Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

An Encyclopaedia of Indian Archaeology v1.c6: 1 Animals, Domestication of

An Encyclopaedia of Indian Archaeology v1.c6

Language
English

Contents

1 Animals, Domestication of

1.1 General Observations

v1.c6.s1.1

[For Pleistocene and early Holocene faunal remains see 15.1-6.]

v1.c6.s1.2

The process of domestication of animals, one of the factors to lay the foundations of civilization, involves first the capture and subsequently the taming of select species, and then their breeding and maintenance under controlled conditions for man's benefit. Its origins may lie in a symbiotic relationship between animals and the early hunter-gatherers or may have been motivated by religious beliefs or even by the supposed womanly instinct to feed and ultimately keep and tame pets. With man's gradually increasing control over his environment, he also realized the value of animals as sources of food and clothing and for transport. The majority of animals economically useful to man were probably domesticated under conditions of scavenging (e.g. pig, dog) or social parasitism (e.g. reindeer, sheep, goat). Domestication was probably largely the outcome of the interaction of economic and biological phenomena. The most important physical changes that occurred in domesticated animals are reflected in size, skeletal elements, soft parts and colour (Zeuner, 1963).

v1.c6.s1.3

Definite archaeozoological evidence of domestication first occurs in the Mesolithic [4.5; 15.1.5,6]. By 6000 B.C. the dog was companion to man, both in n. Europe and the Near East. There is, however, evidence which might prove the domestication of the dog during the Upper Palaeolithic in Russia (Narr, 1959). The domesticated sheep and goat are recorded both in parts of n.-w. Europe (*c.* 4000 B.C.) and the Near East (*c.* 6710 B.C.).

v1.c6.s1.4

From the beginning of the Neolithic [4.6] domestication is closely linked with food production. During the later Neolithic livestock became a prominent part of the economy and domesticated animals included both crop-robbers and those used mainly for food (the cattle, pig, buffalo, etc.). Subsequently animals were domesticated for traction (e.g. the elephant, horse, camel, ass). Unsuccessful attempts at domestication included animals like the hyena, gazelle, ibex and fox.

v1.c6.s1.5

General consensus (Zeuner, 1963; Clason, 1974) favours the Near East as the principal centre of domestication, but a number of individual species had their origin elsewhere. The reindeer was confined to n. Europe, the horse was domesticated n. of the great mountain ranges and certain species of the camel and dog originated in the New World. Clason, 1974, suggests that from the Near East stock-breeding spread e. wards to Afghanistan and Baluchistan, further e. to Pakistan and India and probably even to s.-e. Asia, to the w. into Europe and n. Africa and subsequently to the Nile valley and e. Africa. The beginnings of domestication in the Indian subcontinent, on present excavated evidence, can be traced back to the Mesolithic. The data, however, are meagre, as much of the palaeontological material remains unpublished. Excavations have often been too small and bone collections inadequate, often the reports merely give catalogues with little bearing on the history of domestication. The earliest archaeozoological remains were found at the sites of ADAMGARH (5500 B.C.) and BAGOR (4500 B.C.). The presence of both wild and domesticated animals suggests that hunting was augmented by pastoralism, trade or theft. Besides skeletal remains a substantial part of the archaeological evidence includes animals painted on pottery and in caves and rock-shelters, terracotta figurines and seals, but these must be classed as only of secondary importance.

v1.c6.s1.6

Of the domesticated animals found in India today some were domesticated within the subcontinent. They include the *mithan* or *gayal* (*Bos frontalis*), which is the product of cross-breeding of the domestic cattle with the wild gaur and is presently found in e. India, the buffalo and certain species of birds. The cattle, sheep, goat, horse, donkey, two-humped camel, cat and dog are the product of initially imported stock, probably from the n.-w. The cattle are the most widely occurring species at prehistoric sites, but it is not known if a wild ancestor was indigenous, as no parent species is known today. The wild sheep and goat still roam in the n. and w. mountain ranges, but their relationship with domesticated breeds is not very clear. Along with the pig they are not reported from all early Neolithic-Chalcolithic sites. The wild boar was and is still found in Indian jungles and may have been locally domesticated.

v1.c6.s1.7

About 10 species of domesticated animals, represented by limb bones, maxillae, teeth, pelvic and pectoral girdles, vertebrae, scapulae, metapodials, etc., have been found in excavations in India.

1.2 Bovidae

1.2.1 Bos Indicus (cattle)

v1.c6.s2.t1.1

Bones of the Indian humped cattle (zebu) account for as much as 80% of the collection from all archaeological sites. Two skeletal characteristics which distinguish the domestic species are the broad, flat, cleft spina dorsalis of the thoracic vertebrae and the flattening of the median condyle of the trochlea of the humerus. Evolutionary changes are also noted in the horn-cores which pointed sidewards in the wild prototypes and not upwards as in the modern Indian cattle. Some horn-cores, e.g. at NAVDATOLI, bear a faint depression around the base, generally observed only in European breeds. Other major changes in cattle bones are, e.g., complexity or simplicity of the enamel pattern of molars from Mohenjo-daro (Sewell and Guha, 1931), which might show evidence of a gradual change. At UTNUR (Allchin, 1961) there is a progressive reduction in the size of bones in the successively later levels. The significant variation observed in the medullary cavities of cattle bones here and at other sites suggests that they represent a relatively earlier evolutionary stage (Alur, 1967). Further changes are the anchylosis of the bones of the hock joint and the bony growth (exostosis) on certain parts of the skeleton, e.g. third phalanx. Both are the result of compression of the joints produced by heavy work and have been observed in bones from PALAVOY, HALLUR, SANGANAKALLU, UTNUR, etc.; Alur, 1975, believes that the cattle were not only eaten but used as draught animals (cf. the incised depiction of an ox-drawn cart from INAMGAON). Measurements of the maxillae indicate that the NEVASA cattle were larger than the NAVDATOLI ones (Clason, 1977). In the s.-e. Deccan Neolithic sites, e.g. UTNUR, remains of both the smaller and larger cattle occur (Allchin, 1961), parallels being observed even at present in the region. An extant breed of *Bos indicus* is still found today in Gujarat and is larger and heavier than other varieties of *Bos* found elsewhere in the peninsula. Feral herds of the zebu are still found.

v1.c6.s2.t1.2

Archaeozoological evidence, e.g. from KAYATHA, INAMGAON, points to the slaughter of young animals. Some of the bones are charred, suggesting that the animals were roasted for food, while a number of split bones, e.g. from UTNUR, indicate that the marrow was also consumed. Split shafts and long bones were used for making tools like scrapers, points, etc., e.g. at T. NARSIPUR. This, along with the evidence from rock-paintings, suggests that cattle-breeding was one of the principal occupations of the Neolithic-Chalcolithic people.

v1.c6.s2.t1.3

The earliest evidence for the zebu dates back to *c.* 3500 B.C. in the Quetta valley and the Zhob region in Baluchistan. The Harappa sites (*c.* 2000 B.C.) [4.9] have also yielded bones of cattle (humped and humpless) in addition to depictions on seals and pottery. The humpless cattle are traced back to *primigenius* (aurochs) cattle originally from w. Asia, but the origins of the zebu remain problematic. Its ancestors may have been the Pleistocene humped cattle of India, *Bos namadicus*, bones of which have been found at sites along the Narmada and Godavari, and at Mohenjo-daro and LANGHNAJ. Theories tracing its origin to an African wild race of *Bos* or the wild ox of Burma and Malaysia (*Bos banteng*) remain unsubstantiated. An indigenous origin is also proposed, because *Bos indicus* is believed to have some gaur blood and is found in several very early prehistoric sites, e.g. ADAMGARH. Pilgrim, 1939, considered *Bos acutifrons* of the Siwaliks as a possible ancestor of both *Bos primigenius* and *Bos namadicus*. Evidence suggests a connection between the former and *Bos indicus*, but these issues must await further data from the intermediate regions, as the original centre of domestication in the Old World has not yet been established.

1.2.2 Bubalus bubalis (buffalo)

v1.c6.s2.t2.1

Although a great variety of bones of the domestic buffalo is found at most excavated sites, their number suggests that only small herds were kept and bred. The earliest domestic buffalo remains come from ADAMGARH, *c.* 5500 B.C. At NAGARJUNAKONDA bones of wild and domestic species occur together in the historical levels, and this might throw light on the possibility of local domestication. Buffalo bones from some sites, e.g. ROPAR, HASTINĀPURA, bear cut-marks, perhaps indicating that the animal was eaten. Clason, 1977, suggests that larger and smaller varieties (cf. Navdatoli) were cross-bred to increase the milk yield. Bulls were used for traction. At INAMGAON the measurements of buffalo metacarpals are the same as those of the wild breed. The metapodia of the buffalo are wider than those of the cattle—an adaptation which facilitates walking on mud. Although buffaloes appear only in the upper levels at Mohenjo-daro, their occurrence on seals has been considered evidence for their domestication in Sind by this period.

v1.c6.s2.t2.2

It is generally accepted that the Indian buffalo was domesticated within the subcontinent and is a direct descendant of *Bubalus palaeindicus* found in the Siwaliks. The domestic buffalo has changed so little that it is regarded as only semi-domesticated and continues to interbreed with wild species. It is still uncertain whether the domesticated buffalo of s.-e. Asia and China is descended from the wild Pleistocene buffalo of China or from the Indian wild buffalo. The domestic buffalo was introduced from India into Iraq and thence into the Jordan valley in *c.* A.D. 725. By the Middle Ages it was known in Egypt, Bulgaria and Hungary. The buffalo was successfully bred in Sicily but was a failure in Spain and Germany. Generally speaking the discontinuity of distribution of the buffalo w. wards is due to the lack of tropical swamp conditions.

v1.c6.s2.t2.3

*1.2.3 Caprahircus aegagrus* (goat). Bones of the domestic goat are present at most excavated sites and at places, e.g. BAGOR, along with the sheep, it is the most widely represented species at all cultural levels. Bone measurements indicate that the prehistoric goat was larger than the modern one.

v1.c6.s2.t2.4

Like the sheep, in the Deccan Neolithic levels the goat is poorly represented, but at HALLUR the population of the goat and sheep shows a marked increase in the Iron Age. This is significant because it implies that here either the people had developed some special methods of goat/sheep-breeding or the animals assumed special importance in the economy. Cut-marks, e.g. at ROPAR, indicate the consumption of goat meat and the state of teeth eruption, degree of fusion of the epiphysis, etc., suggest that animals were slaughtered when 2 to 3 years old.

v1.c6.s2.t2.5

Bones of the goat and sheep are generally indistinguishable, but there is a significant difference in their cranial characteristics. In the goat the coronal suture is straight and the lambdoidal suture projects forward at an angle, while in the sheep these traits are reversed. Wherever goats have been unmistakably identified from excavations, their ratio to the sheep has generally been of the order of 1:2. Second to the cattle, the sheep and goat together comprise the largest group of animals bred and slaughtered at prehistoric sites. Interestingly, at a number of sites bones of the goat predominate over those of the sheep in the earlier levels, but later on the latter become more numerous. This may be attributed to the actual chronological sequence of domestication or to ecological conditions. In temperate climates the sheep were bred in larger numbers because of greater wool yield and tastier meat. Wherever cattle-breeding is successful, the goat is not reared as a milch animal (Zeuner, 1963).

v1.c6.s2.t2.6

The five species of the wild goat occurring in the subcontinent are: *Capra falconeri* and *Capra ibex*, both found in the region between Afghanistan, Kashmir, Punjab and Kumaun, the latter an important food animal during the Upper Palaeolithic; *Capra hircus*, found in Baluchistan and Sind, probably the main ancestor of the several breeds of the domestic goat; *Hemitragus jemlabicus*, Himalayan Tahr; and *Hemitragus hylocrius*, Nilgiri Tahr, reported respectively from the Himalayan and sub-Himalayan belt and the Nilgiris of s. India. The prehistoric migratory movements of these wild populations are not known.

v1.c6.s2.t2.7

The goat is known from the pre-Harappa settlements of the Quetta and Zhob-Loralai valleys and from the mature Harappa levels of Harappa sites. At most Indian sites, specially Neolithic, the goat is reported earlier than the sheep, but that the former was in fact domesticated before the latter is not established. Furthermore there is no archaeological evidence to support the theory that the goat was indigenously domesticated.

v1.c6.s2.t2.8

*1.2.4 Ovis orientalis vignei* (sheep). The domesticated sheep is widely represented at most excavated sites. The animal appears to have been profusely slaughtered during the Mesolithic (65% of the total bone collection at TILWARA are of sheep), suggestive of a pastoral economy where they formed an important dietary item. Evidence from the lower Deccan Neolithic sites (cf. goat from HALLUR) indicates that only small herds were kept and the number of unworn teeth and unfused epiphyses suggests that animals between the ages of 2 to 3 years were butchered. Probably lambs were eaten, while ewes were kept for breeding and milk. The measurements of sheep bones from prehistoric sites generally tend to be larger than those of the modern sheep. At PIKLIHAL bones of the goat predominate over those of the sheep, the latter being similar to those of the modern domestic sheep of the Deccan.

v1.c6.s2.t2.9

Of the four wild species of the sheep existing today (*Ovis musimon*, moufflon, found in Europe and the Middle East; *Ovis orientalis*, the Asiatic urial, found in the region between Iran and n.-w. India; *Ovis amnion*, argali, found in Tibet, Ladakh, Sikkim, Mongolia, the n. Himalayas and n. China; and *Ovid canadensis*, the Bighorn of n. Asia and n. America), the last is excluded from the ancestry of the domestic species. All domesticated sheep are descended from the moufflon, urial or argali. They are closely related to each other and are connected by intermediate breeds. Most wool sheep are believed to have been derived from urial stock, while hair sheep are traced back to the moufflon. The Indian domestic sheep, as also those of Tibet and s.-e. Asia, are essentially derived from the urial stock. The argali has also contributed to this domesticated group but is of subordinate importance.

v1.c6.s2.t2.10

The sheep had been domesticated with the aid of the dog before agriculture was fully developed. The original centre of domestication was the Aralo-Caspian and Turkestan region. Sheep-rearing thence spread first to Iran and later to Iraq. The most notable skeletal changes that have occurred with domestication are a convexity of the nasals (possibly connected with a shortening of the jaws), shortening of the facial bones and decrease in the size but increase in the degree of wrinkling of the horns.

1.3 Camelidae

v1.c6.s3.1

It is generally believed that a wild ancestor of the domestic one-humped camel, *Camelus dromedarius*, existed in the deserts of Sind and Rajasthan and it might have been locally domesticated from *Camelus sivalensis* of the Siwaliks. Excavated camel bones from Mohenjodaro and Harappa have been questioned as being a late intrusion (Zeuner, 1963). KALIBANGAN and PRABHAS PATAN are the only Indian sites where a large number of camel bones are found and when fully studied may help to elucidate the problem of its indigenous or foreign domestication. In n.-w. India the camel was, and still is, an important beast of burden.

1.4 Canidae

v1.c6.s4.1

Only a few prehistoric sites have yielded skeletal remains of the domestic dog (*Canis familiaris*). In India the earliest indisputable evidence comes from the Mesolithic levels of ADAMGARH. Clutton-Brock, 1965, identified the canid remains from LANGHNAJ as probably those of the Indian wolf—*Canis* cf. *lupus pallipes* on the grounds that the small teeth fall within the sizerange of the dingo (i.e. the cross between the wolf and pariah dog) and that the teeth are uncompacted (Degerbol, 1961). Dogs with skulls very similar to the Indian wolf have also been reported from Harappa (Prashad, 1936).

v1.c6.s4.2

The following wild species of Canidae present in the subcontinent are immigrants from the n.: *Canis lupus*, the wolf; *Canis aureus*, the jackal; *Vulpes bengalensis*, the fox; and *Cuon alpinus*, the Indian wild dog. Reed, 1959, and Zeuner, 1963, hold that the Indian wolf is the probable ancestor of the domesticated dog because of the close morphological similarity, notably the dentition and complete interfertility between these species. Jackals also interbreed and have affinities with dogs; Prater, 1972, derives the ancestry of some dogs from jackals, but they differ significantly with respect to certain dental characters and chromosome numbers (Matthey, 1954).

1.5 Elephantidae

v1.c6.s5.1

Excavated remains of the elephant (*Elephas maximus*, Indian elephant) are relatively scarce but are of considerable palaeoecological significance. At the s. Neolithic sites, for example, elephant bones indicate the existence of a thicker vegetation cover and more abundant sources of water, which in turn are suggestive of a more humid climate than prevails today in this region. Zeuner, 1963, thinks that the bones and the frequent pictorial representations of the elephant at Mohenjo-daro are the earliest evidence of its domestication. Elephant tusks were variously used (e.g. ivory beads from INAMGAON). Coins depicting the elephant are common during the periods *c.* 250–140 B.C. in the e. Mediterranean and the e., suggesting that the animal continued to remain a symbol of power. Its domestication was at first confined to India, whence it spread to the w. after Alexander’s invasion.

v1.c6.s5.2

The Indian elephant is considered to be a descendant of *Elephas hysudricus* of the Indian Early Pleistocene and related to the group of *Elephas meridionalis*, ancestor of the mammoth and *Elephas antiquus* of Europe.

1.6 Equidae

v1.c6.s6.1

1.6.1 *Equus asinus* (ass). The modern domesticated ass is descended from the almost extinct species—*Equus asinus africanus*. It is believed to have been domesticated in Egypt in *c.* 2000 B.C. and was probably introduced into India during the period of contact between the Indus valley and the Near East (Wheeler, 1968), whence it spread to other parts of the subcontinent.

v1.c6.s6.2

Two wild species, *Equus hemionus kiang*, Tibetan wild ass, and *Equus hemionus khur*, Indian wild ass, are found today in the n. and w. (Rann of Kutch) respectively. The former is not domesticated, while the latter is readily tamed when young. Despite its potential usefulness (transport, milk, dung), its skeletal remains occur only infrequently. It is possible that the taboo on eating its flesh was applied because of its close affinity with the horse. Very occasionally the ass was used as a sacrificial animal (e.g. NAGARJUNAKONDA).

v1.c6.s6.3

1.6.2 *Equus caballus* (horse). The horse was primarily domesticated for labour and transport. There are no examples of its ancestral forms in India. Wild caballine horses were widespread in prehistoric and early historical Europe and Asia. Their descendants have either become extinct (e.g. Ukranian tarpan) or been domesticated, and only the Mongolian horse survives in a wild state. It appears likely that the horse was domesticated in *c.* 2000 B.C. in the region around Turkestan, although Europe and w. Asia are considered as alternative centres. Thence movements occurred both to the e. and w., and by *c.* 2000 B.C. it is found in Egypt and Mesopotamia.

v1.c6.s6.4

In India the earliest evidence for the domesticated horse occurs in *c.* 4500 B.C. at BAGOR. Subsequently the true horse is reported from the Neolithic levels at KODEKAL and HALLUR and the late Harappa levels at Mohenjo-daro (Sewell and Guha, 1931) and ROPAR and at Harappa, LOTHAL and numerous other sites. UJJAIN and HASTINĀPURA are among the important Iron Age sites where there is evidence of the domesticated horse at an early date, and cut-marks on the bones from HASTINĀPURA (Period II) suggest the slaughter of the animal for food. At SURKOTADA bones of *Equus caballus* occur from Periods I A to I C (2100–1700 B.C.) along with those of *Equus asinus* and *Equus hemionus* (Sharma, 1974). Some of the caballine bones are charred; possibly the older animals were killed and eaten. Further study of the bones from this site might reveal skeletal changes which would indicate whether the animal was merely used for transport or was in fact also ridden. Recently bones of *Equus caballus* have also been reported from the proto-Harappa site of MALVAN in Gujarat. However the introduction of the horse into the subcontinent has sometimes been associated with the Indo-Aryans (Allchin, 1969).

1.7 Felidae

v1.c6.s7.1

The identification of the domestic cat (*Felis catus domesticus*) is extremely difficult on the basis of skeletal remains, its bones having been reported only from a few sites. The cat is one of the few animals that can easily revert to its feral state in the early stages of domestication. Changes in hair-length and colour, a general reduction in size, a broadening of the skull, corresponding to a shortening of the face and, occasionally, changes in dentition are some of the characteristic traits associated with the domestic breeds.

v1.c6.s7.2

At NEVASA, both in the Chalcolithic as well as historical levels, apart from *Felis catus domesticus*, two feral species, *Felis libyca* and *Felis bengalensis*, were also found. The latter, commonly called the leopard cat, is found throughout India, while the former, the desert cat, which presently occupies the region of the Great Indian Desert and the arid zone of c. India, is believed to be the ancestor of *Felis catus domesticus*, originally introduced into India from Egypt where it was first domesticated in *c.* 3000 B.C. A few cat bones from Harappa levels, *c.* 2000 B.C., have been identified as belonging to a domesticated variety (Prashad, 1936), but the evidence is unsubstantiated.

1.8 Suidae

v1.c6.s8.1

Bones of the domestic pig (*Sus scrofa cristatus*) are first found in the Mesolithic levels at ADAMGARH and BAGOR. In general they occur most numerously after the bones of the cattle, sheep and goat, though at INAMGAON they are replaced by those of the deer. At AHAR², NAVDATOLI, ROPAR and HASTINĀPURA, bones occur profusely and predominantly of pigs of around the age of 1 to 2 years. Obviously pork was a staple dietary item at the c. Indian Chalcolithic sites, specially NAVDATOLI, where the generally humid environment may have favoured its breeding. Interestingly, pig bones are found infrequently at s. Indian Neolithic sites and are absent at UTNUR and PIKLIHAL. In the Megalithic period the pig occurs in greater numbers. Possibly, therefore, it was a later introduction to the s. from the Deccan. At BAGOR only small herds were kept. Several examples of teeth closely resembling those of the wild boar suggest that the latter may have inhabited the area (as it does even today) and was hunted rather than reared in captivity. Bones of the wild boar predominate in the earlier levels at the site, while those of the domestic pig occurs more frequently in the later levels. This may have some significance on the history of the indigenous domestication of this animal. At PRABHAS PATAN and NAVDATOLI bones of the wild boar occur along with those of the domestic pig. At ADAMGARH and LANGHNAJ charred pig bones are common, and the state of wear of the teeth suggests that both young and old animals were eaten. At KAYATHA the pig is absent in the earlier phases, making its first appearance in *c.* 1500–1200 B.C.

v1.c6.s8.2

A characteristic result of domestication is the notable reduction in length of the third upper and lower molars and to a lesser degree of the second ones. Otherwise, on the basis of other skeletal elements it is difficult to distinguish the wild from the domestic pig.

v1.c6.s8.3

The three feral races of the pig found in India today are: *Sus salvanius*, in the foot-hill regions of the Himalayas; *Sus scrofa andamanensis*, confined to the Andaman Islands; and *Sus scrofa cristatus*, common throughout peninsular India. The last is a subspecies of *Sus scrofa*, the Palaearctic wild boar of the Lower Pleistocene, and is closely related to its European counterpart *Sus scrofa scrofa*. Opinions differ as to whether it is really possible to distinguish between the European and Indian subspecies on the basis of skull measurements and the size and complexity of the molars (Clutton-Brock, 1965). Little is known of the actual history of pig domestication in Asia, and the theory that it was domesticated in India remains unsubstantiated. *Sus cristatus*, regarded as the ancestor of the Asian domesticated pig, is traced back to the earliest Neolithic in the Near East (at Jarmo, *c.* 6500 B.C.). The earliest evidence for the domestic pig is associated with the beginnings of agriculture and domestication of the cattle. The pig was bred for meat and fat and rarely used as a sacrificial animal. It increased in importance as food once the cow began to be worshipped but later ceased to be an important dietary item, the sheep and goat further reducing its value.

v1.c6.s8.4

Allchin, F.R., 1961, *Utnur Excavations*, Hyderabad, pp. 54–64; 1969, in Ucko, P. J., & Dimbleby, G.W., ed., *Domestication & Exploitation of Plants & Animals*, London, pp. 317–22. Alur, K.R., 1975, in Clason, A.T., ed., *Arch. Studies*, Amsterdam/Oxford, pp. 407-12; 1967 unpublished, *Note on the animal remains from Utnur*; Clason, A.T., 1974, in *Eastern Anthropologist*, 27, I, pp. 5-21; 1977, in *Eastern Anthropologist*, 33, 1, pp. 41–89, Clutton-Brock, J., 1965, *Excavations at Langhnaj*, II, *Fauna*, Poona. Degerbol M., 1961, in *Proc. Prehistoric Soc. Cambridge*, 27, pp. 35–55. Matthey, R., 1954, *Mammalia*, 18, p. 225. Narr, K.J., 1959, in *Berliner Beiträge für Vor-und Frühgeschichte*, 2, 119-25, Pilgrim, G.E., 1939, in *Palaeontologia India*, N.S. 26, 249-330. Prashad, B., 1936, *Animal Remains from Harappa*, Mem. ASI, 51. Prater, S.H., 1972, *The Book of Indian Animals*, Bombay. Reed, C.A., 1959, in *Science*, 130, pp. 1629–39. Sewell, R.B.S., & Guha, B.S., 1931, in J. Marshall, *Mohenjo-daro & the Indus Civilization*, London. Sharma. A.K., in *Purātattva*, 7, pp. 75–6. Wheeler, M., 1968, *Indus Civilization*, Cambridge. Zeuner, F.E., 1963, *History of Domesticated Animals*, London. For sites see respective entries in vol. II.—G.L. BADAM

Linked texts (20)