[Pramāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/) › [Studies](https://indike.org/pramana/ins) › [Reference works](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.reference) › [An Encyclopaedia of Indian Archaeology](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.reference.ghosh-1989) › v1.c23 # An Encyclopaedia of Indian Archaeology v1.c23: 18 Toilet Objects An Encyclopaedia of Indian Archaeology v1.c23 - **Language:** English ## Contents - [v1.c23.s1 18.1 Antimony Rods](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.reference.ghosh-1989.v1.c23.s1) — 6 parts - [v1.c23.s2 18.2 Caskets](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.reference.ghosh-1989.v1.c23.s2) — 7 parts - [v1.c23.s3 18.3 Combs](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.reference.ghosh-1989.v1.c23.s3) — 17 parts - [v1.c23.s4 18.4 Flesh-rubbers](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.reference.ghosh-1989.v1.c23.s4) — 3 parts - [v1.c23.s5 18.5 Mirrors](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.reference.ghosh-1989.v1.c23.s5) — 9 parts ### 18 Toilet Objects ### 18.1 Antimony Rods ### [v1.c23.s1.1](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.reference.ghosh-1989.v1.c23.s1.1) Copper/bronze, bone, ivory, shell, lead, and sometimes terracotta or stone, rods of various shapes and forms and generally termed as antimony rods, kohl sticks or collyrium sticks are reported from the Harappa sites \[4.9\] to the historical sites almost all over in the entire subcontinent. Mostly of copper/bronze, ivory and bone, they are generally long and round. The commonest are the plain, round and long ones with both ends rounded, clubbed or bulbous; others have one end rounded, clubbed or bulbous and the other end unfinished, plain, pointed, cut-off square, tapering, scooped or with a pin, tooth-pick, ear-cleaner or some decorative figure(s). Apart from the clearly identifiable specimens not all such rods might have been used as antimony rods and are identified by excavators as either styluses or objects of indeterminate use. ### [v1.c23.s1.2](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.reference.ghosh-1989.v1.c23.s1.2) The earliest examples of antimony rods are from Harappa and Mohenjo-daro. The specimens from Mohenjo-daro are of copper/bronze and round in section with both ends bluntly rounded (Marshall, 1931, pp. 504-5; Mackay, 1938, pp. 475-6). At Harappa (Vats, 1940, pp. 390, 460) have been found, apart from a specimen which is rectangular in section, an antimony stopper-rod having the figure of ‘a dog biting the ear of a goat’ and a duck-headed kohl stick of terracotta. Kohl jars of terracotta, bronze/copper and stone have been found at Mohenjo-daro (Mackay, 1938, pp. 211, 322, 323, 450) and Chanhu-daro (Mackay, 1943, p. 177). The fluted cosmetic jar from Chanhu-daro is cast and the fluted ornamentation on this specimen, according to Mackay, ‘is unique as far as the Harappa culture is concerned.’ \[cf. 18.2.\] ### [v1.c23.s1.3](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.reference.ghosh-1989.v1.c23.s1.3) Except for copper antimony rods from the third phase of the pre-NBPW black-and-red ware deposits \[4.13\] at NAGAL and from the Megalithic \[4.17\] levels at PEDDABANKUR antimony rods have so far not been reported from any site till the period marking the emergence of the NBPW \[4.18.1\]. Apart from the plain kohl sticks of copper with either both or one end rounded, etc., found in the NBPW and early historical levels at a large number of sites, e.g., Taxila (Marshall, 1951, pp. 585-7) including Sirkap (Ghosh, 1947-8, p. 78), HASTINĀPURA, TRIPURĪ, RAIRH, BESNAGAR, NASIK, KAYATHA, NAGARI, PRAKASH, SONPUR, RAJGHAT⁴, VAIŚĀLĪ, TIRUKKAMBULIYAR KAUNḌINYAPURA, CHIRAND, BUXAR, AHICCHATRĀ, NOH, CAMPĀ MASAON, TUMAIN, TAKIAPER, BANGARH, etc., specimens with either one end decorated or shaped for use as ear-cleaner or tooth-pick and decorated in the middle have been found at HASTINĀPURA, Taxila (Marshall, 1951, pp. 585-6), NAGDA and RAIRH. The specimen from RAIRH has a \*tri-ratna\* symbol at the other end of the rod. According to Marshall (1951, p. 585) antimony rods of bone, ivory, copper or bronze which occur at Taxila from the 3rd or possibly the 4th century B.C. were introduced there by the Greeks. ### [v1.c23.s1.4](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.reference.ghosh-1989.v1.c23.s1.4) Antimony rods of ivory or bone have been found at VAIŚĀLĪ, TRIPURĪ, NAVDATOLI, NASIK and Taxila (Marshall, 1951, pp. 657-8) from the early historical levels. The ones found at Nasik are decorated at one end; so also the specimens from NAVDATOLI and KARAD. ### [v1.c23.s1.5](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.reference.ghosh-1989.v1.c23.s1.5) Besides antimony rods, phials, containers or caskets for keeping antimony powder have also been reported from some sites. At PRAKASH an ivory (?) casket has been found in Pd II (c. 5th to 1st centuries B.C.); metal caskets for keeping antimony are reported from UJJAIN, Taxila (Marshall, 1951, p. 587) and SAMBHAR, besides antimony holders in the form of fish carved out of conch-shells from RAIRH. ### [v1.c23.s1.6](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.reference.ghosh-1989.v1.c23.s1.6) Ghosh, A., 1947-8, in \*AI\*, 4 (for Sirkap). Mackay, E.J.H., 1938, \*Further Excavations at Mohenjo-daro\*, Delhi; 1943; \*Chanhu-daro Excavations 1935-6\*, New Haven. Marshall, J., 1931, Mohenjo-daro & the Indus Civilization, London; 1951, Taxila, Cambridge. Vats, M.S., 1940, \*Excavations at Harappa\*, Delhi. For other sites see respective entries in vol. II.—B.M. PANDE ### 18.2 Caskets ### [v1.c23.s2.1](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.reference.ghosh-1989.v1.c23.s2.1) Toilet caskets are vessels or containers which could be identified as those for keeping toilet articles such as perfumes, unguents, antimony, kohl, etc. The earliest clearly identifiable example of a toilet casket is a fluted kohl or cosmetic jar of cast bronze (?) from Chanhudaro (Mackay, 1943, p. 177, pls. LXXIII, 39 and LXXVI, 32) whose ‘narrow mouth (0·22 inch, 5·58 mm) and the long neck . . . suggest that it was made to hold a fine powder such as kohl.’ Mackay also identified some of the miniature vessels from Chanhu-daro as either cosmetic jars (\*ibid.\*, pl. XXVII, 68-78, 81-92) or kohl jars (\*ibid.\*, pls. XXXIX, 22 and 26, XXVII, 73 and 92). Some of the small pottery jars from Chanhu-daro with a minute hole drilled on either side in their rims were also considered by Mackay to have ‘once contained some cosmetic, and it was thought necessary to hang them up to protect their contents from mice and ants’ (\*ibid\*., p. 68, pls. XXVII, 84, 89, 92 and XXXIX, 22). The faïence \[16.6\] toilet jars from Mohenjo-daro (Marshall, 1931, p. 365, pl. CI, 3 and 10; Mackay, 1938, p. 318, pl. CV, 34 and 35) also had two minute holes perforated on the flanged rim for suspension. ### [v1.c23.s2.2](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.reference.ghosh-1989.v1.c23.s2.2) Vessels, variously of bronze, silver, faïence, alabaster and pottery, have been found at Mohenjo-daro (Marshall, 1931, pp. 365-66, pl. CI. 8; Mackay, 1938, p. 194, pls. LV, 27, LX, 31a, CXLI, 60, pp. 211, 317, 450, pls. LXIV, 42, CXXVIII, 18, CXXXIII, 5, pp. 317-8, 21, 22, pls. LVI, 24, CV, 34 and 35, CXLIII, 12 and 13, pp. 321-3, pl. CXLII, 42, 43 and 52) and Harappa (Vats, 1940, pp. 311-2, pl. LXXXII, 30 and 16) which were perhaps used as containers for cosmetics as is evident from traces inside these variously of collyrium, kohl, cerussite, etc. (Marshall, 1931, p. 365; Mackay, 1938, pp. 322-3; Vats, 1940, p. 312). It is likely that the miniature pottery vases (Mackay, 1938, p. 194, pls. LV, 27, CXLI, 60) found at the Harappa sites which simulate the shapes of bronze, faïence and alabaster vases also served the purpose of keeping cosmetics. From the shapes of some of the faïence jars it appears that they were kept in toilet boxes or other receptacles. The compartmented stone vessels found at Mohenjo-daro (Marshall, 1931, p. 369, pl. CXXXI, 36 and 37; Mackay, 1938, p. 321, pl. CXLII, 43a and 45) could also have served as toilet boxes. ### [v1.c23.s2.3](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.reference.ghosh-1989.v1.c23.s2.3) No known examples of toilet caskets have so far been reported from the Chalcolithic \[4.14\] sites. The next known examples are from the NBPW \[4.18.1\] to the Gupta levels as reported from PRAKASH, NOH, UJJAIN CHANDRAKETUGARH, NEVASA, SAMBHAR and Taxila (Marshall, 1951) and are variously of bone, ivory, steatite, soapstone, etc. Among these the ‘perfume casket with a delicately worked stopper’ made by carefully scooping out the bone-marrow and having a polished surface’ from PRAKASH is a fine specimen. In this context Thapar has referred to a similar caskets in metal from UJJAIN where bone and soapstone caskets have also been reported. It can only be surmised that the steatite and soapstone caskets from NOH, SUGH and SAMBHAR were used for holding cosmetics unlike the caskets found at Buddhist sites where these were used as reliquaries \[12.8\]. ### [v1.c23.s2.4](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.reference.ghosh-1989.v1.c23.s2.4) The largest variety and number of toilet caskets of schist or steatite are from Taxila, where these have been found from the Śaka-Parthian period at Sirkap and the Dharmarājikā sites and are either globular and slightly squat, cylindrical and tall, cylindrical and shallow, spherical with a closely fitting lid or square in shapes (Marshall, 1952, pp. 498-500, pl. 141, 98-105). Most if not all of the toilet caskets are decorated and have been found along with their lids. Caskets of gold, silver, copper and agate, apart from those of slate and pottery (\*ibid\*., pp. 134, 587-8) and stone unguent vases (\*ibid\*., p. 492, pls. 141, 58 and f, 143 r and s) have also been found at Taxila. In fact it is also likely ‘that some of the caskets found in \*stūpas\* may originally have been used as ordinary jewel-boxes’ (\*ibid\*., p. 587). From VAIŚĀLĪ are reported small pots which actually contained gold and silver objects and beads of semiprecious stones. In the Jandial temple, Sirkap, was found ‘a small phial of limestone, which was probably meant for some unguent or kohl’ and which was of the late historical period (Marshall, 1951, p. 492, pl. 141 g). ### [v1.c23.s2.5](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.reference.ghosh-1989.v1.c23.s2.5) Recalling the shape of stone caskets from Taxila (Marshall, 1951, p. 499, pl. 141 O and U) is a flat-based blackish soapstone casket found in the Indo-Roman levels at NEVASA. ### [v1.c23.s2.6](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.reference.ghosh-1989.v1.c23.s2.6) Toilet caskets are reported from MAHESHWAR as well where they were found on the surface or in the topmost deposits which belong to the Maratha period. ### [v1.c23.s2.7](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.reference.ghosh-1989.v1.c23.s2.7) Mackay, E.J.H., 1938, \*Further Excavations at Mohenjo-daro\*, Delhi; 1943, \*Chanhu-daro Excavations 1935-6\*, New Haven. Marshall, J., 1931, \*Mahenjo-daro & the Indus Civilization\*, London; 1951, \*Taxila\*, Cambridge. Vats, M.S., 1940, \*Excavations at Harappa\*, Delhi. For other sites see respective entries in vol. II.—B.M. PANDE ### 18.3 Combs ### [v1.c23.s3.1](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.reference.ghosh-1989.v1.c23.s3.1) Toothed objects of bone, ivory or horn used for cleaning and arranging the hair and holding it in place have been found at a number of excavated sites (Dwivedi, 1976). Combs used for weaving, leather-working, etc., if some specimens could be identified as such, are very few. ### [v1.c23.s3.2](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.reference.ghosh-1989.v1.c23.s3.2) The earliest combs are from Harappa sites \[4.9\] besides a Neolithic \[4.6.1\] one from BURZAHOM. So far ten Harappa combs have been reported, five from Mohenjo-daro, three from Harappa and one each from Chanhu-daro and SURKOTADA. ### [v1.c23.s3.3](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.reference.ghosh-1989.v1.c23.s3.3) Save for two examples, the Harappa combs are decorated with double incised concentric circles, in one case filled with a black pigment, with the teeth cut with a saw, and are of various types. That these had been used for a considerable time is evident from the polish they have acquired. Out of the five examples from Mohenjo-daro (Marshall, 1931, p. 532; Mackay, 1938, pp. 541-2) only one, double-edged or -sided, lay ‘among the nine skeletons that were found packed together at the western end of Long Lane’ (Mackay, 1938, p. 542). According to Mackay this is the finest comb found at Mohenjo-daro and ‘was probably worn in the hair’ (\*ibid\*., p. 116) as it was found quite close to a skull. One of the combs is V-shaped and without any decoration which ‘judging from its shape and firmness of the teeth … may have been used to remove vermin from long, lanky hair’ ### [v1.c23.s3.4](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.reference.ghosh-1989.v1.c23.s3.4) Fig. 55. Combs; 1-2, Mohenjo-daro; 3, Harappa; 4, Burzahom; 5, Ropar; 6, Nagal; 7, Atranjikhera; 8, Oriup; 9, Nagda; 10-12, Taxila Combs ### [v1.c23.s3.5](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.reference.ghosh-1989.v1.c23.s3.5) Fig. 56. Combs; 13, Taxila; 14, Nevasa; 15, Sambhar ### [v1.c23.s3.6](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.reference.ghosh-1989.v1.c23.s3.6) (Mackay, 1938, p. 541). One comb from Mohenjo-daro (Marshall, 1931, p. 532) is badly burnt and blackened with both its ends missing but was perhaps identical in shape with the other two examples (Marshall, 1931, pl. CXXXII, 13; Mackay, 1938, pl. XCI, 26). ### [v1.c23.s3.7](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.reference.ghosh-1989.v1.c23.s3.7) Of the three specimens from Harappa, both having decoration similar to those from Mohenjo-daro, one has a knobbed handle (\*ASI-AR 1927-8\*, p. 87) with only one tooth preserved; of the other two one of which has only the middle part of the body and the teeth intact (\*ibid.\*, p. 88, not included in Vats, 1940) when complete, another, also from Harappa, (Vats, 1940, pl. CXIX, 1), and the one from Chanhu-daro (Mackay, 1943, p. 196) may have been similar to other Harappa specimens. A fragmentary comb of ivory is also reported from SURKOTADA. ### [v1.c23.s3.8](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.reference.ghosh-1989.v1.c23.s3.8) It is not unlikely that the combs generally used by the Harappans were of wood (Marshall, 1931, p. 532) which would explain their relative paucity. In fact a wooden comb is reported from a cairn burial at Suntsar in the Zhob-Loralai area of Baluchistan (Stein, 1937). ### [v1.c23.s3.9](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.reference.ghosh-1989.v1.c23.s3.9) In this context reference may also be made to the comb motif painted on Harappa pottery (11.6.1) which, and even the comb itself, according to Mackay, were perhaps venerated in the centres of Harappa culture (Mackay, 1943, p. 98). ### [v1.c23.s3.10](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.reference.ghosh-1989.v1.c23.s3.10) The ‘saw-edged bone object’ found in Pd I, Neolithic \[4.6.1\], of BURZAHOM could not have been used as hair comb and was perhaps an implement for weaving, dressing wool or removing hair from skins of animals or even for incising decoration on pottery. Nothing can be said about the use of the three terracotta ‘combs’ of the Chalcolithic Pd \[4.14.6\] of BAHAL. A fragmentary decorated comb is reported from Pd I, Chalcolithic \[4.14.4\] of MAHISDAL. An ivory comb from POCHAMPAD has been found from underneath the skull in a Megalithic burial \[4.17.7\]. That it was kept underneath the skull in a secondary burial suggests that perhaps it was a part of the Megalithic burial customs. ### [v1.c23.s3.11](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.reference.ghosh-1989.v1.c23.s3.11) Two combs are reported respectively from the PGW and late PGW levels \[4.15\] at ATRANJIKHERA of which the one found from the former level is of bone while the other is of bone or ivory. The latter is rectangular in shape and is decorated with engraved circlets. ### [v1.c23.s3.12](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.reference.ghosh-1989.v1.c23.s3.12) Combs from the NBPW levels \[4.18\], all of ivory, have been found at PANDU RAJAR DHIBI, ORIUP, ROPAR, UJJAIN, NAGDA, NAGAL and PRAKASH. The specimen from NAGDA is squarish in shape, the lower half of the body decorated with concentric semicircles and circlets with dots all along the outer ring of the semicircles and parallel lines on the straight top portion. Of the three combs from NAGAL found in the NBPW and black-and-red ware levels one has similar concentric semicircles on the lower half of the body and is interspaced with circles formed out of circlets with dots, another a horizontal row of circlets with dots on the lower portion and the third a row of concentric circles with dots each capped by three vertically placed circlets with dots in the centre, the upper and lower portions having respectively closely and widely spaced parallel lines. The comb from ORIUP is interesting because of the shape of its top portion and contains a row of circlets with dots on the upper half. The ROPAR comb (Sharma, 1955 and 1956, p. 126) has one straight side and the other curved and has on the margin a double row of circlets with dots and is again of a singular type. The combs from UJJAIN are plain with a round top and the side teeth exceptionally thick. Identically shaped combs have been found in the first century B.C.-A.D. levels at Taxila (Marshall, 1951, pp. 655-6). The comb from PRAKASH is without any ornamentation and lacks finish unlike the other specimens. The comb from PANDU RAJAR DHIBI is not illustrated. Ivory combs have also been found in the NBPW and early historical levels of BESNAGAR (M.D. Khare, personal communication). ### [v1.c23.s3.13](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.reference.ghosh-1989.v1.c23.s3.13) The combs from the early historical levels are variously of ivory, bone and flat horn. The combs from NEVASA, NAGARA, BHOKARDAN and TRIPURĪ are all plain. While the combs from NEVASA and TRIPURĪ are of ivory those from NAGARA, of which two are of the early historical and one of the medieval period, are of flat horn. The one from TRIPURĪ has been found in Vihāra 2; according to Dikshit (1955, p. 131) the use of comb was forbidden to the monks and its discovery in a Buddhist monastery ‘indicates that the laws were not very strictly adhered to in later times’. An ivory comb containing on both sides beautiful figures including \*mithuna\* couples has been found in early Sātavāhana levels from Dhulikatta in Dt Karimnagar (personally seen by the writer in the Andhra Pradesh Department of Arch. and Museums, Hyderabad). ### [v1.c23.s3.14](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.reference.ghosh-1989.v1.c23.s3.14) Most interesting are the combs from Sirkap (Taxila) datable between the 1st century B.C. and 1st century A.D. (Marshall, 1951, pp. 655-6). According to Marshall ‘they are of a type familiar in the Graeco-Roman world and were no doubt introduced from the West.’ Out of the six specimens found in the excavations only one is plain and ‘the rest are decorated with incised circlets or more elaborate designs, including a shell, foliate devices, duck and a pair of human busts of the kind that are familiar in Graeco-Roman art as well as in the carvings of Gandhāra and Mathurā.’ The teeth of these ivory and bone combs are sawn very evenly with a fine saw and are slightly rounded and not pointed at the ends. Perhaps the smaller and lighter combs were used as ornaments in the hair. ### [v1.c23.s3.15](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.reference.ghosh-1989.v1.c23.s3.15) One of the best examples is an excellently carved ivory comb found at Sirkap from 1st century A.D. levels (\*AI\*, 4, 1947-8, p. 79). Half-elliptical in shape with a rectangular section and slightly raised rim, it has 116 projecting teeth, the end ones being thicker than the rest. On one side is the figure of a heavily ornamented seminude woman loosely clad in a \*sāri\* reclining on her right palm on a pillow with beaded borders. Near the head of the female figure is seated a dwarfish male figure in loin-cloth and with folded legs; the remaining portion of the field is filled up with rows of short notches representing an ornamental cushion. The other side of the comb is divided into four zones by three vertical lines; the first zone has a rather crudely depicted figure of a pouncing lion; the second has an ornamental design perhaps representing an altar or the front of a building (?); the third shows a treading elephant with its trunk, head and body decorated with notches possibly representing trappings and the space in its front, between the forelegs and over its back, filled with rosettes; in the fourth is drawn an inverted conch-shell. According to A. Ghosh ‘the sensuous pose and features of the lady are foreign to the contemporary art of Gandhāra and suggest Mathura as a possible source for the comb,’ even though ‘a general resemblance to the Amaravati and Nagarjunakonda sculptures is also fairly pronounced’ (\*AI\*, 4, 1947-8, pp. 79-80). Ghosh has also drawn attention to the ivory plaques and a comb from Begram which are later in date but have a family likeness with the Sirkap comb suggesting ‘a common Indian origin, possibly in the Mathura region’. ### [v1.c23.s3.16](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.reference.ghosh-1989.v1.c23.s3.16) An ivory comb from SAMBHAR is of the Gupta period; it has a single row of teeth and is adorned with incised concentric circles. The bone object with broad, widely spaced teeth found in the early historical levels of KANCHIPURAM could not have possibly served as a comb. ### [v1.c23.s3.17](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.reference.ghosh-1989.v1.c23.s3.17) Dwivedi, V.P., 1976, \*Indian Ivories\*, Delhi. Mackay, E.J.H., 1938, \*Further Excavations at Mohenjo-daro\*, Delhi; 1943, \*Chanhudaro Excavations 1935-6\*, New Haven. Marshall, J., 1931, \*Mohenjo-daro & the Indus Civilization\*, London, 1951, \*Taxila\*, Cambridge. Sharma, Y.D., 1955 & 1956, in \*Lalit Kalā\*, 1-2. Stein, A., 1937, \*Arch. Reconnoissances in n.-w. India & s.-e. Iran\*, London. Vats, M.S., 1940, \*Excavations at Harappa\*, Delhi.—B.M. PANDE ### 18.4 Flesh-rubbers ### [v1.c23.s4.1](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.reference.ghosh-1989.v1.c23.s4.1) The antiquity of terracotta flesh- or, more appropriately, skin-rubbers dates back to the Harappa culture \[4.9\]. They have been found in the Chalcolithic \[4.14\] levels at NEVASA and AHAR², as also at several other excavated sites throughout India except the far s. They occur in the historical levels, e.g. at KUMRAHAR, HASTINĀPURA, AHICCHATRĀ, BHOKARDAN, BESNAGAR, RAJBADIDANGA, MASAON and CHIRAND. ### [v1.c23.s4.2](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.reference.ghosh-1989.v1.c23.s4.2) These rubbers have various shapes and patterns—mostly rectangular, square or circular and rarely planoconvex, oval, barrel-shaped or trapezoid. To enhance their utility for scrubbing the skin they are either pecked or incised with oblique lines, rectangular or semicircular notches, triangular V-shaped notches, checks, zigzags chevrons. While the barrel-shaped rubbers are wheel-turned others are handmade. For terracotta rubbers the clay is mixed with lime and a sufficient quantity of sand to obtain a rough surface. Often quartz pieces are added to roughen the exterior. ### [v1.c23.s4.3](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.reference.ghosh-1989.v1.c23.s4.3) The AHAR² examples are rectangular, circular or even shaped like a double-axe while those from NEVASA have a punctured surface. The one from the Kushan levels at CHIRAND shows a criss-cross pattern encircling a row of triangles with a flower in the centre. The PRABHAS PATAN example is inscribed with characters of the 2nd century B.C. Such objects of toilet are still in common use. ### 18.5 Mirrors ### [v1.c23.s5.1](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.reference.ghosh-1989.v1.c23.s5.1) Mirrors in the shape of circular metal discs, originally polished on one side and plain or with a design or decoration on the other, have been found in a limited number at many sites. The earliest reported examples are from Mehi (Stein, 1931, pp. 157-8) in Baluchistan where two copper mirrors have been found in the cemetery. One of them has been described as a thin copper disc probably used as a mirror; the other, 1·27 cm in diameter, has an elegant handle 'representing a stylized female figure ... with breasts and conventionalized arms akimbo, but with the head provided only by the reflection of the user of the mirror.' (Piggott, 1961, pp. 112-13). The stylized female figure has been done in the 'manner of the clay figurines' from sites of the Kulli culture indicating thereby that it is a local product. In Piggotts view the idea of the head of the user of the mirror serving as the head of the figure on the handle and 'the sophistication of the metal-work make the Mehi mirror stand out among the toilet accessories of the whole Ancient East—there is nothing like it in the otherwise more advanced Harappa culture, and the use of a human figure as a mirror handle, though familiar in Egypt in the XVIII Dynasty (from about 1570 B.C.), is unknown in Western Asia' (\*ibid.\*). However a handled copper mirror of the Mehi type has also been found at Sapalli-Tepe near Termex on the Oxus in s. Uzbekistan (Gupta, 1979, 2, pp. 203-4). ### [v1.c23.s5.2](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.reference.ghosh-1989.v1.c23.s5.2) Eight Harappa \[4.9\] mirrors are reported, three each from Mohenjo-daro and Harappa and one each from KALIBANGAN and LOTHAL. Of those from Mohenjodaro (Mackay, 1938, pp. 477-8), all of bronze, slightly oval in shape with recessed face and the edge slightly raised, one is comparatively small in diameter and was 'possibly made for a child' (\*ibid.\*). The other two have respectively a rectangular and long flat handle, each having a hole at the end of the handle. The mirrors from Harappa are of copper. One of them, 1·80 cm in diameter, is oval in shape with a long tang (Vats, 1940, p. 391), while another, which is similar, is of a smaller size (\*ASI-AR 1936-7\*, p. 40). The third specimen, round in shape with a plain flat handle, was 'found in the water-jar' placed along with other pottery in Burial 2 from Cemetery R 37 (Wheeler, 1947, pp. 87, 125-6). The copper or bronze mirror from KALIBANGAN also has been found in a grave near the head of a human skeleton (\*IAR 1963-4\*, p. 38). The LOTHAL bronze mirror is ovoid in shape having a slightly concave surface. In this context reference may also be made to the bronze/copper mirrors found at a number of contemporary sites like Mundigak and Dashli-Tepe, respectively in s. and n. Afghanistan, Altin-Depe in s. Turkmenia, Bronze Age sites of the Andronovo culture and Tulkhar Depe in s. Tadjikistan (Gupta, 1979, 2, pp. 116, 160-1, 190, 193, 195 and 201). ### [v1.c23.s5.3](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.reference.ghosh-1989.v1.c23.s5.3) Four moulded plaques, of which three are flat and one hollow, variously 1·46, 1·78 and 2·29 cm in diameter, and fragment of a boss similar to the one on the back of another specimen have been found in the Megalithic urn burials \[4.17.9\] at ADICHANALLUR (\*ASI-AR 1902-3\*, pp. 128, 129), which have been identified as mirrors (Margabandhu, 1977, p. 434). One of them has a flat triangular pointed handle, 3·8 cm, with a broad flat bead moulding around the circumference, the underside being flat and the upper side slightly convex. The other illustrated specimen also probably had a handle similar to the former as is evident from the break at the rim. ### [v1.c23.s5.4](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.reference.ghosh-1989.v1.c23.s5.4) A 'circular dish with a handle attached to it and a knob in the centre' and another, again of copper and similar shape found close to it, have been recorded from VAIŚĀLĪ \*ASI-AR, 1903-4\*, p. 99) in the Mauryan levels. On the basis of similarity with the BRAHMAPURI and ADICHANALLUR specimens, they have also been identified as mirrors with the knob in the centre as \*omphalos\* (Margabandhu, 1977, p. 434). At PĀṬALIPUTRA (Bulandibagh) has been found a small circular mirror, probably of copper, 6·35 cm in diameter and provided with a round handle of the same material; it is probably assignable to the Śuṅga period (\*ASI-AR 1926-7\*, p. 139). The rim of this mirror is decorated with a wavy ornament and the back is slightly convex in shape. The two circular handled bronze mirrors, both of the Śuṅga-Kushan period, from RAIRH have a recessed face with a small pointed tang soldered to the recessed portion of the mirror. ### [v1.c23.s5.5](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.reference.ghosh-1989.v1.c23.s5.5) The finest examples of mirrors are from Taxila, where they are found only in the Śaka-Parthian city of Sirkap datable to the 1st century B.C.-A.D. (Marshall, 1951, pp. 215, 584-5). About a score in all, they are circular discs varying between 5·55 and 16·5 cm in diameter, 'furnished with a tang at the base which fitted into a bone, ivory or wooden handle. The face of the mirror is smooth and slightly convex, the back sometimes plain, but more frequently relieved with a broad wavy rim and a raised boss or \*omphalos\* in the centre.' These mirrors, unlike their w. prototypes, are not 'decorated with the incised or repoussé figures so often found on Greek mirrors' except the copper mirror pendant which has two birds facing each other on the rim which is a typically Greek pattern (\*ibid.\*, pp. 581 and 584). Another mirror pendant, of bronze, from Sirkap has the same motif but with a simplified design and the ring is attached to the handle of the mirror instead of to its top (\*ibid\*., p. 581). One of the mirrors with a tang 4·10 cm in length has been found separately along with its bone handle, roughly decorated with incised bands (\*ibid\*., pp. 215, 584), while another has also a complete bone handle (\*ibid\*.). ### [v1.c23.s5.6](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.reference.ghosh-1989.v1.c23.s5.6) Three mirrors and a mirror-case or \*patera\*, which have been ascribed to Roman workmanship or its local imitation, have also been found in the Kundangar hoard in a large metal pot buried in a room of a house of the Sātavāhana period (\*c\*. 1st to 3rd centuries A.D.) at BRAHMAPURI (Khandalavala, 1960, pp. 29-75). Of them, all datable to the 2nd century, the two smaller ones, respectively 6·66 and 7·30 cm in diameter, and having concentric grooves or \*omphalos\* are considered to be miniature local imitation of the third which is of Roman workmanship. This last one which is convex in shape and 18 cm in diameter, with \*omphalos\* is smaller to one of the Taxila specimens (Marshall, 1951, pl. 181 f). Besides these ‘a thin circular metal repoussé emblem with very slightly upturned rim indicating that it formed the base of some form of dish or may be the decorative pattern of a small mirror-case’, of copper, 8·2 cm in diameter, has also been found in the hoard which, according to Khandalavala, is probably from a mirror case or \*patera\* depicting the legend of Perseus and Andromeda and is probably of Alexandrian workmanship. ### [v1.c23.s5.7](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.reference.ghosh-1989.v1.c23.s5.7) Two copper mirrors are reported from MASAON, one in the NBPW \[4.18\] levels and the other having a handle and a hook in the Gupta levels. ### [v1.c23.s5.8](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.reference.ghosh-1989.v1.c23.s5.8) Reference may also be made here to ivory mirror handles (Dwivedi, 1976, p. 7) from Harappa (Vats, 1940, pp. 177, 459-60). Bone and ivory mirror handles are also found in 1st century B.C.-A.D. levels of Sirkap; they are either decorated with figure carvings in relief or turned on the lathe and decorated with mouldings and incised lines and hatching (Marshall, 1951, pp. 658-9). Other sites where ivory handles, which could be mirror handles, are reported from are ROPAR, HASTINĀPURA, VAIŚĀLĪ, NEVASA, etc. In this context it is interesting to mention the ivory figure of Lakṣmī from Pompeii which is also identified as a mirror handle (Vogel, 1940, p. 1; Dwivedi, 1976, pp. 10, 64-6). \[See TER.\] ### [v1.c23.s5.9](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.reference.ghosh-1989.v1.c23.s5.9) Dwivedi, V.P., 1976, \*Indian Ivories\*, Delhi. Gupta, S.P., 1979, \*Arch. of Soviet C. Asia & the Indian Borderlands\*, Delhi. Khandalavala, K., 1960, in \*Lalit Kalā\*, 7. Mackay, E.J.H., 1938, \*Further Excavations at Mohenjo-daro\*, Delhi. Margabandhu, C., 1977, in \*Jour. Oriental Inst.\*, 26, 4. Marshall, J., 1951, \*Taxila\*, Cambridge. Piggott, S., 1961, \*Prehistoric India\*. Harmondsworth. Sharma, Y.D., 1955 & 1956, in \*Lalit Kalā\*, 1-2. Stein, A., 1931, \*Arch. Tour in Gedrosia\*, Mem. ASI, 43. Vats, M.S., 1940, \*Excavations at Harappa\*, Delhi. Vogel. J. Ph., 1940, in \*Annual Bibliography of Indian Arch. for the Year 1938\*, 13, Leyden. For other sites see respective entries in vol. II.—B.M. PANDE ## Linked texts (47) - [Harappā](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.site.harappa) - [Mohenjo-daro](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.site.mohenjo-daro) - [Lothal](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.site.lothal) - [Kālībangan](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.site.kalibangan) - [Chanhu-daro](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.site.chanhu-daro) - [Surkotada](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.site.surkotada) - [Mundigak](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.site.mundigak) - [Ahicchatra](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.site.ahichchhatra) - [Hastināpura](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.site.hastinapura) - [Atranjikhera](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.site.atranjikhera) - [Vaiśālī](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.site.vaisali) - [Pāṭaliputra](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.site.pataliputra) - [Nevasa](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.site.nevasa) - [Nāsik](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.site.nasik) - [Ādichanallūr](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.site.adichanallur) - [Burzahom](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.site.burzahom) - [Chirand](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.site.chirand) - [Navdatoli](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.site.navdatoli) - [Kāyathā](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.site.kayatha) - [Maheswar](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.site.maheswar) - [Prakash](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.site.prakash) - [Kumrahar](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.site.kumrahar) - [Nagda](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.site.nagda) - [Prabhas Patan](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.site.prabhas-patan) - [Bahal](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.site.bahal) - [Nagal](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.site.nagal) - [Kanchipuram](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.site.kanchipuram) - [Rajbadi-danga (Jadupur)](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.site.rajbadi-danga-jadupur) - [Pochampad](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.site.pochampad) - [Sugh](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.site.sugh) - [Noh](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.site.noh) - [Mahisdal](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.site.mahisdal) - [Masaon](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.site.masaon) - [Oriup](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.site.oriup) - [Peddabankur](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.site.peddabankur) - [Tumain](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.site.tumain) - [Takiaper](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.site.takiaper) - [Dhulikatta](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.site.dhulikatta) - [Pandu Rajar Dhibi](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.site.pandu-rajar-dhibi) - [Bhokardan](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.site.bhokardan) - [Mehi](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.site.mehi) - [Dharmarājikā](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.site.dharmarajika) - [Suntsar](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.site.suntsar) - [Sirkap](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.site.sirkap) - [Karad](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.site.karad) - [Sambhar](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.site.sambhar) - [Brahmapuri](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.site.brahmapuri) --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/ins.reference.ghosh-1989.v1.c23](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.reference.ghosh-1989.v1.c23) · Pramāṇa