Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

History of Technology in India, Vol. I: From Antiquity to c. 1200 A.D. v1.c39.s2.t3: The Role of the Iron Age

History of Technology in India, Vol. I: From Antiquity to c. 1200 A.D. v1.c39.s2.t3

Language
English

The Role of the Iron Age

v1.c39.s2.t3.1

The issue of the Iron Age influencing second urbanization in India has been widely debated. R.S. Sharma suggested that the discovery of iron resulted in speedy clearance of forest, more extensive cultivation through the use of iron ploughshare, accumulation of large agricultural surplus and formation of city-states. This model has been criticised on many counts.

v1.c39.s2.t3.2

Iron was discovered as early as 1200 B.C., but its widespread use in the Gangetic valley did not start, according to Sharma himself, before the sixth century B.C. The artisans in the Rajasthan-Uttar Pradesh area took many centuries to standardise reduction-smelting, lamination and fabrication of iron artifacts, and they did not have sufficient good grade iron ore for mass production. Kosambi had pointed out that the spurt of iron technology in India had to wait till the Vedic cultural people crossed the Ganges in Bihar, moved south and gained proper access to the iron ore deposits (Kosambi, 1965).

v1.c39.s2.t3.3

Prakash and Tripathi have meticulously noted (Prakash and Tripathi, 1986) that the early PGW-era iron tools were war implements like spear heads, arrow heads, dagger, knives, and building materials like rods, pins and nails. Only a few agricultural tools e.g. axes and sickles were made in iron. Spades and ploughshares came much later. Thakur asserted (Maity, Thakur and Narain, 1988) that iron implements such as axe, plain or socketed, hammer and ploughshare were conspicuous by their rarity, if not absence, even in the 500 B.C. NBP sites; this fact negates Sharma's hypothesis. Furthermore, A. Ghosh pointed out (1973, specially ch. III) that the clearance of forest, done in the epic/PGW era was more by the use of fire rather than iron implements. Cultivation used to be done more by hoes, sickles and wooden ploughshares tipped with iron rather than iron ploughshares and axe which became popular only around 4th/3rd century B.C.

v1.c39.s2.t3.4

Agricultural surplus was no doubt generated during the early part of the first millennium B.C., supporting non-agricultural crafts. But this did not by itself promote urbanisation. Debiprasad Chattopadhyaya has included in his book (1991) two invited articles written by Ranabir Chakravarti (Chattopadhyaya, 1991, Appendix I, pp. 305-350) and N.R. Banerji (Ibid, pp. 371-396) which touch upon the above issues. Chakravarti and Banerji tend to support the criticisms against Sharma's model.

v1.c39.s2.t3.5

We propose that the emergence of the new technologies and the Iron Age was one amongst many factors underlying second urbanization. Besides, this was a cyclic relationship, urbanization further promoting iron technology. Was there a deeper cause promoting both? Ghosh accorded priority to the social need/political demand for surplus rather than the capacity to produce the surplus as a result of technological innovations (Ghosh, 1973). His argument was in favour of the greater role of a ‘power structure’ without which a surplus could not appear the moment it is asked for (Chakravarti, 1991, pp. 305-350). The megalithic culture in the Peninsular India produced iron and agricultural surplus, and yet no urban tradition.

v1.c39.s2.t3.6

Following the leads provided by Childe, Sharma and Ghosh, we may try to go deeper into this problem. What causes the emergence of a ‘power structure’ articulating ‘socio-political needs’? Basically it is a psychological drive-against complacency and for consolidation of existing resources and distribution mechanism by centralisation; it is also promoted by an expansionist urge to meet shortage of resources by trade or conquest, and even cultural expansionism viz. to propagate one brand of religion or culture. This urge could be articulated in the ancient world as physical/social/political ‘needs’ only when there was an opportunity, when there were trade contacts with the neighbouring states. This reality of psycho-physical situation promoted in the ancient world - and still promotes in the modern world - urbanization and breakthroughs in new science and technology simultaneously. Ultimately, urbanization and technology activate each other in a cyclic fashion, Chakravarti pointed out (Chakravarty, 1991, pp. 305-350) that urbanization also meant new ideas and a revolt against tradition and conservatism.

v1.c39.s2.t3.7

We propose that the situations as enunciated in the previous paragraph must have ripened prior to the first and, a millennium later, the second urbanization in India. The Yajurveda referred to not only gold, silver, copper, bronze, tin and lead, but also the newly discovered iron, the black metal - *śyāma* or *kṛṣṇāyasa* (*Sukla Yajurveda* 18.13). *Bṛhadāraṇyak Upaniṣad* (3.9.18) mentioned a tong handling hot charcoal, and in *Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa* (*Śat.Br*), we find references of leather bellow blowing air into a furnace, blow-pipe used by the smelter and so on (1.1.2.7, 1.6.3.16). *Śat.Br* also described a large number of iron implements and the emergence of gold-based money economy: ‘with gold they do nothing, and yet it is an object of respect’ (5.5.5.16). Even lead was used as a medium of barter (*Śat. Br.* 12.7.2. 10-12). Heavy pieces of lead were used in the art of weaving. Barley and rice were traded for lead (*Śat. Br.* 12.7.2.10); sheep’s wool was also used as a medium of barter for obtaining grain and other commodities (*Śat. Br.* 12.7.2.10).

v1.c39.s2.t3.8

The late Vedic literatures clearly describe the prominence of the non-agricultural professionals: smelter, smith, carpenter, cloth manufacturer, leather worker, potter and jeweller etc., who could thrive only on agricultural surplus and some kind of administrative protection and control.

v1.c39.s2.t3.9

International trade seems to have started a millennium after the collapse of the Harappan civilization and before the ‘historical period’. Around 1015 B.C., King Solomon of Palestine received from Ophir - now identified as Sauvira in the Gulf of Cambay - gold, silver, ivory and peacocks. Homer reported trade with India. Thus the process of second urbanization in India had started right in the beginning of the first millennium B.C. through initial trade contacts and gradual territorial expansions.

v1.c39.s2.t3.10

Around 1000 B.C., Hastinapura settlement brought in from outside agate and carnelian beads, and the first settlement of Taxila started at Haithal. *Chāndogya Upaniṣad* refers (5.11.5) to a *janapada* or township in which there is no liquor or adultery. It is quite evident that the late Vedic era (1000-600 B.C.) initiated the establishment of the famous (sixteen) *mahājanapadas* or states most possibly sometime during the 7th-6th century B.C. period.

v1.c39.s2.t3.11

During the latter half of the sixth century B.C., the Persian king Cyrus had made an unsuccessful onslaught on India. During this time, Ujjain in India became a leading centre for the manufacture of iron war implements. The king Pradyota, contemporary to Gautama Buddha, ascended the throne of Ujjain around 528 B.C.

v1.c39.s2.t3.12

He attacked Kauśāmbi and Taxila years before the Persian king Darius occupied Taxila in 518 B.C. For many decades thereafter, the Persians used to take Indian gold, precious stones, brass, iron-tipped arrows and even Indian soldiers to assist them in their fights against Greece. Pythagorus might have visited the Jain settlements in the Western India during this time. The second urbanization took place in India amidst a clearly emerging international backdrop.

v1.c39.s2.t3.13

The social factors underlying the nascent urban technology included the new geographical-cum-geological scenario. The sophistication of iron technology in the Bihar sites like Rajagriha was essentially on account of the proximity of iron ore deposits in the Singhbum area (Kosambi, 1965), which also produced alluvial washings of gold (the name of the river ‘suvarṇarekhā’ is suggestive).

v1.c39.s2.t3.14

Hegde has adduced conclusive proof for the geographical /geological basis regarding the development of the successive categories of potteries (1200-300 B.C.) in the Ganga-Yamuna basin (Hegde, 1987). Thick deposits of ferruginous, plastic, secondary clay in this area were laboriously elutriated to produce 10-100 µm clay particles, free from the larger and heavier particles (of feldspar, quartz, limestone etc.) and paste of this was used to produce the famous PGW or Painted Grey Ware. The black pigment on BSW (Black Slipped Ware) corresponded to magnetite (Fe3O4).

v1.c39.s2.t3.15

Evidently the sun-dried ware was painted with a suspension of finely ground red ochre (Fe2O3 as such or hydrated) which was locally available, and then baked in reducing atmosphere, surrounded by cowdung cakes in gajapuṭa fire.

v1.c39.s2.t3.16

Lastly, the Northern Black Polished Ware or NBPW also showed under an electron microscope opaque crystals of magnetite (produced similarly) in a background of amorphous glass-like matrix which assayed 11-13 p.c. Na2O and 2-4 p.c. CaO. For producing this glassy glaze, sājjimāṭṭi or reh, the alkaline, natural efflorescence, profusely found in the Ganga valley, chiefly in the mid-eastern and eastern Uttar Pradesh and Bihar, was used (Hegde, 1987). This sājjimāṭṭi assays 20-40 p.c. Na2O, 50-70 p.c. silica and 5-10 p.c. lime. Availability and use of sājjimāṭṭi enabled the PGW people to produce not only the famous glassy glaze in NBPW but also the soda-lime glass (Hegde, 1987; Tripathi, 1976; Roy, 1986; Sen and Chaudhuri 1985). Very significantly Atranjikhēra and Hastinapura produced the earliest samples of glass in India. The Harappan people could produce faience but not glass.

Linked texts (4)