Chapter 5 - Folk-Planning (Jātivarṇa-adhivāsa)

N.B.—Folk-planning here means not only the planning of the residential houses but also the market-places, the shops etc. along with other essentials which constitute the residences and establishments of the ‘Jātis’ and ‘Varṇas’. Again it may be remarked that Road-planning and Folk-planning, being essentially based on the site-planning (what has been termed as Vāstu-pada-vinyāsa—vide ‘Fundamental Canons’ Pt. I), both these canons may be deemed as simply the gradual development of the site-planning according to Hindu Texts of Architecture.

After the planning of the roads, the next important topic is the planning of the boundary wall, ditches, ramparts, etc. of the town. To put it in one word—the subject of fortification is taken in hand after the roads are prescribed or laid out. But as per the discussion already made in previous pages, I have in my own way suggested that the question of residential houses be taken up first and then that of the fortification. This goes well with the arrangement of the Town-Planning. After all, a town is not an individual business. It is a business of society. It is a corporate business in which the individuals, the society and the government all take part in evolving a model town. Once the roads are planned out, the plots carved out, the individuals and the societies start their work of building residential houses and Public Works Department take up the necessary planning of fortification, water reservoirs, gates, Gopuras, parks, gardens, tanks and so on so forth. Thus the civil planning and the individual planning go simultaneously in order to speed up the work. Moreover, if the fortification is laid out first, the building operations necessitating the delivery of the materials would be obstructed to a great extent. Hence in order to avoid congestion and inconvenience, in the passage of the transport and traffic as well as providing the fullest freedom in the circulation, the priority should go to the folk-planning first and the fortification should come afterwards. The Samarāṅgaṇasūtradhāra does support this procedure (Ch. X).

It may be pointed out at the very outset before taking up the site-planning or folk-planning as prescribed by the Samarāṅgaṇasūtradhāra that folk-planning and site-planning though materially identical, have their respective importance in the respective angles from with the planning starts. There were principally five kinds of towns in ancient and the early medieval period—temple-cities, capital-citiesand commercial towns, forts, and big villages, like Kheṭa, Nigamas, etc. corresponding to five principal needs of the civilised life, namely worship, state-craft, commerce, defence and agriculture. They had their especial characteristics each as per the special requirements in each case. It may however, be noted that in accordance with the previous thesis that the Samarāṅgaṇasūtradhāra prescribes only three principal categories of towns—Pura, Kheṭa and Grāma; the Pattani (the secondary capital) and Puṭabhedana, the commercial town are really the especial categories of Pura. It may, however, be permitted to remark that this might be the evolutionary period of the growth of towns. But, as time passed, all these specialities like temples, fortification, market places, council halls, and seats of government, were amalgamated into one unit, if not wholly atleast partially. According to the Samarāṅgaṇasūtradhāra, a town of superior variety used to serve all these necessities. Accordingly, the norms of the town-planning especially the folk-planning of the Samarāṅgaṇasūtradhāra substantially differ from both the groups of this class of earlier literature, namely the Śilpa-Śāstras like Mayamata, Mānasāra, etc. and works like Arthaśāstra and Śukranītisāra. In the former, the folk planning hinges upon Pada-Vinyāsa, whereas in the latter, there is no importance to it. Samarāṅgaṇa combines both these and has evolved a composite planning in which on the one hand, the purpose of the padas presided over by the different divinities was served by the construction of the temples and shrines in the interior, as well as the exterior part of the town, on the other, the arrangement of the corporate and the co-operative, the public and the State buildings together with segregation of the residential houses castewise and profession-wise also was made.

Now in relation to the directions the following eight-fold division of the residential quarters representing eight-fold circle of the directions presided over by the respective deities may be very briefly tabulated as under—

N.B. The folk-planning begins from the South-East and the East is fully reserved for imperial quarters, a special consideration for the aristrocacy of those days and it was natural also in the political structure of those days:—

South-East.—Goldsmiths and those earning their livelihood by fire and other such artisans together with the fourfold army.

South. Vaiśyas, potters, or cart-wheelers (Cākrikas), dice-players, and the professionals in the dance and drama together with the Śreṣṭhīs and Deśa-Mahattaras.

South-West. The hoggers, the shepherds, the hunters, the fishermen and those belonging to the department of punishment (Damanādhikṛts).

West. Charioteers, soldiers, all those skilled at weapons together with the head of the treasury, the Mahāmātya, the Ādeśika and the artists and Niyāmakas.

North-West. People belonging to the Public Works Department and the labourers, distillers and sellers of wine together with the chief of the Police (Daṇḍanātha) along with other officers.

North. The hermitages of ascetics, the Brāhmaṇas the Assembly hall, water-shed, the dwellings of the Priest, the Astronomer, and Brahmavādins,

North-East. Sellers in commodities like clarified butter and fruits.

N.B.—It means their number was very large, as a separate quarter is reserved for only these two classes of professionals.

East. The Royal dignitaries like the Priest, the Prime minister, Commander-in-Chief.

N.B. The king himself; with all his establishments (vide Samarāṅgaṇasūtradhāra ch. 15th.)

So far this is only the profession-wise allotment of the residences. As regards the castewise allocation in a town, the text recommends the following procedure:—

1. The Brāhmaṇas. — The North.
2. The Kṣatriyas. — The South-East.
3. The Vaiśyas. — The South.
4. The Śūdras. — The West

N.B.—The Vaiśyas (the merchant class, sellers in articles of daily use) and the physicians should be distributed in all the quarters along with the Police and the Army.

This is the scheme of the settlement of various castes and professionals in a city, i.e. planned habitation of the city population according to the Samarāṅgaṇasūtradhāra A special notice in this connection are the royal dignitories or State-functionaries like Niyāmakas and Ādeśikas which throws a light on the composition of the government of those days and persons like Deśa-mahattaras etc. composing the then society.

One point needs a bit of clarification here. It is strictly speaking literally the folk-planning, the Jātivarṇādhivāsa—the planning of the residential houses castewise and profession-wise on the eight blocks, on the eight quarters. Here in this scheme, we do not find any mention of the residence of the king (also cf. Agnipurāṇa where too the Rāja-Veśma is conspicuous by its absence). The planning of the palace, the Samarāṅgaṇasūtradhāra does not include in folk-planning or site-planning It is a separate unit of planning altogether. Therefore, in this scheme of town-planning the central parts of the town are reserved for the roads and the palace in all its establishments, domestic, like the chambers for the queens, the palaces of the princes and the princesses as well as those for the queen-mother, ministers, commander-in chief and other dignitaries of the kingdom, and the pleasure gardens, ponds, lakes, flower-beds, and all contributory to a vast paraphernalia of an Indian king. The Samarāṅgaṇasūtradhāra as a standard manual on palace-architecture, has devoted a separate chapter to the planning of a palace as a component part of town-planning which reads like another plan altogether with all the characteristics of a big town. As temples of old grew into cities, similarly the palaces of old also grew into great towns.

To put it more succinctly, let us draw a graph to show the place of a palace in a capital town:—

NE	N	NE
W	Rāja-Veśma	E
sw	S	SE

It is this nine square scheme of habitation with the king in the centre.

It may be remarked here that this scheme of the town plan of the Samarāṅgaṇasūtradhāra in connection with the Jāti-Varṇādhivāsa and the royal palace is strikingly similar to one given in the Agnipurāṇa, (the detailed accounts of the Agnipurāṇa’s scheme and those of other texts may be seen in Datta’s book T. P. in Ancient India).

Bhoja has dealt with this subject also in his Yukti-Kalpataru. The accounts however, are fundamentally similar. It may be noted as Sri Datta has also concluded that the general feature that is conspicuous in all the prescribed plans, as advocated by the different authorities on the subject, is, that generally in the central part of the town all the public buildings of importance, such as the royal palace, the court, the town-hall, the temple, the council house and the like are to be located. This was an ideal arrangement both for the healthy and efficient functioning of the corporate life of the citizens as well as from the point of view of the architectural appearance and grandeur of the metropolis.

Thus this is the evidence of the Samarāṅgaṇasūtradhāra A brief notice of the folkplanning as prescribed by other notable texts like the Mayamata etc., may also be taken—vide also V. Lakṣaṇa. “The Mayamata makes an exhaustive treatment of the proper distribution of the residential quarters interspersed with market stalls (antarāpaṇaka [antarāpaṇakam]).

It particularly deals with these inter-residential stalls and the articles sold in them It lays down:

“Whether in small towns or large cities, I shall now deal with residential sites and the shops situated in their midst. Within the processional boulevard, circumscribing the city are situated in rows the houses of the merchants. To the south but a little removed to the sides are given sites to the weavers; to the north are the residential plots of the wheel-wrights (carters? cakriṇām). Along the processional street are settled the various artisans and mechanics, e.g, blacksmiths, or even day-labourers. Inter residential market-stalls may be set up along the roads encircling the chambers of Brahmā and those stalls should be reserved for fruits and betel-leaves. Tn the quarters held sacred for the deities from Īśa to Mahendra should be erected the stall for fish and meat, dry articles, and vegetables. The stalls for staple foods and edibles are fixed in sites from Mahendra to Agni; and from Agni to Gṛhakṣata are raised sheds for basins and pottery. From Gṛhakṣata to Nirṛti should be allocated the shops for brass and bronze. The cloth shops are set up in the quarters from Pitṛs to Puṣpadanta; and from the latter to Vāyu should be laid out the mart for rice and paddy. From Vāyu to Bhallāṭa quarters are meant for the drapers (tailors and cutters) and those who deal in salt and oils. From that to īśa are situated the shops for perfumeries and flowers. The above are the nine intervening shopping sheds in the outer-most sites. But along the roads that arc laid out within the boulevard are stationed the stalls and shops of jewels and precious stones, gold, clothes, drugs and candiments such as mañjiṣṭhā, pepper, pipal, ginger, honey, ghee, oil and the like, medicines and these in all directions. Then he makes allocation of the sites for divine edifices consecrated various deities. In all directions are allowed all sorts of habitants. About two hundred daṇḍas to the east or to the north-east of the town the cottages for the chāṇḍālas and the washermen should be raised as in the settlement of a village. The above is the scheme of site-planning of an ordinary town. But in a port or commercial emporium such inter-residential shopping stalls are not desirable; but on the other hand to secure economic efficiency, they should be concentrated, being set up in continuous rows on either sides of the highways. In the other types of cities, every thing should be arranged with regard to the peculiar needs and interest of them”.

This is the typical folk-planning in relation more to the professions than to the castes which in that hoary age may be taken as a very advanced folk-planning akin to one in modern-times. As regards the other authorities, the relative tabulations will do but some words on Kauṭilya’s and Śūkra’s folk-planning may also be said. Without going into details it may be said that in Kauṭilya’s scheme, it is the streets and not the Pada-vinyāsa that divide out the city, unlike the plans of Śilpa-śāstra, hence our thesis that in ancient India there was no dearth of civil planning or civil architecture gets supported.

Similarly according to the dictates of Śukra and the advice of the Agnipurāṇa, the folk-planning does not hinge upon Pada-vinyāsa, though the site-planning of the former is a bit different from that of Kauṭilya’s. Unlike Kauṭilya, Śukra provides for the Sabhā or the Council house in the centre of the capital (sabhāmadhyām rāja-dhānīm) and the royal palace in the midst of the council buildings (rājagṛham sabhāmadhyam). The court and the Śilpa-śālā or the museum (literally, hall of arts), both are to be stationed to the north of the palace. Leaving a space of hundred cubits from the palace (probably towards its north) the ministers, the clerks, the councillors, and officers should be located in detached lodges. Two hundred cubits away from the palace, either to the north or to the east, are allowed sites for the military cantonments. Śukra observes a certain order in the allocation of different classes ol military barracks. First, the important personages (prakṛtayaḥ), then the ordinary people, next the officers, then the commanders of the army, then the infantry, then the cavalry, the attendants of horses or elephants, next the guns and ordnances, the mares, the constabulary and sentry thereafter, lastly foresters; this is the order to be followed in the location of these sites or quarters. Wealth and birth were the determining factors in the distribution of sites for dwellings of the citizens round about the royal palace. The inns and restaurants should be well protected and provided with ample supply of water. The cognate houses, their relation being determined by similarity of business or identity of castes, shall be congregated together in a row. In the towns or villages the buildings should face either the north or the east. In the market place, the stalls or shops are to be placed according to the classes of commodities. The best plots along the side of the high ways should be distributed with regard to the wealth and power of the residents. In this way the king should plan both the town and the grama.”

To sum up the basic canons of town-planning in ancient India, we may conclude in the words of B. B. Datta—T.P.A.I. pp. 147-8;

“In India, considerations of efficiency in corporate life, and the principle of the Varṇāśrama Dharma developing a social stratification of the people in general and of the functionaries of the state, led to a segregation of the classes following different pursuits; and the same caste or people of the same profession were congregated in the same ward so that a uniformity of life and consequent economic efficiency and progress were secured. Every ward was set apart for a caste or trade guilt of note which enjoyed an autonomy of its own. Thus if the Śūdra class was numerically very large, a separate block or even a separate site was alloted to it. The goldsmiths, the artisans, the perfume-dealers, the Brāhmaṇas, or the soldiers would have distinct muhalla or a detached group or block of their own. Even today in the town or village of Southern India the Brāhmaṇa quarter is separate and goes by the name of Agrahāra [agrahāram] In large cities any of the sites into which the whole city was divided by the main highways, was so large that no particular class was important and big enough to inhabit it to the full. Again in large cities such detachment of classes or castes is neither conducive to the integrity of civic life nor good for the class itself, because corporate life connotes manifold needs and responsibilities and consequently necessitates inter-dependence and inter-communication. Hence every site was divided into different blocks or plots, one being meant for each class, In a word, a site Was the prototype of the whole city on a smaller scale. This admixture and congregation of classes came as a remedial measure against possible accentuation of class differences