Part 4 - Urban features of ancient Vārāṇasī

This aspect was reflected in the archaeological remains of the ancient city of Vārāṇasī. On mound 1 some unusual buildings, not meant for residential purposes were discovered. Of them one marked as 26 is catuśālah in plan and has a courtyard in the centre and eight rooms around it. Similar structure was also located near it. These were surely made for some social or official purposes. In the same area single rooms in a row were identified as shops. Some underground structures were also found were meant for storage function. This elaborate commercial complex was certainly an ancillary of the trade activities of ancient Vārāṇasī. The Mānasāra description of Pattana closely matches to Vārāṇasī. It is a citadel city, near waterways, with a rampart, a mixed population of all castes and a sizeable mercantile class and a centre of exchange of goods. The urban layout of Vārāṇasī matches with this model.

At the archaeological site of Rajghat identified as Vārāṇasī there is an enclosing wall around. There is a scholarly controversy about its purpose. In a recent paper of Frederica Barba, following other leading scholars (Erdosy 1988, Chakrabarti 1998, Allchin B. And R. 1982, Roy 1983), she has commented that fortification of urban sites of northern India in the context of early India in general took place in two phases. The surrounding wall of Rajghat if we call it a fortification at all belonged to the first phase when other major cities like Kauśāmbī, Rajgir, Campā, Atranjikhera got fortified in 6^th- 5^th centuries BCE. In the first phase it was more in the form of a mud rampart can only be seen in the area along the river and not around the whole settlement. For that reason this rampart was taken as a flood protective device and not a fortification.^[1] But it was too weak for that purpose. It was made thicker and higher and was provided with wooden planks used as ramps or platforms to load and unload goods. Everyone is not convinced that it is an embankment. Rather they call it a regular wall to protect the settlement from outside attacks, raids of robbers and wild animals. Even the Jātakas corroborated the view that the city had a fortification wall around.

Other feature that could speak of urbanity of ancient Vārāṇasī is its city planning. From the post-NBPW times regular house building activities started in this site. Houses were found in clusters and they contained spacious rooms, advanced sanitary system. Sanitation was in general quite advanced in Vārāṇasī. A variety of sanitary devices and arrangements can be seen there. From the earliest unlined pits of 300 BCE a gradual evolution to terracotta ring pits may be seen. It is also found in a number of contemporary sites of middle Gaṅgā plain like Prahladpur, Takiapur, Sonepur, Vaiśāli and Kauśāmbī. Large soakage jars came to be used from the period III (1^st- 3^rd centuries CE) as another sanitary device. Long public drains started appearing from the 3^rd century CE.^[2] A general sense of hygiene may be noted in the whole arrangement. Broad and well arranged streets running in north-south and east-west orientation is certainly another hallmark of urbanity. So the urban traits though lacked monumentality may qualify the Childean Internal specialisation of a city or its internal specialised role.

The Buddhist literary sources eloquently speak about the urban life and culture of Vārāṇasī. The riches of Vārāṇasī could be sensed from the huge and expensive merchandise carried in business sojourns. Many Jātakas portrayed traders travelling with five hundred cart loads of merchandise.^[3] The Jātakas also mentioned extremely rich merchants stationed in Vārāṇasī. They owned millions and crores of wealth.^[4] Childe speaks of a long distance trade as an essential of a city. Jātaka references clearly demonstrated that Vārāṇasī fulfilled the requirement of Childean specialisation on trade. Its strategic location and a virtual monopoly over the routes of the region and control over Deccan and other long distance trade made it a pattana or mercantile city and lucrative to all major powers.

Other than these magnificent riches the Jātakas also enlisted numerous ordinary professions. Recovery of bead, tool and metal crafts, variety of small stone objects, iron slags of local smelting, reference of Kammaragama or an exclusive blacksmith’s village where thousand blacksmith’s families stayed was referred to in the Jātakas.^[5] The Bodhisatva figured as a member of potter’s family^[6] or as the son of an elephant trainer.^[7] Other than the individual professionals we have group of same professionals organised in the corporate fashion living within the limits of the city or just off it. We notice ivory workers^[8] with their seat in the ivory bazaar and making luxury items out of ivory and village of 500 carpenters very close to Vārāṇasī.²⁰ Some unusual professions also been referred to. Musicians and entertainers formed an important group. Thus we see Bodhisatva was a musician entertaining traders in their long travel,^[9] drummer and conch blower^[10] earning his money during festivals, performing as an acrobat^[11] etc. Profession of a corn factor^[12] , stone cutter^[13] were also mentioned.

Other than these specialised economic activities the city offered thousands of opportunity for earning the livelihood for the hapless, disabled, idle and vagabonds. They lived on charity made in plenty by the city authority and individuals. The city had at least six almonries, four at each city gate, one at the centre of the city and the other at the palace gate serving the poor and the needy.^[14] So early urban sites like Vārāṇasī offered a host of economic and social opportunities to people. Thus we notice merchants and Householders of the highest level, with enormous money and highest social status. There were a number of craftsman and professionals and the paupers and destitute helped by the city charity funded by various agencies. This feature has been noted by Monica L. Smith.^[15] She takes note of the city’s role as the seat of economic networks and exchange. This feature helps people to earn their living and to avail numerous goods and materials. Thus they stood as active population centres catering to the needs of different type of people.

The urban culture and general prosperity of Vārāṇasī was reflected in the description of festivals in the Jātakas. The city was decorated like that of Indra during the night festival of Kārtika,^[16] people’s merry making and celebrations, how a class of entertainers make money in these festivals. This reflects an urban ethos and a vibrant urban community whose existence and identity was urban based but their individual identity and community feeling made up a civic urbanism. Size of the urban site was another major component of Childe’s criteria of urbanity. Childe emphasises on some of the peculiarities that distinguishes a city from a village. Size wise a city should be much bigger than a village. At least sixty medium to large cities were located at the Gaṅgā valley whose size varied from 50- 200 ha. With nearby Mathura as the largest urban site with 300 ha. of areal span and Kauśāmbī with a 200 ha. we may presume that ancient Vārāṇasī must had an impressive size since a fair knowledge in this regard is not available. The Tanḍulanāli Jātaka informs us that the city proper extended to twelve leagues.^[17] Vārāṇasī’s cultural orbit shows that it fulfils some of the basic demands of the Childean set of internal specialisation to measure urbanity.

The political history of Kāśī mahājanapadaand that of Vārāṇasī is full of ups and downs but there had been a strong monarchy. The Jātakas consistently referred to the Brahmadatta dynasty ruling over Vārāṇasī. Probably this was a native dynasty and later Kāśī was engaged into fight with its neighbours Kośala and Magadha and came under their respective control. However there had always been a ruling agency in charge of the control and management of the kingdom. Thus a close look on the city’s details showed that it nearly fulfilled the Childean or the axe of internal specialisation of Smith’s Triaxial model.^[18]

Footnotes and references:

[1]:

H.C. Raychaudhuri, Political History of Ancient India, New Delhi, Cosmo Publications, 2006, p.131

[2]:

Frederica Barba, The fortified Cities of the Ganges Plain in the First Millennium B.C. in East and West, Vol.54, No. 1/4, December 2004, pp.224, 230.

[3]:

T. N. Roy, The Ganges Civilization, New Delhi, Ramanand Vidya Bhavan, 1983, pp.146-48.

[4]:

E.B. Cowell ed. & translated by W.H.D. Rouse The Jātaka or the Stories of the Buddha’s Former Births, Vol. II, Delhi, Motilal Banarasidass Publishers Pvt. Ltd. 1990, no.291, Bhadra Ghaṭa Jātaka, p.203 and E.B. Cowell ed. & translated by H.T. Francis and R. A. Neil, The Jātaka or the Stories of the Buddha’s Former Births, Vol. III, New Delhi, Cosmo Publications, 1979, no.313, Khantivādi Jātaka, p.26.

[5]:

Ibid, 1979, no.387, Sūci Jātaka, op.cit. p.178.

[6]:

E.B. Cowell ed. The Jātaka or the Stories of the Buddha’s Former Births, Vol. III, op.cit. no.408, kumbhakāra Jātaka, p.26 and E.B. Cowell ed. The Jātaka or the Stories of the Buddha’s Former Births, Vol. II, op.cit. no.178, Kacchapa Jātaka, p.55.

[7]:

E.B. Cowell ed.The Jātaka or the Stories of the Buddha’s Former Births, Vol. II, op.cit. no.182, Saṃgāmāvacara Jātaka, p.64.

[8]:

Ibid, no.221, Kāsāva Jātaka,p.139 20. Ibid, no. 156, Alīnacitta Jātaka,p.14.

[9]:

Ibid,no.243, Guttila Jātaka,p.172

[10]:

E. B. Cowell ed. The Jātaka or the stories of the Buddha’s Former Births, Vol. I, op.cit. no.59 Bherivāda Jātaka, and no.60 Saṃkhadhamana Jātaka, pp. 146-48

[11]:

Ibid, no.116, Dubbaca Jātaka, p.259

[12]:

E.B. Cowell ed. The Jātaka or the stories of the Buddha’s Former Births, Vol. III, op.cit. no.365, Ahiguṇḍika Jātaka, p.131.

[13]:

E. B. Cowell ed. The Jātaka or the stories of the Buddha’s Former Births, Vol. I, op.cit. no.137, Babbu Jātaka, p.294.

[14]:

Ibid, no.51, Mahāsīlava Jātaka, p.129.

[15]:

Monica L. Smith, The Archaeology of the South Asian Cities, Journal of Archaeological Research, 14

[16]:

E. B. Cowell ed. The Jātaka or the stories of the Buddha’s Former Births, Vol. I,,no.59, Bherivāda Jātaka and no.60, Saṃkhadhamana Jātaka, pp.146-48.

[17]:

Ibid, no.5 Tanḍulanāli Jātaka, pp.21-23.

[18]:

Monica L. Smith, op.cit.2006, pp.104-08.