Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

Minerals and Metals in Ancient India v1.c15: 7. Chalcolithic Ahar

Minerals and Metals in Ancient India v1.c15

Language
English

Contents

7. Chalcolithic Ahar

v1.c15.1

AHAR, Ahad (Sanskrit Aghatapur) is situated on the river of the same name about 2 miles to the east of Udaipur town and about half a mile west of Udaipur railway station. Ahar-Udaipur are thus situated in the south-eastern corner of Rajasthan. Ahar was a copper-smelting site, hence its name in popular memory ‘Tambavati Nagari’ (a city of copper).

Cultural Sequence

v1.c15.s1.1

The Banas Valley culture at Ahar was nurtured by food-producing, copper-using people. The C-14 dates range from 2145-1270 BC (Agarwal, 1984: 275-76), but Sankalia et al. (1969: 5-6) believed that the settlement started around 1940 BC and the Period Ia ranged between 1940-1765 BC, Period Ib: 1725-1600 BC and Ic: 1550-1270 BC Period II at Ahar is marked by the introduction of iron. It seems that the occupants of Period IIa came to settle ‘directly on the debris of Period Ic, disturbing the latter’s horizons’. This has led to a controversy whether introduction of iron at Ahar was around 1270 BC or later. This chapter deals primarily with the Chalcolithic Periods Ia to Ic.

v1.c15.s1.2

Rajasthan abounds in various types of rocks which were used even in proto-historic periods, as for instance, schist, sandstone, quartzite, quartz and grit. Different varieties of schist are to be found. These rocks locally occur in the Archaean formations around Udaipur. The main stone objects are stone balls, hammer-stones, rubber-stones, mullers, mace-heads and saddle querns. The saddle querns at Ahar were generally made on irregular flat pieces of locally available rocks like quartzite, sandstone, and schist. Even the softer varieties like mica, schist have been utilized at times. These querns were used not only for crushing the grains but for preparing curry paste also.

v1.c15.s1.3

Although the houses of Ahar were made of stone, only six flueted cores of chert, chalcedony and quartz and a large number of quartz nodules were found. Considering the fact that Ahar was a copper-manufacturing site, located in the heart of the copper belt, it is probable that most of the cutting and other tools were of copper. This explains the dearth or absence of stone tools. However the Banas culture had a developed blade industry at Gilund just 80 km away and also at Kayatha.

Pottery

v1.c15.s2.1

The pottery at Ahar is not only abundant but very distinctive, both in fabric and technique, shape and decoration. Ahar is notable for its Black- and Red-Ware with white paintings, and also rich and varied types of Red-Ware and Grey-Ware.

v1.c15.s2.2

The Ahar potter has demonstrated how a pottery — even utilitarian like storage jars — can be made beautiful without painting. The pottery is remarkable for the sense of production and self-restraint displayed. In the storage jars we find fine decorations with cut, applique and incised ornaments in the shoulder.

v1.c15.s2.3

The Black- and Red-Ware at Ahar was produced either by the inverted firing technique and/or the double firing technique. The Red- and Grey-Wares had several sub-types. The finer wares with almond slip, red slip with stony core and chocolate slip, show the use of well-levigated clay along with fine sand, hay and possibly ash. Typical items were storage jars with corrugated necks and shoulders, dish-on-stand and stepped dish-on-stand. The dish-on-stand and the lustrous red ware of Ahar show some resemblance with Harappan wares. These styles were transmitted to Navdatoli.

Beads at Ahar

v1.c15.s3.1

The total yield of beads at Ahar was 191, of which 109 were made of terracotta. It is generally found that the beads show a concentration mostly in Phase Ib and Ic whereas none of the sub-phases of Period II shows much use of beads. The bead materials were mainly agate, bone, calcite, carnelian, crystal, faience, glass, jasper, lapis lazuli, schist, shell, steatite and terracotta. Except lapis lazuli, all other rocks are locally available in Rajasthan. In spite of that it is found that the people of proto-historic Ahar seem to show predilection for the use of terracotta. The range of raw materials used and the shapes executed bring out certain characteristic of the bead-making industry in proto-historic Ahar. The selection of material, the method of perforation, the mode of decorating the surface of beads and the exquisite polish in some cases are noteworthy.

v1.c15.s3.2

The beads of Ahar display a few noteworthy features. The first and foremost is the abundant use of terracotta as the material for beads in all the phases of occupation. This preference for clay seems to be intentional when we take into consideration the fact that these incised terracotta beads are so far unique in India. Possibly on clay alone, the patterns familiar to the inhabitants could be easily copied. More or less exactly similar and in eight cases identical pattern are reported from Western Asia. Secondly, faience and steatite, which are the materials *par excellence* so far as proto-historic habitation are concerned, are represented meagerly at Ahar. Thirdly, the collection of beads in semi-precious stones does not show any unusual feature either of shape or technology, and lastly it appears that at least shell beads were made locally. The schist beads were also probably made on the site.

v1.c15.s3.3

The range of terracotta objects at Ahar comprised of beads, skin-rubbers, head-scratchers, figurines, toys, stoppers, discs, wheels, ear-studs, votive tanks, lamps, crucibles and bangles. This attests to the large scale use of clay for various objects in proto-historic and early historic Ahar. Regarding crucibles, one piece each came from the horizons of Period Ib and Ic. One of them is with high straight sides, hollow cylindrical interior, pointed external bottom and external surface, coated with glass or possibly faience. The other one is a complete specimen with conical body, irregular periphery.

v1.c15.s3.4

The use of carnelian beads continued from the Phase Ib to Ic. Similarly, faience, schist and shell beads continued to be used.

v1.c15.s3.5

There was not much evidence of the use of glass in the different phases of occupation at Ahar. However, the shells and shell objects were much more in quantity than the object of glass. Glass was represented by four pieces of bangles, all of monochrome category. Of the four pieces, two came from phase Ic and two were surface collections. The range of colours employed in the make up of glass bangles comprised of turquoise blue, sea green and milky white. The bangle pieces are covered with a whitish filmy patina. Glass, though technically reported from the horizons of Phase Ic, is better assigned to Period II.

v1.c15.s3.6

The objects of shell comprised of bangles and ear-studs. Altogether, thirty-five fragments of bangles were found. It is probable that shell bangles were made locally at Ahar as is attested by the file-abrasions on the bangles and numerous waste pieces of the columela of shells. However, most of the bangles are plain except a group of three pieces which show grooved exterior, and one having a channel section, probably so made as to accommodate gold leaf between the ridged margins of the exterior surface. It may incidentally be noted that similar bangles with gold leaf are even now in use in Rajasthan.

Copper in Ahar

v1.c15.s4.1

The use of copper in Ahar, which was a major chalcolithic centre, is attested by the unearthing of the following objects:

v1.c15.s4.2

Six circular rings (Period I and II) of diameter 15-20 mm and thickness 2-5 mm; three bangles (Period Ia and Ib); knife blades; Kohl sticks; four celts (Phase Ib) length 13 cm width 8-12 cms, maximum thickness 5 mm, thinner than those reported from Jorwe, Nevasa etc.; several unidentified objects; four socketless flat copper axes of dimensions similar to the celts; 1 mm thick sheet etc.

v1.c15.s4.3

Hegde undertook detailed analysis of one axe and the metal sheet made of copper. (Hegde In Sankalia, Deo and Ansari, 1969: 225-28) The axe and the sheet assayed in terms of copper 90.92 and 96.28 per cent respectively, Fe 6.48 and 1.22, Pb 1.62 and 1.64, Ni 0.31 and 0.26, Mn 0.23 and 0.31 per cent repectively. Both the samples contained detectable traces of Zn, Co, As, Bi and S.

v1.c15.s4.4

Spectrographic analysis was made of the above two samples and a copper ore from Khetri in the northern Rajasthan. Hegde found that (a) the following elements were detectable in all the three samples: Cu, Pb, Ni, Co, Bi, Fe, Mn, Zn, Al, Cr, Mo, Ti, Mg, Gd, P, Ca, As, Sb; (b) the following elements were not detectable in any sample: Sn, Au, Ag; and (c) while W and V were present in the ore, these were not detectable in the metal samples. The impurity patterns (a) and (b) led Hegde to suggest that “the copper metal of the artefacts recovered from Ahar was probably smelted from the chalcopyrite ore of the Aravalli region”. (Hegde In Excavations at Ahar, Sankalia, Deo and Ansari, 1969: 226)

v1.c15.s4.5

However, Aravalli region extends through hundreds of kilometers, and there is no reason why the Aharians had to bring copper ore from far away Khetri in north Rajasthan. The high lead content (1.62-1.64%) in the artefact suggests that the Aharians might have tapped copper-lead ore from some neighbouring deposits in south Rajasthan.

v1.c15.s4.6

During the excavation of Period I levels at Ahar, heaps of slag-like material were recovered from more than one trench at three different depths. Evidently the copper-smelting industry at Ahar was extensive. The analysis of the slag is as follows: SiO₂ 35.2-38.2 per cent, Fe₂O₃ + FeO 43.9-48.3, MgO 2.4-3.6, Al₂O₃ 5.3-7.8, MnO₂ 1.2-2.3, CuO 0.7-0.9 and SO₃ 3.6-6.1 per cent Evidently, complete removal of sulphur and recovery of copper were not possible. Copper ore from Khetri indicated 16.7 per cent silica in its composition, which is less than half of the percentage of silica in the slag. So Hegde presumed that the copper ore was fluxed with silica during smelting in the chalcolithic period at Ahar.

v1.c15.s4.7

It is unfortunate that Hegde did not conduct phase studies on the ancient slag. The modern Khetri Copper Plant produces slag which contains phases such as magnetite Fe₃O₄ and copper ferrites such as CuFeO₂, Cu₆Fe₃O₇ and some free copper oxide. (Sharma and Shekhawat, 1984) Similar phase studies on the ancient slag would have shown whether (a) such a slag could be derived from Khetri copper ore containing specific gangue materials, and (b) if so, what temperature and other physico-chemical conditions might have been employed.

v1.c15.s4.8

Iron content in the Ahar axe was high: 6.48 per cent, but in the copper sheet we find much lower value viz., 1.22 per cent iron, which means that removal of iron from copper was substantial. Considering that chalcopyrite ore of Khetri contains as high as 4 per cent arsenic and Ahar artefacts contain only traces, it is possible that the crushed ore might have been heated to a high temperature such as 500°C to remove arsenic. Lothal copper artefacts also contain negligible quantity of arsenic and for this we do not have to agree with S.R. Rao (1979 and 1985) that the ingot was imported from Oman. Lothal artisans might have learnt like the Aharians the technology of removal of arsenic from copper ore.

v1.c15.s4.9

Metallographic examination of the Ahar axe showed casting fins and rough uneven corrugated surface finish, which suggest that the artefact was cast in a crude sand mould. There are globules of cuprous oxide and lead which does not form solid solution with copper. The metal sample is porous; the porosity must have resulted due to inadequate ventilation during casting and entrapment of the evolved gases. Presence of dendrites and coring indicated slow cooling after casting and the fact that the sample was not work-hardened.

v1.c15.s4.10

Aharians do not seem to have used tin and other alloying elements to produce bronze etc. Their techniques of casting, forging and fabrication were certainly inferior to those of the earlier Harappans or later Navdatolians. On the other hand, Aharians were, like the artisans of Ganeshwar-Jodhpura, the prime producers of copper and probably their target was to produce crude ingots for further processing elsewhere. It may be noted that the Banas culture in the neighbouring site of Kayatha revealed copper artefacts of better finish and quality.

Iron at Ahar

v1.c15.s5.1

While the earlier excavations had not yielded any iron object at Ahar, the 1961-62 excavations yielded seventynine objects of iron, including thirty-six iron slag samples. (Sankalia et al., 1969: 203) A wrongly published chart led Sahi (1979) to assert that the iron samples belonged to Ib and Ic phases and therefore could be dated as early as thirteenth century BC. However, this claim has been contested since the iron samples actually belong to the much later period II with NBP wares.

v1.c15.s5.2

Several suggestions have been made that iron metallurgy has been an off-shoot of copper metallurgy (Charles, 1979), and that iron was made at Ahar from copper slag (Chakrabarti, 1985). Vibha Tripathi refuted this suggestion, ‘since it is just not possible to produce iron from chalcopyrite ore’. The Ahar samples which have not been thoroughly analysed could however be iron-rich copper having magnetic properties.

v1.c15.s5.3

It is thus not established whether iron production was first made in India at Ahar around 1300 BC, as claimed by Sahi (1979). It is possible however that the expertise in smelting technology diffused from Ahar to Atrañjikhera where iron was definitely made around 1200-1100 BC.

The Origin and Transmission of the Ahar Culture

v1.c15.s6.1

The origin of the Ahar culture has not been clearly established. Some people suggested without any concrete proof that ‘Aryans from Western Asia settled at Ahar’. It is much more plausible that after the collapse of the Harappan civilization, the potters of the northern Rajasthan and the metal-smiths of the Ganeshwar-Jodhpura area around Jaipur migrated southwards and settled at Kayatha and Ahar. They indeed brought the earlier traditions of fine levigated clay technology and the Mohenjo-Daro tradition of dish-on-stand. (Sankalia et al., 1969: 221-23)

v1.c15.s6.2

Ahar imbibed the techniques of manufacturing shell objects, carnelian beads and Black- and Red-pottery as well as the technology of inverted firing from the Harappan settlement at Lothal, and these traditions were gradually transmitted towards Navdatoli, Rangpur and Atrañjikhera. (Sankalia et al., 1969: 219-21) It is thus conceivable that the metal-smelting traditions in the Ganga-Yamuna valley were developed around 1200-1100 BC with the assistance of smelters migrating from the Rajasthan sites such as Ahar.

References

v1.c15.s7.1

Agarwal, D.P., 1984, *The Archaeology of India*, Select Book Service Syndicate, New Delhi. Chakrabarti, Dilip K., 1985, “The Issue of the Indian Iron Age”, In *Recent Advances in Indian Archaeology*, Poona Seminar in 1983, edited by S.B. Deo and K. Paddayya, Deccan College, Poona, pp. 74-88 including comments by R.C. Gaur, M.D.N. Sahi, V. Tripathi, etc. Charles, J.A., 1979, “From Copper to Iron — The Origin of Metallic Materials”, In *Journal of Metals*, Volume 30, pp. 8-13. Hegde, K.T.M., 1969, “Technical Studies in Copper Artifacts Excavated from Ahar”, In *Excavations at Ahar, 1969*, edited by H.D. Sankalia, S.B. Deo and Z.D. Ansari, pp. 225-28.

v1.c15.s7.2

Rao, S.R., 1979 and 1985, *Lothal — A Harappan Port Town* (1955-62), Volumes I and II, Archaeological Survey of India, New Delhi.

v1.c15.s7.3

Sahi, M.D.N., 1979, “Iron at Ahar”, In *Essays in Indian Proto-history*, B.R. Publishing Corporation, Delhi, pp. 365-68.

v1.c15.s7.4

Sankalia, H.D., Deo, S.B. and Ansari, J.D., 1969, *Excavations at Ahar*, Deccan College Postgraduate and Research Institute, Poona.

v1.c15.s7.5

Sharma, P.D. and Shekhawat, K.S., 1984, Slag Treatment Practice at Khetri Copper Complex, XIV International Mineral Processing Congress, October 17-23, Toronto, Canada.

v1.c15.s7.6

The Origin and Transmission of the Ahar Culture

v1.c15.s7.7

The origin of the Ahar culture has not been clearly established. Some people suggested without convincing proof that it came from Western Asia and had at Ahar. It is much more probable that after the collapse of the Harappan civilization, the people who knew copper and the metal-smiths of the Ganeshwar-Jodhpura culture migrated southwards and settled at Ahar. It is possible that they brought their traditions of iron level and the Chalcolithic culture. This is a point which we can-stand. (Sankalia et al. 1969).

v1.c15.s7.8

It is noticed that the technique of manufacturing shell objects, carnelian beads and Black-and-Red pottery as well as the technology of inverted firing from the Banas culture (Ahar) and these traditions were gradually transmitted towards Navdatoli, Maheshwar and Atranji-khera, (Sankalia et al. 1969: 219-230). It is thus clear that the metal smelting traditions in the Ganga-Yamuna valley grew during c. 1700-1300 BC with the assistance of smelters migrating from the Banas region such as Ahar.

v1.c15.s7.10

Agrawal, D.P., 1984, *The Archaeology of India*, Select Book Service Syndicate, New Delhi. Chakrabarti, D.K., 1985, "The Issues of the Indian Iron Age", In *Recent Advances in Indian Archaeology*, Pune, Volume 16, 1985, edited by S.B. Deo and K. Paddayya, Deccan College, Pune, pp. 14-18, edited by S.B. Deo and D.K. Bakr, V. Tripathi.

v1.c15.s7.11

Hegde, K.T.M., 1969, "Technical Studies in Copper Artifacts from Ahar", In *Excavations at Ahar (Tambavati)*, Poona, edited by H.D. Sankalia, S.B. Deo and Z.D. Ansari, pp. 191-196.

Linked texts (10)