Rukmininagar Fort (also referred to in early colonial accounts as Bishnook Nuggur or Bhismaknagar) is an archaeological hill fort located in the Lower Dibang Valley district of Arunachal Pradesh, India. The site lies in the hills near Chidu and Chimiri, north of the plains of Sadiya, between the Dikrong and Dibang River systems. It consists of scattered brick-and-stone structural remains across an elevated plateau. Archaeological evidence suggests that the site belonged to the same cultural tradition as Bhismaknagar[1], which has been associated with the Chutia kingdom[2], indicating that Rukmininagar was constructed under Chutia rule.[3] Archaeological evidence further supports this attribution, as a brick bearing the name of Śrī-śrī-Lakṣmīnārāyaṇa has been recovered from the ruins at Rukmininagar, indicating that the site was in use during the Chutia king Lakshminarayana's reign and was likely associated with his political centre.[4] The site also formed part of the historical Sadhayapura capital region of the Chutia kingdom and can be identified with the fortified hill city of Doi-Chantan (or Chandangiri) described in the Buranjis.[5] Chandangiri was one of the three fortified cities mentioned in the Buranjis, the others being Barnagar (Che-lung in Tai) and Thanggiri (Doi-Thang).[6] The original fort may have been associated with the line of hill forts attributed to the Chutia king Gauri Narayan. According to the Chutia chronicles, Gauri Narayan, after consolidating his kingdom, “built a line of forts along the foot of the hills”, along with large tanks and temples.[7]

Map showing Rukmininagar along with the two other cities of Sadhayapura.

The site was first described in detail by British officer S. F. Hannay in 1848, who identified it with the legendary city of Bhismaka, king of Koondilpur.[8] Later archaeological and gazetteer accounts distinguish Rukmininagar from the better-known fortified site of Bhismaknagar east of Roing.[1]

Location

Rukmininagar is situated in the foothills north of the Sadiya plains, between the Dikrong and Dibong rivers. The site occupies a naturally elevated plateau accessible from the plains via river routes and steep ascents. Hannay described the approach as involving travel across the Sadiya plain, followed by movement along the Dikrong River valley and a steep ascent of approximately 24–30 m (80–100 ft) to reach a forested plateau.[9]

Ruins of an inner wall in Rukmininanagar.

Etymology and identification

The name Rukmininagar derives from local traditions associating the site with Rukmini, the daughter of the legendary king Bhishmaka. These traditions connect the hill structures near Chidu and Chimiri with her residence. In his 1848 account, Hannay referred to the site as “Bishnook Nuggur” and identified it as a city built by the legendary Bhismaka.[8] This reflects a broader colonial tendency to equate archaeological remains in the Sadiya region with locations mentioned in the Mahabharata and Puranic traditions. Modern scholarship treats Rukmininagar as a distinct archaeological site, separate from Bhismaknagar east of Roing, though both are associated with the wider cultural landscape of the Chutia kingdom.[1] The discovery of a brick inscribed with the name of King Lakṣmīnārāyaṇa at the site has also been cited as evidence that the fort was occupied during his reign, and may have formed part of the capital region of Sadhayapuri centred around Sadiya.[10]

Brick found in Rukmininanagar with the name of King Lakshminarayan.

History

Rukmininagar is generally associated with the Chutia kingdom, which dominated the Sadiya region until its annexation by the Ahoms in the early 16th century. The architectural features of the site—particularly the combination of stone and brick masonry, large ramparts, and hill-edge fortifications—are consistent with other sites attributed to the Chutias in the Lohit valley.[1]

Hannay opined that the strategic placement of the fort along the hill–plain transition zone might indicate that it was used as a defensive enclosure or refuge site.[11] The Buranjis record that the fortified hill city of Doi-Chantan (or Chandangiri) was where the Chutia king fled when his capital city was attacked. The king along with the queen was attacked by the Ahom generals Phrasen-mung Borgohain and King-lun Buragohain in 1524. The king was killed and beheaded, and his head to the Ahom king Suhungmung, then stationed at Barnagar.[12] The Chutias of Doi-Chantan are further recorded to have revolted in 1529 CE, though the uprising was subsequently suppressed.[13]

Architecture

The fortifications of Rukmininagar consist of an extensive defensive system combining earthen ramparts, sandstone masonry and brick gates constructed along the edge of an elevated plateau at the foothills as well as and brick superstructures and a second line of defensive wall and brick superstructures inside the fortifications.[1] Hannay suggested that the enclosure may have extended several miles, possibly towards the Dibang River, and the presence of fruit trees and earthenware vessels suggests that the place had been peopled, or at least that it had been occasionally occupied as a summer residence.[14]

In 1873, four large tanks and extensive brick foundations were reported in the same locality of the ruins between the Dibang and Dikrong gorges. One of the tanks was described as “almost as large as the famous tank at Sibsagar”. The reports, however, did not specify whether these features lay within the hill-fort enclosure, on the adjoining tableland, or elsewhere in the broader lowland archaeological landscape.[15][16]

The defensive works include a high earthen rampart faced with hewn sandstone blocks in the lower portions and brick parapets above, with the masonry laid without mortar. The parapet walls, approximately 1.2 to 1.4 m (4 to 4.5 ft) thick, were constructed using well-fired bricks of varying sizes, arranged in multiple courses with projecting layers forming a rudimentary cornice.[17]

This diagrams show the offset(bent) gateway fortifications of some Medieval forts.

The rampart extends in a north-westerly direction for at least a quarter of a mile, with sections of brick wall rising up to 1.5 m (5 ft) in height and containing loopholes, likely intended for archery or spear defence. In several places, right-angled turns in the wall suggest provisions for flanking defence. Gateway structures are inferred from cross-walls intersecting the rampart, particularly where spurs of the plateau meet the defensive line, indicating controlled points of entry. Much of the structure was found in a dilapidated state, with vegetation and large trees growing over the ramparts.[11]

Historical accounts from Buranjis describing the assault on Chandangiri suggest that the fortifications may have been organized in multiple defensive tiers, with successive lines of resistance from the outer slopes to inhabited zones and finally to the main gateway (Bar-Dwar), a pattern broadly consistent with the structural layout observed at Rukmininagar.[18][19]

Archaeological findings

Hannay's 1848 Report

Archaeological evidence further includes large quantities of pottery and earthenware, including large storage vessels similar to those used for holding water, as well as smaller vessels of varied forms. Debris of such pottery has also been reported from the bed of the Dikrong River, differing in material quality and form from contemporary Assamese wares and showing affinities with Gangetic ceramic traditions.[11]

1973–74 Archaeological Survey

Further archaeological investigations conducted by the Research Department of the Government of Arunachal Pradesh between January 1973 and April 1974 have provided additional insights into the site. Scattered brick structures located in the hills north of Roing, particularly between the villages of Chidu and Chimri at an altitude of about 305 m (1,001 ft) have been discovered.[20]

Parts of a ruined brick foundation of Rukmininagar.

Excavations at Chimri, approximately 11 km (6.8 mi) from Roing, revealed two brick-built rooms measuring 10 m × 10 m (33 ft × 33 ft) and 10 m × 12 m (33 ft × 39 ft), constructed on a slope and located about 14 m (46 ft) apart. The fill within these structures consisted of river-borne materials, suggesting destruction due to flooding. The potsherds recovered from the site closely resemble those found at Bhismaknagar in shape, fabric, and technique, indicating the extension of the same cultural horizon into this region.[20] Additional archaeological locations in the area include sites near the Chidu Inspection Bungalow, at Cheko Nati between Chidu and Chimri, and in the hills north of Chimri at an altitude of about 610 m (2,000 ft). While no significant structural remains were observed at the first two sites during the survey, earlier reports mention the presence of potsherds at Chidu and brick walls and steps at Cheko Nati. The high-altitude site north of Chimri yielded scattered bricks without alignment, indicating extensive destruction.[20] The distribution of these sites across defensible hilly terrain suggests that they formed parts of a single fortified complex extending from Chidu to Chimri, with Cheko Nati possibly serving as its principal centre. Another related site, Duku Limbo, located on the left bank of the Dibang river at the foot of Elopa hill, has yielded brickbats indicating that the cultural assemblage associated with Bhismaknagar extended to this area as well.[20] These features indicate planned fortification rather than irregular construction.

1992–93 Archaeological Survey

Subsequent archaeological exploration undertaken by the Directorate of Archaeology, Government of Arunachal Pradesh, in 1992-93, at Mayo Hill near Roing identified another brick-built structure associated with the wider Rukmininagar archaeological landscape. Located approximately 3 km (1.9 mi) upstream from Rukmininagar at an elevation of about 560 m (1,840 ft) above sea level, the site consisted of a rectangular brick mound measuring approximately 29 m × 25 m (95 ft × 82 ft). Large quantities of bricks and brickbats were observed on the surface, with brick sizes ranging from about 20 cm × 16 cm × 4 cm (7.9 in × 6.3 in × 1.6 in) to 12 cm × 8 cm × 3 cm (4.7 in × 3.1 in × 1.2 in). Based on preliminary investigations, archaeologists suggested that the structure may have functioned as a watchtower guarding the approaches to the fortified complex.[21]

References

  1. 1 2 3 4 5 Dutta Choudhury 1978, p. 40.
  2. ↑ "Bhismaknagar". Government of Arunachal Pradesh. Archived from the original on 11 June 2017.
  3. ↑ "The ruins of two forts in Lohit district of Arunachal Pradesh are said to be the remains of Bhīṣmaka’s city, viz. Bhismaknagar (sk. Bhīṣmakanagara): one ruin about 16 miles northwest of Sadiya at the foot of the hills between the rivers Dikrang and Dibang is known as the fort of Bhīṣmaka, and the other about 24 miles north of Sadiya between the gorges of those two rivers is believed to be the fort of Śiśupāla. Based on an inscribed brick with the name of Śrī-śrī-Lakṣmīnārāyaṇa, discovered from the ruins of the forts in Bhismaknagar, it is assumed that Chutiya king Lakṣmīnārāyaṇa of the early fifteenth century had his capital in the area. The paleographical analysis of the inscription supports this dating." (Shin 2020:56)
  4. ↑ (Neog 1978:817, 819)
  5. ↑ "Here our guide, who by the way had never seen the Fort, said we had reached it, and mentioned that the tract of table land covered with various fruit trees extended inland to the foot of the Giri mountain.(Hannay 1848:460)
  6. ↑ Barua, Gopal Chandra,"Ahom Buranji",p.56-63
  7. ↑ Brown, W.B. (1895). An Outline Grammar Of The Deori Chutiya Language. Shillong: Assam Secretariat Printing Office. pp. 75, 84. Returning with his bride to his chosen seat of government, he (Gaurinarayan) sought no further extension of his dominions, bur directed his whole attention to the improvement of what he had acquired and to the consolidation of his power. He built a line of forts along the foot of the hills, probably to restrain the hungry barbarians, his former countrymen; made large tanks and founded temples.
  8. 1 2 Hannay 1848, p. 459.
  9. ↑ Hannay 1848, p. 460.
  10. ↑ (Neog 1978:817, 819)
  11. 1 2 3 Hannay 1848, p. 461-462.
  12. ↑ Barua, Gopal Chandra, Ahom Buranji, pp. 56–57.
  13. ↑ Barua, Gopal Chandra, Ahom Buranji, pp. 62–63.
  14. ↑ "The tableland to the east being naturally strong from the steepness and difficulty of ascent, required no artificial defences, and from the circumstance of the rampart and wall abutting upon the souther most point of the tableland, it appeared to me evident that those works, to their utmost extent westward, probably to the Dibong, about 6.4 km (4 mi) distant, were merely intended to enclose the table-land at the foot of the hills, and thus form a place of refuge in time of invasion. The quantity of fruit trees, such as Shaum (Artocarpus chaplasha), Jack and Mangoe, would also lead us to suppose that the place had been peopled, or at least that it had been occasionally occupied as a summer residence."(Hannay 1848:461)
  15. ↑ Allen, B. C. (1905). Assam District Gazetteers, Vol. VIII: Lakhimpur. Calcutta: The City Press. p. 93. In 1873, four tanks were discovered in the same locality, one almost as large as the famous tank at Sibsagar, and the brick foundations of what must once have been extensive buildings.
  16. ↑ Gait, Edward Albert (1906). A History of Assam. Calcutta: Thacker, Spink & Co. p. 16. In the same locality are four large tanks and the brick foundations of what must have been extensive buildings.
  17. ↑ Hannay 1848, p. 460-461.
  18. ↑ Barua, Gopal Chandra, "Ahom Buranji, p.56-57
  19. ↑ Bhuyan,S.K.,"Deodhai Assam Buranji, p.17
  20. 1 2 3 4 Dutta Choudhury 1978, p. 40-41.
  21. ↑ (Archaeological Survey of India 1992–93:17)

See also

source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rukmininagar_Fort