Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

Minerals and Metals in Ancient India v1.c22: 14. Minerals and Metals in Taxila Through Centuries

Minerals and Metals in Ancient India v1.c22

Language
English

Contents

14. Minerals and Metals in Taxila Through Centuries

v1.c22.1

Taxila or the ancient Takṣaśilā, 22 miles north of Rāwalpiṇḍi in Pakistan, was one of the ancient sites in the Indian sub-continent which witnessed rise and fall of empires through centuries. Since the discoveries of the site by Cunningham in 1871 and further explorations by Marshall 1912 onwards, it was widely believed that the ancient establishment at Taxila was the outcome of the Achaemenid incursion by Cyrus during the sixth century BC. But Wheeler's excavation at the Bala Hissar mound, Charsada, and the recent excavation at the Hathial area have revealed an earlier culture, dated at least c. 1000 BC, using a red burnished pottery. (Allchins, 1983: 314) Charsada settlement and the nearby grave site Timargarha are also marked by the early use of iron in the North-Western part of the sub-continent.

v1.c22.2

The main findings of Taxila are however dated 500 BC to AD 400 — the chronology of the principal events connected with the history of the site being summarised in Table 14.1.

v1.c22.3

The three successive sites of Taxila are I. Bhir Mound (the earliest), II. Sirkap, III. Sirsukh — all located in an area of 25 square km, also including the Buddhist Dharmarājika Stūpa.

v1.c22.4

Being one of the towns near the border, Taxila must have been an important site during the *mahājanapada* era. Pradyota of Ujjain and Darius of Persia sent their armies to Taxila. The vanquished inhabitants helped Darius by providing gold and Indian soldiers equipped with arrow and iron arrowheads. The Indian soldiers fought under the Persian banner against the Greeks. Wheeler and Piggott (1947-48) suggested that the Maurya traditions of throne (*siṃhāsana*) with griffins (Waddell's discovery from Kumrahar at Patna) or lions, polished sandstone pillars, pillared diwān (persian) or apadāna or audience hall, originated from the achaemenid traditions of Persepolis. The Kharosthī script of the northwestern India evolved from the official Aramaic script of Persia. After the fall of Persepolis, the Persian craftsmen passed through Taxila and helped the Mauryas. The older haphazard Bhir Mound city of the Persian era was later replaced by the well-planned Sirkap founded by the Greeks.

v1.c22.5

Chronology of the Principal Events Connected with the History of Taxila

v1.c22.6

| c. 1000-700 BC | First City of Taxila at Hathial |
| 522-586 BC | Darius extends Achaemenid (Persian) empire up to Taxila in 518 BC, the probable date of the city of Bhir Mound. Introduction of Aramaic for official purposes by Persians. |
| 326 BC | Alexander reaches Taxila |
| 305 BC | Candragupta defeats Seleucus Nicator |
| ~ 290 BC | Aśoka viceroy at Taxila |
| 220 BC | Approximate date of the establishment of Sātavāhana dynasty in the Andhra Pradesh |
| 200-58 BC | The rule and influence of the Yavana princes of the house of Euthydemus, king of Bactria |
| 162 BC onwards | Yavana princes of the house of Eucratides. Fight between the two houses up to 25 BC. |
| 189 BC | Demetrius, son of Euthydemus conquers Gāndhāra and makes Taxila his capital |
| 189-90 BC | Rule over Taxila by the two Greek houses |
| 190-160 BC | Menander of the house of Euthydemus extends his empire up to Punjab. King of Seālkot. |
| 184-72 BC | Śuṅga dynasty |
| 184-148 BC | Pusyamitra, originally king of Vidiśā displaces the Mauryas from Pāṭaliputra. Patañjali, the grammarian was his contemporary. Lost Seālkot to Menander. Grandson Vasumitra defeated Yavanas on the Sindhu (theme in Mālavikāgnimitra). After 148 BC, the Śuṅgas lost Ujjainī to the Sātavāhanas or Sātakarṇis (Setae of Pliny?) of Andhra Pradesh. |
| 90 BC | The last Greek king of Taxila overthrown by the Śaka Chief Maues. |
| 75 BC-AD 50 | Rule of Taxila by Scythians (Śaka) and Parthians (Pahlavas) |

v1.c22.7

| 58 BC | Azes I, Scythian Era |
| 38 BC | Azes I conquers Taxila, Seālkoṭ etc. |
| AD 5 | Azes II in Taxila |
| AD 25 | Gondophernes, the Parthian Ruler (East Iran) defeats Azes II and conquers Taxila |
| AD 40 | Visit of St. Thomas to the court of Gondophernes (AD 19-45) |
| AD 50 | Kuṣāṇa power emerges from Bactria |
| AD 60 | Vimā Kaḍphises occupies Taxila and pushes the Parthians down the Indus Valley. He introduces gold in place of silver currency on the standard of Roman aurei. |
| AD 78 | Beginning of Kuṣāṇa era by Kaniṣka I |
| AD 89 | Empire extended to Lower Indus. |
| ~ AD 100 | Periplus reports ‘Parthians continually expelling each other’ (allusion to fight with Kuṣāṇas). Trajan of Rome fights the Parthians, destroys their silk route and thus indirectly helps Kuṣāṇas. |
| AD 101 or before | Kaniṣka acquires Ākara (diamond) region of East Malwa (Panna area) from the Sātavāhanas. |
| AD 230 | Sassanid (Iran) power defeats Kuṣāṇas. |
| AD 320-21 | Gupta era. First year of the reign of Candragupta I |
| AD 350-58 | Shapur II establishes Sassanid empire at Taxila. Introduces copper money. |
| AD 380-414 | Candragupta II Vikramāditya finally crushes the Śakas. |
| AD 390 | Kidāra dēfeats the Sassanians and re-establishes Kuṣāṇa stronghold over Taxila |
| AD 400 | Fa-Hien visits Taxila |
| AD 460-70 | The white Hūṇas attack and destroy Taxila. The city never recovered. |
| AD 629-45 | Hiuen-Tsang visits desolate and half-ruined Taxila. |

v1.c22.8

Taxila was the meeting ground of indigenous craftsmanship and successive waves of foreign influences: Persian, Greek, Scythians, Parthians, Kuṣāṇas and Sassanids (Table 14.1). Under the Mauryas and the Guptas, the city assimilated the foreign styles and produced artefacts reflecting a synthetic culture. The synthetic traditions based upon the Hellenistic culture spread to far-away cities such as Mathurā, Ujjain, Vidiśā and Pāṭaliputra.

v1.c22.9

In this chapter, we would record the Taxilian achievements related to stonecraft, bead-making, various gems and minerals, gold, silver, copper, alloys of non-ferrous metals and finally iron implements. The data (Young; Ghosh; Marshall) would show sustained and continuous indigenization of foreign influences in Taxila; the exports of raw materials, finished goods and ideas, often equalled and sometimes surpassed in quality the corresponding imports from outside the sub-continent.

The Stone Objects

v1.c22.s1.1

The Buddhist sculptures are the most important stone objects in Taxila. Besides them, there is a large collection of utensils and other articles of daily use recovered from Bhir Mound and Sirkap of the period 300 BC to AD 100.

v1.c22.s1.2

The coarse and soft lime *kaṅkar* and flint-like hard limestone were available in the nearby foothills and widely used as building materials. Apart from the local limestone, other hard stones used were: blue serpentine, *saṅ-i-abrī* or *abrī*, granite, basalt, quartzite etc. Many semi-precious stones were used, and these would be referred to later. *Abrī*, a lower cretaceous shell limestone of a variegated chocolate and yellow colour, and abundant in the Hazara and Attock districts, were used for bowls, cups and dishes in the Bhir Mound settlement only, up to about 200 BC. (Much later, in Mughal times, *abrī* became a favourite stone for the inlay-work on buildings and pavements).

v1.c22.s1.3

The Greeks emphasized on the increasing use of softer varieties of stone instead of the hard one. Replacing the hard basalt or quartzite saddle-querns, the softer sand-stone stool-querns became fashionable during the Maurya period. Up to the beginning of the second century BC, four kinds of sandstone were used in the Bhir Mound settlements: (1) the grey *tarakī* or *Kambiāl* sandstone, locally available and used for the temple pillars and pilasters, (2) spotted red and white sandstone from Mathurā, (3) greyish quartz sandstone and (4) buff-coloured fine-grained hard sandstone, usually with some black spots, from Chunar near Vārāṇasī. The second variety has been widely used for the Hellenistic and Mathurā style statues and sculptures under considerable Greek influence. The fourth variety was evidently brought from Chunar to make the Aśoka pillars and later thrown down, broken and re-used for making utensils.

v1.c22.s1.4

The other soft stones found on the Bhir Mound are steatite, alabaster and slate. The slate of the Hazara district was freely used for the construction of drains and bathroom floors, heat-resistant inlay moulds for making jewellery etc. The alabaster at the foot of the Salt Range in the Punjab was used to make household vessels and exquisitely curved ringstones. Schist and phyllite, probably obtained from the neighbourhood of Southern Swāt, were used for the vast majority of Gāndhāra sculptures. During the end of second century BC, schist was used under the Pārthian domination, for caskets, household vessels, lamps and sculptures. In the first century AD, phyllite began to supersede schist, being more durable and less liable to split in the process of carving. Agate bowls, cups, caskets etc. (first century AD) were probably made in the Kaṭhiāwār, Gulf of Cambay region. Some of these were exported by the Pārthian merchants to Rome.

v1.c22.s1.5

Marshall (1975: chapter 25) referred to a natural stone, which looked like artificial porcelain, found in Taxila. He named it porcelain-agate, a term new to geology. It was found in the form of round flat disks, evidently used for some kind of inlay work during the Maurya period. Analysis of a sample at the Royal College of Science, England, by Prof. H.B. Baker, yielded the values: 98.40 per cent silica, 0.99 per cent ferric oxide and alumina, 0.12 lime and 0.05 magnesia. Baker concluded that porcelain-agate was “a natural substance produced, possibly in a volcanic region, by the long-continued heating of ordinary quartz”. The source of occurrence of this material is not known.

v1.c22.s1.6

The semi-precious stones found at Taxila were obtained from other sources, imported as items of trade. Pebbles of jasper of various colours — red, green and yellow — probably came from Rājpūtānā or Central India. Jade, comprising of both jadeite and the nephrite variety, came from the well-known mines in the Karakash Valley of Eastern Turkestan, or the Tunga Valley of the Pamirs (jadeite) or the Rewāh State in Central India (nephrite variety only). As noticed by Hiuen-Tsāng, jade assumed greater importance in the context of Buddhist carvings, during the post-Taxilian period.

v1.c22.s1.7

Lapis lazuli came from Badakshan in northern Afghanistan, turquoise from Persia, and garnets from Rājpūtānā. South India must have supplied beryl and aquamarine to Taxila as well as to Rome, just as the gem gravels of Sri Lanka supplied trade items of a variety of precious gems.

The Beads at Taxila

v1.c22.s2.1

The beads recovered at Taxila number over 8500, twenty per cent of the number from the Bhir Mound, sixtyfive per cent from Sirkap and the rest from the Dharmarājika and other sites. The inhabitants of the Bhir Mound area preferred agate, carnelian, shell, bone, and glass — blue and green. In the later day Sirkap inhabitation (vide Table 14.2) we find continued uses of agate and carnelian, increased uses of imported garnet, jasper, lapis lazuli, malachite, turquoise, serpentine, marble and diversely coloured glasses as beads of different shapes — spherical, oblate, ovoid, barrel, hemispherical, scaraboid, disk, lenticular, cylindrical, cone, bicone, cube, angular, tabular, gadrooned, leech, pendants and miscellaneous types.

v1.c22.s2.2

Table 14.2

v1.c22.s2.3

Stratigraphical Table of Beads from Sirkap, Taxila

v1.c22.s2.4

(Not including the gold and silver specimens)

v1.c22.s2.5

| Material | Pre-Greek | Greek | Early Śaka | Śaka Parthian | Surface | Total |
| *Semi-precious stones :* | | | | | | |
| Agate | - | 1 | 10 | 111 | 3 | 125 |
| Amethyst | - | 1 | - | 10 | 1 | 12 |
| Aquamarine | - | - | 2 | 1 | - | 3 |
| Beryl | - | - | - | 2 | - | 2 |
| Carnelian | 1 | 3 | 21 | 215 | 11 | 251 |
| Carnelian, etched | - | 1 | - | 8 | - | 9 |
| Chalcedony | - | 1 | 2 | 2 | - | 5 |
| Garnet | - | - | 3 | 24 | 2 | 29 |
| Jasper | - | 2 | 2 | 20 | 2 | 26 |
| Lapis lazuli | - | 1 | 3 | 28 | 2 | 34 |
| Malachite | - | - | 7 | 40 | 2 | 49 |
| Onyx | - | - | 1 | 2 | - | 3 |
| Quartz crystal, colourless | - | 1 | 2 | 46 | 2 | 51 |
| Quartz crystal, yellow | - | - | - | 4 | - | 4 |
| Quartz crystal, glazed | - | 1 | 2 | 39 | 1 | 43 |
| Quartz crystal, opaque | - | - | - | 2 | 1 | 3 |
| Turquoise | - | - | - | 1 | - | 1 |
| Blue serpentine | - | - | - | 5 | - | 5 |
| Red serpentine | - | - | - | 1 | - | 1 |
| | 1 | 12 | 55 | 561 | 27 | 656 |
| *Common stones :* | | | | | | |
| Granite | - | - | - | 3 | 2 | 5 |
| Limestone, white | - | - | - | 1 | - | 1 |
| Limestone, nummulitic | - | - | - | 3 | - | 3 |
| Marble | - | - | - | 2 | - | 2 |
| Steatite (soapstone) | - | - | 2 | 7 | - | 9 |
| Shale | - | - | 1 | 1 | - | 2 |

v1.c22.s2.6

| Nondescript | - | - | 2 | 11 | - | 13 |
| | - | - | 5 | 28 | 2 | 35 |
| *Metals (excepting gold and silver) :* | | | | | | |
| Copper | - | 1 | 2 | 4 | 2 | 9 |
| *Miscellaneous :* | | | | | | |
| Amber | - | - | - | 7 | - | 7 |
| Coral | - | 2 | - | 2 | - | 4 |
| Shell | 1 | 16 | 224 | 1,144 | 58 | 1,443 |
| Bone | - | - | - | 11 | 2 | 13 |
| Faience | - | 13 | 7 | 198 | 4 | 222 |
| Ebony | - | - | - | 2 | - | 2 |
| Ebonite | - | - | - | 1 | - | 1 |
| Jet | - | - | - | 3 | 1 | 4 |
| | 1 | 31 | 231 | 1,368 | 65 | 1,696 |
| *Glass :* | | | | | | |
| Amber | - | - | 2 | 56 | 1 | 59 |
| Black | - | 1 | - | 17 | 2 | 20 |
| Blue | - | 8 | 27 | 203 | 9 | 247 |
| Cobalt blue | - | - | - | 1 | - | 1 |
| Pale blue | - | - | 2 | - | - | 2 |
| Peacock blue | - | - | - | 1 | - | 1 |
| Cream-coloured | - | - | - | 3 | - | 3 |
| Green | 1 | - | 10 | 336 | 5 | 352 |
| Grey | - | - | - | 68 | - | 68 |
| Orange opaque | - | - | - | 139 | - | 139 |
| Red | - | 1 | - | 5 | - | 6 |
| Violet | - | - | - | 1 | - | 1 |
| White opaque | - | - | - | 22 | 1 | 23 |
| Yellow | - | - | - | 4 | - | 4 |
| Yellow opaque | - | 6 | 182 | 1,437 | 45 | 1,670 |
| Blotched | - | - | 1 | 2 | - | 3 |
| Multicoloured & colourless | 1 | 9 | 31 | 474 | 18 | 533 |
| | 2 | 25 | 255 | 2,769 | 81 | 3,132 |
| Terracotta | - | - | 1 | 4 | 1 | 6 |
| | | | | | | |
| Total | 4 | 69 | 549 | 4,734 | 178 | 5,534 |

v1.c22.s2.7

We have mentioned about etched carnelian beads in the chapters 4, 5 and 13. All the three varieties — (a) etched in white by sodium carbonate or other alkali solutions, (b) etched in black by copper or iron nitrate on the white background, or (c) on the natural colour — were found in Taxila, confirming the continuity of the tradition of etched beads in India. (Beck, 1933)

v1.c22.s2.8

Glazed quartz beads, found even in the Bhir Mound became more popular during the first century AD Śaka-Pārthian period. The process of glazing consisted in heating the bead with soda until the quartz fused and flowed as a glaze over the surface. Spectroscopic examination made by Beck showed that the surface of the beads, thus treated, contained a large quantity of soda, though the interior was free from it. Some reagent must have been used to provide pale blue colour to the beads. Natural quartz is more beautiful when polished than when glazed; therefore, the only purpose of glazing was to provide colour on the molten surface.

v1.c22.s2.9

Marshall's view (1975: chapter 37, p. 739) is “that the real purpose of glazing was to give the quartz the appearance of beryl or aquamarine, both of which were very rare and very much prized. Pale blue would give the quartz an appearance like that of beryl or aquamarine, and this no doubt is why one of these beads from Sirkap was cut to the shape of a hexagonal cylinder, which is the natural form of beryl”.

v1.c22.s2.10

Pliny (N.H., 37.20) wrote that the lapidaries cut all beryls to a hexagonal form, because the colour is heightened by the reflection from the angles. Apparently, he was unaware that the hexahedral was the natural form of beryl. Beryls came mainly from the Coimbatore district of Madras. Pliny also made a very significant statement: “The people of India, by colouring crystal, have found a method of imitating various precious stones, beryls in particular”.

v1.c22.s2.11

Intermediate in properties between glazed quartz and fused glass is faience, which is made by breaking up quartz into small grains, adding a small amount of lime, and fusing until the surface of the quartz has flowed and cemented the whole into a solid mass. The quality of the faience depends upon the fineness of the grains and the degree of fusing. Mohenjo-Daro and Harappa produced some unusually fine-grained and hard faience, but most of the samples were coarser and more friable. This commoner variety was locally produced in Taxila for making beads during the later Śaka-Pārthian period. Compared to the Bhir Mound collection, the Sirkap collection showed much larger faience, glass and shell beads. Whereas in the former collection, the percentages of the beads made of semi-precious stone, glass and shell were 42, 32 and 14 respectively, the corresponding percentages in the later day Sirkap became 12, 50 and 26 respectively. The figures show the spurt of artificial gem industry, mentioned in the drama Mṛcchakaṭika.

v1.c22.s2.12

Table 14.3 present the chemical composition of glasses found in Taxila, Rājghāṭ and Kopia. It is seen that these were basically soda-lime glasses. In Taxila, CuO was added to make blue bangle (0.44%), green blue tile (0.2-0.6), and turquoise blue powder (3.6%); about 5.08 per cent and 2.42 per cent Sb₂O₃ were present in white opaque glass and turquoise blue powder respectively. A red opaque glass assayed 37.1 per cent SiO₂, 10.3 Na₂O. 6.5 CaO, 0.9 K₂O, 0.7 MgO, 3.2 Al₂O₃/Fe₂O₃, 0.1 MnO and colouring agents: 7.2 per cent Cu₂O and 34.9 per cent PbO. Blackness of some Indian glasses is due to iron and manganese oxide. Cu, Cu₂O and CuO are common ingredients in many coloured glasses of ancient India. Some of the other colour-producing oxides used in Indian glasses are: PbO (Taxila, Tripurī, Ter, Ahicchatra), SnO₂ (Kauśāmbi, Arikamedu), Sb₂O₃ (Taxila), BaO (Tripurī), P₂O₅ (Kauśāmbi, Ahicchatra, Arikamedu) etc.

v1.c22.s2.13

Śaka-Pārthian strata of Sirkap yielded a large number of minute disk beads of opaque-yellow and orange glass and also of favourite colours — blue and green, blue holding the premier place in the Bhir Mound and green in the Sirkap settlements. There were the favourite blue bangles, the green ones becoming rarer after the second century BC. Some glass vessels might have come to Taxila from inland Kopia in Uttar Pradesh or even from the Western Asia. Most beads, some bangles and simple glass objects were produced in Taxila itself.

v1.c22.s2.14

Table 14.3

v1.c22.s2.15

**Percentage Chemical Composition in Ancient Indian Glass** **from Taxila and other sites**

v1.c22.s2.16

| | Taxila | Rājghāṭ | Kopia |
| | 600-300 BC | 600-200 BC | 300 BC-AD 300 |
| SiO₂ | 53.8 - 71.0 | 64.7 - 70.1 | 62.2 - 70.3 |
| Na₂O | 12.9 - 23.5 | 5.3 - 17.5 | 19.3 - 21.7 |
| K₂O | 2.4 - 4.9 | 0.3 - 9.7 | — |
| CaO | 4.9 - 8.9 | 3.1 - 8.9 | 2.4 - 8.9 |
| MgO | 0.5 - 4.5 | 0.4 - 1.6 | 1.2 - 2.1 |
| Al₂O₃ | 1.5 - 5.7 | 2.3 - 9.9 | 4.9 - 8.5 |
| Fe₂O₃ | 0.8 - 8.5 | 1.3 - 7.2 | 0.2 - 3.0 |
| MnO | 0.01-0.17 | 0.02 | 0.03 - 0.1 |

v1.c22.s2.17

One house in Sirkap was found to have 5 lbs. of vermilion pigment assaying 85.1 per cent HgS, 12.4 per cent Fe₂O₃, 2.69 per cent SiO₂ and 0.24 per cent Al₂O₃.

Gold and Silver Jewellery

v1.c22.s3.1

Out of 213 items of jewellery, the majority of 180 came from the first century AD strata of Sirkap. The rest came from Bhir Mound and Dharmarājika settlements. Barrying a few items like anklet, swastika on the amulet, nandipada on the hairpin etc., which clearly show indigenous style, the vast majority bore imprints of Graeco-Roman styles.

v1.c22.s3.2

Much of the jewellery from Taxila was made with the help of stone moulds or copper and bronze dies. The stone moulds were of two types, according as they were intended for the production of solid or hollow pieces of jewellery. In several cases, the moulds were used for the production of metal dies on which the more precious metals were beaten into shape preparatory to their being graved and finished off by hand.

v1.c22.s3.3

In several gold samples, the surfaces were decorated with fine granules, the technique of granulation being known and widely practised in the ancient Greece and Near East. The gold granules were made by precipitating the molten metal in small sizes, soldering with an alloy of gold and copper, and removing the copper by heating it in sal-ammoniac.

v1.c22.s3.4

Another method of decorating gold and silver ornaments, which India learnt from the Graeco-Roman world, was that known as filigree. This is effected by soldering fine wire to the surface of the metal, the wire being either plain, twisted, plaited into a chain or beaded.

Gems, Inlays and Intaglios

v1.c22.s4.1

Marshall admits (chapter 30, p. 619) that although the art of granulation and filigree was a Western one, "it is certain that the art of incrusting jewellery and other objects with gems was of Eastern origin, and that it was rarely practised in the Mediterranean area before the conquests of Alexander opened up the Orient". The art originated in India itself. The Indian king Sopeithes (Saubhuti) is said to have worn golden sandals studded with jewels and to have carried a golden staff studded with beryls, (Q. Curtius, Hist. Alex IX.1.5) The pavilions of Indian kings are said to have been bejewelled. (Claudian, Stilicho 1, 158 — quoted by Marshall)

v1.c22.s4.2

There are other evidences that the art of incrusting jewellery with gems was well-known in India before Alexander invaded the sub-continent. The Buddhist text Mahāvagga (V.8.3) and Cullavagga (V.9.1) forbade the monks to use shoes and bowels (made of gold and silver) studded with gems like beryl, crystals or pearl. The Arthaśāstra of Kauṭilya mentioned (2.13.33 and 38) Kāñcanakāru and Kācārpaṇa, i.e., setting of gems in gold.

v1.c22.s4.3

Marshall opines that although the art of incrustation might have originated in India, the jewelleries in Taxila during the first century AD had distinct Pārthian style and characteristics. The semi-precious stones used in jewellery at Taxila were: carnelian or sard, chalcedony, agate, onyx, garnet, jasper, lapis lazuli, rock crystal, turquoise, turquoise paste, black marble and white orthoclase feldspar.

v1.c22.s4.4

Gems were inlaid in ornaments such as necklaces, pendants, bracelets and finger rings. When inlaid, the pieces were cut to shape and cemented in cells formed by strips of metal soldered to a background. The surface of the inlay was generally cut flush with the top edge of the cell; sometimes when the cells were not contiguous, the inlay was cut en cabochon to rise above the cell, the latter turned inwards at the top to hold the inlay securely. This method was frequently adopted in ring bezels.

v1.c22.s4.5

In necklaces, bracelets finger rings, gemstones of bright colours were inlaid by cementing with lac, amber and paste. In necklaces with pendants, white feldspar, lapis lazuli, rock crystal, turquoise etc., surrounded by gold granules, were inlaid. Some of them were also inlaid en cabochon either with garnet or blue turquoise. Bracelets of gold consisted of open work type with square ‘gate’ clasps encrusted with gems such as white orthoclase feldspar and circular settings with amber.

v1.c22.s4.6

Finger rings of gold from Sirkap were also inlaid with gems. The rings had hoops with flat raised bezels and were inlaid with specific gems such as lapis lazuli, malachite, rock crystal, garnet, carnelian, jacinth and a grey-brown chert. The lapis lazuli ring was found in the second century BC stratum; most others were made during the first century AD.

v1.c22.s4.7

The spurt in jewelleries and gem incrustations in the area came after Alexander’s invasion which indirectly influenced a synthesis of the Greek, Pārthian and Indian arts. No gold finger-ring of any kind has been found in the Bhir Mound, and no ring of any metal inset with a stone or paste. This tradition started only in the second century BC Greek establishment at Sirkap. The Edwin Jack collection in the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston contain third-second century BC Greek artefacts — ear-rings, bangles and snake bracelets made of gold and inset garnet/agate/lapis lazuli or emerald, the like of which was not known in Greece before Alexander. Emerald must have come from the Egyptian mines and gradually gained popularity in India as the celebrated marakata.

v1.c22.s4.8

Intaglios have designs cut or engraved in a hard stone or metal, depicting scenes, portraits etc. The early ones at Sirkap belong to the Pārthian period and the rest are datable to the fourth-fifth century AD. They are cut *en cabochon* in stones such as malachite, jacinth, carnelian and chert as well as in glass.

v1.c22.s4.9

One of the best executed intaglios depicts a warrior with shield and spear on a lapis lazuli bezel, which dates around second-first century BC. On another intaglio, there is an Indian version of Heracles in the guise of Śiva, holding the lion-skin in one hand and a bow or snake in the other. While most of the motifs are Graeco-Roman, some are distinctly Indian, e.g., *nandīpada*, *swastika*, etc. Clearly, there was a fusion of different traditions of art culture in the Sirkap inhabitation.

Metal Coins at Taxila

v1.c22.s5.1

John Allan examined the punch-marked, local Taxilian and Greek coins collected by Marshall (chapter 41, p. 853).

v1.c22.s5.2

The earliest coins found on the site are the silver bars bearing a wheel-like symbol. One specimen was found in Sirkap and forty-one in the Bhir Mound, including thirty-three in the great hoard of silver from that site. These pieces probably belong to the fourth century BC.

v1.c22.s5.3

The Bhir Mound hoard pot contained 1,167 silver coins and several pieces of jewellery. The silver coins were a Persian siglos, tetradrachms of Alexander the Great and of Philip III Aridaeus, thirty-three silver bars mentioned in the previous paragraph, seventy-nine tiny pieces weighing 2-3 gms, and several punch-marked silver pieces.

v1.c22.s5.4

The Mauryan period is represented by punch-marked silver coins, many of them really copper, plated with silver. In one of the hoards was found a stray gold coin of Diodotus II (~ 235 BC) and some Mauryan jewellery.

v1.c22.s5.5

Local copper coinage of Taxila started during the end of the Mauryan era, and covered the period of autonomy between the decline of the Maurya empire and the Greek occupation. The majority of the coins were marked with the Taxilian symbols such as *caitya* (commonest), *swastika*, hollow cross, plant, animals like lion or elephant, and later, presumably under Greek influence, the horse. Attempts were made to impart glamour to copper coins by not only silver-plating but also alloying the metal with nickel. White copper coin of Euthydemus II (180 BC) contained 20 per cent nickel, 1 iron, 0.6 cobalt and rest copper.

v1.c22.s5.6

Whereas the metallic artefacts were found scattered in different places, the coins were found in special hoards, buried prior to anticipated events of disaster.

v1.c22.s5.7

The date of burial of the Bhir Mound hoard was probably not long before the destruction of the city about 170 BC. The hoard coins reflect the ebbs and tides of the political history in the region as well as the availability of the metals during the different epochs. The Mauryas functioned in a silver-base economy. Facing shortage of silver, they substituted it by copper. Euthydemus II, the Bactrian king could draw upon the source of nickel from Central Asia to produce ‘white copper’ coins. The Kuṣāṇas could supplement their requirement of gold by imports from the Near East by way of the Persian Gulf. An ingot of gold, found in the Śaka-Pārthian city of Sirkap, strongly resembled the ingots which were traded in the Roman World.

Copper and its Alloys in Taxila

v1.c22.s6.1

Hardly any copper or bronze objects have been unearthed at Taxila of a date earlier than the fourth century BC, and very few until after the establishment of the Indo-Pārthian empire in the first century AD. Pliny stated (N.H., XXXIV.17) that India possessed neither bronze nor lead, and the *Periplus* recorded (49.56) that copper, tin and lead were imported to the Indian ports of Barygaza (Broach), Muziris and Nelcynda (near Cochin) etc. On the other hand, the widespread use of copper and its alloys in ancient India has been well-established, as recorded in our earlier chapters.

v1.c22.s6.2

The occasional scarcity of copper in Taxila was a local and temporary phenomenon. There was no dearth of copper coins in the third century BC Mauryan era. During the period 200 BC-AD 25, the struggles between the Yavana (Greek), Śaka (Scythian) and Śuṅga dynasties, specially over the mines of copper and non-ferrous metals in Rajasthan etc., caused the shortage, not only in Taxila but also in the entire western India. While some of these metals were imported to the Western ports, the eastern states around Pāṭaliputra, Vārāṇasī etc. did not encounter any shortage of copper. Marshall rightly observed (chapter 28, p. 566 fn.) that “it is quite impossible that the large quantities of copper used under the Pārthian rule at Taxila (after AD 25) could have been imported by sea; the chief sources of supply must have been the copper mines of Afghanistan and Kashmir”. We might add that the copper mines of Rajasthan must have been productive during peace time.

v1.c22.s6.3

‘Pārthians continually expelling each other’, as reported in *Periplus*, alludes to the fight between the Pārthians and the Kuṣāṇas during the first century AD, over not only the seats of power but also the mines of copper, non-ferrous metals and gems. Eventually, Trajan of Rome vanquished the Pārthians, destroyed their silk route, and indirectly helped Kuṣāṇas who used to import gold through the friendly Romans. When Shapur II established the Sassanid (Persian) empire at Taxila, defeating the Kuṣāṇas in AD 350, he emulated the first century AD Pārthians (also from Persia) in re-introducing copper money (vide Table 14.1).

v1.c22.s6.4

The tin ore or cassiterite, necessary to produce bronze, might have been obtained from Pālanpur state of western India, or Dhārwār district or Hazārībāgh in Bihar, but the most likely source for Taxila could have been the Khorassān and Kārādāgh hills in the Hindukush region where the close proximity of copper and tin ore reserves could have led to the earliest discovery of bronze in the Pre-Harappan era. In India, tin has been known as trapu or the ‘quick melting’ metal since the Vedic times, but around third century BC the other word for tin that entered the Sanskrit vocabulary was kastira, a modification of the Greek kassiteros or cassiterite (SnO₂). Similarly, the Greek oreichalcos for brass became ārakūṭa in Sanskrit which normally used the term riti for the said alloy. These are the metallurgical evidences for the early Indo-Greek contact in the north-west.

v1.c22.s6.5

Lead in Taxila was probably obtained from the same mines as silver at Fāranjāl and neighbouring localities in Southern Afghanistan or from the lead-zinc ore mines of Rajasthan. When Pliny said that lead and bronze, being imported in the west Indian ports were not available in India, he had little knowledge about the rest of India, or about the fact that the Andhras and Śakas had earlier made the metals from indigenous sources and used them.

v1.c22.s6.6

We reproduce the analytical data regarding copper and alloys of Taxila reported by Sana Ullah and M.A. Hamid to Marshall (chapter 28, pp. 567-69). The data correspond to (a) soft copper objects (Table 14.4), (b) objects of bronze unalloyed with lead (Table 14.5), (c) bronze alloyed with lead (Table 14.6), (d) brass objects (Table 14.7), (e) objects of copper-nickel alloy (Table 14.8), and (f) solder (Table 14.9).

v1.c22.s6.7

The analysis given in Table 14.4 shows that soft ductile copper of great purity was freely used at Taxila for hammering out domestic utensils, bars, sheet and wire. In one of the specimens (No. 7), the impurity amounts only to 0.32 per cent. Marshall thought that this suggest the use of natural copper such as that exist in the Zanskar Valley, a specimen of which was assayed by Sana Ullah: 99.48 Cu, 0.08 Fe and 0.34 insoluble (SiO₂, etc.).

v1.c22.s6.8

Other samples show the presence of sulphur indicating that sulphide ore of copper was the source. High purity of copper (97-98%) in these cases, showing 0.5 per cent sulphur suggest a high technological efficiency in copper metallurgy. 0.99, 1.13 and 1.23 percentages of antimony in copper samples No. 3, 13 and 14 respectively are too low to be considered as the results of deliberate alloying; on the other hand such appreciable values indicate that the antimony-rich copper ore from Badakshan, Balkh and Kabul might have been tapped to make the stated alloy. Such an ore might have been also used to make the earlier stated Taxilian white opaque glass (5.08% Sb₂O₃) and turquoise blue powder (2.42 Sb₂O₃ and 3.6 CuO). During the medieval period, antimony sulphide of this region was indeed used to make khārsini alloy and cast into ‘hairclips and amulets for the women of Hindustan’ (Al-Bīrūnī), and antimony mirrors. This trend might have started with the first century AD Taxilian mirrors (see No. 14). The sample No. 8 contains a high percentage of lead which was added probably to facilitate casting. Unalloyed copper was never cast at Taxila.

v1.c22.s6.9

Bronze containing 21-25 per cent tin, with little lead but some antimony, was in general use at Taxila for casting domestic utensils, bells, ornamental pieces (vide Table 14.5). This alloy is very hard and easy to cast on account of its low fusibility but has the disadvantage of being brittle. Nearchus, Alexander’s admiral, remarked that the Indians at that time employed only cast bronze, not hammered, so that ‘their vessels broke like earthenware if they fell’.

v1.c22.s6.10

It is surprising that Taxilians did not make much of the modern gun-metal type of bronze containing 8-12 per cent tin, which possesses great strength and elasticity. The ram-headed handle No. 16 containing 11.66 per cent tin, was evidently hollow cast by the cire perdue process. The Taxilians preferred high tin bronze presumably on account of its easy melting and casting properties. (Their preference also indicates easy availability of the metal from Afghanistan).

v1.c22.s6.11

The bonze samples alloyed with lead (Table 14.6) were also amenable to easy casting but resulted in weak structure. Lead was added to partially substitute tin. The analytical results show the relative proportions of the elements varying erratically; this has been explained by Marshall suggesting that scrap copper and bronze might have been added to molten lead in a haphazard manner before casting.

v1.c22.s6.12

An unguent flask (No. 21 in Table 14.6) obatined from the Greek stratum of Sirkap deserves particular notice because its shape, material and technique all combine to indicate its Hellenistic character. With its flared base, long neck and wide-projecting brim, it is obviously quite foreign to India. It contains large percentages of tin and lead (7.34 and 7.78 % respectively) — an alloy which appears to have come into vogue during the Greek period, the advantage of adding the lead being that it rendered the metal less brittle and easier to cast than the ordinary high-tin Indian bronze of that period. The unguent flask of Hellenistic design might have been fabricated by the cire perdue process.

v1.c22.s6.13

The brass items in Taxila (Table 14.7) are of outstanding importance insofar as the evidence proves the earliest use of zinc in the world. There are many Soft Copper Objects in Taxila

v1.c22.s6.14

| Object | Reference number | Age (century) | Copper | Tin | Arsenic | Antimony | Iron | Nickel | Zinc | Lead | Sulphur | Total |
| 1 Flat bar | Bm.'30-1,087 | 5th BC | 97.78 | — | — | — | 1.79 | — | — | — | — | 99.57 |
| 2. Rod | Bm.'20-302 | 4th BC | 98.33 | 0.19 | 0.19 | 0.35 | 0.45 | 0.51 | — | Trace | — | 100.02 |
| 3. Ear-cleaner | Bm.'19-275 | 3rd BC | 97.11 | — | 0.25 | 0.99 | 0.70 | 0.29 | — | 0.20 | 0.46 | 100.00 |
| 4. Plate | Sk.'14-1,779 | 1st BC | 98.93 | — | Trace | 0.16 | 0.17 | 0.52 | — | — | 0.22 | 100.00 |
| 5. Sheet | Sk.'26-2,194 | 1st AD | 98.13 | — | 0.23 | 0.59 | 0.24 | 0.30 | — | — | 0.51 | 100.00 |
| 6. Ladle | Sk.'30-337 | " | 99.10 | — | 0.02 | 0.16 | 0.44 | 0.12 | — | — | — | 99.84 |
| 7. Pan | Sk.'28-1307/c | " | 99.68 | 0.11 | Trace | — | 0.09 | 0.11 | — | — | — | 99.99 |
| 8. Spout of pot | Sk.'16-252 | " | 77.45 | 0.74 | 0.24 | — | 0.56 | 0.43 | — | Trace | 18.65 | 98.07 |

v1.c22.s6.15

Objects of Bronze Unalloyed with Lead at Taxila

v1.c22.s6.16

| Object | Reference number | Age (century) | Copper | Tin | Arsenic | Antimony | Iron | Nickel | Zinc | Lead | Sulphur | Total |
| 9. Rod | Bm. '19-558 | 4th BC | 87.24 | 8.28 | 0.55 | 0.46 | 1.23 | 0.91 | — | 0.94 | 0.39 | 100.00 |
| 10. Round bowl | Bm. '30-916 | 3rd BC | 76.76 | 21.55 | 0.16 | — | 0.95 | 0.48 | — | — | — | 99.90 |
| 11. Bell | Sk. '30-216 | 2nd BC | 74.80 | 24.14 | 0.10 | 0.20 | 0.55 | 0.21 | — | — | — | 100.00 |
| 12. Mirror | Sk. '14-1,385 | 1st BC | 74.28 | 24.85 | 0.04 | 0.12 | 0.71 | — | — | — | — | 100.00 silver trace |
| 13. Dish with central boss | Sk. '17-109 | 1st AD | 75.69 | 22.40 | 0.06 | 1.13 | 0.30 | 0.34 | 0.07 | 0.01 | — | 100.00 |
| 14. Mirror | Sk. '33-143/10 | " | 74.61 | 22.00 | 0.11 | 1.23 | 0.71 | 0.47 | — | — | — | 100.00 |
| 15. Bowl | Sk. '15-1, 115 | " | 75.54 | 23.20 | 0.28 | 0.30 | Trace | 0.49 | — | Trace | — | silver = 0.87% 99.81 |
| 16. Ram-headed handle of saucepan | Sk. '33-143 | " | 87.15 | 11.66 | — | — | 0.88 | — | — | Trace | — | 100.00 |
| 17. Bowl | Sk. '22-645/16 | " | 75.69 | 23.69 | — | — | 0.37 | 0.25 | — | Trace | — | 100.00 |
| 18. Goblet | Sk. '27-1, 021 | " | 73.39 | 25.59 | — | 0.12 | 0.71 | 0.15 | — | 0.05 | — | 100.00 |
| 19. Mixing pan | Sk. '14-111 | " | 74.24 | 24.58 | 0.18 | 0.02 | 0.72 | 0.26 | — | — | — | 100.00 |

v1.c22.s6.17

Table 14.6

v1.c22.s6.18

Objects of Bronze Alloyed with Lead at Taxila

v1.c22.s6.19

| Object | Reference | Age (century) | Copper | Tin | Arsenic | Antimony | Iron | Nickel | Zinc | Lead | Sulphur | Total |
| 20. Handle of bell | Sk.'29-2,653 | 2nd BC | 85.24 | 9.79 | 0.13 | 0.27 | 0.48 | 0.71 | — | 3.38 | — | 100.00 |
| 21. Flask | Sk.'29-2,010/1 | " | 80.38 | 7.34 | — | — | 1.33 | 0.26 | 2.49 | 7.78 | — | 99.58 |
| 22. Stand of goblet | Sk.'29-1,855 | 1st BC | 87.42 | 2.12 | 0.15 | 0.06 | 2.49 | 0.65 | — | 7.06 | — | 99.95 |
| 23. " | Sk.'13-1,015 | 1st AD | 80.98 | 15.03 | 0.10 | 0.13 | 0.09 | 0.27 | — | 2.59 | 0.81 | 100.00 |
| 24. Lion | Sk.'20-318 | " | 83.75 | 7.34 | 0.20 | — | 1.94 | 0.78 | — | 5.42 | — | 99.43 |
| 25. Cock | Sk.'30-159 | " | 83.35 | 5.62 | — | — | 0.56 | 1.00 | — | 9.61 | — | 100.14 |
| 26. Flask | Sk.'13-A 492 | " | 83.57 | 4.50 | — | 0.30 | 1.48 | 1.51 | 0.52 | 7.92 | — | 100.00 |
| 27. Rod | Jn.'16-F 556 | 5th AD | 76.50 | 9.39 | 0.25 | — | 0.21 | 0.05 | — | 12.71 | 0.89 | 100.00 |

v1.c22.s6.20

Table 14.7

v1.c22.s6.21

Objects of Brass at Taxila

v1.c22.s6.22

| Object | Reference number | Age (century) | Copper | Tin | Arsenic | Antimony | Iron | Nickel | Zinc | Lead | Sulphur | Total |
| 28. Vase | Bm.'15-284 | 3rd to 2nd BC | 55.39 | 4.25 | — | 0.26 | 1.77 | 0.40 | 34.34 | 3.08 | — | 99.49 |
| 29. Bangle | Sk.'29-2,681 | 2nd BC | 73.72 | 0.10 | — | 0.18 | 0.42 | — | 19.70 | 5.84 | — | 99.96 |
| 30. Bangle | Dh.'30-20 | 1st to 5th AD | 76.75 | 2.58 | — | — | — | 0.11 | 13.07 | 6.33 | — | 98.84 |
| 31. Pot | Dh.'33-273 | " | 79.19 | 3.58 | Trace | 0.10 | 0.94 | 0.09 | 12.88 | 3.22 | — | 100.00 |

v1.c22.s6.23

Objects of Copper-Nickel Aloy at Taxila

v1.c22.s6.24

| Object | Reference | Age (century) | Copper | Tin | Arsenic | Antimony | Iron | Nickel | Cobalt | Lead | Sulphur | Total |
| 32. Antimony rod | Bm.'21-432 | 3rd to 2nd BC | 87.05 | 2.01 | — | — | 0.98 | 9.02 | 0.86 | — | — | 99.92 |
| 33. Bangle | Bm.'14-290 | " | 78.09 | 0.64 | — | — | 1.53 | 18.88 | ? | — | — | 99.46 |
| 34. Coin of Euthydemus II | — | 2nd BC | 77.58 | 0.04 | — | — | 1.05 | 20.04 | 0.55 | — | 0.09 | 99.35 |
| 35. Plate | Sk.'14-1,746 | 1st BC | 77.45 | — | — | 0.30 | 0.68 | 21.35 | 0.52 | — | — | 100.30 |

v1.c22.s6.25

Table 14.9 Solder Objects at Taxila

v1.c22.s6.26

| Object | Reference number | Age (century) | Copper | Tin | Arsenic | Antimony | Iron | Nickel | Cobalt | Lead | Sulphur | Total |
| 36. Filling from bottom of Kohl flask | Sk.'29-2,010/1 | 2nd BC | 0.62 | 0.20 | — | 0.85 | 0.35 | — | — | 97.98 | — | 100.00 |
| 37. Solder | Sk.'28-1,307/c | 1st AD | 3.11 | 46.13 | — | 0.37 | 0.72 | — | — | 49.67 | — | 100.00 Zinc trace |

v1.c22.s6.27

claims of brass objects having been made in the ancient world (Turkey, Greece, Iran) during first millennium BC by the accidental cementation process viz., reducing a zinc-containing copper ore at a temperature above 917°C (b.p. of zinc) but not far above 1000°C. By this process zinc vapour gets absorbed in copper. It has been proven by Haedecke (1973) that this cementation process cannot give brass containing more than 28 per cent zinc.

v1.c22.s6.28

We have reported earlier Lothal brass containing 6.04 per cent zinc (chapter 6) and Atrañjikhera bronze-brass containing 16.20 per cent zinc and 20.72 per cent tin (chapter 11) which must have been obtained by the cementation process. The vase sample No. 28 in Table 14.7 however assays much more that the critical 28 per cent in zinc. We may quote Craddock's (1981: 16) comment on this particular sample:

v1.c22.s6.29

This could have been produced only by mixing copper and zinc metals. Hence the overriding importance of the vase (BM 15-284) excavated from the Bhir Mound at Taxila, dated to the fourth century BC, and shown to contain 34.34 per cent zinc. (Marshall, 1951, 1975: 568) This is very strong evidence for the availability of metallic zinc in the fourth century BC.

v1.c22.s6.30

The Bhir Mound specimen was made long before the dates of the Greek settlement in Sirkap and Alexander's invasion of Taxila. Therefore the credit of discovering zinc as a separate metal and using it for making brass goes to the Indians and not to the Greeks. Marshall wrote that "brass was known to the Greeks at least as early as the 3rd century BC, but the knowledge of it may have come from India". (chapter 4, p. 129)

v1.c22.s6.31

Table 14.7 shows second century BC Sirkap bangle assaying 19.70 per cent zinc. In the Dharmarājika settlement, the post-Christian brass objects like bangle and pot were made of a remarkably controlled composition 12.88-13.07 per cent zinc. The brass specimens contain both lead and tin in appreciable proportions, so that the alloy was too hard for hammered work, and suitable only for casting.

v1.c22.s6.32

We would continue our general discussion on the antiquity of zinc and brass in India separately in chapter 18.

v1.c22.s6.33

Table 14.8 presents the composition of some 'white copper' objects consisting of copper and nickel. The alloy was evidently prepared by the smelting of mixed ores of copper and nickel which are known to occur naturally in the province of Yunan, China. This alloy is known as pai-tung meaning white copper in China, and as 'packtong' in Europe. The material was used in the coins of Euthydemus II, Agathocles and Pantaleon as well as in making antimony rod, bangle and plate etc. The use of this alloy proves the intimate trade relationship between the Greek dynasty in Taxila, Bactria and the Han dynasty of China during the second century BC.

v1.c22.s6.34

Articles of ‘white copper’ occurs at Taxila from the third century BC, but seem to have disappeared after the first century BC presumably because the trade link was snapped. The amount of nickel in the earliest specimen is only 9 per cent, the later ones containing a fairly regular proportion of 19-21 per cent. The alloy is very ductile and well-adapted for hammered work. It was valued for its durable silvery lustre, and employed for jewellery, coinage and small fancy goods. Lead and tin-lead solders have been reported in Table 14.9.

v1.c22.s6.35

The processes employed at Taxila in the manufacture of copper and bronze objects were as follows: (a) hammering, riveting and soldering, (b) solid casting, (c) hollow-casting by the *cire perdue* process, and (d) embossing or *repoussé* work.

v1.c22.s6.36

Of the thirty-two copper and bronze objects from the early Bhir Mound site, twenty-three are hammered and nine solid-cast. Compared to the Greek and early Śaka levels, the Pārthian rule of the first century AD yielded a larger number and greater variety of copper/bronze household utensils and ornaments such as bracelets, bangles, ear-rings, ear-pendants, brooches, neck-pendants and buckles. The hammering process is well-illustrated in some of the large cauldrons and cooking vessels of the first century AD, which were made in sections and riveted together.

v1.c22.s6.37

Stone or terracotta moulds were used for solid casting of high tin (21-25%) bronze objects. None of the statuettes unearthed is sufficiently large to have been hollow-cast, but from the second century BC onwards, the *cire perdue* process was frequently employed for the fabrication of household vessels and utensils. Copper, bronze and silver embossed reliefs were made by hammering the metal sheet on to a solid metal die. The techniques were known to the Indians but the Greeks, Śakas, Pārthians, Kuṣāṇas etc. introduced new patterns and styles for the art and household objects.

v1.c22.s6.38

Surgical instruments like spatula etc. made of copper and bronze were found in the Kuṣāṇa period layer at Taxila.

The Iron and Steel Objects at Taxila

v1.c22.s7.1

The vast majority of the iron objects at Taxila were found in a severely corroded state. Of the 221 objects considered to be worthy of examination, less than one-fifth came from the Bhir Mound. The Śaka-Pārthian buildings of Sirkap and the later monasteries of Jaulian etc. were burnt out by the invading Kuṣāṇas and White Hūṇas respectively. Due to great heat and subsequent burial in wood ash, the iron objects in these buildings were better preserved aganist corrosion and disintegration.

v1.c22.s7.2

The objects which have survived may be classified under six groups: (a) household utensils, (b) arms and armour, (c) horse-bridles and elephant-goads, (d) carpenter’s and black-smith’s tools, (e) agricultural implements, and (f) miscellaneous articles like needles, plummets, unwrought ingots etc. Some of these objects are clearly of foreign origin such as ladles with vertical handles, candelabra, wheeled braziers, heavy iron javelins, helmet, snaffle-bits etc. which were not known/common amongst the Indians.

v1.c22.s7.3

The 108 ingots found in Sirkap came from the first century AD layer. These are hexagonal, long torpedo-shaped and shuttle-shaped pieces measuring between 4.75 and 7.12 inch in length and 1.3 to 2.5 inch in width at the middle. (Similar blooms were used for forging the iron beams at Koṇārka, several centuries later). The ingots weighed 1-1/2 to 4 lbs. and assayed in terms of elemental percentages: 0.1 C, 0.03 Si, 0.019 S, 0.077 P, trace Mn and 99.6 Fe.

v1.c22.s7.4

A complete longitudinal section showed the ingot to be very porous, some of the holes being 1/2 inch in maximum dimension. The standard diamond pyramid hardness figures over the section varied between 76 and 129, with an average of 95. The tensile test on a small testing bar showed the yield point and maximum stress in tons per sq. inch to be 16.1 and 22.8 respectively. These pure wrought iron pieces were evidently used as raw materials for the final carburized iron or steel products.

v1.c22.s7.5

Ten special specimens such as sword, dagger, adze, axe, chisel, knife etc., some of them carburised, were examined by the eminent metallurgist of Sheffield, U.K., Sir Robert Hadfield. The analytical results quoted by Marshall (1951, chapter 27, p. 536) are provided in Table 14.10.

v1.c22.s7.6

Hadfield noted the very low sulphur and phosphorus content of the Taxila samples and remarked:

v1.c22.s7.7

The chief feature of the present specimens is the high carbon percentage, 1.23, in No. 5. The Brinell hardness and the microstructure of Nos. 1 and 2 also indicate they are of similar high carbon. We have never come across any ancient specimens as high as this before. The highest was 0.7 carbon in the Khambāba specimen (100 BC Besnagar broken sword, also 0.04 Si, 0.02 P, 0.02 Mn, 0.008 S, rest Fe), and this was so exceptional that we thought at the time it must be a fluke.

v1.c22.s7.8

Evidently the Indians in this locality (Taxila), and at this period (first century AD), quite deliberately made high carbon steel. But apparently they did not know how to harden and temper. If they had, the two swords, specimens 1 and 2, and the adze (No. 5) would be just the articles to apply this treatment to. The micro gives no indication of anything more than the ordinary heating for forging, and of course the hardness is only ordinary.

v1.c22.s7.9

Marshall speculated that the ancient steel in Taxila (1.23% carbon) was probably produced by the crucible or wootz process, but no evidence could be obtained to that effect. It was really surprising that the specimens did not show any sign of having been tempered. Indians had produced quenched martensitic structure in the third century BC site of Pāṇḍu Rājār Dhibi (vide chapter 12). Great heat during fire carnage might have destroyed the martensitic structure. Marshall could have arranged metallographic examination of more samples from the Sirkap site.

v1.c22.s7.10

The correlation between the archaeological data with the historical or traditional is not a straight-forward task. However, the eminence of Taxila since the Early Historical Period is quite evident. Darius of Persia and Pradyota of Ujjain sent their armies to Taxila. The famous physician Jivaka, who was contemporary to Gautama Buddha, had received his training in Takṣaśilā or Taxila which was a seat of learning and a centre of medicine and surgery. The Persian and Greek influences in Taxila were evident even before Alexander's invasion. We have referred to the Kuṣāṇa era surgical instruments found at Taxila.

v1.c22.s7.11

Pāṇini was born in Śalātura (Lahur) near Taxila and flourished during the middle of the fifth century BC. He mentioned about furnaces having more than one bellow or bahubhastrikā (Aṣṭādhyāyī, 7.3.47). Bellow pipe and pair of bellows with nozzles have been found in the Parthian stratum of Sirkap during the excavations at Taxila. We have discussed the eminence of beryl or vaidūrya in Taxila. Pāṇini had explained (Aṣṭādhyāyī, 4.3.84) that the name of the mineral was derived from Vidura, the city where the gem was processed. Pāṇini's śatamāna coin (Aṣṭādhyāyī, 5.1.27) was probably the punch-marked, bent-bar silver coin unearthed from the fourth century BC stratum of Bhir Mound.

v1.c22.s7.12

The archaeological findings from the Maurya, Greek, Pārthian, Scythian and Kuṣāṇa layers at Taxila corroborate many aspects of written history. Minerals and metals found at Taxila indeed tell us the history of India and its contact with neighbouring countries over a long period of centuries.

v1.c22.s7.13

Table 14.10

v1.c22.s7.14

**Table of Analysis, Brinell Hardness and Micro-Examination of Some Iron/Steel Objects Found at Taxila**

First 105 of 127 passages. Read on

Linked texts (18)