Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

Prehistory and Protohistory in India and Pakistan c9: Chapter IV. Neolithic and Chalcolithic Cultures

Prehistory and Protohistory in India and Pakistan c9

Language
English

Contents

Chapter IV. Neolithic and Chalcolithic Cultures

c9.2

WHILE announcing the general series of lectures, no specific mention was made of the Neolithic cultures. This was done advisedly. Even though the first neolith—a ground or polished stone implement—was found as far back as 1842¹ even after 100 years we really do not know much about the Neolithic Culture or Cultures in India. At best the various surface finds and some from the excavations can be plotted on a map and inferences may be drawn from the distribution pattern regarding the different types of tools and various cultural influences. This indeed is extremely inadequate and helps little in understanding the significance of a cultural stage which takes us to the very beginning of civilization.

c9.3

¹ According to Dr. F. R. ALLCHIN, "Piklihal Excavations", p. XI (For full reference see below).

Neolithic and Chalcolithic

c9.s1.1

Neolithic truly is a sub-division of the Stone Age and originally was conceived on a purely technological basis. It connoted that at this time the tools of man were of stone, but unlike those of his predecessors these stone tools were "ground" or "polished."² This simple definition of neolithic has long since been given up. It now means a cultural or economic stage when man had learnt not only to smooth his stone tools by different methods, but above all he had begun to produce his own food. Agriculture in however primitive a form³ was known. In addition man had begun to domesticate animals like the cow or ox, sheep or goat, pigs and dog. He also made pottery.³ All these singly or collectively imply that man lived at a fixed place. He was no longer a hunter, a hunter moving from place to place in small groups but had an organized community or social life. Thus he ceased to be a savage or barbarian. It goes without saying that in a true neolithic stage knowledge of metal—copper or iron—was not known. If we are to apply this definition to our knowledge of conditions in India, then we shall have to say that so far we know very little of a pure or full neolithic culture. Recently an attempt has been made by Shri V. D. KRISHNASWAMI⁴ to give a picture of the neolithic pattern of India. While doing so he has divided the existing data into four neolithic provinces, (a), (b), (c) and (d). This attempt, no doubt, is admirable. But it does not make a sharp distinction between the Neolithic and the Chalcolithic cultural stages of man's development. It is no doubt true that these very often overlap and do overlap and therefore it is difficult to say when the Mesolithic as indicated by tiny stone implements develops into the Neolithic or where the Neolithic stops and the Chalcolithic begins. In spite of this it is possible to have a clear picture of the cultures which have been brought to light in the last 10 years in Central and Western India and to compare them with what we know of the surface distribution of ground stone tools from Southern and Eastern India. Before going into details, it should be pointed out that while the ground stone implement, irrespective of its exact type, is abundant in the East and South, in Western India it has so far been found only in the Deccan and very casually in Central India and elsewhere in the North. In the South-east and in the East, it seems to form the basic industry. In addition, copper tools have not been associated with stone tools in the East and the South, except for solitary occurrences of a copper chisel and a copper and bronze rod at Brahmagiri, and also at Piklihal nearby, whereas in the West and Central India, it seems to occur more frequently. Likewise, short, parallel-sided blades do not occur invariably in the East. Again no cutting and heavy tools—whether of stone, copper, bronze—are reported from the Grey Ware levels in the Ganga-Yamuna Doab and South-east Rajputana.3a Thus the content of the various cultural complexes is indeed different and we should on the evidence say that the cultures of the East and the South formed the true Neolithic cultures. Those of Central India and the Deccan constitute the Chalcolithic cultures, whereas those of the Gangetic Valley fall into another group.

c9.s1.2

² Some writers distinguish between "grinding" and "polishing" but as has been pointed out elsewhere by the writer "polishing" is not a distinct technique, but the final stage in grinding.

c9.s1.3

³ Even the knowledge of pottery is not now regarded as an essential prerequisite. For at Jarmo, Jericho and Hacilar in Iraq, Palestine and Turkey respectively pre-pottery (also called a-ceramic) Neolithic cultures have been unearthed.

c9.s1.4

⁴ KRISHNASWAMI, V. D., Proceedings of the Forty-Sixth Indian Science Congress, pp. 124-40.

c9.s1.5

3a A large scale excavation at Ahar, Udaipur in 1961-62 seemed to show that the exploitation of copper was the main economic basis of the early settlers in the valley. See, SANKALIA, H. D., I.L.N., September 1, 1962, p. 322.

c9.s1.6

Taking these factors into consideration, it is here proposed to group the zones on certain technological grounds. It is not the occurrence of a few copper or bronze objects, the number of which has generally been very small, but the knowledge of smelting copper that is important. Thus the criterion of the difference between a Neolithic and Chalcolithic or Bronze Age culture is technological.

c9.s1.7

Admirable though this criterion is, it is rarely that sufficient evidence is available to decide from the discovery of a few copper objects in an excavation or a hoard, whether these are really imports from a genuine copper-smelting and forging area or the products of a local industry. Subsidiary criteria have therefore to be resorted to. Two of these have been here utilized.

c9.s1.8

*Other Criteria*

c9.s1.9

The first is pottery. As per present evidence, in Eastern India, in the absence of proper excavations,⁴ no pottery is recorded. In the south-eastern, the pottery is basically hand-made and partly made on a turn-table; whereas in the rest—Western and Central India—wheel-made pottery is the rule, the hand-made being an exception and confined to huge storage jars and the like.

c9.s1.10

⁴ See however below a small note based on a recent excavation at Baripada, Orissa.

c9.s1.11

The second criterion is the presence of the lithic blade and ground stone industries. From Eastern India, only the ground stone tools are known, the association of the blade industry with it not being yet established.⁵ In the South-east, it appears, we have to make a sub-division : (a) Southern India having hand-made pottery and ground stone industry, but no (or very little of) stone blades, (b) South-eastern India, having a stone blade industry in addition to the above two. In Western India (Maharashtra) the stone blade industry plays a major role, the ground stone industry occupying a minor one.

c9.s1.12

⁵ However, as mentioned below, it appears that a true microlithic industry underlies the ground-stone industry.

c9.s1.13

In Central India, including Rajputana and Saurashtra, the ground stone industry is so far absent, whereas the blade industry is very prominent in Central India, but not so much in Rajputana and Saurashtra.

c9.s1.14

Thus with these three criteria (i) nature of pottery—hand-made or wheel-made; (ii) the presence or absence of ground stone industry; (iii) as well as the blade industry, we may provisionally distinguish between Neolithic and Chalcolithic cultures in Peninsular India as follows:

c9.s1.15

| (A) | Pure Neolithic | comprising | (i) the whole of Eastern India, with only ground tools. Eg. Assam, Bihar and Bengal |
| | | | (ii) North-eastern India with (a) ground and bone tools Eg. Kashmir, (b) pottery (c) pit-houses |
| | | | (iii) Southern India. Eg. Lower with (a) ground tools Mysore (b) pottery (hand-made) |
| (B) | Neolithic-Chalcolithic | comprising | (iii) South-Eastern India. with (a) ground tools, Eg. North Karnatak (b) blade tools, |
| | | | (iv) North-West India. with (c) hand-made pottery Eg. Early Baluchi Cultures. |
| | | | (v) Northern Gujarat Eg. (d) houses of wattle and Langhnaj (no traces of houses) daub. |
| (C) | Chalcolithic | comprising | (v) South-Eastern, Western with (a) blade tools and Central India. Eg. (b) wheel-made pottery, North Karnatak, Maha- mostly painted. rashtra, Malwa, (c) houses of wattle and daub. |
| (D) | Chalcolithic-Bronze Age | comprising | (vi) Northern and Western India with (a) blade tools Eg. Sind, Panjab, Sau- (b) wheel-made pottery rahstra (c) tools of copper and bronze (d) baked brick houses |
| (E) | Chalcolithic or Bronze Age | comprising | (vi) Northern India Eg. Ganga- with (a) wheel-made pottery Yamuna Doab and South-East- (b) tools of copper and ern Rajasthan. bronze (?) no stone tools. (c) houses of wattle and daub or mud walls with stone plinth. |

c9.s1.16

It must be emphasized that no watertight compartments are envisaged. Discovery of earlier phases in the same zone, at the same site, or in its vicinity or co-existence of two cultures at slightly different levels is not ruled out. Much depends upon the chance of excavation, and the extent of the area excavated. Nothing illustrates this better than Maski and Piklihal, both in the Raichur District. At the former site, numerous stone axes were found earlier, but not one in a later, well-conducted excavation. At the latter small blades and cores were found along with the ground stone axes, and hand-made pottery.

c9.s1.17

Thus the scheme here set forth is *strictly provisional*, applicable to our little knowledge available today.

Dating

c9.s2.1

A word regarding the dating and the discussion of various groups in this book. The Indus Valley Civilization, its maturer phase at least, is dated by C-14 method to c. 2500 B.C., thus confirming its hypothetical dating based on stylistic and other evidence. The various Chalcolithic cultures, particularly the Navdatolian of Central India, and that of the Banas Valley are again c. 1800 B.C. and thus seem to be contemporary with or follow closely the decline of the Indus Valley Civilization. These in their turn are followed by the Painted Grey Ware Culture in the Gangetic Valley, and with a break (or without break) by the historic cultures in Peninsular India.

c9.s2.2

CHALCOLITHIC AND NEOLITHIC SITES OF INDIA

c9.s2.3

Fig. 70 Map showing the Chalcolithic and Neolithic sites in relation to the ancient Trade routes.

c9.s2.4

CHYTOCOPLASMIC AND CYTOGENIC MAP OF THE WORLD

c9.s2.5

No exact date is yet available for the Eastern Neolithic. But it is believed to be later; but how much late, cannot be said at the moment. But the South-eastern Neolithic or "Neolithic-Chalcolithic" in our terminology has been dated by C-14 to c. 2000 B.C. and is thus partly contemporary with the decline of the Indus Valley Civilization.

c9.s2.6

Chronologically thus the development of various regions is very uneven and cannot be treated in a very logical way, beginning with the Neolithic and passing through the Chalcolithic and Bronze Age into the Iron Age or the Early Historic.

c9.s2.7

The expansion of the Indus or Harappa Civilization is treated first, then the Painted Grey Ware Culture of the Gangetic Valley and the Chalcolithic Cultures of Central India and the Deccan. Description of the Neolithic Cultures of Eastern and South-eastern India is take up last, to be followed by the discussion of significance of these new discoveries.

A. The Bronze Age and Chalcolithic Cultures of Northern, Central and Western India

The Indus or Harappa Civilization

c9.s3.t1.1

During the last ten years extensions of the Harappa or Indus Valley Civilization have been located in East Panjab and Uttar Pradesh, almost near Delhi; in North Rajputana in the former State of Bikaner, in Kutch and almost all over Saurashtra, and Central and Southern Gujarat as far as Surat, and in the west not only at a number of places in Baluchistan but right on its sea coast. Equally significant are some of the new features.

c9.s3.t1.2

The frontiers of this civilization which were already very extensive, some 1,000 miles by 5,00 miles have been further extended by some hundred miles both in the east and the south (Fig. 67). Thus roughly the civilization covers an area of 12,00 x 700 miles = 84,00,00 square miles, in area. Not only is its vast expanse remarkable and unique for a prehistoric (really protohistoric) culture, among the then contemporary or immediately earlier or later cultures, but it is also noteworthy for the almost unfailing uniformity of the various aspects of the civilization such as town planning (including mud-brick ramparts), well-aligned brick houses, sanitation, pottery, seals, ornaments, weights and measures, and methods of disposal of the dead. No doubt a few variations have been observed in pottery fabrics, forms and designs, but these cannot be discussed here in detail unless and until full reports of three or four important excavations are published. Nevertheless, some great unifying factors seem to be actively working behind this feature. What it is, we do not exactly know—a great governmental organization, or the innate sense of its citizens trying intentionally or unintentionally to repeat the same features of their city life wherever they went or their basic needs for such means. Whatever be the facts, with these also went the various technological skills of the city-planner, architects, engineer, mason, brick-maker, potter, seal-engraver and metallurgist. But the questions still remain how and why did the Harappan culture spread eastwards and southwards (and westwards)? Was it a peaceful advance, in the natural course of events, towards the fertile plains of the Ganges? Or did they flee as refugees before some invader? None of these questions can be answered satisfactorily for want of adequate evidence.

c9.s3.t1.3

⁶ WHEELER, R. E. M., The Indus Civilization, p. 2.

c9.s3.t1.4

6a Curiously the so-called "mother-goddess" figurines of baked clay have not yet been found outside Sind and Baluchistan, and even here it is at Mohenjodaro and Harappa that these are found in large numbers. May be this fact is significant and suggests that these were the real religious centres.

East Panjab and Gangetic Valley

c9.s3.t2.1

Excavations at Rupar and Bara in East Panjab, Alamgirpur near Meerut, and several sites in Bikaner suggest that these sites were occupied after some lapse of time by the Painted Grey Ware people after they were abandoned by the Harappans. In Saurashtra the story seems to be different. At Lothal the main Harappan Civilization shows a maturity and degeneration, but no replacement by another culture. At Somnath (Prabhas) a few Harappan features have been noticed in the pottery forms in the lowest deposits, which indicates that the habitation began with a Harappan bias, but this was soon lost when other influence became dominant. This was not the case at Rangpur, where a kind of evolution is witnessed after Period II, suggesting that the Harappan culture was not forcibly replaced or abandoned, but changed imperceptibly into a new one owing, of course, to contact with newer elements. Thus the story of the Harappan Civilization is different in the Panjab and Saurashtra, two of the most outlying provinces of its culture-spread.

c9.s3.t2.2

With this introduction, we shall see in some detail these regional manifestations, though the account cannot be in any sense final, unless definitive reports are published.

Sites in East Panjab

c9.s3.t3.1

The Harappan settlements in East Panjab are found, to date, on the Sirsa and other smaller tributaries of the Upper Sutlej, now comprised within the districts of Ambala, Jullandar and Bhatinda. Thus besides Rupar, which is the principal site, we have Bikkum⁷ or Dher Majra, Bara, Kotli, Talapura, Chamkaur, Howra (having an extensive mound), Dhang, Merhanwala, Dhogri, Madhopur,⁸ near Jullandar and Raja Sikak,⁹ 2 miles to the south of Faridkot. The sites at Dhang and Merhanwala are situated on the river terraces and flat surfaces on the hills. It is therefore felt that the Harappans proceeded into the hilly terrain along the valleys of smaller rivers. If this can be proved by further work, it may mean a regular colonization. Similar phenomenon is witnessed in the Deccan, where sites of the Chalcolithic period of Jorwe-Nevasa type are found in very hilly terrains, which even now are desolate.

c9.s3.t3.2

⁷ I.A.R., 1953-54, p. 38.

c9.s3.t3.3

⁸ Ibid., 1956-57, p. 78.

c9.s3.t3.4

⁹ Ibid., 1958-59, p. 78.

Rupar

c9.s3.t4.1

So far only Rupar¹⁰ and two sites nearby called Bara and Salaura have been partially excavated. These have yielded very significant evidence regarding the relationship between the Harappan and the later Painted Grey Ware Culture. The Harappan occupation at Rupar took place on the fluviatile sandy deposits; Bara was built with the debris of late Harappan material; Salaura, only 300 yards to the east of Bara began with the Painted Grey Ware. In addition, at Rupar itself the latter ware was found over the two phases of the Harappan culture. This juxtaposition proves that the Harappan is the earliest culture in the region, and the Painted Grey Ware came much later. The pottery forms at Bara show new forms, not known in the true Harappan, but found in Bikaner. This further seems to suggest that Bara continued to be occupied when Rupar was abandoned by the Harappans. Thus in East Panjab it will be possible to build up a regular sequence of cultures within the Chalcolithic beginning with the Harappan, late Harappan, degenerate Harappan, gap, Painted Grey Ware, and the N. B. P.

c9.s3.t4.2

¹⁰ Rupar is about 25 miles from Chandigarh.

c9.s3.t4.3

The mound at Rupar is nearly 50 ft. high, and occupies a strategic position, viz. at the junction of the plains and the Himalayan foothills. Here the Sutlej enters into the fertile plains of the Panjab. Owing to this fact, it was repeatedly inhabited and also destroyed, as it lay on the path of the invaders.¹¹ The several strata show six cultural periods, of which the first two fall within the proto-historic period. Period I constitutes the Harappan and its derivatives, and therefore it is sub-divided into two phases. Its lower deposits exhibit a late phase of the mature Harappan, while the upper deposits introduce new ceramic traditions.

c9.s3.t4.4

¹¹ I.A.R., 1953-54, p. 7 and SHARMA, Y. D., "Excavations at Rupar", Lalit Kala, Nos. 1-2 (1953-54), pp. 121-29.

c9.s3.t4.5

Not much is known about the houses, though four phases of the Harappan buildings were encountered, because the excavations were limited in extent. However, one can definitely say that from the very beginning the first settlers used the local material in the shape of river pebbles, roughly hewn kankar stones, besides the traditional material viz. mud-bricks and baked bricks¹² with which they were familiar. Mud was also used as mortar.

c9.s3.t4.6

¹² Ibid., 1953-54, p. 7.

c9.s3.t4.7

While the ornaments of faience, and various other beads, the steatite seal, terracotta cake, chert blades and bronze celts are but replicas of the now well known sites of Mohenjodaro and Harappa, and need no comment, the pottery assemblage¹³ shows a few variations, which might be explained as a regional phenomenon, or as the excavator thinks, a degeneration or a new feature. The typical Harappan forms include the dish-on-stand, cylindrical beaker, flat platter, shallow basin and perforated brazier. The goblet with pointed bottom is rare, and absent in the upper levels of the Harappan phase. On the contrary, characteristic incised designs on pottery make their appearance now.

c9.s3.t4.8

¹³ Ibid., pls. IIIA, IVA.

c9.s3.t4.9

Interesting, however, are the burial practices. These confirm once again that among the Harappans, the cemetery was always at a little distance away from the main habitation area. It is now a low mound, about 160 ft. to the west of the inhabited area. This was disturbed by the Painted Grey Ware people. However, some skeletons have remained intact. The grave pits, 8 ft. × 3 ft. × 2 ft., were dug into the natural soil. Within the pit, the body was placed in an extended position, with the head usually towards the north-west. In one case, the body lay north-south. Most burials had a group of pots at the head, feet and on the sides of the body. But in one burial, the pots seemed to have been arranged first and then covered with earth. The body was placed last (where?) and the pit was finally sealed.¹⁴ The number of pots was not uniform, but varied from 2 to 26. This might be according to the status in life of the individual buried, and so give some idea of the needs, while alive and dead.¹⁵

c9.s3.t4.10

¹⁴ *I.A.R.*, 1954-55, p. 9.

c9.s3.t4.11

¹⁵ A personal visit to Rupar after these lectures were delivered makes me feel that the site deserves a "total" or horizontal excavation to enable us to know the life of the people in East Punjab at various periods of its history.

Bara

c9.s3.t5.1

The work at the nearby mound of Bara is very briefly noticed. As mentioned earlier it consists principally of the very late Harappan phase. Some pottery forms are new, whereas there is diversity in slips and paintings,¹⁶ which is not found in the lower levels at Rupar: large water-jars and cooking vessels, and bare horizontal or wavy incised lines,¹⁷ a feature which is supposed to be present in the Harappan sites in Bikaner, but unknown at Harappa and Mohenjodaro.

c9.s3.t5.2

¹⁶ *I.A.R.*, 1954-55, pl. X, XIA.

c9.s3.t5.3

¹⁷ *Ibid.*, pl. XII. Simple horizontal black bands have now been proved to be a feature of the Early Harappan at Kot Diji and Kalibangan.

Alamgirpur

c9.s3.t6.1

Alamgirpur¹⁸ in Uttar Pradesh continues the story of the Harappan expansion in the Ganga-Yamuna Doab. The site is situated about 2 miles off the left bank of the Hindon, a tributary of the Yamuna. It is 17 miles west of Meerut and 28 miles north-east of Delhi. It is worth watching whether this Indian city also becomes one of the Harappan outposts, and thus the oldest continuously inhabited capital in India. Excavations here revealed four periods of occupation. Periods I and II respectively belong to the Harappan and Painted Grey Ware cultures. Both, however, are separated stratigraphically and culturally. The top surface of Period I was hard and whitish suggesting a long exposure. It was further covered with weather-worn potsherds.

c9.s3.t6.2

¹⁸ *I.A.R.*, 1958-59, p. 50-52, Pl. IXII-IXV.

c9.s3.t6.3

No building phases were brought to light in the excavations proper, but kiln-burnt houses have been evidenced by the occurrence of two sizes of bricks: the smaller 11½ to 11¾ in. × 5¼ to 6¼ in. and 2¾ in. to 2¾ in. in thickness and the larger averaging 14 in. × 8 in. × 4 in. Some of the bricks bore three figure marks.

c9.s3.t6.4

There is nothing to note about pottery, ornaments, etc. which are identical in type with those of the true Harappan. Interesting are the platters with a ring-base or three low legs and troughs bearing incised Harappan symbols. If the low-legged plates were used for making bread, as it is suggested by Dr. SHARMA, then the antiquity of the present contrivance is very great. The existence of woven cloth was provided by impressions on a trough. The yarn seems to be fine, though not of uniform thickness. Among the animal figurines, those of a bear (?) and a snake deserve notice. (Cf. Snake motif on Lothal II pottery p.166).

Saurashtra

c9.s3.t7.1

As far back as 1934-36, Saurashtra had yielded evidence of Harappan penetration. Pandit VATS¹⁹ and Prof. GHURYE²⁰ discovered Rangpur and carried out preliminary digging there. Later it was further excavated on a very small scale by the writer and Dr. DIKSHIT²¹ The latter scholar²¹ thought from his study of pottery that Rangpur had little of Harappan traits. Since then the site has been more fully explored by Shri S. R. RAO²², who has undoubted evidence of Harappan occupation there²³. Soon after Lothal was discovered by the last mentioned scholar²⁴. Now every year explorations bring to light more and more sites of this culture almost all over Saurashtra—eastern, western, northern, southern and even central (which was supposed to be immune from this enveloping movement) so that the whole of the peninsula seems to have been colonized by the Harappans. If they came from Sind, as it seems most probable, then the coastal route²⁵ seems to have been preferred, small groups arriving by boats which would keep as near the coast as possible. Whether Kutch was first colonized and Saurashtra later, or the former was treated as a half-way house (the destination being Saurashtra) cannot be definitely known,²⁶ unless Kutch is fully explored and one or two sites excavated which would prove the priority of the Kutch Harappan over that of Saurashtra. To date, typically Harappan pottery—perforated jar, handled bowl, dish-on-stand besides steatite beads, microliths and copper objects—have been reported from the surface at Desalpur,²⁷ on the left bank of the Morai river, Nakhtrana taluka, and Todia Timbo²⁸ in Lakhpat taluka.

c9.s3.t7.2

¹⁹ A.S.I.A.R., 1934-35, pp. 35-8.

c9.s3.t7.3

²⁰ GHURYE in J.U.B., vol. III (N.S.), 1939, pp. 3-11.

c9.s3.t7.4

²¹ DIKSHIT, M. G., B.D.C.R.I., Vol. XI, 1950, pp. 1-55.

c9.s3.t7.5

²² I.A.R., 1953-54, p. 7; 1954-55, p. 50; 1956-57, p. 80.

c9.s3.t7.6

²³ The full report is in press, and is expected to be published in 1962.

c9.s3.t7.7

²⁴ I.A.R., 1955-56 and later.

c9.s3.t7.8

²⁵ See, however, below writer's comment, p. 164.

c9.s3.t7.9

²⁶ RAO, S. R. "Excavations at Lothal" in Lalit Kala, Nos. 3-4 (1956-57), p. 82, seems to think that Desalpur in Kutch and Lothal are the earliest Harappan sites in Kutch and Saurashtra respectively.

c9.s3.t7.10

²⁷ I.A.R., 1955-56, p. 70. It is regarded as a very promising site.

c9.s3.t7.11

²⁸ Ibid.

Northern Rajasthan

c9.s3.t8.1

In Northern Rajasthan through which flow the Vedic Sarasvati and the Drishadvati rivers, a number of Harappan sites have been discovered. Sir Aurel Stein noticed a few in the extreme western border in the former Bahawalpur State (now in Pakistan). Many more were noted by Shri A. Ghosh. Of these, a site called Kalibangan on the southern bank of the Ghaggar (ancient Sarasvati) in Ganganagar District has been systematically dug since 1961. The ancient habitation was spread over an area of about a quarter of a square kilometre and from the beginning consisted of two closely knit but distinct mounds. The one on the east is larger and higher (11 metres or 36 ft.), the second being 8 metres or 26 ft. But their size is not the only distinguishing feature. While both the mounds show the characteristic Harappan well-oriented roads and houses and drains alongside, a sure sign of town planning, the western mound was thought to reveal a massive mud-brick platform over which stood houses or remains of a citadel as at Harappa and Mohenjodaro. Hence Shri Lal conjectured that Kalibangan could be a third provincial capital, guarding the Sarasvati Valley.28a However, further work this season (1962) has not confirmed Lal's surmise.

c9.s3.t8.2

28a I.L.N., March 24, 1962, p. 454, and I.A.R., 1960-61, p. 31.

c9.s3.t8.3

But another explanation is possible for the supposed mud-brick rampart and the only extensive remains of the burnt-brick drains found so far28b either in this trench or elsewhere on this mound. This mound overlooks the Ghaggar river and is also smaller and so is likely to be more easily flooded than the eastern. Hence the need of a rampart and baked bricks. However, this point should be settled by the actual "contents" of the houses in the western mound. Whatever it be, the construction of houses shows features peculiar to this site or the valley. First, unlike elsewhere, the houses by and large have been built with mud-bricks, the latter often plastered with a coating of mud. (*Pl. XI, Fig. 70A*) The floors made of rammed clay were paved with terracotta nodules, interspersed with fairly large bits of charcoal. Not only this method of flooring survives in the neighbourhood today as noted by Lal, but these nodules, on the erosion of the mound, litter the surface, making it a prominent feature not noticed either in the Indus Valley or other protohistoric and historic sites in India. The famous terracotta "cakes" were also utilized for paving floors, though it is difficult to say whether this was their primary or secondary use.

c9.s3.t8.4

28b Based on the personal inspection of the site in 1961 and 1962, facilitated by the kindness of Shri B. B. Lal and Shri B. K. Thapar.

c9.s3.t8.5

How the houses were roofed at Mohenjodaro, Harappa and Lothal is not known. But at Kalibangan were found wooden rafters embedded in mud and Shri Lal thinks "that these might have supported, with a cushioning of reeds, a flat mud roof such as is in vogue in the region today."28c Another intriguing feature of these houses is the presence of "small oblong enclosures of mud-bricks often containing broken bits of jars and clay-lined oval pits full of charcoal and occasionally having one or more bricks in the middle." Small mud-lined oval formations round a shallow pit, having a stone within were also noticed by us in the Chalcolithic deposits at Nevasa. But there too the exact purpose could not be determined.

c9.s3.t8.6

28c Lal, I.L.N., March 1962, p. 454.

c9.s3.t8.7

Among the smaller, portable objects while the large majority were after the typical Indus type, two objects deserve attention. One is a small terracotta, human head with a receding forehead, long, ovalish eyes, straight, pointed nose, rather thick lower lips, and firm chin. It certainly recalls a similar head from Mohenjodaro, although other features are missing. Equally notable and charming is the terracotta figure of a charging bull or goat (*Pl. XII, Fig. 70C*).

c9.s3.t8.8

The second is the occurrence of inscribed letters on potsherds which by their superposition show, as Lal has so intelligently pointed out, that the Indus script was written from right to left. But then it has to be remembered, as Sir Mortimer Wheeler remarked on Lal's lecture, that the Indus script was also boustrophedon (that is written from left to right as well). Thus these potsherds from Kalibangan do not provide exclusive evidence as to the method of writing the Indus script.

c9.s3.t8.9

However, the most important data which Kalibangan provides is the insight into the origin or, better, earlier phases of the Indus civilization. Last season (1961), the lower levels had yielded thin, unslipped, dull red ware. The shapes seem to comprise small and medium-sized globular pots with a small out-turned rim. Usually there is a broad black band round the neck, followed by other bands and patterns.

c9.s3.t8.10

Pottery believed to be similar was previously noticed by Wheeler in the pre-defence deposits at Harappa in 1946 and recently has also turned up at Kot Diji in Sind. (See Fig. 71) However, some scholars who have handled the pottery from these sites feel that the correspondence is not very close. This season (1962) Shri Thapar has succeeded in isolating it at Kalibangan in the earliest layers. Thus there is no doubt that such a pottery was not the regular feature of the Harappan culture. Now the question is, is it pre-Harappan or proto-Harappan, that is, does it belong to a people who were quite different from the Harappan folk, or does it belong to the Harappans themselves, but in their initial, formative stage when they did not cover their pottery with fine red slip, nor make it very sturdy, and further decorate it with characteristic Indus designs? In understanding this problem, pottery should not be the only diagnostic feature. A site like Kalibangan if more fully dug (as it seems it will be) should also inform us about the details of life—method of house construction, house-hold objects, tools and weapons—of the two or three main phases at the site. All these would help in ascertaining whether these phases are but the reflections of an evolving way of life or of different people with different ways of life.

c9.s3.t8.11

Added significance is lent to this problem because we have almost identical Carbon-14 dates for the top phases of Kalibangan and Lothal, viz. 4070 ± 115 B.P. and 3980 ± 115 B.P. And if these phases have also yielded identical or similar pottery and other objects, then it would mean that the same forces were at work in both these regions, lower Saraswati valley and northern Saurashtra.

c9.s3.t8.13

Fig. 71. Pre-defence pottery from Harappa.

c9.s3.t8.14

INDUS CIVILIZATION SITES BEFORE & AFTER 1931

c9.s3.t8.15

Fig. 71. Add site of Sotka Koh on the Makran Coast.

c9.s3.t8.16

So far as it is known, the top phases at Lothal distinctly reveal a new pottery. Such is not the case at Kalibangan.

c9.s3.t8.17

Why did the Harappans go to Saurashtra? Was it a migration or colonization or an outward march from Sind for "capturing markets"? Unless the causes of the destruction of the Harappan civilization in Sind and Harappa are well known, the question of this migration or coming as refugees may be ruled out. The last alternative can be considered only if we know of the existence of some earlier inhabitants in Saurashtra who were sufficiently advanced culturally so that trade relations with them would be profitable. Of course, while finally discussing this point, the oft-repeated expressions that the Harappans were traders and chose site near some river and sea ports have to be taken into account. A suitable port is necessary, if there is a continous water traffic by sea or river. No conclusive answer can be had at this stage; nevertheless, the question may be discussed a little more fully after we know of the Harappans in Saurashtra in some detail.

c9.s3.t8.18

First Rangpur, then Lothal, were the only partially excavated sites. However, since 1958 Rojadi near Rajkot seems to be another important Harappan settlement, and there might be a few more, if not many. Lothal, nevertheless, remains the only extensively excavated Harappan habitation in Saurashtra.

Lothal

c9.s3.t9.1

Set in a dead flat alluvial marshy low-land called "Bhal" in Gujarati, almost at the junction of north-eastern end of Saurashtra Peninsula and mainland Gujarat, it may be claimed by both. Today Saragwala, the village which shelters Lothal (mound of the dead)²⁹ is included in Ahmadabad District, being nearly 60 miles due south of that city. Anciently, the site might have been on the confluence of the rivers Bhogava and the Sabarmati which is now removed to a distance of nearly two miles to the south-west of Lothal. While this may have been the initial factor in the selection of the site by the first settlers, this very proximity to the rivers nearing the estuary brought repeated and final destruction of the habitation.

c9.s3.t9.2

²⁹ Rao, S. R., in *Illustrated London News*, February, 25, 1961, p. 302.

c9.s3.t9.3

In fact, a careful topographical study of the region would show that Lothal once was on or very near the sea. For, now the region of the Nal lake marshes which joins Saurashtra Peninsula with mainland Gujarat was, as well inferred by the writer in the *Bombay Gazetteer*,³⁰ some 2,000 years ago, or in the time of the Indus Civilization, under sea which connected itself with the Gulf of Cambay on the south-east and that of Kutch on the north-west. Saurashtra thus must have been an island. Later silting in the above mentioned gulf and the probable decrease in sea-level formed a low, marshy land, which even now gets easily flooded during the monsoon and becomes an inland lake, locally known as 'Nal.' Its southern part is called *Bhal*. Here is situated the mound of Lothal.

c9.s3.t9.4

³⁰ *Bombay Gazetteer*, Vol. VIII, Kathiawar (1884), p. 359.

c9.s3.t9.5

The area is so flat that no one can imagine that there is a mound which harbours the debris up to a depth of 22 ft. Superficially it looks like a small mole on a large body. Within this debris are enshrined the remains of a town which, according to the latest interpretation of the building levels, showing signs of destruction by flood and other material data, had witnessed two main periods. Period I, having four sub-phases and dated between 2500 B.C.-1500 B.C. is regarded as the manifestation of mature Harappan Civilization, while decadence characterizes Period II (1500-1000 B.C.)³¹. As the mound and the surroundings imperceptibly merge, the exact extent of the town is difficult to calculate, but it is suggested³² that "the town must have been twice as large as that indicated by the present mound."

c9.s3.t9.6

³¹ Rao, I.I.N. p. 302, C-14 dates are 2018 B.C.-1918 B.C. and 1818 B.C. respectively.

c9.s3.t9.7

³² I.A.R., 1958-59, p. 13.

c9.s3.t9.8

Town

c9.s3.t9.9

Though small, some 2 miles in circumference, it was a well-laid out town, a "miniature Mohenjodaro"³³ with a rampart encircling main habitation, a cemetery without at a distance of one furlong in the north-west corner, and a unique, large brick-built enclosure, which might well be a dockyard, the first of its kind to be unearthed in India or anywhere else. Lothal thus exhibits the characteristic features of the "twin metropolis" and something new in addition.

c9.s3.t9.10

³³ This seems to be more appropriate than "miniature Harappa", as suggested by Rao in Lalit Kala, op.cit. p. 84; Shri Rao in his latest "version" of Lothal uses the terms "acropolis" and "lower town" I.I.N., p. 302.

c9.s3.t9.11

"The town," it is said,³⁴ was divided into six blocks, each built on an extensive mud-brick platform of a varying height. So far four streets, two from north to south and two from east to west, with two side lanes have emerged from the excavations. On one side of a street lies a row of 12 houses. Smaller houses on either side of another street are believed to be shops, each with two or three rooms, with different dimensions, 12 ft. × 9 ft. to 8 ft. × 6 ft. A few larger houses measured 72 ft. × 42 ft. Some had verandahs in front, while others had a central courtyard with rooms around. The houses of artisans like coppersmiths and bead-makers were small and made of mud-bricks.

c9.s3.t9.12

³⁴ I.A.R., 1959-60, p. 17.

c9.s3.t9.13

The town had, as usual, a fine system of sanitation which included a public drain, internal drainage which was joined with the main road, bitumen paved bath-rooms and lavatories with a soak-pit behind. A very elaborate drainage in a large house in the south block built over a terraced platform coupled with a separate well might have belonged to an important person, or might be a public house, since it overlooks a large dockyard.

c9.s3.t9.14

Dockyard (Pl. VIII, Fig. 68)

c9.s3.t9.15

This huge brick-lined enclosure is situated on the east of the town, by the side of a mud-brick and mud-built rampart and assigned to Phase II, Period I. Roughly trapezoidal in plan, from north to south it measures nearly 710 ft. and 120 ft. from east to west. Built with baked bricks its extant height is 14 ft. but it might have been originally much higher. There is a large opening, about 23 ft. wide, in the wall on the eastern side. This is believed to be the "inlet" channel, whereas on the south, there is a smaller opening called, "spill channel" which might have been for regulating the outflow of the water by the insertion of a wooden door in the grooves provided at the mouth. The Sabarmati now flows at a distance of about two miles from the eastern wall of the enclosure. It is possible that formerly, some 4,000 years ago, it flowed much nearer and at high tide, the water could be carried inwards through a specially built canal—which this year's excavation shows was cut into the bedrock and provided with brick walls—to facilitate the navigation of small ships. This would become still more easy, if the Bhal area which forms a part of the former Nal Lake (now marshy) was originally a sea.³⁶

c9.s3.t9.16

Whether this enclosure is a dock-yard or something else can indeed be proved by (1) stratigraphically connecting the dock-yard with the present or extinct Sabarmati river, exposing the ancient channel—its sandy banks etc. (2) by consulting the traditional navigators (kharvas) who still ply small as well as large boats in the numerous ports in Saurashtra; (3) by searching for parallels in Egypt and Crete and Mesopotamia. Unless at least one of these investigations is made, the matter will have to be left in an undecided state; with a statement that there is undoubtedly some evidence to regard the enclosure as a dock-yard.³⁶

c9.s3.t9.17

³⁶ After these words were spoken, Shri Rao has stratigraphically connected the enclosure with the old river-bed and also consulted the traditional and modern naval engineers. And it is felt that this could be a "dock-yard" and described as such in his article in I.L.N. That the Harappans had regular "ports" now seems to be an established fact by the discovery of ports on the Makran coast. For details see below.

c9.s3.t9.18

In other ways too Lothal is an exact replica of a true Harappan town. The town folk enjoyed the same prosperity as witnessed at Mohenjodaro, for instance. Fine, well-made, sturdy pottery recalling in shape, designs, fabric, and even in the levigation of clay the now famous Indus pottery (Pl. X, b). But in addition to the beakers, goblets, troughs, dishes-on-stand, knobbed vessels with-flaring sides, perforated jars and lamps in thick red or buff ware, there is a black-and-red or cream ware which is throughout contemporary with the usual ware. While this ware is different in the technique of manufacture, it shows no new forms. Some of the Harappan forms are copied in it.

c9.s3.t9.19

However, a few new ceramic forms are visible in Period II. (Pl. X, d). These are supposed to be evolved from the earlier ones and virtually ousted the latter. These new forms include (a) bowl with blunt carinated shoulder, and a simple dish without carination on a squattish stand. Goblets, beakers and perforated jars are absent. While some old designs like hatched and filled triangles and oblong and alternately hatched squares are common with Period I, some designs³⁷ such as snakes, very realistically drawn stags and ducks are new. If these and others also occur in Period I, then Lothal should be regarded as not mature or true Harappan but as Wheeler calls it a "sub-Indus" variety.

c9.s3.t9.20

³⁷ I.A.R., 1957-58, p. 13, pls. XVA B, XVII A and XVI B.

c9.s3.t9.21

The regularity in town planning is said to be a feature of Period I. Later degeneration is evident: the houses are out of alignment and drains haphazardly laid.

c9.s3.t9.22

However till the very last, efforts were made to protect the town from recurring floods by mud platforms, a feature witnessed at Mohenjodaro, Harappa and Rangpur. Right from the beginning houses were built on such solid mud-brick platforms, and every time floods caused destruction, the platforms were raised. In addition the main habitation was protected by a mud-brick rampart.

c9.s3.t9.23

³⁵ As pointed out above.

c9.s3.t9.24

*Ornaments*

c9.s3.t9.25

Ornaments of various materials—like shell, ivory, steatite, faience, terracotta, semi-precious stones (agate and carnelian), copper and gold—beautifully polished weights, gamesmen, figurines in terracotta and copper once again testify to the artistic skill of the Indus Saurashtra craftsmen. There is, for instance, a small copper dog, which even though now encrusted, has a beautiful expression.37a And the gold necklace in five lakh (500,000) tiny gold beads with spacers. (For typical beads *see Fig. 101A*).

c9.s3.t9.26

37a This may be compared with that of the Kalibangan bull.

c9.s3.t9.27

*Toys*

c9.s3.t9.28

While these evoke our appreciation, a few objects found very recently advance our knowledge of this civilization. Gamesmen with heads of a ram, and ³⁸ ox are indeed interesting in themselves, but also take back the antiquity of similar pieces in the game of chess. For all we know, these gamesmen might belong to the game of chess, or a game very similar to it. A game board for such a game has been recovered from the Royal Graves of Ur.³⁹

c9.s3.t9.29

³⁸ *I.A.R.*, 1959-60, pl. XVI, A.

c9.s3.t9.30

³⁹ WOOLLEY, LEONARD, C. *Ur of the Chaldees*, pl. V(a) and WOOLLEY, C. L., *Ur Excavations*, Vol. II, "The Royal Cemetery" plates 93-98.

c9.s3.t9.31

*Instruments (Pl. IX, Fig. 68A).*

c9.s3.t9.32

Well-aligned streets and houses could not have been built without some precision instruments like a foot-rule and a compass. Now fortunately a small measuring rod of ivory,⁴⁰ about 7 in. long, graduated along the upper margin, each division about 1.7 mm.⁴¹ has been found and a peculiar object like a *yoni* (if looked from one side only), but identical in shape on all the four sides, may be a compass for measuring angles. With these also may be noted terracotta plumb-bobs of different sizes with or without vertical rods.

c9.s3.t9.33

⁴⁰ *I.A.R.*, 1959-60, pl. XIIIB.

c9.s3.t9.34

⁴¹ *Ibid.*, pl. A, second row from tip, centre.

c9.s3.t9.35

Important tool is a twisted copper or bronze drill. Its occurrence at so early date is of great moment in the history of civilization.

c9.s3.t9.36

*Horse? (Pl. X, Fig. 69a).*

c9.s3.t9.37

The occurrence of a terra-cotta figure of a horse⁴² or horse-like animal—the thick, short tail is unmistakably that of this animal, whereas the face and head are very much like it—is very significant. If found from the mature Harappan deposits of Period I,⁴³ then all the arguments regarding the authorship of the civilization based on the existence or non-existence of horse in this Indus Civilization will have to be revised, unless of course, the animal is not a horse, but onigar—wild ass—which is still surviving in the Little Rann of Kutch and north-west Saurashtra.⁴⁴

c9.s3.t9.38

⁴² *Ibid.*, pl. XV, B.

c9.s3.t9.39

⁴³ Shri Rao kindly tells me that one is from Period I and the other is unstratified.

c9.s3.t9.40

⁴⁴ This suggestion was made by Professor F. E. ZEUNER and later he and Dr. B. SUBBARAO specially went to see the onigars in their present natural habitat.

c9.s3.t9.41

*Cemetery*

c9.s3.t9.42

The discovery of the cemetery in the south, on the lower part of the mound, almost level with the surrounding plain confirms once again our views regarding the methods of disposal practised by the Harappans.

c9.s3.t9.43

Till early 1960, some 17 graves or burials had been found. Stratigraphically, it appears, these are assignable to Phase III-V, that is the closing part of Period I and the whole of Period II (which has only one phase viz. Phase V).

c9.s3.t9.44

The method of burial seems to be simple: a fairly large pit was dug and the body put in a north-south direction with the head to the north, placed on a slightly raised ground, and the face in some cases turned to the east, exceptionally east-west. But in one case (Phase III, Period I), the pit was lined with mud-bricks, which suggest that shrouds, coffins or built-in chest-like contrivances were probably in vogue. It may be recalled that at Harappa, WHEELER found the traces of a wooden coffin and the bodies covered by a reed-shroud.⁴⁵

c9.s3.t9.45

⁴⁵ *A.I.*, No. 4, 1947, pp. 87-88. Burial No. 5 in Cemetery R. 37 found in 1946.

c9.s3.t9.46

In 1955-5646 three instances of earthen pots containing crushed bones, some pottery and a carnelian bead were noticed at two places in the excavation. It is difficult to say whether these are examples of urn burials and if so of children who were very often buried in pots right in the houses.

c9.s3.t9.47

Normally each pit contained one skeleton, but in three cases, all of Phase III, two bodies were placed side by side. (*Pl. X, Fig. 69*).

c9.s3.t9.48

*Sati*

c9.s3.t9.49

This is indeed an interesting, nay remarkable, exception but cannot be called a *Sati* as Shri RAO thinks.⁴⁷ For the practice of *Sati* connotes a very highly specialized conception—voluntary self-immolation by the wife after her husband in the same funeral pyre. Thus burials are automatically ruled out, and would rather suggest a practice which was in vogue in Iraq or Mesopotamia viz. ceremonial burial of the wife or servant or, better say, dependents after the husband or the master. Thus to describe the Lothal twin burials as *Sati* is not proper. It is an anachronism.

c9.s3.t9.50

⁴⁷ *I.A.R.*, 1958-59, p. 14.

c9.s3.t9.51

These three twin-burials were devoid of any grave goods—mostly pottery—because possibly there was no room. But the single graves were provided with a number of pots,⁴⁸ though very often49 (when disturbed) a single dish-on-stand and a vase with round base or a high-necked jar only are found.

c9.s3.t9.52

⁴⁸ *Ibid.*, 1958-59, p. 15, pl. XX, A.

c9.s3.t9.53

*New Cultural Elements*

c9.s3.t9.54

Period II at Lothal is not only remarkable for the general decadence of the Harappan way of life, but for the appearance of new pottery, shapes, designs and blades of jasper and agate. The last two provide a probable explanation for the deterioration in the Harappan Culture. Flint blades have uniformly characterized the Harappan Civilization wherever it is found, even as far as Alamgirpur, and Lothal. At both these places flint is not locally available. It must have been imported from Sukkur and Rohri—an inference which can be fairly well established if the specimens from both the areas are found to be identical on petrographic examination. This source seems to have been stopped for some reason. The newcomers—influence or people—used instead blades of another fine-grained material, jasper, chalcedony, agate—a feature which marks all the later Chalcolithic cultures of Saurashtra including Rangpur, Rajputana, Central India and the Deccan (except Karnatak viz. Maski). Though the technique probably remained the same, the blades are smaller in length and breadth because the cores are small, much smaller than those of Sind.

c9.s3.t9.55

⁴⁶ *I.A.R.*, 1955-56, p. 6, pl. VII B.

c9.s3.t9.56

This new influence seems to have spread or arrived gradually—almost infiltrated—both at Lothal and Rangpur. But before it could establish itself at Lothal, the latter was destroyed by severe floods and abandoned. Rangpur continued to exist, but in a different form.

c9.s3.t9.57

Who these new people were we do not know. Nor we know, whether the contact with Sind was stopped, because in the latter itself the Harappan Civilization was being destroyed by nature and man. However, a guess may be hazarded. Three terra-cotta horses were found last season (1959-60) at Lothal. But if they belong to Period II,⁵⁰ then the horse seems to have arrived with the new elements. It also appears in a small terra-cotta fragment⁵¹ and in a stylized painting⁵² on pottery from Rangpur.

c9.s3.t9.58

⁵⁰ But see footnote above, p. 167.

c9.s3.t9.59

⁵¹ Dhavalikar, M. G., op. cit., pl. XVII, p. 51, and other earlier references.

c9.s3.t9.60

⁵² Ibid., pl. XII, 1, p. 41. It has been described as a palm "frond" design, but Professor MALLOWAN on seeing it with the writer in the Institute of Archaeology, University of London, in 1951, immediately said that the design looked like a horse's head with mane.

Rangpur

c9.s3.t10.1

Rangpur in north-eastern, Rojadi in Central, Somnath or Prabhas in the southern, and Lakha Bawal-Amra—in western Saurashtra carry forward the story interrupted at Lothal. These are but a few well known sites. As mentioned earlier, each is representative of a cluster⁵³ of Harappan and later settlements in Saurashtra.

c9.s3.t10.2

⁵³ I.A.R., 1953-54, p. 7 and 1954-55, p. 11.

c9.s3.t10.3

The topographical features of Rangpur⁵⁴ are not much different from those of Lothal from which it is 30 miles to the north-east. Situated on the Bhadar river in the former Limbdi state, it is about 3 miles from Dhandhuka Railway Station. Often tapped but not sufficiently fully, we have so far no clear picture of the various town or village plans or houses. However, the culture sequence it provides is interesting. Three main cultural periods have been observed. The earliest is quite significant—microliths in a sandy river deposit. Over this took place the mature or probably a late phase of the Harappan. It exhibits all the characteristics typical of this civilization—brick structures, drains, mud brick fortification (or rampart?), pottery, ornaments, tools, weapons and weights. Yet so far the seal or sealings and figurines of mother goddesses etc. have not yet turned up. Among the pottery shapes and designs is a bowl with a low stand and a peacock painted in black over a red surface.⁵⁵ While the design is typically Harappan, the ringed-base seems to herald later features noticed in Period II.

First 145 of 1,223 passages. Read on

Linked texts (48)