Ancient Settlements of Lower Bengal and Mouths of the Ganga

[Full title: Indian Subcontinent; 3: Eastern India (Andhra Pradesh, Orissa and Bengal); (1): Harbours and Coastal Settlements (3) Lower Bengal and Mouths of the Ganga]

The geographer Strabo was probably the first Hellene to comment upon the geography of the Ganges estuary when he recorded that the Ganges discharges into the sea by a single mouth. The Periplus, tracing the coastline north along the Orissa coast, records the moment when the Ganges 'comes into view' (Periplus Maris Erythraei 63). This, of course, would be an allusion to the westernmost mouth of the river. According to McCrindle (in Sastri 1927:71) 'Ptolemy appears to have been the first writer who gave to the western world any definite information concerning that part of the Bengal coast which receives the waters of the Ganges.' Ptolemy names five mouths of the Ganges in order of Kambyson, Mega, Kamberikhon, Pseudostomon and Antibole. He also mentions two estuarine settlements: Poloura and Tilogrammon. Commentators of the Geographia and historical geographers have attempted the identification of the mouths of the Ganges the basis of toponyms and geomorphology of the Ganges delta. The present study proposes to review the previous identifications by integrating the substantial archaeological records from Early Historic sites explored on the Ganges estuary in the last fifty years Before we begin the review it is necessary to put into perspective the idea of 'mouth.' From a purely geomorphological point of view there are many more mouths of the Ganga than the five detailed by Ptolemy. In all likelihood Ptolemy's mouths refer to the important navigable estuaries on the Ganga delta. We know that Ptolemy fixed the positions of ports and other settlements in India on the basis of information acquired from those voyaging to this far land (Gole 1983:29-30). The

234 occurrence of Mediterranean artefacts in Early Historic sites port-sites of lower Bengal, including votive seals and tablets of mariners inscribed in Greek, points to direct Hellenic voyaging to this part of the world (see discussion in Chapter V) In the Dasakumaracharita of Dandin there is a reference to Yavana mariners near the port of Tamralipti in lower Bengal (Kale 1986: pp. xxxvi, xxxvii, 324-325). Since Ptolemy's knowledge of the Ganges mouths was likely to have been derived from mariners, it is necessary to understand the mouths in terms of the experience of the ancient navigators negotiating their ships into the delta In this context, Ptolemy's mouths must have represented navigable points of ingress into the Gangetic delta and riverine ports further upstream. In Another preliminary factor to be considered is the issue of shoreline changes Is it plausible to attempt a reconstruction of Ptolemy's mouths on the basis of the present configuration of the delta or has the extension of fluvial deposition completely distorted' the geomorphology of the delta as it was in Early Historic times? Our understanding of fluvial-marine dynamics in the Ganga Delta will be clearer when the recent work of the Geological Survey of India on coastal geomorphology and shoreline changes on the Bengal coast is published in full (Goswami et al. 1989). However, consideration of the new evidence of archaeological sites in the Ganga deltaic zone provides some answers to the above questions Fig. 37 we can see that there is a proliferation of Early Historic sites on the estuarine area of the Ganga. The distribution of these sites extends into the present tidal zone. This is indicated by the location of the sites of Harinarayanpur below Diamond Harbour, Mandir Tala on Ganga Sagar Island and Kanthi on the coast opposite Ganga Sagar. In fact, the island mentioned in the Periplus (sec.63) as situated opposite the mouth of the Ganga may well be a reference to Ganga Sagar The presence of Early Historic archaeological deposits at the edge of the present delta suggests that the geomorphology of the Ganga deltaic zone was not very different from as it exists today. The identifications proposed for locations of Ptolemy's mouths are reviewed below The review is presented in two parts. First, the various identifications of Ptolemy's mouths are specified. Thereafter the various identifications are reviewed in the light of new archaeological data Kambyson Saint-Martin (in McCrindle-Sastri 1927.71) locates Kambyson at the mouth of the River Hughli saying that it would be possible that below Diamond Point the principal channel (of the Hughli) instead of passing now in front of Kalpi remounted to the west in front of Tamluk and came thus to touch at a

235 locality of which the actual name Nungabusan recalls that of Kambysum or Kambyson Wilford and Yule (in McCrindle-Sastri 1927:71) place Kambyson further west at the mouth of the river Suvarnarekha In his study of the ancient geography of the Ganga, Dey (Ind. Ant. 1921:35-36) locates Kambyson at Kapilasrama near Sagar island Explaining the phonetic connection between Kambyson-Kapilasrama, Dey (Ind. Ant 1921:35-40) says "that according to phonetic rules the word 'asrama' is sometimes changed into 'ason' or 'son', as Gurga-Asrama is the modern Gugason, Bhrigu-Asrama is the modern Bagrason." Mega Saint-Martin (in McCrindle-Sastri 1927:71) identifies this mouth with the Matla estuary Wilford and Yule (in McCrindle-Sastri 1927 71) identify it with the estuary of the River Hughli which, as we see above, has been associated with Kambyson by Saint-Martin and Dey. Dey (Ind. Ant. 1921: 38-39) suggests that Mega is a corruption of Magra, explaining his position thus: At some remote period there was perhaps a mouth of the Ganges near Magra in the district of Hughli and perhaps with the gradual extension of the delta towards the south the name has also gone down along with the shifting course of the channel and it is at present situated in the district of 24 Parganas now known by the name of Magra-hat near the Rasulpur river which joins the Ocean through the Jamira Estuary.' 1927-71) identifies the name Kamberikhon Kamberikhon: Saint-Martin (in McCrindle-Sastri Kamberikhon with the Baraganga Estuary. In his opinion derives from the river Kobbadak which joins the Baraganga Dey (Ind. Ant. 1921:38) also associating Kamberikhon with Kobbadak-Baraganga explains his position: "Kamberikhon appears to be a transcription of Kumbirakhatum which means the *Crocodile channel'. The name of Kumaria village on the river Kobbadak, the river Kumer in the district of Jessore and several places with the name of Kumbhira or its corruptions, situated on the present branches of the Ganges in the neighbourhood, lead us to believe that Kamberikhon must be a corruption of Kumbhirakhatam, now represented by the Bangara estuary." Pseudostomon According to McCrindle (in Sastri 1927 71) "the fourth mouth was called Pseudostomon, that is 'false mouth' because it lay concealed behind numerous islands and was often mistaken for the easternmost mouth of the Ganges." Dey does not discuss this mouth. Antibole According to McCrindle (in Sastri 1927:71) the easternmost mouth of the Ganga as detailed by Ptolemy 'is the Dhaka or the old Ganges river and seems to have been the limit of India and the point from which measurements and distances relating to countries in India were frequently made' Dey (Ind.Ant.

236 1921:40) postulates that 'the Antibole mouth in the second century was probably near Atopur in the district of Nadia: Atopura or Atpura is now perhaps represented by the Matla estuary '