripum—pattinam may serve as the best examples. The other variety is called sthala-durga which is situated on a high land girt round stagnant (as opposed to flowing) fathomless water. It may be laid out in the midst of a lake or a vast tank.

3. Desert fort. (Dhānvana) is in the midst of a desert devoid of any water. ‘Nirudaka’ and ‘Airaṇa’ are its principal varities. The former is characterized by barren tract, latter made barren by and saturated with salt or brine water. In both the cases an oasis is turned into a fortified town. In the opinion of Sri Datta many principalities in Rajasthana will fall under these heads.

4. Forest fort. (Vana-durga) has also two sub-varieties ‘Khāñjana’ and ‘Stamba-gahana’ the latter termed by Manu as Vārkṣa. Khañjana is hemmed in by fens variegated with thickets and thorny shrubs while its companion is environed by a dense jungle of lofty trees.

5. Earth fort. (Mahī-durga). It has three species—‘pārigha’, ‘paṅka’ and ‘mṛd-durga’ and they are quite celar cf. details—-vide V.L.

6. Man-fort. (Nṛdurga). Its defence lies in the strength of man-power. It is also sub-divided into ‘Sainya-durga’ and ‘Sahāya-durga’, which are quite clear.

7. Mixed forte. (Miśra-durga) is a combination of Giri-durga and Vana-durga.

8. God’s fort. (Daiva-durga) may be defined as a fort unapproachable on account of its vary natural circumstances like Mt. Everest. Others take it as a fort whose entrance and exit are guarded by gods, Rākṣasas, Vaitālas, ghosts etc. and which has been made inaccessible by hail-storm, constant typhons and frequent showers and which is protected by spells, charms and incantations. According to the Śilparatna vide V. L. however that fort is called daiva-durga, upon whose walls are installed the gods Indra, Vāsudeva, Guha, Jayanta, Vaiśravaṇa, the Twin Aśvinis, Srimadirā (not Śrimandira as Datta takes it—as Śrīmadirā is another name of Pārvatī—vide my H. C. Ico. and Painting) and Śiva, Durgā, Sarasvatī.

9. Kṛtaka. Lastly the Kṛtaka is the artificial fort as distinguished from the foregoing varieties.

Of all the forts the Mountain fort is the best.—“sarveṣāmava[?] durgāṇāṃ”.—Śukrācārya also arranges the forts in order of merit as follows: Giri, Jala, Dhanu, Vana, Pārikha, Airaṇa and Pārigha. With all these special characteristics of each of these the general characteristics in the words of the author of the Śilparatna ‘all strong-holds worth the name must be invariably protected by walls and according to Muni Maya all forts must have unfailing stores, provisions, arms, water arrangements, to be girt round by lofty gigantic trees, secured by walls and furnished with many guarded gates. The absence of bulwarks suggest that the Aryan town-planners were not slow to appreciate the local circumstances, and they took advantage of the natural barriers and, with slight manipulation and modification, turned them into best fortifications where rivers and oceans, mountains and rocks, trees and bushes, deserts and swamps were made to play important parts of their own.