An Encyclopaedia of Indian Archaeology v1.c5: Introduction

An Encyclopaedia of Indian Archaeology v1.c5

Language: English

Introduction

v1.c5.1

The present *Encyclopaedia* is an attempt to encompass the major findings of Indian archaeology during the last hundred and fifty years, on prehistory, protohistory and the ancient historical period.

The growth of archaeology in India was essentially the product of corresponding developments in Europe. Earlier concealed in the swaddling clothes of the antiquarianism and dilettantism of the last quarter of the eighteenth century, which contributed to the founding of the Asiatic Society of Bengal in 1784, archaeology obtained formal, or official recognition in 1861, when Alexander Cunningham was appointed to undertake a systematic investigation of ancient and medieval monuments and sites in India. Prehistoric archaeology could similarly be assigned one of its initial points in January 1860, when H.P. Le. Mesurier of the East Indian Railway discovered a large number of neoliths in the valley of the Tosney river. In 1863, not long after Boucher de Perthes’ significant discovery of worked flints in the Somme valley in France, Robert Bruce Foote of the Geological Survey of India unearthed a genuine palaeolith from a small ballast-pit at Pallavaram, near Madras. More discoveries followed with the result that a beginning of the prehistoric studies in India was made.

v1.c5.3

Cunningham largely followed the footsteps of the Chinese pilgrim Hiuen Tsang and in his two tours (1861-65 and 1871-85) as Director-General of the Archaeological Survey of India, explored a greater part of northern India, reporting on various monuments and sites. He was the first archaeologist to excavate Harappa but unfortunately failed to recognize its cultural content or significance. The twentythree volumes of his survey-reports constitute a valuable mine of information for students of Indian archaeology. James Burgess, who succeeded Cunningham, was largely occupied with architectural surveys and epigraphical studies. The *New Imperial Series* of the Archaeological Survey of India and *Epigraphia Indica* owe their origin to his efforts. By 1889, when Burgess retired from service, Indian archaeology had come to occupy a proper place in the scheme of knowledge.

v1.c5.4

With the appointment in 1902 of John Marshall as the Director-General, a new phase of activity began. During the first two decades excavations were undertaken at Bhita, Charsada (ancient Pushkalavati), Kasia, Nalanda, Pataliputra, Rajgriha, Sanchi, Sravasti, Sarnath, Taxila and Vaisali which laid bare Buddhist and other historical remains and yielded a rich harvest of finds. Important as these excavations were, they were practically put into the shade when in 1921-22 preliminary trial diggings at Harappa and Mohenjodaro revealed a forgotten civilization, later to be named the Indus Civilization, which at a single bound pushed back the beginnings of India’s cultural history to the third millennium B.C. The decade following these exciting discoveries witnessed large-scale excavations at Mohenjodaro and Harappa and sustained field-work in Baluchistan and Sind. Marshall further enlarged the existing publication programme of the Survey by starting the *Annual Reports* and *Memoir* series.

v1.c5.5

In 1944, another upturn came when Mortimer Wheeler was appointed as Director-General. He realized that in a country so vast and containing so many ancient sites as India, careful planning was essential if archaeological field-work was to produce coherent results. He devised two systems of digging, *viz*., vertical and horizontal, to meet these requirements and advocated the employment of strategic planning in the solution of archaeological problems. He felt that orderly knowledge of cultural sequences must precede detailed investigations of particular cultures. Initially, therefore, he stressed the building up of a cultural time-table for Indian archaeology through vertical excavation. As a result, during 1944-47 problem-centred excavations were carried out at Arikamedu (1945), Brahmagiri (1947), Harappa (1946) and Taxila (1944). The selected problems related to primary and obvious gaps in our knowledge of protohistory and early history. In the work of excavation itself, he introduced scientific methods of stratification, recording, etc., and so ‘modernized’ Indian archaeology. Realizing the role of universities in the development of archaeology as a discipline he made a strong plea for the participation of Indian universities in archaeological field-work with the result that many universities thereafter entered the field. Another noteworthy contribution from Wheeler was the starting of *Ancient India*, the bulletin of the Archaeological Survey of India, which was a venture ‘to put archaeology regularly on to the bookstalls, and to interest the educated Indian public in the current work relating to the exploration and conservation of the heritage of material culture'.

v1.c5.6

In the post-Independence period the tempo of archaeological field-work increased considerably and covered all periods of human culture. Prehistoric investigations adopted new approaches, working on geomorphology, palaeontology, palaeobotany and palaeo-climatology, in order to establish the ecological relationship between human settlement and their environmental contexts. In Rajasthan, the sand-dunes have now been dated (through thermoluminiscence), providing the first reliable dating control for sand dynamics, palaeo-climatology and spread of deserts. In Kashmir valley, studies have been made by the chronostratigraphy of loessic and lacustrine sediments. A comparative study of the glaciofluvial and lake deposits has been made. Many river valleys have been studied for establishing a Stone Age stratigraphy for the sub-continent. The industries of the Lower, Middle and Upper Palaeolithic have been defined both stratigraphically and typologically. C-14 dates are now available both for the Middle and the Upper Palaeolithic horizons in certain regions. For the Mesolithic, which is found widely scattered, industries have been defined and their enviornmental studies made. C-14 dates are now available for some of the sites, indicating a postglacial succession of environments. Neolithic cultures have been identified in six regions and their time-range ascertained. Principal excavated sites belonging to the Neolithic Period, within India, are Burzahom, Brahmagiri, Chirand, Daojali, Hading, Gufkral, Hallur, Kodekal, Koldihawa, Kuchai, Mahagara, Maski, Nagarjunakonda and Utnur.

v1.c5.7

On protohistoric and historic side, cultural sequences supported by a chronological frame-work, obtained through carefully observed vertical excavations, are now available for all parts of the country. The overall pattern of the cultural development of the sub-continent has come much more clearly in form and a grammar of Indian archaeology is now available for reference. We now know more of the dynamics of the Indus Civilization, including its genesis, spread and decay, the principal excavated sites in India being Banawali, Kalibangan, Lothal, Mitathal, Rangpur, Ropar, and Surkotada. A late phase of Harappan culture being an amalgam of different traits has been duly recognized, particularly in Haryana and Punjab. The Dark Age intervening between the end of the Indus Civilization and the beginning of the historical period has been filled, though not closely secured, through the recognition of various chalcolithic cultures in western, central and eastern India, the principal excavated sites being Ahar, Chandoli, Chirand, Daimabad, Eran, Inamgaon, Jorwe, Kayatha, Mahishdal, Nagda, Nasik, Navdatoli, Nevora, Pandurajardhibi and Prakash. The elusive 'Copper Hoards' and the inappropriately termed Ochre Coloured Pottery (OCP) have been placed in a cultural and chronological sequence, the principal excavated sites being Atranjikhera, Bahadarabad, Hastinapura, Jodhpura, Lal Qila and Saipai Lichwai. The pottery has been dated by thermo-luminiscence method, which indicates a time-range from 2650 to 1180 B.C Another ceramic industry which is thought to fill the gap between the Indus Civilization and the historical period and stratigraphically follows the OCP is the Painted Grey Ware (PGW). This Ware is widely distributed in northern India, Punjab, Haryana, north-eastern Rajasthan and western Uttar Pradesh, and marks the beginning of the Iron Age in that region. Strata yielding this ware have been extensively excavated include Ahichchhatra, Atranjikhera, Hastinapura, Mathura, Noh and Ropar. Excepting a solitary date from Atranjikhera (1025 B.C.) the remaining C-14 dates of the contemporary levels fall within a range of 800-400 B.C. (uncalibrated). Relevant to the issue is the excavation at Bhagwanpura where the deposit yielding the grey ware has been found interlocked with that yielding a late Harappan complex.

v1.c5.8

Around sixth century B.C. a patent fabric, the Northern Black Polished (NBP) Ware, makes its appearance in northern India with its nuclear area in Bihar and eastern U.P. and area of spread extending to Kandahar in Afghanistan, Somnath on the Arabian Coast, Chandraketugarh near the Indo-Bangladesh border and Korkai in Tamil Nadu. It continued in use till about the end of the second century B C and in the peripheral sites a little later. This Ware is a godsend to archaeologists who use it as a chronometer for the historical period. The principal excavated sites where this Ware has been found are Ahichchhatra, Ayodhya, Chandraketugarh, Hastinapura, Kausambi, Mathura, Pataliputra, Rajghat, Rajgir, Ropar, Sanghol, Semthan, Sisupalgarh, Somnath, Sringaverpura, Sravasti, Tamluk, Ujjain, Vaisali and Vidisha.

v1.c5.9

South India is no longer full of unresolved problems. The cultural equipment of the Megalithic Culture and its time-scale is now sufficiently clear. Megalithic burials have been excavated in various parts of India including Vidarbha, the Vindhyan region and the peninsular. On the basis of the available C-14 dates, the Megalithic Culture in these regions seems to fall between 1000 and 100 B.C. Despite the excavation of a large number of burials, the identity of their builders and the origin of the culture still remain problematic. The distinctive ceramic industry of the Megalithic Culture is the Black-and-red Ware. The principal excavated sites are Brahmagiri, Mahurjhari, Maski, Nagarjunakonda, Porkalam, Paiyampalli, Sanur and Yelleswaram. Much controversy rages about the origin of this Ware and its occurrence in non-megalithic association, including the chalcolithic. The excavation at Arikamedu near Pondicherry defined for the first time, the chronological position of an extensive complex of south Indian pottery and other equipment with the associated finds of dated imports of Arretine Ware. Among the products of Arikamedu was a type of dish, decorated on the internal base with concentric rings of a rouletted pattern, mainfestly derived from a characteristic feature of the Arretine Ware with which it was associated. Being a *sui generis* otherwise foreign to Indian ceramics, the Rouletted Ware. as it was christened, soon became a chronological marker. Its subsequent discovery at other sites introduced an element of chronological precision. Among the hinterland sites where it has been found, Ayodhya in Uttar Pradesh deserve special mention.

v1.c5.10

The excavated sites of historical period located in south India include Arikamedu, Brahmagiri, Dharanikota, Kaveripattinam and Maski. With these excavations, the succession of cultures prior to the Pallavas is now fairly well-defined. Besides. Buddhist monument-complexes have been excavated in various parts of the country, principally at Amaravati (Andhra Pradesh), Antichak (Bihar), Devnimori (Gujarat) Nagarjunakonda (Andhra Pradesh), Pauni (Maharashtra), Piprahwa (Uttar Pradesh) and Ratnagiri (Orissa) belonging variously to a period extending from the Asokan to the Pala.

v1.c5.11

During the last two decades an interdisciplinary approach has been developed for the solution of various archaeological problems. The focus has shifted from the concern for ascertaining the bare culture-sequence to recovering or reconstructing the complete life pattern, including socio-economic conditions, climate, etc. Palynological, palaeopathological and environmental studies and soil and spectrochemical analyses undertaken at some sites have furnished much useful evidence. A significant addition to the Survey's publications was the inauguration in 1953-54 by A. Ghosh of a new series *Indian Archaeology—A Review*, giving an account of all the archaeological work done in the country.

v1.c5.12

Quite naturally, information on all the work that has so far been accomplished remains widely scattered, published in different Indian and foreign journals and monographs and as such is not easily accessible. With a view to making this information available in a ready compendium, the Indian Council of Historical Research sponsored a project for the compilation of an *Encyclopaedia of Indian Archaeology* which was very ably supervised and seen through by the late A. Ghosh, former Director-General, Archaeological Survey of India, assisted by Dr. (Mrs) Himanshu Prabha Ray. Unfortunately, Shri Ghosh passed away in 1981 after successfully completing the project but before the manuscript could be sent to the press. This *Encyclopaedia* is a befitting tribute to his untiring service to Archaeology as well as his scholarship.

v1.c5.13

The articles in the *Encyclopaedia* have been contributed by scholars chosen by a specially constituted committee of the Indian Council of Historical Research. For preparing the general list of sites, assistance was taken of regional coordinators who submitted lists of explored and excavated sites in their respective regions. To all these contributors the ICHR is deeply beholden.

v1.c5.14

The *Encyclopaedia* has been planned to meet the requirements of the researcher, the professional archaeologist and the general reader. The list of subjects has been carefully chosen to provide background information on as wide a range as possible, avoiding at the same time unnecessary duplication or overlap. For the interested reader, bibliographical notes are given at the end of each article. The scope of the *Encyclopaedia* covers all aspects of Indian archaeology up to the twelfth century. Pakistan and Bangladesh, though parts of the same sub-continent and sharing many cultural mainfestations with India, are not covered. The data drawn are primarily based on published exploration and excavation with reports, evidence about numismatics, epigraphy, sculpture or architecture is excluded.

v1.c5.15

The work is divided into two volumes: Vol. I deals with twenty broad subjects, alphabetically arranged and further sub-divided into sections and sub-sections. The sections under most subjects follow a chronological rather than alphabetical order. This rule, however, has not been followed universally as in the case of section 6, Domestic and Miscellaneous Objects, where the sections numbered 6.1, 6.2 and so on, are arranged alphabetically.

v1.c5.16

Cultures have been dealt with under pragmtically convenient regions which combine present day political divisions with natural geographical boundaries. Thus the workable framework includes: n.-w. region (roughly Jammu and Kashmir), n. region (Punjab, Haryana and Uttar Pradesh), w. region (Rajasthan, Gujarat), middle Ganga Region (Bihar), Lower Ganga Region (West Bengal), e. region (Assam, the adjoining states and centrally administered territories), c. region (Madhya Pradesh), n.-e. Deccan (Orissa), Upper Deccan (Maharashtra), s.-e. Deccan (Andhra Pradesh), Lower Deccan (Karnataka), s. region (Tamil Nadu), and s.-w. region (Kerala). Special regions such as the Vindhyas and Chhota Nagpur have been dealt with separately when a culture so demands, otherwise they have been included in the nearest larger units. The principles of this regionalization and periodization have been explained under 4.1.

v1.c5.17

The use of abbreviations and symbols has been restricted to the barest minimum. Square brakcets have been used before and after all editional insertions. Small capitals, preceded by a larger one, have been used in both the volumes for names of sites on which there are detailed articles in vol. II. Thus the occurrence of an awl at Ahichchhatra may not necessarily mean that under the article Ahichchhatra the find of the object would be mentioned. Similarly, in vol. II, an entry like 4.6.1 in an article would indicate that the site belongs to the north-western neolithic culture: 4, standing for cultures, 6, for neolithic and 1, for north-western. Here again it does not mean that the site would necessarily find mention under 4.6.1 in vol. I; it only means that it is a site belonging to the north-western neolithic culture.

v1.c5.18

A detailed index is provided to vol. I; since vol. II adopts the dictionary-form, an index for it has not been judged necessary.

v1.c5.19

Vol. II contains a list of explored and excavated sites, arranged alphabetically. When there are two or more sites with the same name, these are indicated by superscripted numbers e.g., *Dhanara*¹, *Dhanara*² and *Dhanara*³. Wherever an alternative spelling occurs it carries a cross reference such as Doonda, Dunda with a cross reference for Dunda. This system holds good for alterntive names e.g. Dudli Bukhara (Mustakhan), with a cross reference for Mustakhan. However, such cross references have been omitted when the alternative spellings do not involve any appreciable change in the alphabetical order e.g., Degapuri, Degapudi. When two sites cited in different publications with different spellings are the same, or appear to be the same, the names are clubbed together, e.g., Kakkera, Kakkers, both in District Gulbarga, and both having an ash-mound, or Kachraud, Kachrod, both in District Ujjain, and yielding Kayatha Ware. It has not been possible to give the latitudes and longitudes of all listed sites, and for this the reader’s indulgence is solicited. Wherever data on coordinates was available, it has been given.

v1.c5.20

Certain deviations have also been made from the standard practice of citations references in the bibliographies. Titles of articles appearing in journals/books have been omitted, the name of the author of the article being followed by the date of publication of the journal, the latter preceded by ‘in’. Whenever necessary, the subject-matter of the article has been given in parenthesis after the full bibliographical references. Thus under 15.1.6, a reference is made to Boessneck, J, 1969, in Brothwell, D., and Higgs, E. ed., *Science in Archaeology*, London, pp. 331-58 (for osteological differences between sheep and goat), instead of the full entry: Boessneck, J, 1969, Osteological differences between sheep (*Ovis aries Linn*) and goat (*Capra his Linn*) in Brothwell, D., etc. This system has been dispensed with in some cases where the subject-matter is evident from the text or from the name of the book/journal.

v1.c5.21

In using this *Encyclopaedia* it should always be borne in mind that owing to the gap between its completion and publication it represents information available by the late 1970s. But so long as the finds published and the hypotheses proposed before the year 1980 continue to be an indispensable part of the baggage of the excavator and the theorist, this *Encyclopaedia* too should remain an indispensable work of reference. And for this, one would always cherish with special gratitude the memory of A. Ghosh, eminent archaeologist and prince among editors.