Minerals and Metals in Ancient India v1.c29.s2: No Magic Solution from Scientific Investigations
Minerals and Metals in Ancient India v1.c29.s2
- Language
- English
No Magic Solution from Scientific Investigations
v1.c29.s2.1
It must be noted that although scientific investigations should continue in the field of archaeo-materials, “the natural scientists do not provide any magic answer to archaeological or historical problems” (Agrawal, D.P. and Chakrabarti, D.K., 1979: 390) This point needs some elaboration.
v1.c29.s2.2
Firstly, the scientific method itself may not be free of controversy. D.P. Agrawal (1984: 268-69) has explained that there are three major uncertainties about C-14 dating:
v1.c29.s2.3
(a) Uncertainty about the half-life of C-14 which is taken as 5730 years; the earlier figure was 5568 years;
v1.c29.s2.4
(b) The ratio of C¹⁴: C¹² in the atmosphere is taken as 1/(8 x 10¹¹) but this might not have remained constant over the ages; the C-14 dates of ancient sites have been computed on the basis of ‘constancy’ of the said ratio and thus errors might be committed;
v1.c29.s2.5
(c) Sample contamination.
v1.c29.s2.6
Reviewing the C-14 dates obtained from the different Mature-Harappan sites, Allchins (1983: 217-19) concluded that ‘there is still plenty of room for uncertainty’.
v1.c29.s2.7
Secondly, the value of the scientific data on an archaeological sample depends on the authenticity of the sample, i.e., how carefully it was collected and labelled. Numismatists have often complained (Gupta, P.L., 1987-88: 86; Lahiri, A.N., 1990: 213) that while they have unearthed many missing dates and episodes of history, ‘the archaeologist very rarely provides necessary details of the coins he digs up’. As a result the numismatists are sometimes not in a position to help the archaeologists properly. Thus the onus for co-ordination is very much on the archaeologists who should provide ‘standard’ samples of known date to the scientists so that more reliable C-14 datings may be compiled by the latter.
v1.c29.s2.8
The issue of ore-artefact correlation through the ascertainment of trace element compositions may be recalled. This approach may be pursued but we have pointed out in our chapter 10 the hazards and pitfalls. The ore used from one locality may not have consistent composition, and the ancient smelting process, which is not fully knowable at present, would certainly have considerable effect on the trace element composition as proven by recent smelting experiments. (Tylecote *et al.*, 1977) Lead isotope ratio correlation between ore and artefact has been successful in one case. (Gale *et al.*, 1982) Reporting failure in another case, Craddock (1985: 59) has rightly questioned that lead in the artefact could come not only from the copper ore (as presumed) but also from the flux and deliberate addition of lead during smelting. Correlation in the case of alloy artefacts is even more severe; the origin of iron in brass icon for example could be from copper or zinc or even some iron rod which might have been used to stir and mix the molten metals.
v1.c29.s2.9
We do not discourage attempts for correlation or scientific measurements; as a matter of fact more analysis of varied nature are necessary. We are simply cautioning the archaeo-metallurgists that they should not accept one piece of data as conclusive but rather consider the entire spectrum of evidences to elicit some tentative conclusions.
v1.c29.s2.10
In this context we fully endorse the suggestions of several archaeologists and scholars such as D.P. Agrawal *et al.* (1979: 390), R.S. Sharma (1990: 7) etc. that there should be “total retrieval of all the things that are dug in the course of excavations; not even the soil is to be lost”. The idea is that this should be followed by total analysis. If immediate analysis is not possible then the excavated materials should be stored stratigraphically ‘to facilitate future studies by researchers’.
v1.c29.s2.11
Multiplicity of analytical techniques and data may at times be bewildering but not necessarily dismaying. Two different categories of evidences may turn out to be contradictory, but further scientific and logical analysis are likely to show the unacceptability of one kind of evidence and plausibility of the other. The total approach as enunciated above should also lead us to undertake hinterland or horizontal archaeology along with the conventional vertical excavation at a particular site. The tradition of sharing artefacts, samples and pertinent informations with fellow-scholars is not too good in India and must be improved.