Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

Minerals and Metals in Ancient India v1.c21.s2: Comments on the Mahābhārata Sites

Minerals and Metals in Ancient India v1.c21.s2

Language
English

Comments on the Mahābhārata Sites

v1.c21.s2.1

There was very little material prosperity in the pre-1200 BC settlement at Hastināpura. Even the PGW era on the site starting from 1100 BC does not show widespread urban settlement. Along with PGW we find some alloyed copper, glass and carnelian. Iron was introduced only towards the end of the era, i.e., around 800 BC.

v1.c21.s2.2

The Hastināpura evidence shows that the original core of the Mahābhārata story evolved in an agro-rural setting, and was later expanded in the altogether different urban setting of the Historical Period of the sixth century BC NBPW era. Ahicchatra archaeology is not dated very much earlier than third century BC.

v1.c21.s2.3

White copper and its alloys, glass, faience, shell, carnelian and agate, mentioned in the Mahābhārata, were pre-Mauryan commodities, the rest of the gems mentioned in the epic must have come from south India or across the north-western border of India during the Mauryan period. The varieties of the weapons made of iron were evolved during the Historical NBPW Period. There was another spurt of gem industry during the Christian era 100 BC to AD 200. While etched beads and special glasses were evolved in India, coral came from Italy, and gem incrustations might have been introduced by the Indo-Scythians’ (?).

v1.c21.s2.4

The negative evidences in Hastināpura and Ahicchatra clearly show that the Mahābhārata epic text was heavily re-touched and expanded at least twice — once during the Historical Period starting from the fifth century BC, and later during 100 BC-AD 200.

v1.c21.s2.5

The other epic Rāmāyaṇa is based on the story in Ayodhyā where the archaeological excavations have shown a PGW settlement but nothing else of an earlier date such as the OCP culture of Hastināpura. This contradicts the usual notion that Rāmāyaṇa story is of an earlier date compared to Mahābhārata. The horde of gems mentioned in the Rāmāyaṇa cannot be explained in terms of the Ayodhyā excavations. Evidently certain portions of the epic were written much later in the Historical Period. (Gupta & Ramachandran, 1976; Lad, 1983)

v1.c21.s2.6

Agrawala, V.S., 1947-48, “The Terracottas of Ahichchhatra”, In *Ancient India*, No. 4, 1947-48, pp. 104-79.

v1.c21.s2.7

Dikshit, M.G., 1949, *Etched Beads in India*, Deccan College Monograph No. 4, Poona, 1949.

v1.c21.s2.8

——, 1952, “Beads from Achichchhatra, U.P.”, In *Ancient India*, No. 8, 1952, pp. 33-63.

v1.c21.s2.9

Ghosh, A. and Panigrahi, K.C., 1946, “Pottery of Ahichchhatra (U.P.)”, In *Ancient India*, No. 1, 1946, pp. 37-59.

v1.c21.s2.10

Gupta, S.P. and Ramachandran, K.S. (ed.), 1976, *Mahabharata, Myth and Reality*, New Delhi.

v1.c21.s2.11

Joshi, J.P., 1987, “The Mahabharata and Indian Archaeology”, In *Archaeology and History*, edited by B.M. Pande and B.D. Chattopadhyaya, Agam Kala Prakashan, Delhi, 1987, Vol. 1, pp. 19-34.

v1.c21.s2.12

Lad, Gouri, 1983, *Mahabharata and Archaeological Evidence*, Deccan College, Poona.

v1.c21.s2.13

Lal, B.B., 1954 & 1955, “Excavation at Hastinapura and other Explorations in the Upper Ganga and Sutlej Basins 1950-52”, In *Ancient India*, No. 10 & 11, 1954 & 1955, pp. 5-151.

v1.c21.s2.14

The date of the whole evolved text of the Mahabharata is thus conjectural. It is generally agreed that the core of the epic was already formed before the Christian era, and that it evolved from oral traditions, which might have been introduced to the Indian subcontinent by the Aryans.

v1.c21.s2.15

The archaeological evidence of the Mahabharata is still inconclusive. Excavations at Hastinapur have shown no settlement but nothing else of the Mahabharata period. The Painted Grey Ware (PGW) culture, which is often associated with the Mahabharata, is dated to the period of about 1200-600 B.C.

v1.c21.s2.16

The epic is primarily based on the story of the Bharatas, and archaeological excavations have shown a PGW settlement but nothing else of the Mahabharata period. The PGW culture is dated to the period of about 1200-600 B.C.

v1.c21.s2.17

References: Aswal, S.V., 1987. The Mahabharata. Delhi, pp. 101-104. Chakravarti, A., 1990. The Mahabharata. Delhi, pp. 105-107. Gupta, S.P. and Ramachandran, K.S. (eds.), 1976. Mahabharata: Myth and Reality. Delhi, pp. 17. edited by M.C. Joshi and K.S. Ramachandran, 1976. Mahabharata: Myth and Reality. Delhi, pp. 18. Lal, B.B., 1954-55. Excavations at Hastinapur and other explorations in the upper Ganga and Sutlej basins. Ancient India, 10 & 11, pp. 5-151.

Linked texts (5)