Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

An Encyclopaedia of Indian Archaeology v1.c9.s2: 4.2 Lower Palaeolithic

An Encyclopaedia of Indian Archaeology v1.c9.s2

Language
English

Contents

4.2 Lower Palaeolithic

v1.c9.s2.1

Investigation into the Indian Palaeolithic cultures commenced over a century ago with the discovery of the first palaeolith at PALLAVARAM near Madras by R. Bruce Foote in 1863. But the real impetus to the scientific study of the cultures was given in the thirties of this century by the Yale-Cambridge team of geologists and archaeologists under the leadership of H. de Terra and T.T. Paterson. They worked in the Kashmir valley and Potwar plateau and briefly examined the Narmada valley near HOSHANGABAD and the Kortalayar river near Madras and by their study tried to integrate the Palaeolithic cultures with their contemporary environments. The somewhat earlier work of M.C. Burkitt and L.A. Cammiade in Andhra Pradesh, the Calcutta University's work in Mayurbhanj in Orissa in 1940 and later and F.E. Zeuner's study mostly in Gujarat in 1948 were the other notable contributions prior to 1950. Following the methods of de Terra and Zeuner extensive regional surveys have later on been carried out by the ASI and a few universities and institutes, so that considerable progress has taken place in this field and practically all the regions in India have now been covered for Palaeolithic research.

v1.c9.s2.2

It is now clear that early man, recognized by his artefacts, had penetrated into all regions of India of diverse physiography, climate, vegetation and to some extent animal life. Palaeolithic sites have been found in periglacial sub-Himalayan areas like Kashmir and the Kangra valley; in arid or semi-arid tracts of Rajasthan and Kutch; in heavy-rainfall areas of Assam and thickly forested regions of Bihar; and in coastal areas like Konkan, Saurashtra and Tamil Nadu. They occur in practically all the river basins in peninsular India and in rock-shelters like GUDIYAM in Tamil Nadu. This wide distribution of the Lower Palaeolithic assemblages has raised many new problems but has at the same time removed such notions as that certain regions were not congenial to early man's habitation, either because they were very heavily forested, rain-fed, snow-clad or under the sea, or because they did not possess suitable raw material for tool-making.

v1.c9.s2.3

The Lower Palaeolithic cultures of India fall within the time-span of the Middle Pleistocene [9.8.2] and early part of the Upper Pleistocene, approximately covering a period from about half-a-million to 50000 years B.P. Stratigraphically the earliest of them is the one represented by tools found in the fluvio-glacial deposits in the LIDDAR valley near Pahalgam in Kashmir, which are overlain by the Second Glacial phase of the Middle Pleistocene in Kashmir. Another area yielding older cultures is w. Saurashtra where the tools have been obtained underlying the Middle Pleistocene miliolite [9.7]. There being no Early Pleistocene industry in India, the Lower Palaeolithic of India is of a later date than that of Africa, where the earliest lithic cultures have been dated to nearly 1·75 to even 3·5 million years.

v1.c9.s2.4

The industries of the Indian Palaeolithic cultures consist of a variety of stone tools, distinguished by different terms, generally according to their probable function, such as handaxes, cleavers, choppers, picks, scrapers, borers or points and worked flakes. But by far the most important types in this list are the handaxes and cleavers, because their forms, being standardized, can be comprehensively examined in respect of technology and subtypes. The tool types do not display any artistic talent of early man but were manufactured with an eye to utility only.

v1.c9.s2.5

The choppers are generally made on pebbles and rarely on rock blocks or thick flakes. They are either worked in one direction (unifacial) or two directions (bifacial), the two varieties being often distinguished as chopper-chopping tools. On the basis of their first discovery in large quantities on the terraces of the Sohan (Soan) river, a tributary of the Indus, these tools have been called the Sohan industry by de Terra and Paterson. The Sohan valley also yielded handaxe industries which de Terra christened as the Madras handaxe industries due to their occurrence in large numbers in the Madras area. These two industries were viewed as representatives of two cultural traditions—Sohan or pebble-tool culture and Madras handaxe culture. And on the basis of percentages of these two industries at Indian sites various hypotheses of migration, diffusion and meeting of the two have been put forward.

v1.c9.s2.6

In peninsular India pebble tools (choppers) and pebble-butted handaxes generally occur together, both the types being stratigraphically inseparable. However the pebble tools from MAHADEO PIPARIA on the Narmada, named as Mahadevian, were considered to be of a pre-handaxe culture similar to the Oldowan industry from Olduvai Gorge in e. Africa. But exactly contrary evidence also came from the excavations on the same river near MAHESHWAR and at MAHADEO PIPARIA itself, conclusively proving that there was no stratigraphical basis for establishing the existence of a pebble tool substratum underlying the handaxe industries. The experience from several other localities in peninsular India is not different. The excessive percentage of pebble tools in areas like the Kangra valley or at places on the Narmada perhaps shows the ecological influence on the industries, for here the pebbles are the only available tool-making raw material. The choppers are thus an inseparable adjunct of the Indian Lower Palaeolithic cultures.

v1.c9.s2.7

The handaxe-cleaver tools are the most dominant type of the Indian Lower Palaeolithic occurring throughout the peninsular region. Both handaxes and cleavers occur in a variety of shapes and can be distinguished on the basis of their length, breadth and thickness and morphological outlines. Typologically they can be grouped into: cruder types in which the flaking has left deep and irregular scars, thick bodies and asymmetrical forms; and finer types with smoother surfaces due to controlled flaking and symmetrical forms. Unless these two groups occur in a stratigraphic succession they do not imply evolutionary stages. If they are present in the same collection their contrasting typological features perhaps denote only the stages in the manufacture of the tools belonging to the same cultural level.

v1.c9.s2.8

Typologically, however, it is possible to bring out the distinction between the handaxe-cleaver industries of one site and another. For example, the industries from GANGAPUR, NEVASA, LALITPUR, KHYAD, etc., show highly advanced forms. The deposits in which they occur directly underlie the sediments containing Middle Palaeolithic tools with ¹⁴C dates of 30000 to 40000 years. Such evolved forms of the closing phases of the Lower Palaeolithic therefore belong to the Upper Pleistocene, roughly 50000 B.P.

v1.c9.s2.10

Fig. 2. Acheulian tools: 1, cordiform handaxe, 2, ovate; 3,4, cleaver—Vadamadurai; 5, blade—Paisra; 6, blade; 7, borer; 8, scraper on pebble

v1.c9.s2.11

Fig. 1. Lower Palaeolithic tools: 1, flat-based chopper—Soan valley, 2, Flake—Guler; 3, Chopping tool—Soan valley

v1.c9.s2.12

Statistical studies of the relative proportion of handaxes and cleavers carried out on the collections from major explored and excavated sites have shown that in general the cleaver-handaxe ratio ranges from 1:1 to 1:2. Handaxes are thus the dominant types even in areas of contrasting vegetational and climatic features. In the presently dry areas like Rajasthan, the moist and deciduous tracts of Orissa and the forested upper reaches of the Narmada handaxes are in excess over cleavers by 3 to 6 times. In the s. in Kurnool area again handaxes are in excess over the cleavers by 2 to 3 times. The Krishna basin presents a varied picture. But at a few sites like ADAMGARH and BHIMBETKA rock-shelters, GANGAPUR, NAGARJUNAKONDA, etc., cleavers outnumber handaxes. Typologically speaking these cleaver-dominated cultures show an advanced stage. It may be said that broadly in the Early and Middle Acheulian stages the handaxes are dominant while in the Late Acheulian the cleavers are in excess over handaxes (Joshi, 1970).

v1.c9.s2.13

The Indian Palaeolithic industries are by and large Acheulian in character. The feeble element of the Abbevillian, if at all present, is discernible only by a detailed technological scrutiny although this does not find much stratigraphic support. It is also difficult to further subdivide the Acheulian industries stratigraphically (Joshi, 1964). In open sites like river-banks the possibility of a considerable admixture brought about by natural agencies like the river is bound to exist. The only undisturbed localities are the caves or rock-shelters. In recent years excavations have been carried out within the rock-shelters at ADAMGARH and BHIMBETKA in the Narmada valley. Although the question of the subdivisions of Abbevillian-Acheulian cultures still remains unsolved, the excavations have in a way been helpful in tracing the cultural evolution from the Lower to the Middle Palaeolithic.

v1.c9.s2.14

The tools are made on a variety of rocks. The most common and abundantly available stones are the quartzites and sandstones from the sedimentary Vindhyan and Cuddapah formations. They occur in a variety of colours—grey, red, brown—depending on the different cementing material. The next preference is the basaltic rocks like the Deccan trap or dolerite. As is logical early man made use of these rocks wherever they were available and at this early cultural stage there was little effort of transportation of raw material from one region to another. There are however some instances where preference was shown to a particular raw material not locally available, as instanced by a jasper handaxe from MANDSAUR, chert handaxe from CHIRKI and phyllite handaxe from HUNSGI, implying some kind of transport. Limestone and chert were also used at some sites in Andhra and w. Rajasthan, where the rocks were available locally. Interestingly even granite (Bundelkhand granite in the Lalitpur area) and some metamorphic rocks (MALAPRABHA sites) were made use of. Viewing the tools made on such different material as a whole we notice a remarkable similarity in technique and form, which clearly brings out the fact that the Palaeolithic man handled varied raw material with equal efficiency.

v1.c9.s2.15

The Indian handaxes compare very well with all European types, and the same is true of their African counterparts. The cleaver, though rare in Europe, is extremely common in Africa. Since the raw material used in Africa and India is the same the resulting tools also show close correspondence; in fact one could easily replace every one from the Olduwai Gorge or s. African collections. Thus Africa only remains in the field if a foreign origin or contact is to be sought for the Indian Lower Palaeolithic cultures, particularly so as India is geographically nearer Africa. In Africa and Olduwan pebble tools are undoubtedly of great antiquity and its handaxe-cleaver group should be fairly old. As such one may postulate a slow diffusion to India from Africa. Alternatively the Indian tools which show advanced forms may have had an independent origin and were slightly later than those of Africa.

v1.c9.s2.16

In the sub-Himalayan Kashmir basin Lower Palaeolithic tools occur near PAHALGAM in association with the fluvio-glacial deposits laid down partly by the moraine and by the stream. As these deposits are overlain by considerably thick Middle Pleistocene boulder beds into which are cut Upper Pleistocene terraces, the tools suggest a very high antiquity of about half-a-million years and provide proof that man existed in this region prior to the beginning of the maximum cold phase in the Himalayas. The tools occurring on the high terraces in the Jammu area have decidedly no relationship with Pleistocene glaciation.

v1.c9.s2.17

Choppers and handaxe-cleavers have been found on the terraces on the BANGANGA, NALAGARH on the SIRSA and Saketi area on the MARKANDA, all in Himachal Pradesh. All these terraces have been cut into fluvio-glacial cone deposits. It is not possible at the moment to understand the relationship of the terrace sequence in this periglacial region with the Pleistocene glacial sequence. As stratigraphically these terraces are of the late Middle to the Upper Pleistocene Age, the industries lying on their surfaces should be of a comparable period. Since the terrace deposits are unfossiliferous and the tools are rarely found buried in them the terrace sequence by itself has no stratigraphic significance and is of little use in the tracing of different cultural stages.

v1.c9.s2.18

In the Hiran valley in Saurashtra, Lower Palaeolithic tools have been discovered in the fluvial gravels underlying the miliolite formation of fluvio-marine origin. This formation, representing a transgressive marine phase, has been tentatively correlated with the well-dated (by ¹⁴C and Uranium-Thorium isotopic method) marine transgression of the last interglacial, i.e. c. 120000 years. Thus it is for the first time in India that the Lower Palaeolithic tools have been definitely proved to be older than 120000 B.P., being possibly of the Middle Pleistocene Age.

v1.c9.s2.19

Scores of these industries have been found in peninsular India in the gravel deposits which are exposed in the cliff sections of rivers like the NARMADA, GODAVARI, Krishna, TAPTI and their tributaries like the PRAVARA, Mula and Kan. Generally the associated gravel conglomerate is coarse and there are chances of getting in these sediments fresh as well as differentially rolled tools, depending upon whether the tools got buried at the same place where they had been manufactured or got transported by the stream. At places the tools acquire patination. The degree of rolling and intensity of patination are sometimes a useful aid for typological analysis of the tools found in a mixed condition and have been used for distinguishing various Sohan collections of choppers and the Madras handaxe industries. It should however be noted that highly rolled and patinated tools do not necessarily represent the earliest tools in the collection, for both these properties largely depend on the nature of the deposits in which they were buried, such as red lateritic clays, calcareous clays, etc.

v1.c9.s2.20

Some tool-bearing gravels contain animal fossils, as in the valleys of the NARMADA, BELAN, GODAVARI, PRAVARA, Krishna, etc., which throw useful light on the palaeo-environment. These gravels usually occur at the base of the section and represent the earliest aggradational deposit. They are covered by a succession of gravels, sands, silts or clays indicating several periods of deposition. The tools of the later period occur in such deposits overlying the basal gravel containing Lower Palaeolithic tools. Fine sections of these deposits are found on the NARMADA, Sabarmati, GODAVARI, PRAVARA, etc.

v1.c9.s2.21

In the SINGRAULI basin in Uttar Pradesh, particularly on the Rihand river and the Bichi Nala, more or less similar stratigraphy has been noticed. The choppers found here were once considered to be of Sohan variety, indicating this region as a sort of meeting place of the n. Sohan culture and the s. handaxe culture. This view however is no longer tenable. Recently very interesting Palaeolithic sites have been discovered in the BELAN valley in Dt Allahabad, where a succession of sediments has been worked out: the lowest highly cemented gravel has yielded Lower Palaeolithic tools comprising pebble tools, handaxes and cleavers. Besides, this gravel also contains animal fossils which may be of the Middle Pleistocene age.

v1.c9.s2.22

Rarely Lower Palaeolithic tools are found on the hills in thickly forested areas like BHIMBANDH in Dt Monghyr and MALVAN in Konkan. Their occurrences have been noticed at the foot of the hills as well as on the talus slopes and in hill-wash gravels in the Garo Hills of Meghalaya. Tools are found in the secondary laterities or lateritic gravels in the Mayurbhanj area and POONDI, ATTIRAMPAKKAM and VADAMADURAI sites near Madras. At MALVAN tools are found on a lateritic plateau.

v1.c9.s2.23

Factory sites of the Lower Palaeolithic industries are known from LALITPUR, ANAGWADI, GANGAPUR, CHIRKI (Joshi & Marathe, 1975), NEVASA, etc., close to the rivers Shahzad, GHATAPRABHA, GODAVARI and PRAVARA. LALITPUR is a surface site, while ANAGWADI, GANGAPUR, CHIRKI, NEVASA and HUNSGI are stratified sites.

v1.c9.s2.24

No Lower Palaeolithic cave sites are known in India, but tools occur in several rock-shelters in the Vindhyan hills in c. India. Of them the largest group is at BHIMBETKA and a few near ADAMGARH, respectively on the n. and s. banks of the NARMADA near HOSHANGABAD. A complete sequence of cultures from the Lower Palaeolithic through the Middle and Upper Palaeolithic and the Mesolithic (and in some places even the Chalcolithic) has been uncovered in the excavations conducted in these shelters.

v1.c9.s2.25

The settlement or habitational pattern of the camp site of the Lower Palaeolithic people cannot be made out from the observations of the open-air factory sites or the river-valley sections containing artefacts. Basically early man used to roam about in search of food and thus had no fixed abode. A glimpse of the life of these people can, however, be had from horizontal excavations of such sites. In India such excavations have been carried out recently at the rock-shelter sites at BHIMBETKA, at CHIRKI on the Pravara and at HUNSGI on the Krishṉa. At BHIMBETKA there is evidence of the construction of a wall of boulders for partitioning the shelter during the Acheulian phase. It is also a factory site. CHIRKI is a rich factory-cum-camp site, for here within an area of 15 × 15 m more than 2000 tools were found in mint condition. Unfortunately the debris one would expect in such a workshop has been washed away as the site is on a rock surface close to the Pravara. No trace of any contrivance for windbreak is available here. At HUNSGI an ovalshaped living floor, covering an area of about 65 sq m, has yielded over 600 artefacts. It is surrounded by granite blocks on all sides, some of which must have been deliberately placed by man to facilitate the construction of hut-like structures. Most of the tools from this site are made of limestone.

v1.c9.s2.26

Allchin, B. & R., 1968, *Birth of Indian Civilization*, Harmondsworth. Jayaswal, V., 1978, *Palaeohistory of India*, Delhi. Joshi, R.V., 1964, in *Asian Perspectives*, 8, 1, pp. 150-63; 1970, in *Archaeocivilization*, Paris, 7-8, pp. 39-46; Joshi, R.V., & Marathe, A.R., 1975, in *Puratattva*, 8. Marathe, A.R., Rajaguru, S.N., & Lele, V.S., 1977, in *Sedimentary Geology*, Amsterdam (for age of miliolites in the Hiran valley). Sankalia, H.D., 1974, *Prehistory & Protohistory of India & Pakistan*, Poona, with complete bibliography. For sites and river valleys see respective entries in vol. II.—R.V. JOSHI

4.2.1 Siwalik region

v1.c9.s2.t1.1

The youngest part of the Himalayas, or the outer Himalayas, is known as the Siwalik region. Composed of the accumulation of alluvium in the remote past, the region derives its name from the mountain near Hardwar, which is made of a similar formation and is called 'Siwalik'. The Palaeolithic implements are found on the earlier terraces of the rivers SIRSA, BEAS, BANGANGA and RAVI. [For the Sohan in Pakistan, see 4.2.]

v1.c9.s2.t1.2

In the valley of the Sirsa, around NALAGARH, in the foothills of the Simla Himalayas, terraces are found in the post-Siwalik deposits. The artefacts obtained by Sen, 1955, from the middle and upper terraces are made on big quartzite pebbles. The tool-kit is devoid of Acheulian and Abbevillian implements and contains primarily choppers and crude flakes of the Early Sohan tradition. At a distance of less than 16 km from NALAGARH two terraces were discovered by Mohapatra, 1966, on the GHAGGHAR. Pebble choppers and unworked flakes were found on the terraces at DERA, KHARAUNI and CHANDI-MANDIR, all of the Sirsa culture-complex. The course of the BANGANGA lying in Dt Kangra retains five terraces near GULER. Choppers made on quartzite pebbles, a few chopping tools, protohandaxes and flakes of Clactonian and proto-Levallois tradition [16.15.1] were collected from the first three terraces. In Dt Kathua of the Jammu area in Jammu and Kashmir Pleistocene deposits containing tools are reported from JURRO, PINYANI, TERRA, MOH and JAGATPUR (*IAR 1965-6*, p. 19). The assemblages belong to Early Sohan and Pre-Sohan traditions. Near SAMBA pebble tools were obtained from the terraces of the Basantar at NANDI, MANANU and PALTHA (*IAR 1968-9*, p. 19). Later on an Abbevillian handaxe, pebble tools and massive flakes were discovered from the deposits of the Second Glaciation and Interglaciation near PAHALGAM in Kashmir (Sankalia, 1974).

v1.c9.s2.t1.3

Mohapatra, G.C., 1966, in *Bull. Deccan College Res. Inst.*, 25, pp. 221-30. Sankalia, 1974, *Prehistory & Protohistory of India & Pakistan*, Poona, p. 33. Sen, D., 1955, in *Man in India*, 35, pp. 177-84. For sites see respective entries in vol. II.—V. JAYASWAL

v1.c9.s2.t1.4

*4.2.2 Vindhyan region.* The area roughly includes the hilly track of the Vindhyan and Kaimur ranges and the adjoining plains of the Ganga and Narmada systems. In the Malwa plateau a number of Lower Palaeolithic localities are reported from the banks of river Shivna, a tributary of the Chambal. The industries either are found in Gravel I of the region or have been associated with it on the basis of the typological similarities with implements found *in situ*. All the implements found at BHANGARH, NANAKANTHUR, CHIKALIA, NABHARAGARH, KHADKI and MANDSAUR (Khatri, 1957) are made on quartzite pebbles and belong to the Acheulian tradition, as the main component of these industries is handaxes and cleavers. A similar lithic tradition existed and flourished in the area around Bhopal. On the flat hilltop at BHIMBETKA a number of rock-shelters contain Acheulian remains (Misra, 1974). Wakankar, 1973, has claimed a separate horizon for the pebble-tool culture in one of the shelters at BHIMBETKA. In the vicinity there are also a few factory sites of both the pebble tool and Acheulian traditions.

v1.c9.s2.t1.5

An open-air Acheulian workshop was found by Singh, 1965, near LALITPUR in Dt Jhansi. At this site pink granite blocks had been converted into tools. A noteworthy feature of the industry is that cleavers made on flakes, most of which were obtained by Victoria West technique, outnumber handaxes, which generally have the highest frequency in the Acheulian culture-complex of the subcontinent. Besides the industry also retains the technologically advanced features such as a considerable proportion of Levallois flakes and a few Levallois points [16.15.1].

v1.c9.s2.t1.6

At the trijunction of Dts Hamirpur, Jhansi and Chhatarpur, a pebble-tool complex was discovered by Pant, 1965. Near the village LAHCHURA on the bank of the Dhasan and from the foot of the adjoining hills choppers and chopping tools were picked up. There is a complete absence of Acheulian implements. The flakes found in the industry are the by-products obtained during the manufacture of pebble tools. The assemblage compares well with the Early Sohan industries of the Siwalik region.

v1.c9.s2.t1.7

The discoveries in Dts Damoh (Joshi, 1961) and Sagar evidence the existence of both pebble tool and Acheulian traditions in the region. REHLI, GHAGRA, HARAT, ASLANA, MARIADO, etc., are a few noteworthy localities where Acheulian and pebble tools co-occur with crude flakes. A similar assemblage comes from Terrace 1 of the Ken near BARIARI village, Dt Banda. But the collections made from RAMCHANDRA HILL, DURENDI, SITAPUR and LODHWARA in the same Dt (Pant, 1963-4) belong to the typical Acheulian traditions.

v1.c9.s2.t1.8

The claims made by Krishnaswami *et al.*, 1961, in regard to the SINGRAULI basin are similar to the above findings. Here handaxes of Abbevillio-Acheulian tradition were obtained with a considerable proportion of pebble tools from the conglomerate deposits of Balia Nadi, a tributary of the Rihand. But in the adjoining area, which is drained by the BELAN and Seoti, only the Acheulian trend seems to exist (Sharma, 1973, 1975). The conglomerate deposits as well as the hill slopes containing about 17 factory sites have revealed handaxes, cleavers, a few scrapers and prepared flakes made on quartzite blocks. The other group of assemblages having similar techno-typological characteristics come from the upper Son basin around SHAHDOL, SIDHI and BILASPUR (Ahmed, 1966).

v1.c9.s2.t1.9

Important Pleistocene remains are reported from the basin of the NARMADA. After the first proper investigation of the area lying between HOSHANGABAD and Narsinghpur by de Terra and Paterson, 1939, various parts of the basin were studied by a number of explorers. The Pleistocene sequence and cultural remains of this area are a subject of controversy. De Terra and Paterson claimed two sets of industries, i.e. Abbevillio-Acheulian along with Sohan tool types, and developed Acheulian from two sedimentary groups, viz., Lower and Upper. The observations of Sankalia and Subbarao, 1953, near MAHESHWAR, Dt Nimar, agrees with those of de Terra and Paterson. However investigation by Khatri, 1961, near MAHADEO-PIPARIA revealed a gradual techno-typological evolution of industries from the pebble tool to the Acheulian, which he claims to be supported by stratigraphy. Khatri says that the pebble tool complex or Mahadevian is a pre-Chellean industry, comparing well with the Oldowan of e. Africa. Later Supekar, 1968, conducted excavations at the same locality and his conclusions completely ruled out Khatri's presumption.

v1.c9.s2.t1.10

Though not supported by stratigraphy, the Lower Palaeolithic industries of the NARMADA basin do show two techno-typological groups. The first group comprises the industries in which pebble tools and big crude flakes dominate. In the industries of the second group Acheulian implements have a prepondering position. MAHADEO-PIPARIA represents the first group, where the chopper-chopping element is about 20 per cent more than the handaxe-cleaver element; whereas in the Acheulian group, mainly at ADAMGARH, along with the frequent types of handaxes and cleavers, Levallois flakes also account for a good portion of the industry. Both the groups are worked on quartzite pebbles.

v1.c9.s2.t1.11

Ahmed, N., 1966, "Stone Age Cultures of the Upper Son Valley", unpublished thesis, Poona. Joshi, R.V., 1961, in *AI*, 17, pp. 5-36. De Terra, H., & Paterson, T.T., 1939. *Studies on the Ice Age in India & Associated Human Cultures*, Washington. Krishnaswami, V.D., *et al.*, 1961, in *AI*, 7, p. 40. Khatri, A.P., 1957, in *Bull. Deccan College Res. Inst.*, 18, pp. 159-72; 1961, in *Anthropos*, 56, pp. 519-30. Misra, V.N., 1974, in *Seminar on Indian Pre- & Proto-history, 1974*, Poona. Pant, P.C., 1963-4, in *Bharati*, 7, pp. 114-42; 1965, in Misra, V.N. & Mate, M.S., ed., *Indian Prehistory, 1964*, Poona, p. 8. Sankalia, H.D., *et al.*, 1953, in *S. W. Journal of Anthropology*, 9, 4, pp. 343-56. Sharma, G.R., 1973, in Agrawal, D.P., & Ghosh, A., ed., *Radiocarbon & Indian Arch.*, Bombay, pp. 106-10; 1975, *Presidential Address to the Indian Prehistoric Soc.*, New Delhi. Singh, R., 1965, "Palaeolithic Industries of n. Bundelkhand", unpublished thesis, Poona. Supekar, S.G., 1968, "Pleistocene Stratigraphy & Prehistoric Arch. of the c. Narmada Basin", unpublished thesis, Poona. Wakankar, V.S., 1973, in *Jour Ind. History*, 51, 1, pp. 23-32. For sites see respective entries in vol. II.—V. JAYASWAL

4.2.3 W. region

v1.c9.s2.t2.1

The w.most Lower Palaeolithic localities are known from the Mahi, Sabarmati, Karjan and Orsang valleys in Gujarat. From RAMPURA, on the Karjan, Acheulian implements were picked up in the 1941 expedition (Sankalia, 1946). The total kit contains pebble tools, handaxes, cleavers and flakes detached by Levallois technique. Similar remains were found at BAHADURPUR in the Orsang basin. A number of sites situated between Vasad and Jalampur on the banks of the Mahi have yielded Acheulian tools. The stratigraphy and typological position however are much clearer in the Sabarmati basin in n. Gujarat. The alluvial in the basin has been grouped within three stages, i.e. pre-Sabarmati, Sabarmati and post-Sabarmati. The Lower Palaeolithic man was contemporary with the Sabarmati stage, as is evident from the group of finds between WARSORA and GODA. Two groups of industries, viz. Abbevillian and Acheulian, were obtained from the area.

v1.c9.s2.t2.2

Investigations in s. Rajasthan by Misra, 1967; have shown that the basins of the Berach-Wagan and Gambhiri-Kadmali were inhabited by the Early Palaeolithic man. The sporadic discoveries from the Berach-Wagan basin mainly belong to the Acheulian tradition, but a part of the finished tool group also consists of choppers, chopping tools and thick scrapers made on flakes. The sites of the Gambhiri-Kadmali group are also characterized by Acheulian tradition. For example, the representative site CHITTAURGARH, has neatly made handaxes and cleavers along with Levallois flakes and tortoise cores. Typologically there is a striking homogeneity among the industries of the Berach-Wagan and Gambhiri-Kadamali.

v1.c9.s2.t2.3

Misra, V.N., 1967, *Pre- & Protohistory of the Berach Basin*, Poona. Sankalia, H.D., 1946, *Investigations in the Prehistory of Gujarat*, Baroda. For sites see respective entries in vol. II.—V. JAYASWAL

4.2.4 Chota Nagpur region, e. region and n.-e. Deccan

v1.c9.s2.t3.1

Except for Orissa, this region is comparatively less explored and finds from Assam, Bihar, and Bengal are sporadic in nature. In the Chota Nagpur plateau implements of the Acheulian facies are reported from Dts Ranchi, Hazaribagh, Monghyr, Gaya, Purulia and Singhbhum. Among these only the Singhbhum region has been well investigated. Here, in the valleys of the Subarnarekha and Koel, 'chopper-biface' tradition is reported from CHANDIL, CHAIBASA, GHATSILA and SINI. The collection has been divided within four techno-typological evolutionary stages, which is said to be supported by stratigraphic evidence. According to Ghosh, 1970, these are: (1) Abbevillian, obtained from the junction of mottled clay and the overlying conglomerate; (2) Acheulian I, coming from the conglomerated deposit; (3) Acheulian II, associated with the Lower clay; and (4) Acheulian III, found in the loose gravel. Thus the handaxe-cleaver element gradually gains refinement in the group.

v1.c9.s2.t3.2

In Bihar the hilly tracts of Dts Gaya and Monghyr which are in fact the extension of the Chota Nagpur plateau, were occupied by the Acheulian man. Noteworthy discoveries in this regard come from the Jethian valley near Rajgir (Narain, 1969) and BHIMBANDH near Monghyr (*IAR 1960-1*, pp. 5-6; *1965-6*, pp. 7-8). Similarly in the hilly regions of Dts Bankura and Purulia Acheulian tools occur. An evolved Acheulian industry comes from SUSUNIA in Dt Midnapur (*IAR 1965-6*, pp. 56-7).

v1.c9.s2.t3.3

Investigations relating to Palaeolithic remains in Orissa have been confined mostly to the n. part of the state, which includes Dts Mayurbhanj, Keonjhar, Dhenkanal, Sundargarh and Sambalpur. In Mayurbhanj, Bose and Sen, 1948, found three techno-typological stages of the Lower Palaeolithic culture. The first stage, of the crudest implements, comprises massive choppers and is succeeded in the next stage by a crude biface industry, wherein unprepared flakes are also noticed. The third stage is represented by fine bifaces, crude cleavers and a limited number of scrapers. Investigations by Mohapatra, 1962, were confined to the other adjoining Dts of Orissa, where evidence for three stages of Acheulian facies was also recorded. According to him the earliest phase of Bose and Sen could not be noticed, and the three evolutionary stages are part of the Acheulian complex.

v1.c9.s2.t3.4

The extension of the Indian Acheulian complex goes as far as the Garo Hills in Assam, where the cemented gravel of the Waran has revealed handaxes, cleavers and choppers made on dolerite lumps. In the Daphabum area of Dt Lohit a set of three terraces is formed by the Kamlong and Telly rivers, which have revealed the chopper, chopping tool, proto-handaxe, cleaver, ovate, point, scraper and flake. The assemblage is of a mixed nature (Bopardikar, 1972).

v1.c9.s2.t3.5

Bopardikar, B.P., 1972, in *Arch. Congress & Seminar Papers*, Nagpur, pp. 1-8. Bose, N.K. & Sen, D., 1948, *Excavation in Mayurbhanj*, Calcutta. Ghosh, A.K., 1970, in *Trans-American Philosophical Soc.*, N.S., 60. Mohapatra, G.C., 1962, *Stone Age Cultures of Orissa*, Poona. Narain, Lala A., 1969, in *Indian Arch. Conf.*, Patna (cyclostyled paper). Sharma, T.C., 1972, "Stone Age Cultures of Garo Hills", unpublished thesis, Gauhati. For sites see respective entries in vol. II.—V. JAYASWAL

4.2.5 Upper, s.-e. and lower Deccan

v1.c9.s2.t4.1

From the coastal land around KANDIVLI, Bombay, a complete sequence of Pleistocene sediments was reported by Todd, 1939. He found an assemblage containing Clactonian flakes from the lowermost implementiferous deposit, which was overlain by a layer containing Chellean tools and Clactonian flakes. An Acheulian assemblage came from the next layer—the middle clay. But the three assemblages were not noticed by Sankalia and Malik, who later on surveyed the same region (Sankalia, 1962). From the parts of Konkan lying south of Bombay a complex reminiscent of pebble tools was discovered from the Ganshari basin by Joshi (*IAR 1969-70*, p. 23).

v1.c9.s2.t4.2

The TAPTI basin has only recently yielded Pleistocene deposits. Two areas, viz. the Purna (a tributary of the Tapti) basin and Dt Dhulia (c. Tapti basin) are noteworthy in this regard. Both the areas have revealed tools of the Acheulian tradition.

v1.c9.s2.t4.3

Since long the GODAVARI basin around NASIK and NEVASA has been known for its Palaeolithic yield. The tool kit of the NASIK-GANGAPUR group of sites is made of evolved Acheulian implements fashioned out of locally available basalt. The group however has cruder technological features, as the flakes were detached by Clactonian technique. The typo-technological character of the NEVASA group marginally differs from the former. Excavation at Gravel I at CHIRKI-NEVASA, Dt Ahmadnagar, has revealed a rich Acheulian industry, where higher frequency is formed by cleavers made on flakes detached by Victoria West technique (Corvinus, 1967). The position of such cleaver-flakes and flakes detached by the Levallois technique is also well-represented.

v1.c9.s2.t4.4

The Lower gravel deposits of the KRISHNA in Dt Nalgonda, bear Acheulian implements along with quite a few Levallois flakes (Rao, 1966). The industries of Dt Kurnool, with similar typo-technological features, were obtained from the similar stratigraphic horizons (Isaac, 1960).

v1.c9.s2.t4.5

The Lower Palaeolithic phase of NAGARJUNAKONDA (Subrahmanyan *et al.*, 1975), basically belonging to the Acheulian tradition, has a little typo-technological variation from the industries around, the apparent reason for this being the influence of the nature of raw material. By exploiting the curvatures on the big boulders of quartzite, the early man of the valley could obtain several cleaver-shaped flakes without putting in much labour. The industry is thus dominated by cleavers made on such flakes, which seem to be devoid of preparation marks. Its Acheulian nature is represented by the working on handaxes and the secondary working on cleavers.

v1.c9.s2.t4.6

Remains of the Acheulian man are also known from the w. part of Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka. Here Gravel I of the MALAPRABHA and GHATAPRABHA (Joshi, 1955) and the upper course of the KRISHNA (Banerjee, 1957) are implementiferous. The KHYAD and MENSANGI group of sites on the MALAPRABHA is characterized by handaxes, cleavers and pebble tools. In Dt Bijapur around BAGALKOT rich tool-bearing localities were discovered, where the handaxe was the most dominant type of tool, followed by chopping tool, cleaver, chopper and scraper.

v1.c9.s2.t4.7

In Karnataka near TEKKALAKOTTA a pebble tool complex was discovered at NITTUR (*IAR 1963-4*, p. 24). Chopper and chopping tools of the Sohan type were discovered at the site by Ansari, 1970. The assemblage is noteworthy, as it is the s.most locality to yield the pebble tool complex and is situated in the midst of the Acheulian occupation area of the Deccan and s. India.

v1.c9.s2.t4.8

Ansari, Z.D., 1970, in *Indian Antiquary*, 3rd series, 4, pp. 1-7. Banerji, K.D., 1957, "Middle Palaeolithic Industries of the Deccan", Poona, unpublished thesis. Corvinus, G., 1967, in *Current Anthropology*, 9, pp. 216-8. Isaac, N., 1960, "Stone Age Culture of Kurnool", unpublished thesis, Poona. Joshi, R.V., 1955, *Pleistocene Studies in the Malaprabha Basin*, Poona-Dharwar. Rao, S.N., 1966, "Stone Age Culture of Dt Nalgonda", unpublished thesis, Poona. Sankalia, H.D., 1962, in *Jour. Asiatic Soc.*, 34-35, Bombay, pp. 12-13. Subrahmanyam. R., *et al.*, 1975, *Nagarjunakonda (1954-60)*, Mem. ASI, 75. Delhi. Todd, K.R.U., 1939, in *Jour. Royal Anthropological Inst.*, 69, pp. 257-72. For sites see respective entries in vol. II.—V. JAYASWAL

4.2.6 S. region

v1.c9.s2.t5.1

Cultural remains of the Acheulian man are reported from Dts Nellore, Cuddapah and Chittoor of Andhra Pradesh and Dt Chingleput of Tamil Nadu. The Nellore group of sites, brought to light by Manley (Aiyappan, 1942), is sporadic in nature, and the implements are made on quartzite, bearing general Acheulian characters. The Cuddapah group is comparatively well-studied (Reddy, 1968). The sites in this region concentrate in the Pennar basin. The pebbly nature of the industry is striking, for not only is a good proportion of chopper-chopping tools present but even a considerable number of handaxes retain their pebble butt. The Acheulian manner of working occurs on the handaxes and cleavers. The associated flakes lack evolved techniques. The Chittoor group, which is not very far from the Cuddapah group, exhibits a different techno-typological trend (Murty, 1966). Implementiferous localities were discovered on the Rallavakalan, a tributary of the Subarnarekha. These assemblages are dominated by handaxes and cleavers of the Acheulian tradition. The Levallois element is well-represented in this group. Here too pebble tools occur in a good proportion. A typologically similar group of sites is known around AMRIDHAMANGALAM (Gupta and Dutta, 1961) and YIGAVARIPALEM (*IAR 1967-8*, p. 25) in the Araniar basin.

v1.c9.s2.t5.2

Fig. 3. Abbevilian tools: 1, 2, proto-handaxe—Vadamadurai and Bariarpur: 3, 4, sub-triangular handaxe—Attirampakkam and Vadamadurai

v1.c9.s2.t5.3

Dt Chingleput has the distinction of having yielded the first Palaeolithic implement in this subcontinent (Foote. 1916). The Kortalayar basin near Madras retains Pleistocene formation in the nature of four terraces, perhaps made by the river Pennar. On the earlier two terraces are situated VADAMADURAI and ATTIRAMPAKKAM localities. VADAMADURAI contains implements of the earlier phase, where Acheulian workmanship is comparatively crude in form. The Acheulian tool kit from ATTIRAMPAKKAM has evolved forms and advanced technological features. The other noteworthy localities of the area are POONDI and GUDIYAM which have revealed evidence for Acheulian habitation in the whole of the region (De Terra *et al.*, 1939; Kirshnaswami. 1947: *IAR 1963-4*, p. 17; *1965-6*, p. 24; *1967-8*, p. 25).

v1.c9.s2.t5.4

Age) as a distinct cultural phase in the Stone Age of India is a fairly recent development, originating with its discovery and identification at NEVASA on the PRAVARA (Sankalia, 1956). In the exposed sections at this site a number of artefacts—scrapers, points and borers, all on flakes—made of siliceous materials like chert, chalcedony, agate and jasper were found in the middle or upper gravels (Gravel II), overlying or resting against a coarse gravel (Gravel I) with Acheulian artefacts [4.2] like cleavers and handaxes on trap or dolerite. Thus, raw material, typology and stratification establish a separate cultural status of the flake-tool assemblage. Sankalia provisionally called it Series II industry, the handaxe-cleaver assemblage from the earlier gravel forming Series I. This evidence facilitated a clearer understanding of the flake-tool assemblage found at NANDUR-MADHMESHWAR on the GODAVARI a decade earlier and gave a meaning to similar collections reported even earlier from the KANDIVLI region near Bombay, Kurnool in Andhra Pradesh and n.-w. Punjab (the Late Sohan of De Terra, [4.2]).

v1.c9.s2.t5.5

Aiyappan. A.. 1942, *Manley Collection of Stone Tools*, Mem. ASI, 68 De Terra, H . & Paterson. T.T., 1939, *Studies on the Ice Age in India & Associated Human Cultures*, Washington. Foote, R.B., 1916, *Foote Collection of Indian Prehistoric & Protohistoric Antiquities in the Government Museum, Madras: Notes on their Ages & Distribution*, Madras. Krishnaswami, V D., 1947, in *AI*, 3, pp 11-57. Murty, M.L.K., 1966. "Stone Age Cultures of Chittoor", unpublished thesis, Poona. Reddy, K.T., 1968, "Prehistory of Cuddapah", unpublished thesis, Poona. For sites see respective entries in vol II.—V. JAYASWAL

v1.c9.s2.t5.6

Explorations during the last two decades have brought to light hundreds of sites in Maharashtra, Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, Orissa, Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan and

Linked texts (46)