ISBN 978-4-9909150-2-5

South Asian Archaeology Series 4

Current Research on

Indus Archaeology

Edited by

Akinori Uesugi

Research group for South Asian archaeology

Archaeological Research Institute, Kansai University
2018
 South Asian Archaeology Series 4

Current Research on
Indus Archaeology

Edited by

Akinori Uesugi

Research group for South Asian archaeology

Archaeological Research Institute, Kansai University
2018
 CURRENT RESEARCH ON INDUS ARCHAEOLOGY

South Asian Archaeology Series 4

Edited by Akinori Uesugi
Published by Research Group for South Asian Archaeology,
Archaeological Research Institute, Kansai University
3-3-35 Yamate-cho, Suita, Osaka 564-8680 Japan

This is an E-publication version for open access.

All rights reserved ©Research Group for South Asian Archaeology,

Archaeological Research Institute, Kansai University, and individual authors 2018

ISBN 978-4-9909150-2-5

This publication was published under the research project 'Establishing the Chronology of
South Indian Prehistory' funded by the Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research, Japan Society
for the Promotion of Science (Project no. 15H05164, Principal investigator: Akinori Uesugi).
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology

Contents

Preface

Current state of research and issues of Indus Archaeology

Focusing on field researches and material cultural studies
Akinori Uesugi
1

Indus (Harappan) Civilization in the Ghaggar Basin
Vivek Dangi
56

Indus Archaeology in Gujarat:

An expedition through space, time, materials and methods
Rajesh S.V.
87

Exploring stylistic variation in inscribed steatite seals of the Indus civilization:

a comparison of materials from sites in Gujarat and the Ghaggar-Hakra region
Gregg Jamison
169

Indus copper wares:

Study of manufacturing process by metallography
Takekazu Nagae
195
 CONTRIBUTORS

Akinori Uesugi
Ph.D., Part-time Lecturer and Researcher, Kansai University, Osaka/
Visiting Associate Professor, Center for Cultural Resource Studies, Kanazawa University, Ishikawa
southasia.ua@gmail.com

Vivek Dangi
Ph.D., Assistant Professor, Department of History, All India Jat Heroes' Memorial College, Rohtak, Haryana
vivek_dangi@yahoo.co.in

Rajesh S.V.
Ph.D., Assistant Professor, Department of Archaeology, University of Kerala, Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala
rajeshkeraliyan@yahoo.co.in

Gregg Jamison
Ph.D., Assistant Professor of Anthropology, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee at Waukesha
gregg.jamison@gmail.com

Takekazu Nagae
Ph.D., Professor, Faculty of Art and Design, University of Toyama, Toyama
tnagae@tad.u-toyama.ac.jp
 Preface

This publication is a collection of the papers presented at the International Seminar on Current Research on the
Indus Civilization held at Kansai University on June 8, 2018, which includes four papers by the scholars who par-
ticipated in the seminar.

The study on the Indus Civilization has a history of almost 100 years since its discovery at Harappa and Mo-
henjodaro in the early 1920s. Since then, a number of studies and researches have been conducted by numerous
scholars and many issues have been raised to understand this ancient civilization. In the early phase of studies, the
external origin and connection with the Mesopotamian Civilization were emphasised. With an increasing number
of excavations, cultural developments in the Greater Indus Valley region itself were successfully traced leading to
the emphasis on the indigenous developments of this civilization. Recent researches focus on a diverse range of is-
sues including palaeo-environmental reconstruction. The research methods used in fields have also become diverse
introducing digital technologies in recent years.

While our understanding on the Indus Civilization has become profound by the tremendous efforts by scholars
from many countries including India and Pakistan, a number of problems and issues to be solved and investigated
are in our hand. To develop better understanding of this civilization, it is crucial to address problem-oriented
issues, to develop updated research methodology and to share the results of researches among scholars and those
who are interested in this field.

The contributors to this volume are all working in fields to obtain and analyze primary data, and to present their
works and data to the academic society. Dr. Vivek Dangi has been conducting a number of surveys in the Ghaggar
valley which covers the modern states of Haryana, Punjab and Rajasthan of India. He presents a general view on
the Indus sites in the Ghaggar valley based on his fieldworks in this volume. Dr. Rajesh S.V., who also has been en-
gaged in many surveys and excavations in Gujarat, overviews the history of researches at the Indus sites in Gujarat
and presents the current understanding on the Indus archaeology in the region. Dr. Gregg Jamison examines the
stylistic features of the Indus-style seals to see the interregional connections of the Indus urban society. Dr. Take-
kazu Nagae, a metallurgist, who has broad interests in ancient metallurgy in various parts of Eurasia, has recently
been conducting a research on copper/bronze objects of the Indus period and Iron Age in South Asia. I, Akinori
Uesugi, has been parts of many projects in India and Pakistan and has been attempting to develop an integrated
view towards the socio-cultural developments in the South Asian Bronze and Iron Ages. My article in this volume
overviews the current state of the material cultural studies in the Indus archaeology.

I hope that this volume will contribute to our understanding of the significance of the Indus Civilization and the
Indus archaeology. Last but not least, I express my gratitude to the contributors to this volume and the partici-
pants to the seminar.

Akinori Uesugi
Editor of this volume
 Akinori Uesugi Current state of research and issues of Indus Archaeology
Current state of research and issues of
Indus Archaeology
Focusing on field researches and material cultural studies
Akinori Uesugi
(Kansai University/Kanazawa University)
INTRODUCTION
The Indus archaeology has a history of almost 100
years since the commencement of excavations at
Mohenjodaro and Harappa in the 1920s. A diverse
range of studies have been done in this field, and
various issues have been set for researches. However,
it must be admitted that there are many issues yet to
be investigated, especially some fundamental studies
on the material culture of the Indus Civilization. In
this article, the current state of research and issues are
overviewed.
EXCAVATIONS
The number of excavated Indus sites counts 184 to
date (Figure 1; Table 1). In country-wise, four sites in
Afghanistan, 47 sites in Pakistan and 133 sites in In-
dia have been excavated. Among the excavated sites in
Pakistan (Figures 2 and 3), ten sites belong to Sindh,
four sites to Punjab, 11 sites to Khyber-Pakhtunkh-
wa and 22 sites to Balochistan. For the sites in India
(Figures 4 and 5), two sites are from Jammu-Kashmir,
18 sites from Punjab, 24 sites from Haryana, three
sites from Delhi, ten sites from Uttar Pradesh, 14 sites
from Rajasthan, 61 sites from Gujarat and one site
-1-
from Maharashtra.
The number of excavated sites cannot be so over-
estimated in terms of the presence of more than 3,000
Indus sites over the Greater Indus Valley. While most
of the excavations of Indus sites are briefly reported in
the form of preliminary reports, the details and prima-
ry data of finds from excavations are rarely published
resulting in the difficulty to analyse and compare the
data from various sites and to present an integrated
view of the Indus Civilization. The quality of the pres-
entation of the results of the excavations also varies
from one to another.
Overviewing the current trends of archaeological
excavations at Indus sites, it can be pointed out that
the targets of excavations have become more diverse
than before. Not only unearthing the structural
remains and artefacts but also retrieving palaeo-envi-
ronmental data, especially faunal and botanical evi-
dence, have increasingly become important in recent
excavations to reconstruct the palaeo-environments.
The fields of zoo-archaeology and botanical archaeol-
ogy have a long history in South Asian archaeology,
but the palaeo-environmental studies have been more
oriented in recent years.
However, the studies on particular structural
remains and artefacts are limited in number mainly
because of the paucity of published data. Especially
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology
3
1
Balochistan
Sindh
Figure 1 Distribution of Indus-related sites (white dots) and excavated sites (red dots) (made by the author)
diachronic examinations on them are difficult be-
cause the stratigraphic contexts of finds are not well
reported in preliminary reports. Consequently, there
is a great difficulty to systematically examine the
stratigraphic data of finds to understand how the site
was diachronically occupied and how the occupation
changed in time at given site.
14
With regard to this problem, C dating widely
conducted for a number of sites are not well connect-
-2-
Punjab
Ghaggar
Aravali
Gujarat
184
ed with artefactual and stratigraphic evidence. A site
is an accumulation of a diverse range of human activ-
ities happened at the site. Excavations of any archaeo-
logical site aim at obtaining a diverse range of data re-
garding the human occupation from various contexts
or the interconnection between structural remains,
artefacts and stratigraphy. It is desirable to report the
interconnection of various evidence to share them
among scholars to develop a holistic understanding of
 Akinori Uesugi Current state of research and issues of Indus Archaeology

Khyber-
Pakhtunkhwa

52

41
Jammu-Kashmir
8
15 11
14 10 53

7 13
6
5
12
9

Pakistani Punjab
Balochistan 38
39

40

Sindh

Figure 2 Distribution of Indus-related sites and excavated sites:

Pukistani Punjab and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (the numbers correspond to that of Table 1; made by the author)

2
3
1
27
20
30

Afghanistan 21 32
19 36
18
Pakistani
23 25
28
Punjab
31

Iran 34

Balochistan 16

35 44
49
47
24 51
50 48
29

26 46
33 22
43 45
37
17
Sindh
42

Figure 3 Distribution of Indus-related sites and excavated sites:

Balochistan (the numbers correspond to that of Table 1; made by the author)

-3-
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology

65 61
62 68
Pakistani Punjab 54 63
70
71
69
67 56 58
66 59
55 64

Indian Punjab 57
75
102
81
60 78
91 93
100
82 104
77
112 86 73
74 76 107
116
122 94
90
95 108
111 119 121 79 103
117 85 80 99

83 92 88
96
89 72 98
106
97
87
Haryana Uttar Pradesh
Rajasthan 84

105

101
113

115

118

Figure 4 Distribution of Indus-related sites and excavated sites:

Indian Punjab, Haryana, Uttar Pradesh and northern Rajasthan (the numbers correspond to that of Table 1; made by the author)

Rajasthan

120

Sindh
114
110
109
138 135 173
154 183
131
132 163 156 150
175 170
145 146 143 171 149
133 174
160
127
161 147 180
140 Gujarat
165
128 169 151
159 148 141
124 126 178
136 123 181
172 157
176 162 179 155 177
130 166 168 152 158
129 182
164 125 137
153 134
167
142 139

Figure 5 Distribution of Indus-related sites and excavated sites:

Rajasthan, Gujarat and Sindh (the numbers correspond to that of Table 1; made by the author)

-4-
 Akinori Uesugi Current state of research and issues of Indus Archaeology

Table 1 List of the excavated Indus sites (made by the author)

No Site WGS84_E WGS84_N Country State Primary references

1 Deh Morasi Ghundai 65.5000 31.5167 Afghanistan Kandahar Dupree 1963
2 Mundigak 65.5000 31.9167 Afghanistan Kandahar Casal 1961
3 Said Qala Tepe 65.5833 31.6333 Afghanistan Kandahar Shaffer 1978
4 Shortughai 69.5000 37.3000 Afghanistan Badakhshan Francfort 1989
5 Gandhi Umar Khan 70.5401 31.7087 Pakistan Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa Khan et al. 2000a
6 Gumla 70.8333 31.8833 Pakistan Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa Dani 1970-71
7 Hathala 70.5972 32.0167 Pakistan Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa Dani 1970-71
8 Islam Chowki 70.4833 32.9833 Pakistan Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa Khan et al. 1991
Ali and Khan 2001; Khan et al.
9 Jhandi Babar 70.5034 31.6181 Pakistan Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa 2000b
10 Lak Largai 70.5167 32.8167 Pakistan Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa Khan et al. 1991
11 Lewan 70.5833 32.8833 Pakistan Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa Allchin et al. 1986
12 Maru-2 70.5731 31.6151 Pakistan Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa Khan et al. 2000a

13 Rehman Dheri 70.7667 31.9500 Pakistan Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa Durrani 1988; Durrani et al.
1991; Ali 1994-1995
14 Sheri Khan Tarakai 70.4500 32.8167 Pakistan Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa Petrie ed. 2010
15 Tarakai Qila 70.3833 32.9167 Pakistan Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa Allchin and Knox 1981
16 Anjira 66.3167 28.2833 Pakistan Balochistan de Cardi 1965

17 Balakot 66.7250 25.4750 Pakistan Balochistan Dales 1974, 1979; Franke-Vogt

1997
18 Dabar Kot 68.6833 30.0833 Pakistan Balochistan Stein 1929; Fairservis 1959
19 Damb Sadaat 66.9500 30.0500 Pakistan Balochistan Fairservis 1956
20 Kaudani 69.3000 31.4333 Pakistan Balochistan Stein 1929; Fairservis 1959
21 Kili Ghul Mohammad 66.9667 30.2833 Pakistan Balochistan Fairservis 1956
22 Kulli 65.0000 26.2500 Pakistan Balochistan Stein 1931
23 Lal Shah 67.5583 29.4167 Pakistan Balochistan Pracchia 1985
24 Mehi 65.7000 27.2167 Pakistan Balochistan Stein 1931
25 Mehrgarh 67.6124 29.4313 Pakistan Balochistan Jarrige, C. et al. 1995

26 Miri Qalat 63.0125 26.0333 Pakistan Balochistan Besenval 1994, 1997, 2000;
Besenval and Marquis 1993
27 Moghul Ghundai 69.2500 31.4333 Pakistan Balochistan Stein 1929; Fairservis 1959
28 Nausharo 67.5878 29.3647 Pakistan Balochistan Jarrige 1988, 1989, 1990
29 Nindowari 66.0667 26.9500 Pakistan Balochistan Jarrige et al. 2011
30 Periano Ghundai 69.3833 31.3667 Pakistan Balochistan Stein 1929; Fairservis 1959
31 Pirak 67.5000 29.2600 Pakistan Balochistan Jarrige et al. 1979
32 Rana Ghundai 68.7500 30.4000 Pakistan Balochistan Ross 1946
33 Shahi Tump 63.0042 26.0083 Pakistan Balochistan Stein 1931; Besenval 2000
34 Siah Damb 66.1833 28.5667 Pakistan Balochistan de Cardi 1965
35 Sohr Damb/Nal 66.2667 27.7333 Pakistan Balochistan Franke-Vogt 2005a, 2005b
36 Sur Jangal 68.5000 30.2667 Pakistan Balochistan Stein 1929; Fairservis 1959

37 Sutkagen-dor 62.0000 25.5000 Pakistan Balochistan Stein 1931; Dales and Lippo
1992
Dales 1989; Dales and Kenoyer
1992a, 1992b, 1993; Kenoyer
38 Harappa 72.8667 30.6333 Pakistan Pakistan Punjab 1993; Kenoyer and Meadow
2000, 2016; Meadow ed. 1991;
Meadow and Kenoyer 1993,
1994, 1997, 2005a, 2005b, 2008
39 Jalilpur 72.1167 30.5333 Pakistan Pakistan Punjab Mughal 1972, 1974
40 Kudwala Ther 71.8833 29.1917 Pakistan Pakistan Punjab Stein 1943
41 Sarai Khola 72.8002 33.7310 Pakistan Pakistan Punjab Halim 1972a, 1972b
42 Allahdino 67.3000 24.9500 Pakistan Sindh Fairservis 1979, 1982
43 Amri 68.0167 26.1667 Pakistan Sindh Casal 1964

-5-
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology

Table 1 (contd.) List of the excavated Indus sites (made by the author)

No Site WGS84_E WGS84_N Country State Primary references

44 Bhando Qubo 68.3270 27.8032 Pakistan Sindh Shaikh and Veesar 2000-01
45 Chanhudaro 68.3322 26.1708 Pakistan Sindh Mackay 1943
46 Ghazi Shah 67.4667 26.4500 Pakistan Sindh Flam 1993
47 Jhukar 68.1167 27.5667 Pakistan Sindh Mughal 1992
48 Kot Diji 68.7046 27.3470 Pakistan Sindh Khan 1965
49 Lakhanjodaro 68.8476 27.7254 Pakistan Sindh Shaikh et al. 2007-08

50 Mohenjodaro 68.1167 27.3000 Pakistan Sindh Marshall 1931; Mackay 1938;

Dales 1965

51 Naru Waro Dharo 68.6833 27.4167 Pakistan Sindh Department of Archaeology

1964
52 Burzahom 73.9000 34.1667 India Jammu-Kashmir Sharma, A.K. 2000
53 Manda 74.8000 32.9000 India Jammu-Kashmir Joshi 1993
54 Bara 76.5000 30.9167 India Indian Punjab Sharma, Y.D. 1982
55 Bhudan 75.7722 30.5194 India Indian Punjab Suraj Bhan and Shaffer 1978

56 Brass 76.5333 30.5833 India Indian Punjab IAR 1990-91, 1991-92,1993-94,

1994-95
57 Burj 76.4833 30.1500 India Indian Punjab Manmohan Kumar 1984
58 Chandigarh (Sector 99) 76.7833 30.7500 India Indian Punjab Sharma, Y.D. 1982
59 Dadheri 76.7160 30.6345 India Indian Punjab Joshi 1993
60 Dhalewan 75.5961 30.0234 India Indian Punjab Bala and Kant 2000, 2006
61 Dher Majra 76.5500 31.0333 India Indian Punjab Prüfer 1952
62 Katpalon 75.8500 31.0333 India Indian Punjab Joshi 1993
63 Kotla Nihang Khan 76.5667 30.9333 India Indian Punjab Sharma, Y.D. 1982
64 Mahorana 75.9500 30.4833 India Indian Punjab Sharma, Y.D. 1987
65 Nagar 75.8366 31.0404 India Indian Punjab Joshi 1993
66 Raja Sirkap 74.7667 30.6500 India Indian Punjab Sharma, Y.D. 1982

67 Rohira 75.8454 30.6417 India Indian Punjab Sharma, G.B. and Manmohan
Kumar 1981

68 Ropar 76.5242 30.9716 India Indian Punjab Sharma, Y.D. 1955-56, 1982,
2001
Sharma, Y.D. 1982; Sharma,
69 Sanghol 76.3892 30.7837 India Indian Punjab G.B. 2014; Margabandhu and
Gaur 1987, 1988
70 Sarangpur 76.8000 30.7667 India Indian Punjab Suraj Bhan 1967; Sharma 1982
71 Sunet 75.8333 30.8333 India Indian Punjab IAR 1983-84
72 Badli 76.8000 28.5833 India Haryana Thakran et al. 2010

73 Balu 76.3858 29.6696 India Haryana Singh and Suraj Bhan 1982;
Kesarwani 2001, 2002

74 Banawali 75.3928 29.5976 India Haryana Bisht 1977, 1982, 1987; Bisht
and Asthana 1979
75 Bhagwanpura 76.9500 30.0667 India Haryana Joshi 1993
76 Bhirrana 75.5492 29.5504 India Haryana Rao et al. 2003, 2004, 2005
77 Burj 75.6417 29.6573 India Haryana Singh et al. 2010a
78 Daulatpur 76.9397 29.9643 India Haryana IAR 1968-69, 1976-77, 1977-78
79 Farmana 76.3084 29.0406 India Haryana Shinde et al. ed. 2011b
80 Girawad 76.4794 28.9776 India Haryana Shinde et al. ed. 2011a

81 Jognakhera 76.7955 29.9803 India Haryana Acharya and Dahia no date,

Malik et al. 2007
82 Kalayat 76.2564 29.6772 India Haryana Phogat 1970
83 Khanak 75.8692 28.9083 India Haryana Singh et al. 2016
84 Khatoli 76.2500 28.0833 India Haryana Sharma 1982
85 Khera 76.3080 28.9841 India Haryana Thakran et al. 2013

86 Kunal 75.6585 29.6210 India Haryana Khatri and Acharya 1995; Acha-
rya ed. 2008

-6-
 Akinori Uesugi Current state of research and issues of Indus Archaeology

Table 1 (contd.) List of the excavated Indus sites (made by the author)

No Site WGS84_E WGS84_N Country State Primary references

87 Lohat 76.8584 28.5402 India Haryana V. Dangi pers. comm.
88 Madina 76.4199 28.9197 India Haryana Manmohan Kumar et al. 2016
89 Manheru 76.2333 28.7167 India Haryana Thakran et al. 2010, 2010-11
90 Masudpur 75.9833 29.2333 India Haryana Petrie et al. 2009
91 Mirzapur 76.8032 29.9518 India Haryana Singh 1977

92 Mitathal 76.1698 28.8911 India Haryana Suraj Bhan 1975; Manmohan

Kumar et al. 2011, 2012
93 Raja Karna ka Qila 76.8030 29.9512 India Haryana IAR 1974-75, 1975-76
94 Rakhigarhi 76.1134 29.2915 India Haryana Nath 1998, 1999, 2001
95 Siswal 75.5065 29.2214 India Haryana Suraj Bhan 1971-72, 1973
96 Bhorgarh 77.0863 28.8275 India Delhi Babu 1995
97 Dhansa 76.8658 28.5575 India Delhi Suraj Bhan and Shaffer 1978
98 Mandoli 77.3141 28.7040 India Delhi Babu 1996
99 Alamgirpur 77.3667 29.0000 India Uttar Pradesh IAR 1958-59; Singh et al. 2013
100 Ambkheri 77.7667 29.7333 India Uttar Pradesh IAR 1963-64
101 Atranjikhera 78.7333 27.7000 India Uttar Pradesh Gaur 1983
102 Bargaon 77.5407 30.0949 India Uttar Pradesh IAR 1963-64
103 Hastinapura 78.0072 29.1583 India Uttar Pradesh Lal 1954
104 Hulas 77.3595 29.7044 India Uttar Pradesh Dikshit 1980, 1982
105 Jakhera 78.5879 27.7906 India Uttar Pradesh Sahi 1992
106 Lal Qila 78.2500 28.5000 India Uttar Pradesh Gaur 1995
107 Mandi 77.5764 29.4361 India Uttar Pradesh Sharma, D.V. et al. 2000
108 Sanauli 77.2169 29.1411 India Uttar Pradesh Sharma, D.V. et al. 2004, 2006
109 Ahar 73.7216 24.5872 India Rajasthan Sankalia et al. 1969

110 Balathal 73.9844 24.7259 India Rajasthan Mishra 1997; Mishra et al. 1995,
1997
111 Baror 73.3134 29.1689 India Rajasthan Sant et al. 2005
112 Dabli vas Chugta 74.1711 29.5275 India Rajasthan Singh et al. 2012
113 Ganeshwar 75.8162 27.6737 India Rajasthan Agrawala and Vijay Kumar 1982
IAR 1959-60; Shinde and Pos-
114 Gilund 74.2644 25.0323 India Rajasthan sehl 2005; Shinde et al. 2005;
Raczek and Shinde eds. 2010

115 Jodhpura 76.0833 27.5167 India Rajasthan IAR 1972-73; Agrawala and
Vijay Kumar 1982
116 Kalibangan 74.1299 29.4728 India Rajasthan Lal et al. 2003, 2015
117 Karanpura 75.0971 29.1053 India Rajasthan Prabhakar 2013
IAR 1963-64, 1964-65, 1965-
118 Noh 77.5475 27.2103 India Rajasthan 66, 1966-67, 1968-69, 1970-71,
1971-72
119 Nohar 74.7500 29.1667 India Rajasthan Dikshit 1984
120 Ojiyana 74.3500 25.8833 India Rajasthan Meena and Tripathi 2000
121 Sothi 74.8561 29.1859 India Rajasthan Dikshit 1984
122 Tarkhanewala Dera 73.2244 29.2388 India Rajasthan Trivedi 2009
123 Adkot 71.0833 22.0000 India Gujarat IAR 1957-58
124 Amra 69.9333 22.2667 India Gujarat Subbarao 1958; IAR 1955-56
125 Andhi 72.7288 21.2849 India Gujarat IAR 1961-62
126 Babar Kot 71.5708 22.2678 India Gujarat IAR 1990-91
127 Bagasara (Ghola Dholo) 70.6203 23.0368 India Gujarat Sonawane et al. 2003
128 Bet Dwarka 69.0833 22.3333 India Gujarat Gaur et al. 2005
129 Bhagatrav 72.7000 21.4833 India Gujarat IAR 1957-58; Rao 1962
130 Bokhira 69.6028 21.6556 India Gujarat Gaur et al. 2006

-7-
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology

Table 1 (contd.) List of the excavated Indus sites (made by the author)

No Site WGS84_E WGS84_N Country State Primary references

131 Datrana 71.1167 23.7694 India Gujarat IAR 1993-94

132 Desalpur 69.1680 23.4657 India Gujarat IAR 1963-64; Soundara Rajan
1984
133 Dhaneti 69.9131 23.2503 India Gujarat P. Ajithprasad pers. comm.
134 Dhatva 72.7667 21.1500 India Gujarat Mehta and Chowdhary 1975
135 Dholavira 70.2137 23.8881 India Gujarat Bisht 1997
136 Dwarka 69.0000 22.2167 India Gujarat IAR 1979-80
137 Jokha 73.0000 21.2833 India Gujarat Mehta et al. 1971
138 Juni Kuran 69.7651 23.9623 India Gujarat Pramanik 2004
139 Kaj 70.8500 20.7333 India Gujarat Farooqui et al. 2013
140 Kanasutaria 72.2667 22.7833 India Gujarat Rao 1962
141 Kanewal 72.5000 22.4667 India Gujarat Mehta et al. 1980
142 Kanjetar 70.6667 20.7500 India Gujarat Rao 1962; Farooqui et al. 2013
143 Kanmer 70.8632 23.4179 India Gujarat Kharakwal et al. 2012
144 Khanpur 0.0000 0.0000 India Gujarat Chitalwala and Thomas 1978
145 Khirsara 69.0500 23.4500 India Gujarat Nath et al. 2012, 2013, 2017
146 Kotada Bhadli 69.4333 23.3667 India Gujarat Shirwalkar and Rawat 2016
147 Kuntasi 70.6001 22.8922 India Gujarat Dhavalikar et al. 1996
148 Lakhabaval 70.0000 22.4000 India Gujarat Subbarao 1958
149 Langhnaj 72.5333 23.4500 India Gujarat Sankalia 1965
150 Loteshwar 71.8366 23.6004 India Gujarat IAR 1990-91
151 Lothal 72.2497 22.5236 India Gujarat Rao 1979, 1985
152 Machiala-Mota 71.2333 21.6833 India Gujarat Rao 1962
153 Malvan 72.7167 21.1000 India Gujarat Allchin and Joshi 1995
154 Mathutra 71.0833 23.7333 India Gujarat Majumdar 1999

155 Mehgam 72.7500 21.7000 India Gujarat IAR 1957-58, 1959-60; Rao
1962

156 Moti Pipli 71.5005 23.8236 India Gujarat Majumdar and Sonawane 1996-
97
157 Motidharai 71.9000 21.9500 India Gujarat IAR 1957-58
158 Nagal 72.9167 21.6167 India Gujarat IAR 1961-62
159 Nageshwar 69.0333 22.3000 India Gujarat Hegde et al. 1990
160 Nagwada 71.7125 23.3042 India Gujarat Hegde et al. 1988
161 Navinal 69.5833 22.8333 India Gujarat Rajesh et al. 2015
162 Oriyo Timbo 71.6044 21.8867 India Gujarat Rissman and Chitalwala 1990
163 Pabumath 70.5027 23.6146 India Gujarat IAR 1977-78, 1978-79, 1980-81
164 Padri 72.1094 21.3403 India Gujarat Shinde 1992
165 Pithad ( Jaidak) 70.5333 22.6833 India Gujarat Ajithprasad 2008
166 Pithadia 70.6667 21.7667 India Gujarat IAR 1957-58
167 Prabhas Patan (Somnath) 70.5000 20.7833 India Gujarat Nanavati et al. 1971
168 Randaliyo 71.0500 21.8000 India Gujarat IAR 1958-59
169 Rangpur 71.9219 22.3989 India Gujarat Rao 1962
170 Ranod (Vaharvo Timbo ) 71.8033 23.5547 India Gujarat P. Ajithprasad pers. comm.
171 Ratanpura 71.8000 23.4667 India Gujarat IAR 1984-85
172 Rojdi 70.9189 21.8631 India Gujarat Possehl and Raval 1989
173 Santhli 71.5000 23.9028 India Gujarat IAR 1993-94

174 Shikarpur 70.6771 23.2376 India Gujarat Bhan and Ajithprasad 2008,
2009
175 Surkotada 70.9173 23.6113 India Gujarat Joshi ed. 1990
176 Taraghda 70.4333 21.7333 India Gujarat IAR 1978-79
177 Telod 72.7667 21.7000 India Gujarat IAR 1957-58; Rao 1962

-8-
 Akinori Uesugi Current state of research and issues of Indus Archaeology

Table 1 (contd.) List of the excavated Indus sites (made by the author)

No Site WGS84_E WGS84_N Country State Primary references

178 Vagad 71.8667 22.3167 India Gujarat Sonawane and Mehta 1985
179 Valabhi 71.8833 21.8833 India Gujarat Mehta 1984
180 Vallabhipur 71.6419 22.6875 India Gujarat Heras 1938
181 Vejalka 71.8614 22.2514 India Gujarat K. Krishnan pers. comm.
182 Warthan 72.8500 21.3667 India Gujarat IAR 1961-62
183 Zekhada 71.4667 23.8500 India Gujarat Momin 1983
184 Daimabad 74.6007 19.4228 India Maharashtra Sali 1986

the site. It is an important task for us to continuously
elaborate the methods, documentation and reporting
of archaeological excavations, as future studies and
researches depend on these primary data.
SURVEYS
Archaeological surveys in certain regions of the
Greater Indus Valley are one of the most active fields
of researches. Especially post-graduate students tend
to conduct surveys for their dissertations resulting in
discoveries of a number of sites. In the Indus archaeol-
ogy, the Ghaggar Valley and Gujarat are the focus for
extensive and intensive surveys (Shinde et al. 2008a;
Dangi 2009a, 2009b, 2010, 2011; Dangi and Parveen
Kumar 2013; Samunder and Dangi 2014; Garge 2005;
Singh et al. 2008, 2010a, 2010b, 2011, 2012; Petrie et
al. 2009; Rajesh and Patel 2007, 2010; Ajithprasad et
al. 2011).
The increasing use of GNSS in recent years has en-
abled to record the geocoordinates of archaeological
sites and features with higher accuracies. In earlier sur-
veys, the accuracy of the locations of sites was not so
satisfactory. As in the corpus of Indus sites published
by G.L. Possehl (1999), a number of errors are found
in the locations of sites, redocumentation of sites with
accurate locations using GNSS is crucial to examine
the distribution pattern of sites. As the recent destruc-
tions of archaeological sites by land developments
are a serious problem, not only the location of sites
but also the extension and features of archaeological
sites must be recorded in surveys. The method of grid
survey to systematically record and collect archaeo-
logical features and artefacts is also effective to better
understand the site without excavations (Wright et al.
2005). The introduction of a total station and digital
photogrammetric survey is also useful for recording
the details of sites (Figures 6 and 7). The application
of satellite imagery also has been growing to examine
the relations between sites, terrains, vegetations and
riverine systems (Wright and Hritz 2012; Petrie et al.
2016; Conesa et al. 2013, 2014a, 2014b, 2017; Balbo
et al. 2013). It is also desirable to develop some device
to share such fundamental data about sites among
scholars.
It is regrettable that the dissertations by post-grad-
uate students are not widely published. As they are a
crucial source for future studies and researches, it is
also important to publish them in some devices like
the Web.
MATERIAL CULTURE STUDIES
In this section, recent studies on the material culture
of the Indus Civilization are to be briefly reviewed.
The Urban Indus period is characterised by the pro-
duction and consumption of various commodities and
crafts. While there are elements of material culture
continuing from the Pre-Urban period, the material
culture of the Urban period reflects the nature of the

-9-
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology

MTL-2
Area 3
A17
MTL-3

Area 6
Kilns Area 5
Area 4 Excavated area in 2011-12
S2

Area 1
A4-A6

211.21m
Area 2
24.92m
S1
MTL-1

206.30m 16.19m

Excavated area

Removed area

Figure 6 Examples of DEM (Digital Elevation Model) with contours lines generated by total station and GIS software
(Left: Mitathal, Hariyana, right: Shikarpur, Gujarat; the DEM of Shikarpur was produced by the author as a part of the project by
Department of Archaeology and Ancient History, the Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda)

Figure 7 Photogrammetric 3D model of a pottery cluster unearthed at Shikarpur

(Produced by the author with courtesy of Department of Archaeology and Ancient History,
the Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda)

- 10 -
 Akinori Uesugi Current state of research and issues of Indus Archaeology
urban society of the period. One of the most impor-
tant approaches to the material culture of the Urban
period is to examine how the material culture of the
Pre-Urban period was transformed into the urban ma-
terial culture and how new elements were introduced
in the Urban period. In other words, it is crucial to
trace the social transformation from the Pre-Urban
period to the Urban period in the material culture.
Some elements of material culture abruptly appeared
in the Urban period, while others did not exhibit any
change from the Pre-Urban period. Some elements
might have continued from the Pre-Urban period to
the Urban period with new meaning and values. In
sum, it is one of the key approaches to see the changes
in the material culture in connection with the devel-
opments of the urban society.
Chronological studies
Establishing the chronology is essential to archaeolo-
gy in general not only to the material culture studies.
Without any time-scale, the socio-cultural changes
cannot be better traced in material culture. Hence,
establishing a detailed chronological framework for
examining the changes in material culture and the
society is a fundamental concept of chronological
studies. In case of the Greater Indus Valley, three
chronological divisions, Pre-Urban (4000 - 2600
BCE), Urban (2600 - 1900 BCE) and Post-Urban
periods (1900 - 1500 BCE), are used to explain the
socio-cultural dynamics of the rise and decline of the
Indus urban society, but their time span is too large to
trace the socio-cultural developments or events and is
insufficient for the material culture studies. However,
there are very few attempts to divide each phase into
more refined chronological units.
Methodologically, chronological studies consist
of relative chronology and absolute chronology. The
relative chronology aims at tracing various changes in
the material culture and at placing them in chronolog-
ical order. While it is well recognised among archae-
- 11 -
ologists that there is a diverse range of artefacts that
appeared and disappeared at some certain points of
time of the Indus period, very few attempts have been
made to clarify how, where and when a given element
of the material culture made its appearance and van-
ished.
For example, ceramics that are abundantly un-
earthed from sites exhibit temporal and spatial var-
iations. Therefore, it is easy to compare the ceramic
evidence from several sites in one region or different
regions. In this sense, the ceramic evidence can be a
good indicator for demarcating spatial or temporal
unit of material culture. Most archaeologists empir-
ically recognise the stylistic diversity in the ceramics
between the Pre-Urban, Urban and the Post-Urban
periods so that they can classify potsherds into some
chronological groups. In the same way, there is im-
mense diversity in the ceramics of the Urban period,
which might be placed in chronological order. Once
the variations in ceramics are placed in chronology,
the resolution of chronological framework will be
much more elaborated than the three divisions widely
used.
The attempts to make the chronology more re-
fined is rare in the Indus archaeology. In case of the
excavation of a site, the site chronology is established
basically based on the changes of structural remains.
In establishing the site chronology, the material re-
mains other than structural remains are treated in a
secondary position. The chronological units demar-
cated by structural remains tend to have a time span of
more than 100 years. Consequently, the chronological
unit used for examining the material culture at the
site have the same broad time span. With this time
span of chronological units, it is difficult to trace the
changes in the material culture attested at the site.
Structural remains and other elements of a material
culture do have different paces in change. Ideally, vari-
ous elements composing a site must be independently
examined to trace changes in each of them, and the
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology

0 20cm

Kot Diji style

0 20cm

Classical Harappa style

Mehragrh Period VI-VII

Sothi-Siswal style

0 20cm

Anarta style

Distribution zone of
the Harappa-style pottery
0 20cm

Distribution zone of regional ceramic styles

1. Pre-Urban Indus period 2. Early and Middle phases of the Urban Indus period
(c. 3000 - 2600 BCE) (c. 2600 - 2300 BCE)

BMAC

Cemetery H style

Bala style
Bala style
Harappa style

Jhukar style

Kulli style

Rangpur IIC style

Sorath Harappa style

3. Late phase of the Urban Indus period 4. Post-Urban Indus period

(c. 2300 - 1900 BCE) (c. 1900 - 1500 BCE)

Figure 8 Diachronic changes of the spatial pattern of ceramic styles (made by the author)

- 12 -
 Akinori Uesugi Current state of research and issues of Indus Archaeology
stratigraphical relations between them must be clari-
fied.
In any case, it must be kept in mind that the
structural phases and the phases established for oth-
er elements of material culture do not necessarily
match with each other. In the case of ceramics, it
can generally be assumed that ceramics change faster
than structural remains. However, the results of an
excavation including the material culture of a site are
reported based on the site chronology established by
structural remains, hence making it difficult to trace
the dynamic process of changes in the ceramics at the
site. There are a number of archaeological contexts
even in one structural phase. If the material culture
evidence would be reported and examined based on
the contexts, much more refined chronological units
can be demarcated to establish better chronology.
Taking an example from the excavations at Far-
mana and Mitathal in Haryana in which the author
participated, the ceramics were examined based on
structural units including pits and occupational
deposits. As a result, the ceramic sequence from the
Early phase (c. 2500 - 2300 BCE) to the Late phase
(c. 2300 - 1900 BCE) of the Urban period was well
traced (Manmohan Kumar et al. 2011, 2012; Uesugi
2011a, 2011b, 2017; Uesugi and Dangi 2017). The
developments of the Bara-style pottery in the Late
phase of the Urban period was also revealed.
Another example of the stylistic analyses on ce-
ramics to establish the chronology is the work by G.
Quivron (2000) on the painting motifs on the Hara-
ppa-style painted pottery (Figure 9). By examining
the stylistic variations and their stratigraphic contexts
of the Harappa-style painted pottery unearthed
from Nausharo, he divides the developments of the
Harappa-style painted pottery into three phases and
discusses that the origin of the Harappa painting style
may have been located in Sindh and that the Harap-
pa painted pottery dispersed into the Greater Indus
Valley during the first phase. This is a good example of
- 13 -
the stylistic and chronological study on the material
culture to reveal its spatial and chronological features.
The present author also examines the Harap-
pa-style pottery from the Ghaggar Valley and Gujarat
(Figure 10) (Uesugi 2013a) and discusses that the
Harappa-style pottery exhibits a stylistic change
between the Early phase and the Late phase of the Ur-
ban period (Figure 8). This change can be interpreted
as indicating the emergence of regional styles of the
Harappa-style pottery in the Late phase in contrast
to the Harappa-style pottery of the Early phase that
shows homogeneous morphological features over a
wide area of the Greater Indus Valley. This is another
example of the stylistic and chronological studies on
material culture.
Once an elaborated chronological scale is set
based on the ceramic evidence, the diachronic chang-
es in other elements of the material culture such as
stone beads and stone seals can be examined. For
example, Meadow and Kenoyer (2000) discuss the
chronological position of steatite tablets inscribed
with Indus scripts in Harappa Period 3C based on the
stratigraphic evidence of their occurrences at the site
of Harappa. If the chronological or diachronic chang-
es of various artefacts of the Urban period would be
revealed and be correlated with each other, the so-
cio-cultural transformation of the urban society could
eventually be examined based on the changes on the
material culture.
For the understanding of the decline process of
the urban society around 1900 BCE, the more refined
chronology is crucial. While the decline of urban
society has generally been understood as the disap-
pearance of cities and the writing system, it is almost
uncertain how the material culture changed in the
decline process of the urban society. It appears that
the decline of the urban society did not abruptly hap-
pen, but it is a complex process that was going on for
a certain period of time. In order to trace the decline
process in detail, the chronological scale must be more
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology

Earliest phase
1-6: Chanhudaro (after Mackay 1943)
7-13: Nausharo (after Quivron 2000)
14, 15, 18, 20: Harappa (after Vats 1940)
16, 17, 19: Mohenjodaro (after Marshall 1931;
Mackay 1938)

Early phase

Middle phase

Late phase

Figure 9 Diachronic changes in the painting style of the Harappa-style pottery

(made by the author based on the examination by Quivron 2000)

- 14 -
 Akinori Uesugi Current state of research and issues of Indus Archaeology

40 cm

Farmana Cemetery Phase 3

30 cm
Farmana Cemetery Phase 2

Farmana Cemetery Phase 1

Farmana Cemetery Phase 4

20 cm
Bedwa-2 cemetery

10 cm
Phase 1

Phase 2

Phase 3
Phase 4 0

Figure 10 Diachronic changes of the morphology of the Harappan pots (left) and dish-on-stands (right)
(after Uesugi 2013)

refined. It has been pointed out that a significant
change happened on ceramics in Period 4 at Harappa
(Kenoyer 1995), to which the emergence of regional
styles of the Harappa-style pottery as mentioned
earlier might have been related. Although the inter-
connection between these changes on the ceramics
and the decline of the urban society is not yet clear,
the changes of various elements of the material culture
must be examined to reveal their interconnection to
see the dynamics of the urban society.
Studies on crafts
Ceramics
The studies on ceramics in the Indus archaeology are
not well advanced. The ceramics are generally used
as a chronological indicator for the three divisions
mentioned earlier and as a spatial marker for demar-
cating regional cultures. However, the potentiality of
ceramics is not fully examined for understanding the
temporal and spatial patterns as attempts to reveal the
details of the ceramic styles, composition and mor-
phological variation are limited.
Not only ceramics but also artefacts, in general,
are comprised of technological, morphological and
functional (including the traits given at the time of
use) elements. In other words, some socio-cultural
or functional needs of users, socio-cultural groups or
society were substantiated through particular tech-
nologies. Therefore, the examination of any artefacts
must be made to understand these essential elements
of artefacts.
It is well known that various ceramic styles ap-
peared and disappeared since the Pre-Urban period
in the Greater Indus Valley (Figure 8), but a few
attempts have been made to reveal the technological,
morphological and functional relations between
them. There are a number of issues to be examined
regarding the ceramics of the region; for example, the
interrelations between the ceramic styles during the
Pre-Urban period in Balochistan, the Indus Valley, the
Ghaggar Valley and Gujarat; how the Harappa-style
pottery that characterised the Urban period made its
appearance and dispersed to a vast area of the Greater
Indus Valley, how it was related to other ceramic styles
in its developments and how the ceramics including
the Harappa-style pottery changed in the decline pro-
cess.
It is not sufficient for understanding the ceramics
only to reveal the stratigraphic positions of ceramic
styles in excavations. Based on the stratigraphic oc-

- 15 -
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology

Punjab Ghaggar

6 7
Late Phase

28 29 30 31

8 9 10

32

33 34

11 12 13
Middle Phase

20 21 22 23 24 25

4 5 26 27

1 - 13: Harappa (after Wheeler 1947)

14 - 18, 20 - 27: Farmana (after Uesugi 2011a, 2011b)
19: Rakhigarhi (Collection by Vivek Dangi; drawn by
the author)
28 - 34: Mitathal (after Manmohan Kumar et al. 2011,
2012)
Early Phase

19

1 2 3
14 15 16 17 18
0 20cm

Figure 11 Diachronic changes of the morphology of the Harappan pots (made by the author)

- 16 -
 Akinori Uesugi Current state of research and issues of Indus Archaeology

Sindh/Central Balochistan Gujarat

11
35
36

34
37

12 13 14 15
Late Phase

0 20cm

38

39 27 40 41
16 17 18 19 20
1/6
1 - 10: Nausharo (after Quivron 1994, 1997, 2000)
11 - 20: Mohenjodaro (after Mackay 1938) 26
21 - 41: Kanmer (Uesugi and Meena 2012)

27

5 28
Middle Phase

0 20cm 29

30

31

32

7 8 9 10

1/6
33

0 20cm
21
Early Phase

0 20cm
22

23

24 25

0 20cm
1 2 3 4

1/6 1/6

Figure 11 (contd.) Diachronic changes of the morphology of the Harappan pots (made by the author)

- 17 -
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology
currence, the ceramic evidence must be examined in
terms of technological, morphological and functional
aspects, and the ceramic styles that can be defined by
the elements mentioned above must be compared and
correlated in using the ceramic evidence for under-
standing the socio-cultural aspects of the Indus Civili-
zation.
Although not so systematic, the technological
aspects of the Indus ceramics, especially regarding
the use of wheels in the modelling process, have been
examined by Courty and Roux (1995), Roux (1994)
and Roux and Courty (1998). Traditionally, the tech-
nological aspects of Indus ceramics have been argued
in terms of whether they were wheel-made or hand-
made, but there are various techniques for modelling
ceramics. In the case of 'wheel-made' pottery, some
were primarily modelled by the coil technique and
then turned on a wheel to finish the modelling, while
others were modelled from clay set on a wheel using
fast rotation. Some of 'handmade' pottery were mod-
elled primarily by the hand modelling technique such
as the coil technique, and then rotational smoothing
was applied to some part of the vessel while other
parts were finished by non-rotational techniques. The
burnishing technique is also quite common in some
regions like Gujarat. These diverse techniques have
not been well examined in the case of the Indus ce-
ramic studies.
Overviewing the technological developments
of ceramics in the Greater Indus Valley based on
the author's study, the modelling technique de-
pending largely on the use of wheels (wheel-made
or wheel-fashioned) predominantly developed in
Balochistan during the late fourth millennium BCE,
most probably due to the contacts with the south-
eastern Iranian plateau. It appears that the technique
of modelling a vessel from clay set on a wheel (wheel-
made) was introduced in central Balochistan during
the early third millennium BCE (Mehrgarh Period VI
and VII) in prior to the other parts of the Greater In-
- 18 -
dus Valley. The Kot Diji pottery that developed in the
Indus Valley during the early third millennium BCE
is also characterised by the modelling technique using
wheels (most probably wheel-fashioned), which was
probably introduced from central Balochistan by con-
tacts. The extensive use of wheels can be attested in
the Harappa-style pottery of the Urban period (Figure
12), although it is not certain how widespread the
technique of modelling vessels from clay set on wheels
was in its Early phase. Especially medium to large-
sized vessels seem to have been made using the coil
technique and finished with the rotational smoothing
with wheels. During the Middle and Late phases of
the Urban phase, vessels with a slender profile such as
goblet and beaker predominantly increased (Figure
11) indicating that the technique of modelling vessels
from clay set on a wheel was widely introduced for
producing these vessels. The goblets with a pointed
base and small beakers are also indicative of the use of
wheels for their primary modelling.
On the other hand, the Sothi-Siswal pottery in
the Ghaggar Valley and the Anarta pottery in Gujarat,
both of which had developed since the fourth millen-
nium BCE, are distinctly characterised by the hand
or non-rotational modelling techniques with a partial
use of rotative devices (Figures 13 and 14). While
the rim-neck portion of these groups of pottery was
applied with rotational smoothing, the body portion
was finished by non-rotational smoothing as indicat-
ed by the traces of smoothing in irregular directions.
As discussed later, these regional ceramics continued
into the Urban phase without any change in the tech-
nological aspects. The Black-and-Red Ware that had
its origin in Rajasthan during the Pre-Urban period
and spread over Gujarat during the Late phase of the
Urban period is also conspicuous for the limited use
of rotational devices (Figure 15). Thus, clear regional
differences in the use of rotative devices can be seen
across the Greater Indus Valley. The burnishing tech-
nique, which is widely seen on the Anarta pottery,
 Akinori Uesugi Current state of research and issues of Indus Archaeology

1 2

3 4

5 6

7 8

Figure 12 Manufacturing techniques on the Harappa-style pottery from Farmana (after Uesugi 2011a)
1-4: smoothening with rotation, 5-8: scraping with rotation

- 19 -
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology

1 2

3 4

5 6

7 8

Figure 13 Manufacturing techniques on the Sothi-Siswal-style pottery from Farmana (after Uesugi 2011a)
1-4: smoothening without rotation, 5-8: scraping without rotation

- 20 -
 Akinori Uesugi Current state of research and issues of Indus Archaeology

1 2

3 4

5 6

7 8

Figure 14 Manufacturing techniques on the Anarta-style pottery from Kanmer (after Uesugi and Meena 2012)
1-8: Rotational and non-rotational smoothing

- 21 -
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology

1 2

3 4

Figure 15 Manufacturing techniques on BRW from Kanmer (after Uesugi and Meena 2012)
1-4: streak burnishing

1 2

3 4

Figure 16 Manufacturing techniques on the Sothi-Siswal-style pottery from Mitathal (made by the author)
1-4: Rotational and non-rotational smoothing, 3-4: streak burnishing

- 22 -
 Akinori Uesugi Current state of research and issues of Indus Archaeology
the Black-and-Red Ware and the Sothi-Siswal pottery
(Figures 14 - 16), is not predominant in the ceramics
of the regions west of the Indus Valley indicating that
the burnishing technique was closely connected with
the ceramics in the east in which the use of rotative
devices was not common.
For the ceramics of the Post-Urban period (1900 -
1500 BCE), the Cemetery H pottery is distinctive in
the use of the burnishing technique, which might have
been introduced from the regions east of the Indus
Valley. It seems that the technique of the coil model-
ling and rotational finish was used in the Cemetery H
pottery. The Bara-style pottery in the Ghaggar Valley,
which was closely related to the Cemetery H pottery
(Wheeler 1947), also has the same technological fea-
tures as the Cemetery H pottery. The Rangpur Period
IIC pottery is also characterised by the predominant
use of the burnishing technique, which was continu-
ously adopted by the succeeding Lustrous Red Ware.
It is worth mentioning that the paddle-and-anvil
technique was not used in the ceramics of the Greater
Indus Valley. It seems that this technique had its ori-
gin in the Ganga Valley (Tewari et al. 2006) and that
it became predominant in entire North India during
the Iron Age of the late second and first millennia
BCE (Uesugi in press).
Regarding the polychrome painted pottery in
Balochistan, several studies have been conducted on
the chemical composition of pigments used for the
paintings (Cortesi et al. 2016; Didier et al. 2016).
However, similar analyses have not been made on
the monochrome or bichrome pottery in the Indus
Valley and its east. The painting process of the painted
pottery has not also been discussed so far, but it may
contribute to the further understanding of the region-
al ceramic styles.
The study on the morphology of ceramics is also
not so popular. As stated earlier, the morphological
traits of ceramics are used to demarcate the three
chronological units, viz. Pre-Urban, Urban and
- 23 -
Post-Urban periods, but the details of the morpholog-
ical variations, especially from the viewpoint of the di-
achronic and spatial changes, have not been examined.
The temporal and spatial variability of ceramic mor-
phology must be analysed to see the relations between
various ceramic styles and the diachronic changes of
the ceramics.
For the morphological differences between the
Kot Diji-style pottery and its successor, the Harap-
pa-style pottery, P.C. Jenkins examines the examples
from stratigraphic contexts at Harappa ( Jenkins
1994a). With regard to the Harappa-style pottery,
the analyses by G.F. Dales and J.M. Kenoyer (1986)
on the pottery from Mohenjodaro, by P.C. Jenkins on
the evidence from Cemetery R37 at Harappa (1994b,
2000, 2005) and by the author on the evidence from
Farmana (Uesugi 2013a) are noteworthy. For the ce-
ramic sequence from the Pre-Urban to Urban periods
in central Balochistan, G. Quivron (1994) examines
the evidence from Nausharo.
In examining the morphological variability,
complete specimens, mostly from graves, must be
analysed, but the published evidence for the pottery
from graves are still limited (Wheeler 1947; Shinde
et al. eds. 2011b; Sharma 1999; Rao 1985). Therefore,
the morphological variability of the Harappa-style
pottery over 700 years of the Urban period is yet to be
fully understood. As some forms of vessels that are ab-
sent in the assemblage from graves are found in settle-
ment sites, it is important to thoroughly examine the
evidence both from graves and settlements to develop
a full understanding on the emergence, developments
and transformation of the Harappa-style pottery.
The author discusses the morphological changes in
the ceramics from the Late phase of the Urban period
to the Post-Urban period focusing on the evidence
from Mitathal in Haryana (Uesugi and Dangi 2017).
It is argued that the Bara-style pottery, which was de-
fined by Y.D. Sharma (1982) as the diagnostic pottery
in the Ghaggar Valley, emerged out of the stylistic
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology
amalgamation of the Harappa-style pottery and the
Sothi-Siswal pottery in the Late phase of the Urban
period and continued to the Post-Urban period.
It has been becoming more evident that the re-
gional ceramic styles that had developed in various
parts of the Greater Indus Valley during the Pre-Urban
periods continued into the Urban period along with
the widespread Harappa-style pottery. In the Ghaggar
Valley, the continuation of the Sothi-Siswal pottery
has been attested at Farmana (Uesugi 2011a, 2011b),
Mitathal (Manmohan Kumar et al. 2011, 2012) and
Masudpur I and VII (Parikh and Petrie 2016). In the
graves at Farmana (Seman-6), both the Harappa-style
pottery and the local Sothi-Siswal pottery were found
together as grave goods well testifying the coexistence
of the two ceramic styles during the Urban period.
Also in Gujarat, it has been observed in the excava-
tions at Kanmer (Uesugi and Meena 2012) and Shi-
karpur (the author's examination on the pottery from
the site with the permission from Dr P. Ajithprasad)
that the Anarta pottery that had locally developed in
the fourth millennium BCE continued to the Urban
phase. In Balochistan, the Harappa-style pottery that
had no genealogical relations with the local ceramic
styles became widespread and predominant over the
region during the Early phase of the Urban period,
but in the Late phase of the Urban period, the Kul-
li-style pottery that is remarkably characterised by the
elements of the local tradition widely emerged and
took place of the predominant position in the ceram-
ic assemblage of the region from the Harappa-style
pottery, as attested in the evidence from Nindowari
and Nausharo ( Jarrige 1985, 1986, 1988, 1989, 1990,
1994, 1997; Jarrige et al. 2011; Jarrige and Quivron
2008; Quivron 2008).
As stated earlier, the emergences of regional Hara-
ppa ceramic styles such as the Bara-style pottery in the
Ghaggar Valley, the Late-phase Harappa-style pottery
in Sindh and Punjab, and Sorath Harappa-style pot-
tery in Gujarat during the Late phase of the Urban
- 24 -
period (Figure 8: 3) are noteworthy (Uesugi 2013a,
2018) as it is a contrast to the Early phase of the
Urban period when a homogeneous Harappa-style
pottery was widespread over the Greater Indus Valley.
This phenomenon may reflect the change in the inter-
action and integration system of urban society during
the Late phase. It clearly exemplifies the importance
of the stylistic-chronological examinations on the ma-
terial culture.
With regard to the functional aspects of the
ceramics, it is noteworthy that there was a diversifi-
cation in forms of the ceramics in Balochistan during
the early third millennium BCE (Mehrgarh Period
VI and VII) and in the Harappa-style pottery of the
Urban period, which might have been related to a
change in the functions or use of ceramic vessels, that
is the culinary and food-serving style of the people or
the society. The Harappa-style pottery is comprised
of various forms such as tableware, drinking vessels,
cooking vessels and storage vessels, which show a dis-
tinctive difference from the ceramics of the Pre-Urban
and Post-Urban periods. The residue analyses (starch
grain analysis and lipid residue analysis) that are cur-
rently becoming popular in South Asian archaeology
(Kashyap and Weber 2013; Suryanarayan, in prep.,
pers. comm.) may reveal the diversification of the use
of ceramic vessels. The presence of drinking vessels
might have been related to the consumption of some
kind of alcohol.
It is also noteworthy that the complex paintings
consisting of various figurative and geometric motifs
are confined to some particular forms of vessels such
as large jars, S-shaped jars and ledged pots. These
forms seem to have been used as storage vessels as
suggested by the presence of lids for these vessels.
Some of the large jars and S-shaped jars have an ex-
traordinary size exceeding 1 m in height. These vessels
were painted with figurative and geometric motifs in a
systematic pattern over their wide area. Although it is
not certain what kind of values or meanings they were
 Akinori Uesugi Current state of research and issues of Indus Archaeology
given, the wide distribution of these painted storage
vessels indicates that they were special containers.
Their values and meanings may have been related to
the widespread dispersals of the Harappa-style pot-
tery. The examination of the contexts of these vessels
in sites might help understand the role of these vessels.
It should be noted that a number of painted
pottery of the Balochistan tradition appeared in the
antiquity markets and were purchased by museums
of many countries. The documentation and publica-
tion of these collections have been made by scholars
(Uesugi 2012, 2013b, 2013c, 2018; Konasukawa
et al. 2011b, 2012; Shudai et al. 2009, 2010, 2013,
2015; Franke and Cortesi 2015), but the large-scale
outflow of these archaeological items is a serious
problem for South Asian archaeology, as conducting
archaeological excavations in Balochistan is currently
difficult. The loss of archaeological contexts in these
artefacts makes it difficult to assess the importance of
Balochistan in the history of the Indus Civilization. It
is an urgent task to seek for some measures to relocate
the information from these museum collections back
to the original archaeological contexts in Balochistan.
Seals
Seals predominantly made of stones, especially ste-
atite, is an item representing the Indus Civilization.
The Indus seals, which became widespread during the
Urban period, are small artefacts having a size of 2 - 5
cm, but they are distinctive in having unique features
such as square shape with a knob, carved iconography,
signs and scripts, and the highly skilled technologies
of carving and firing steatite at a high temperature
to turn it into a white colour. This distinctive type
of seals occurs not only in the Greater Indus Valley
but also in Mesopotamia and southern Central Asia.
In the Arabian Peninsula, there are a fair number of
round steatite seals that share the elements of the In-
dus seals suggesting the importance of the Indus seals
in the interregional contacts over Southwest Asia.
- 25 -
Three volumes of the corpora of seals and in-
scribed objects from the Greater Indus Valley ( Joshi
and Parpola 1987; Shah and Parpola 1991; Parpola
et al. 2010) provide fundamental information about
Indus seals, but the lack of the archaeological contexts
for many seals is a great obstacle for the study of seals.
Since no seal has been found in the context of graves
in the Greater Indus Valley, it appears that the values
and meaning of Indus seals were closely connected
with the activities of people in settlements including
cities. However, there is no clear-cut distribution
pattern related to any particular type of structure or
context directly showing the function of seals. For
example, the excavations at Farmana yielded four
seals from floor-levels or occupational deposits inside
mud-brick structure, not from any specific contexts.
Although it is apparent that seals were valuable items
for the people of the Indus society, their archaeologi-
cal contexts do not demonstrate their values. It can be
assumed that the seals were not stored in some special
buildings and that they were discarded in a casual
manner. It is expected that the measures to store seals
or the patterns of discard will become clearer in exca-
vations in future.
The seals used during the Pre-Urban period were
the geometric seals that probably had its origin in the
Iranian plateau (Figures 17 and 18) (Uesugi 2011d).
It suggests that the Greater Indus Valley was a part of
the interaction sphere connecting to the Iranian pla-
teau during the Pre-Urban period. In this connection,
the emergence of the seals with concentric patterns
over the northeastern part of Balochistan, Punjab
and the Ghaggar Valley during the early third mil-
lennium BCE is noteworthy (Uesugi 2011d) (Figure
19). Since it was the time-period when the geometric
seals expanded over Punjab and the Ghaggar, it is
not unlikely that the expansion of the interaction
network urged the society in Punjab and the Ghaggar
Valley to invent their seal type. Thus, it seems that the
connection with the Iranian plateau had an unignor-
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology

3500BCE

PHASE 1 Period IV

Rehman Dheri

Iranian-type seal

Period V

3000BCE

Appearance of seal with concentric circles

EARLY HARAPPAN PERIOD

Period VI
PHASE 2

Rehman Dheri

Period VII
Mehrgarh

Gumla Tarakai Qila Kunal Harappa

2500BCE
PHASE 3

Nausharo Nagwada Bagasara

Indus seal with its Continuance of geometric seal

original iconography
HARAPPAN PERIOD

Figure 17 Diachronic changes of seals in the Greater Indus Valley (after Uesugi 2011d)

Tepe Hissar

Tepe Sialk

Tarakai Qila

Gumla

Mundigak Rehman Dheri

Harappa
Shahdad Shahr-i Sokhta
Kunal
Mehrgarh Kalibangan
Tal-i Malyan
Nausharo Tarkhanewala Dera

Baror
Jiroft

Tepe Yahya

Bampur Khurab

Shahi Tump

Figure 18 Spatial distribution of geometric seals in Southwest Asia (made by the author)

- 26 -
 Akinori Uesugi Current state of research and issues of Indus Archaeology

Gumla

Harappa

Rehman Dheri
Tarakai Qila

Mehrgarh Kunal

Mundigak

* *

Tarkhanewala Dera

Baror
* * *

*
Nausharo Bagasara

Nagwada

Figure 19 Spatial distribution of geometric seals in the Greater Indus Valley

(The ones with an asterisk were recovered from the Urban period level; made by the author)

able influence on the emergence of complex society/
ies over the Greater Indus Valley. The exanpation of
geometric seals is likely to have been related to the
Kot Diji culture. This culture that developed over the
Indus Valley during the early third millennium BCE
played a significant role in expanding the interaction
network, as the archaeological evidence indicates that
this culture penetrated the surrounding regions of the
Indus Valley and expanded the connections between
the regions (Figure 8: 2).
However, the stylistic gap between the Pre-Urban
geometric seals and the Indus seals of the Urban pe-
riod is too large to consider that the geometric seals
were the prototype of the Indus seals. It appears that
the Indus seal with its own design was invented at
some point of time in the process of the emergence of

- 27 -
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology
the urban society. If the assumption that the seal was
an indispensable tool for controlling the interaction
system can be accepted, the invention of the Indus
seal was of a political and economic aim of the urban
society. Further studies are expected to reveal how and
when the Indus seal made its appearance in connec-
tion with other elements of the material culture.
One of the recent remarkable advances in the
Indus seal studies is the examinations on the iconogra-
phy and the carving technology of the Indus seals. For
the iconography carved on seals, the unicorn counts
70 - 80 % of the total number of Indus seals, while the
rest of them depict various animals such as humped
bull, bison, buffalo, elephant, rhinoceros, tiger and so
on.
The preponderance of unicorns clearly indicates
its special meaning in the iconography of the Indus
seals (Kenoyer 2013). Unicorn does not have any rep-
resentation during the Pre-Urban period suggesting
that this animal was a part of the Urban Indus icono-
graphic programme that emerged along with Indus
seals around the beginning of the Urban period. In
addition to these animal motifs, some composite an-
imals and composite mythical or ritual scenes are de-
picted on a limited number of specimens (Frenez and
Vidale 2012). These examples clearly demonstrate the
complex iconographic and ideological system of the
urban society, which was created with the emergence
of the urban society.
While several scholars argue the iconographic
variations especially of unicorns (Franke-Vogt 1991;
Rissman 1989), recent studies focused on the more
systematic metric analysis of animal motifs ( Jamison
2016; Uesugi et al. 2017). The classification of animals
based on the combination of metric values of animals
aims at identifying the workshops where seals were
produced.
The question is what the different animals and
iconographic designs represent. It is certain that the
unicorn was given some special meaning in the Indus
- 28 -
society, but the other animals also had some special
meaning due to its rareness. To date, the differentiated
iconographic meanings that are likely to have been
given to different animals have not been revealed
by their archaeological contexts in sites, but future
studies must focus on the different meanings or roles
of various iconographic motifs. In connection to this,
the predominance of short-horned bull on the Gulf
type seals in Bahrain is noteworthy suggesting its spe-
cial meaning or value.
One of the Indus seal types having an animal motif
facing right and a semi-cylindrical knob, which differ
from the typical Indus seals, has been given attention
of scholars (Figure 20: 3) (Uesugi et al. 2017; Ameri
2013; Jamison 2018 in this volume). The number of
this seal is quite limited compared to the typical type
with an animal facing left (Figure 20: 1-2), but a fair
number of this type has been found in the Ghaggar
Valley although it also occurs in the other parts of
the Indus Valley in a limited number suggesting that
this type might have been a regional type among the
Indus seals. It has been suggested that this type may
represent an earlier type of the Indus seals (Kenoyer
and Meadow 2010), but it is difficult to prove it in the
present state of our information about seals. Notewor-
thy is that the depiction style of the animals on this
type resembles that of Dilmun seals found in Bahrain,
especially in terms of the large round eyes. This style
of eyes, which is also similar to that of the Faiz Mo-
hammad-style pottery and the Kulli-style pottery,
suggests that it belongs to a style different from that
of the typical Indus seals. Examinations on stylistic
and technological features of seals are crucial for iden-
tifying different types of the Indus seals and for better
understanding the developments of the Indus seals
over the Greater Indus Valley.
The analyses on the carving technology on Indus
seals can be divided into two types, the Replica-SEM
examination ( Jamison 2013, 2016; Uesugi et al. 2017;
Konasukawa 2015) and the examination using photos
 Akinori Uesugi Current state of research and issues of Indus Archaeology

1: Bagasra, Gujarat

2: Farmana, Haryana
Group 1 (typical type) of Indus seals

3: Farmana, Haryana

Group 2 (atypical type) of Indus seals

Figure 20 Iconographic variations of Indus seals
(not to scale; made by the author; courtesy of Department of Archaeology and Ancient History,
the Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda for the image of the seal from Bagasra)

(Green 2010). The former method, which was devel- nologies.

oped by J.M. Kenoyer, attempts to identify the tools
used for carving motifs, the details of the carvings and
the carving process on seals (Figure 21). The latter
aims at revealing the carving process. Although a few
samples have been analysed by these methods so far, it
has been demonstrated that the carving technologies
differ between the typical Indus seals and the atypical
type mentioned above suggesting that the different
depiction styles were related to different carving tech-
One of the serious problems we face is the difficul-
ty in determining the time-period to which each seal
belongs and in reconstructing the diachronic changes
in seals. As stated earlier, Indus seals are found only in
occupational contexts, but the stratigraphic contexts
of seals in sites do not necessarily exhibit the time-pe-
riod of the production of seals. A fair amount of
unfinished seals that have been recovered at a few sites
cannot help us identify their stylistic and technologi-

- 29 -
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology

Figure 21 SEM images of the carving technology on a seal from Bhirrana (after Uesugi et al. 2017)

cal features because they do not have carved elements.
It is uncertain how long or how many generations
seals were passed on, and the stratigraphic contexts
only exhibit the time of discards. In addition, there are
a number of seals whose contexts are not well known
making it difficult to identify the time-period of their
discards. The stylistic and technological studies must
be connected to the examinations of the stratigraphic
contexts to understand the developments of Indus
seals.
Stone bead ornaments
The study on the Indus ornaments has been remarka-
bly advanced by the studies by J.M. Kenoyer. Recent
studies expand our knowledge on the Indus orna-
ments based on the perspectives that Kenoyer has
developed.
A great number of materials related to stone or-
naments unearthed from Dholavira have been under
study by V.N. Prabhakar and R.S. Bisht (Prabhakar
et al. 2012). There are a number of sites with the
evidence of stone bead production in Gujarat where
the sources of various semiprecious stones used for
beads are located, not only large-scale urban centres
like Dholavira but also small-scale sites such as Kan-
mer (Kharakwal et al. 2012), Bagasra (Sonawane et
al. 2003), Shikarpur (the author's examination of the
materials from the excavation at this site), Khirsara

- 30 -
 Akinori Uesugi Current state of research and issues of Indus Archaeology

Northwest India North India South India

1-5, 7: Farmana 2600 BC

6: Mohenjodaro
8-10: Bedwa-2
Urban Indus

1 11-20: Bhagwanpura
4
21-24 Narhan Period II
25-29: Bhir Mound
2
30-34: Atranjikhera Period III
35: Narhan Period III
5
3 6 36, 37: Sirkap
1900 BC
Bronze Age

38-39: Probably from Taxila

40-42, 47, 49: Atranjikhera Period IV
43: Sonkh Period II
44-45, 48, 55: Ahichchhatra
Post-Urban Indus

46: Sonkh Period II

8
50, 51: Wari Bateshwar
9 52-54: Narhan Period IV
56-58, 61: Khapa
7
59-60, 62: Porkalam
63: Mahurjhari
10
Note : except for the ones from
Farmana, the illustrations were made
from photos published in reports.
1300 BC
Late second mill BC

11

13
14 15

South Indian Megalithic

12 1000 BC
Early first mill BC

21
Iron Age

16 17 18 19

20

22 23 24 600 BC
Mid- first mill BC

26
25
27
30
31 32

28 29 56 57 58 59 60
33
35 34 300 BC
Late first mill BC

43

38 39
40 41 42 61
62
63

36 37
44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 Beginning of CE
Historical Period

AD early first mill

52 53
54 AD 300
AD mid- first mill

Carnelian

Jasper

Others
55
AD 600

Figure 22 Chronological chart of stone beads in South Asia (made by the author)

- 31 -
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology
(Nath et al. 2013) and so on. Stone beads that are
likely to have been produced in the Indus Valley have
been known in the Arabian Peninsula, Mesopotamia
and southern Central Asia (Reade 1979; Possehl
1996; Aruz ed. 2003; Sarianidi 2007; De Waele and
Haerinck 2006) suggesting that the Indus beads were
widely considered as a valuable item in Southwest
Asia. As it can be presumed that they were highly
valued in the Indus urban society as well, it seems that
the production and distribution were controlled by
some authorities or elites. The fact that stone beads
were produced at many sites in Gujarat demonstrates
that the stone bead production was not so strongly
centralised, but in discussing the control over the
crafts including beads, the whole process starting from
acquisition of raw materials through production to
distribution must be examined.
The discovery of a few unfinished beads and debit-
age at some sites in the Ghaggar Valley such as at Far-
mana and Mitathal suggests that stone bead produc-
tions in some scale were also conducted in a region far
from stone sources (Figure 23). The beads produced at
these sites belong to short types, which are remarkably
shorter than the examples from Gujarat. As longer
beads require a higher skill in making a hole through
them, it is not unlikely that only shorter beads that
were relatively easier to be drilled were produced at
these sites. The absence at these sites of constricted
cylindrical drills of ernestite, which were used for
drilling beads during the Urban period, especially for
longer beads and were widely found in Gujarat, may
also indicate that the nature and scale of the bead pro-
duction in the Ghaggar Valley differed from that of
Gujarat. Further examination on more samples from
more sites is needed to better understand the produc-
tion and distribution patterns of stone beads in the
Greater Indus Valley where the sources of stones used
for beads were unevenly located in particular regions
of the Greater Indus Valley.
The study on the drilling technology of beads
- 32 -
using the Replica-SEM method (Figure 24) has also
been developed by J.M. Kenoyer and others (Kenoyer
1997; Kenoyer and Vidale 1992), especially on the ex-
amples from Harappa, and has recently been applied
to other sites (Uesugi et al. 2018). It has been revealed
by Kenoyer that ernestite drills were predominantly
used for drilling beads during the Urban period (Fig-
ure 24: top), among which constricted cylindrical
drills and shorter tapering drills are known. While the
latter was used for shorter beads, the former, which
enabled making a longer straight hole, seems to have
been developed exclusively for longer beads. As, tech-
nologically, the former can be considered as a technol-
ogy more developed than the latter, it is likely that the
former was developed chronologically later than the
latter. However, the SEM examinations on beads from
the Urban period show that both the types were used
for drilling during the period. Further examinations
on examples from more sites including the ones from
bead workshops are needed to better understand the
chronological and functional relationship between
different drilling technologies.
In relation to this issue, the examples from Mitath-
al are noteworthy. The surface patterns of the holes
of the agate beads from Mitathal (Figure 24: middle)
are distinctly different from that of the ernestite drill
that was predominantly attested in the examples from
Farmana (Uesugi et al. 2018). The profiles of holes
are not straight but winding in these specimens from
Mitathal indicating that the drill used was softer than
the ernestite drill that created a very smooth surface.
It seems that the drill used was a tubular copper drill
(Kenoyer pers. comm.). One of the possible inter-
pretations is that the uses of different drills were due
to the chronological difference between Farmana (c.
2500 - 2300 BCE) and Mitathal (c. 2300 - 1900 BCE)
(these dates were given based on 14C dates and ceram-
ic evidence). In this interpretation, it means that the
tubular copper drill was introduced during the Late
phase of the Urban period. Another interpretation
 Akinori Uesugi Current state of research and issues of Indus Archaeology

Farmana/Mitathal Kanmer Production stage

Nodule
12

Split
13
1

Blank
14

2 3
4

16

5
7 Modelling by
6 chipping
15

17

X
8

Grinding

19 20
18

Perforation
21 and polishing
9 10 11
22 23 24

Figure 23 Reconstruction of bead production process at Farmana (nos. 1-5, 7-11), Mitathal (no. 6) and Kanmer (12-24)
(after Uesugi et al. 2018)

- 33 -
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology

Surface Pattern 1
Extraordinarily smooth.
Fine-grained stone (Ernestite)
drill.
Samples 1 & 2: Farmana, Hary-
ana, India. Urban Indus period.

Surface Pattern 3
Shallow parallel grooves.
Copper tubular drill (?).
Samples 1 & 2: Mitathal, Hary-
ana, India. Urban Indus period.

Surface Pattern 4
Deep parallel grooves with
rugged surface.
Diamond drill (?).
Sample 6: Bedwa-2, Haryana,
India. Post-Urban Indus period
(?)
Sample 7: Kanmer, Gujarat,
India. Historical period.

Figure 24 Distinctive surface patterns of drilled holes of beads (after Uesugi et al. 2018)

may be that different types of drills were concurrently
used at different workshops in the Urban period.
Another noteworthy evidence is that stone beads
were extremely limited in number at Mitathal com-
pared to the large number of beads from Farmana,
although it must be noted that the excavated area at
Mitathal was notably smaller than that of Farmana.
If it can be assumed that the supply of stone beads
decreased during the Late phase of the Urban period
than the Early phase, it may be that the production
and distribution patterns of stone beads also changed
in the Late phase. The predominant increase of faience
ornaments in the Late phase, as evidenced at Mitathal,
also reinforces the possibility of the decrease of stone
beads in the Late phase. Although it is not beyond
imagination, the introduction of the tubular copper
drill at Mitathal may suggest a technological adapta-
tion to the situation of the decrease in the supply of
stone beads from the workshops in Gujarat. Further
researches are needed to testify this hypothesis and to
reveal the change in the production and distribution
patterns of crafts in connection to the decline process
of the urban society, especially during the Late phase
of the Urban period.
With regard to the morphology and size of beads,
the metrical analysis on the stone beads from Farma-
na have revealed that the dimensions of beads vary
according to the varieties of stones such as steatite,
carnelian, agate and jasper (Figure 25) (Konasukawa
et al. 2011; Uesugi et al. 2018). For example, while
steatite beads consist of extra-short disc, short cylin-
drical and medium cylindrical beads, many of agate
and jasper beads have a medium size, a few of them
belonging to the long class. This suggests that each

- 34 -
 Akinori Uesugi Current state of research and issues of Indus Archaeology
Carnelian
Agate
Jasper
Chalcedony
Steatite
Amazonite
Length (mm)
Width (mm)
Figure 25 Metrical distribution of stone beads from Farmana (after Uesugi et al. 2018)
stone variety had its function, value or meaning.
The scarcity of long beads at Farmana is also in-
teresting. As higher skill of craftsmanship is needed
to make longer beads, it is likely that the amount of
longer beads, especially extra-long beads, produced
and distributed was limited compared to the shorter
ones. Similar metrical analyses at other sites will reveal
the distribution pattern and the values of beads of
each stone. The composition of ornaments using var-
ious beads has not been so well understood, but the
morphology and size of beads must have been closely
related to the composition of ornaments and the sta-
tus of the person who wore them. Thus, the composi-
tion of ornaments is to be examined in future.
As is the case of seals, the diachronic changes
of the morphology and technology of beads have
not been well understood. The differences in beads
- 35 -
Extra-long
Long
Medium
Short
Extra-short
between the Pre-Urban and Urban periods must be
examined by future studies. The beads of the Urban
period is characterised by the presence of long and ex-
tra-long beads, but the question is when these longer
beads made their appearance. This question also per-
tains to the introduction of the drilling technology
using ernestite drills. As the emergence of the highly
skilled and specialised craft production and the trades
of crafts is closely related to the developments of the
urban society, the diachronic examinations of crafts
are unavoidably needed.
Similarly, the relationships between the craft pro-
duction including beads and the decline process of the
urban society are also important to be addressed for
further study. As stated earlier, the scarcity of stone
beads at Mitathal is relevant to this issue. The stone
beads unearthed from the excavations at Sanauli, a
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology
Post-Urban cemetery site in the Ganga-Yamuna Doab
region (Sharma et al. 2004, 2006), are expected to be
examined to see how the bead production changed
after or in the process of the decline of the urban soci-
ety.
Although the evidence regarding the stone beads
during the late second millennium BCE is limited
as a very few sites of this period have been excavated,
the prevalence of stone beads in the Ganga Valley
during the early first millennium BCE have been am-
ply proved by the excavations in this region (Figure
22). It is highly likely that 'diamond' drill (Figure 24:
bottom) had been introduced by this time showing a
technological innovation from the Indus bead-making
tradition. Further excavations and study of sites of the
second millennium BCE will reveal the technological
continuation and innovation of the bead production
from the Indus to Ganga bead-making traditions. Tak-
ing into consideration the possibility that a large-scale
population shift happened from the Indus Valley to
the Ganga Valley during the second millennium BCE,
it is not unlikely that the Indus bead-making tradition
was transferred to the Ganga Valley where the techno-
logical innovation happened. Further studies on beads
are needed to testify this hypothesis.
Metal objects
The number of studies on metal objects, mostly of
copper and bronze, is not so numerous. Most of the
varieties of copper/bronze objects of the Greater
Indus Valley were revealed in the early excavations at
Mohenjodaro and Harappa in the 1920s, while a few
new varieties were added to the corpus by later exca-
vations. Recent studies on copper/bronze objects are
focused on their technological and chemical analyses.
For the copper/bronze-making technology, the work
by J.M. Kenoyer and H.M.-L. Miller (1999) is the
most comprehensive. With regard to the metallurgical
and chemical analyses, T. Nagae (2011, 2018 in this
volume; Manmohan Kumar et al. 2012) analysed the
- 36 -
chemical composition and microstructure of copper/
bronze samples from Farmana and Mitathal in Har-
yana and characterised the technological features of
the copper/bronze objects. Attempts to identify the
sources of bronze using the lead isotope analysis have
been in progress (Law and Burton 2006a; Law et al.
2016; Prabhakar et al. 2010; Nagae pers. comm.).
Recent studies for identifying the copper/bronze
sources have been revealing the use of various met-
al sources over the Greater Indus Valley while the
sources in Oman and the Khetri region of Rajasthan
had been regarded as major sources of copper for the
Indus society (Weisgerber 1984; Agrawala and Vijay
Kumar 1982). Along with the provenience studies on
stones and minerals as seen later, the study on the cop-
per/bronze sources will reveal the complex patterns
of interregional interactions and trades of the Indus
urban society and beyond.
Lithics
The studies on the lithics of the Greater Indus Valley
were initially conducted by J. Pelegrin, M. Inizan
and M. Lechevallier, especially on the technological
aspects of the Rohri chert blade industry (Figure 26:
left) of the lower Indus Valley (Sindh) and Balochistan
during the Urban period (Inizan et al. 1994; Inizan
and Lechevallier 1990, 1997; Pelegrin 1994). Their
examinations have revealed that the traditional stone
knapping technique using the pressure technique was
widely exploited by the Indus lithic makers. The evi-
dence from the excavations at the Rohri Hills (Biagi
1996; Biagi and Cremaschi 1990; Biagi and Shaikh
1994, 1998-99; Biagi and Veesar 1998-99; Biagi and
Pessina 1994; Biagi et al. 1996) revealed the develop-
ments of this technology used for blade productions.
The blades made of Rohri chert (Figure 26: left)
were distributed over the Greater Indus Valley during
the Urban period and were predominantly used as
a cropping tool suggesting the mass production of
blades using the Rohri chert and their widespread dis-
 Akinori Uesugi Current state of research and issues of Indus Archaeology
5cm
Figure 26 Rohri chert blades (left) and chalcedony/agate blades (rights) from Kanmer (after Endo and Uesugi 2012)
tribution over the region. It is apparent that the blades
of Rohri chert were embedded in the extensive trading
network during the Urban period. However, the pro-
duction and distribution system and their diachronic
change have not been well examined. The future study
must focus on the distribution and consumption
pattern of the Rohri chert blades. The disappearance
of the Rohri chert blades should also be examined in
connection with the decline process of the urban soci-
ety.
The recent studies made by Charusmita Gadekar
focus on the blade industry in Gujarat using local
chalcedony/agate (Figure 26: right) (Gadekar 2015;
Gadekar et al. 2013, 2014a, 2014b, 2015; Gadekar and
Ajithprasad 2018). The locally-produced blades were
widespread in Gujarat along with Rohri chert blades
during the Urban period. While the size of blades in
this local lithic industry is remarkably smaller than
that of Rohri chert blades, a production technology
similar to that of the Rohri chert blades was used in
the local industry in Gujarat. According to her study,
the blade industry had developed in Gujarat since the
Mesolithic period and had continued to the Urban
Indus period, but a crested guiding ridge blade tech-
nique was introduced from Sindh around the begin-
ning of the third millennium BCE, while the people
in Gujarat also persisted using their local technique of
the quartering technique to produce blades.
Her studies demonstrate that a local tradition of
- 37 -
5cm
lithic production persisted in Gujarat even after the
widespread introduction of Rohri-chert blades during
the Urban period depending on the subsistence strat-
egy of local people. The diversity and complexity of
the urban society can be attested in this lithic study.
As the ceramic evidence also shows, the homogeneity
and diversity characterised the material culture of
Indus urban society suggesting the same in the social
structure. Further study on the material culture of the
Indus Civilization must be conducted on these two
contrasting aspects to reveal the dynamic nature of the
urban society, which was composed of the widespread
Harappan cultural elements and the regional cultural
traditions locally developed since Pre-Urban period.
In connection to the lithics, the production tech-
nology of stone artefacts such as beads and weights
also needs more attention (Pelegrin 1994; Inizan
1993). As stone beads and weights were the elements
of the material culture idiosyncratic to the urban so-
ciety, it seems likely that their production was highly
controlled in some way. It is important to examine
how their production technology and system were
different from that of lithics that were consumed
more abanduntly in the daily life of the people and
how they developed in time.
Provenience studies
A series of studies by Randall Law on the proveniences
of stones and minerals (Law 2002, 2005a, 2005b,
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology
2006, 2008, 2011, 2012; Law and Baqri 2001; Law et
al. 2016; Nath et al. 2014a, 2014b) are very impor-
tant for our understanding of the flow of people and
goods and of the trading networks that sustained the
urban society. In the Greater Indus Valley, a number
of stones and minerals were used for a diverse range of
purposes. Agate, carnelian, jasper, amazonite, steatite,
serpentine, grossular-vesuvianite, Lapis Lazuli and so
on, which distributed in particular localities of the
Greater Indus Valley, were used for producing orna-
ments. Sandstone and limestone were used as building
materials. In Gujarat, the buildings were constructed
with stones that were locally available. The studies by
Law based on the chemical characterisation of sam-
ples from his fieldworks in sources and archaeological
samples have revealed the diverse patterns of the use
of various stones, which indicate a highly complex
network connecting sources and places of consump-
tion.
It has been revealed that the stones and minerals
distributed in particular localities were widely trans-
ported to the sites in various parts of the Greater In-
dus Valley from the Pre-Urban period onwards. One
of the most noteworthy facts that Law has revealed
is that Harappa Period 3C, which is almost contem-
porary with the Late phase of the Urban period, wit-
nessed the most extensive use at Harappa of various
stones and minerals brought from different parts of
the Greater Indus Valley. As stated earlier, while the
Late phase of the Urban period is a time-period when
various changes happened in the urban society, such as
the emergence of regional styles of the Harappa-style
pottery and the Kulli-style pottery, the Law's studies
have unravelled the most flourishing trading network
during this period. It exhibits the necessity to corre-
late various kinds of evidence for better understanding
the developments and changes of the complex urban
society.
It is expected that further studies on the material
culture will reveal the relationships between the inter-
- 38 -
regional connections and interactions, and the trading
networks. Especially, the integrated understanding of
the relationships between the distribution pattern of
raw materials and that of the finished objects is cru-
cial. It is important to examine how the raw materials
imported from distant sources were transformed into
products at workshops and how the finished products
were exported to settlements in different parts of the
urban society.
PERSPECTIVES FOR FUTURE STUDIES
The discussions made above can be summarised in the
following points.
1) Although a number of sites have been excavated in
various parts of India and Pakistan, there are several
issues to be overcome in the recording and publica-
tion of the results of excavations. The resolution of
documenting the finds in excavations is not so high
resulting in the obscurity in the relationships between
the finds and the stratigraphy of the sites excavated.
It is important how we can document a diverse range
of information obtained from excavations and corre-
late them with each other to present a holistic view
towards the site excavated. The developing digital
technology can help make the resolution of documen-
tation better.
2) The surveys conducted in various parts of the
Greater Indus Valley have enriched our knowledge
about the Indus Civilization, but the improvement of
documenting sites is also necessary. The use of GNSS
is drastically changing the nature and quality of sur-
veys, but further documentation and visualisation of
sites found will contribute to our better understand-
ing of the distribution pattern of archaeological sites.
The documentation of finds from the surface and the
reporting of sites are also needed to create more infor-
 Akinori Uesugi Current state of research and issues of Indus Archaeology
mation and data from the surveys.
3) The stagnancy in chronological studies is a major
obstacle for examining the diachronic changes of the
Indus urban society. This problem is closely related to
Point 1 mentioned above. Each of three chronological
units, Pre-Urban, Urban and Post-Urban periods, has
a time span of several hundred years, which cannot be
helpful to trace the dynamics of the rise and fall of the
urban society.
This problem also creates another issue for un-
derstanding the spatial variations in material cultures
across the Greater Indus Valley. Assuming that the
Indus urban society was founded on the interrela-
tions between the regional societies/cultures and the
interregional network, it can be presumed that the
developments and changes of urban society were also
affected by regional societies and their relations. To
examine the interrelationships between regional socie-
ties and the urban society, the better understanding of
the spatial variations in material cultures is essential.
4) A diverse range of studies on various elements of
the material culture of the Greater Indus Valley has
been revealing the unity and diversity of the Indus
Civilization. However, the lack of our understanding
of the diachronic and spatial variability of the mate-
rial culture makes the interpretation of the results of
each analysis difficult for presenting the integrated
picture of the Indus Civilization. Examining how the
unity and diversity of the urban society diachronically
changed will lead to a better understanding of the
dynamics of the urbanisation and deurbanisation pro-
cess of the Indus Civilization.
The current trend in the Indus archaeology is ex-
tending its concern to the palaeo-environmental stud-
ies. Zooarchaeology and botanical archaeology, which
significantly contribute to our understanding of the
palaeo-environments, have a long history in South
- 39 -
Asia, but the recent palaeo-environmental studies are
more concerned with the palaeo-climates and mi-
cro-regional analysis on the palaeo-river channels to
understand the dynamics of the human-environment
relationships. Geo-archaeological investigations are
also part of this trend (Schuldenrein 2002; Schulden-
rein et al. 2006).
Especially, the recent palaeo-environmental stud-
ies focus on the decline of the urban society. It aims
at revealing the impact of 2.2k climate changes on the
Greater Indus Valley by focusing on the changes in the
summer monsoon and the precipitation which might
have caused the decline of the urban society in the
Indus Valley (Dixit et al. 2014).
The decline of the Indus Civilization has been one
of the controversial issues of the Indus archaeology, in
relation to which various hypotheses on anthropogen-
ic or environmental factors have been proposed. Most
of the theories did not have hard evidence to prove
them, but the recent palaeo-environmental studies
have been providing the data for reconstructing
environmental changes. The population shifts from
the Indus Valley to the Ghaggar and Ganga Valleys
during the early second millennium BCE attested in
the changes of the distribution pattern of settlements
(Figure 8: 4) (Teramura and Uno 2006) are likely to
have been connected to the deurbanisation process. It
seems that such large-scale population shifts happened
due to environmental changes rather than anthropo-
genic factors. As one moves eastwards to the Ganga
Valley, the precipitation increases, and the alluvial
land with high potential for agricultural productions
is encountered. The population shifts must have been
associated with the changes in the settlement and sub-
sistence patterns.
While the palaeo-environmental studies are very
significant in understanding the macro-scale trend
in social change, the problem to be addressed is that
the human or social adaptations to the environmental
change have not fully been explained. It seems to be
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology
difficult to understand the decline process finally
leading to the abandonment of urban centres and the
writing system until the process of the changes in the
society is revealed. The Indus urban society is a highly
complex one which was characterised by the extensive
urban network connecting regional societies across
the Greater Indus Valley and linking to the South-
west Asian Civilization sphere. The exploitation of a
diverse range of resources, the productions of various
commodities and crafts, the consumptions of such
goods in various contexts, the flows and interactions
of populations and the share of technology and ideol-
ogy and so on sustained the urban society. It is likely
that the decline process of such a highly complex
society also entailed a number of events and changes
to adapt to changing environments and to develop
another form of society. However, the facts that we
know about the decline process is miserably limited.
To overcome the current state of our understanding
of the decline process, it is desirable to address future
studies towards examining the diachronic and spatial
variability at a refined scale and tracing the dynamic
changes of the urban society.
Acknowledgements
The author is grateful to many scholars for their sup-
port and suggestions to his work. Especially he would
like to express his immense gratitude to Dr Jean-
†
François Jarrige , Dr J.M. Kenoyer, Dr Manmohan
Kumar, Dr Ajithprasad, Dr Aurore Didier, Dr Gon-
zague Quivron, Dr Gregg Jamison, Dr Vivek Dangi,
Dr Rajesh S.V., Dr Charusmita Gadekar and Akshyeta
Suryanarayan. The drawings of pottery from Nausha-
ro were reproduced in this article with the permission
of Dr Didier and Dr Quivron of CNRS.
It is noted that this article contains unpublished
images from the excavations at Shikarpur and from
Bagasra, both of which were excavated by Department
of Archaeology and Ancient History, the Maharaja
- 40 -
Sayajirao University of Baroda, and that they were
published with permission from the department. It is
also mentioned that this article was published as part
of a research project 'Establishing the Chronology of
South Indian Prehistory' funded by the Grant-in-Aid,
Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (Project
no.: 15H05164; Principal investigator: Akinori Uesu-
gi).
References
Acharya, M. ed. 2008. Kunal Excavations. Department of
Archaeology & Museums, Haryana, Panchkula.
Acharya, M. and R.S. Dahiya no date. Jognakhera, Kurukshet-
ra (Excavations under Sarasvati Heritage Project). Direc-
tor, Archaeology & Museum, Haryana, Panchkula.
Agrawala, R.C. and Vijay Kumar 1982. "Ganeshwar-Jodh-
pura Culture: New Traits in Indian Archaeology", in G.L.
Possehl ed. Harappan Civilization: a Contemporary Per-
spective. Oxford IBH and the American Institute of Indian
Studies, New Delhi. pp. 125-134.
Ajithprasad, P. 2008. "Jaidak (Pithad): a Sorath Harappan
site in Jamnagar district, Gujarat and its architectural fea-
tures", in T. Osada and A. Uesugi eds. Occasional Paper 4:
Linguistics, Archaeology and the Human Past. Indus Pro-
ject, Research Institute for Humanity and Nature, Kyoyo.
pp. 83-99.
Ajithprasad, P., SV Rajesh and B. Sharma 2011. "Archaeolog-
ical explorations in the Saurashtra coast of Junagadh Dis-
trict, Gujarat", in T. Osada and A. Uesugi eds. Occasional
Paper 10: Linguistics, Archaeology and the Human Past. In-
dus Project, Research Institute for Humanity and Nature,
Kyoto. pp. 27-70.
Ali, I. and G.R. Khan 2001. Jhandi Babar I: A Neolithic Site
in the Gomal Plain, Pakistan. Ancient Pakistan 14: 174-
217.
Ali, T. ed. 1994-95. Excavations in the Gomal Valley: Reh-
man Dheri Report No.2. Ancient Pakistan 10: 1-233.
Allchin, F.R., B. Allchin, F.A. Durrani and M.Farid Khan
1986. Lewan and the Bannu Basin: Excavation and Sur-
vey of sites and environments in North West Pakistan. BAR
International Series 310. BAR, Cambridge.
 Akinori Uesugi Current state of research and issues of Indus Archaeology
Allchin, F.R. and J.P. Joshi 1995. Excavations at Malvan
(Report of the Collaboration of the Archaeological Survey
of India and Cambridge University in 1970, on the Gujarat
Plain). Memoirs of the Archaeological Survey of India
no.92. Archaeological Survey of India, New Delhi.
Allchin, F.R. and R. Knox 1981. "Preliminary Report on the
Excavations at Tarakai Quila, 1978-79", in H. Härtel ed.
South Asian Archaeology 1979. Dietrich Reimer Verlag,
Berlin. pp. 245-250.
Ameri, M. 2013. "Regional Diversity in the Harappan World:
The Evidence of the Seals", in S.A. Abraham, P. Gullapalli,
T.P. Raczek and U.Z. Rizvi eds. Connections and Complex-
ity: New Approaches to the Archaeology of South Asia. Left
Coast Press, Walnut Creek. pp. 355-374.
Ameri, M. 2016. "Changing Patterns of Indo-Airanian Inter-
action in the Third and Second Millennia BCE as Seen
from the Ahar-Banas Culture", in V. Widorn, U. Franke
and P. Latschenberger eds. South Asian Archaeology and
Art: Contextualizing Material Culture in South and Cen-
tral Asia in Pre-Modern Times. Brepols, Turnout. pp. 37-
49.
Aruz, J. ed. 2003. Art of the First Cities: The Third Millennium
B.C. from the Mediterranean to the Indus. The Metropoli-
tan Museum of Art, New York.
Babu, B.S.R. 1995. Excavations at Bhorgarh. Purātattva 25:
88-90.
Babu, B.S.R. 1996. "Mandoli - A Late Harappan Settlement
in Delhi", in C. Margabandhu and K.S. Ramachandran
eds. Spectrum of Indian Culture (Prof. S.B. Deo Felicitation
Volume). Agam Kala Prakashan, Delhi. pp. 98-104.
Bala, M. and Vishnu Kant 2000. Dhalewan - An Early Hara-
ppan site in Punjab. Purātattva 30: 42-44.
Bala, M. and Vishnu Kant 2006. "Dhalewan - Early-Mature
Harappan Excavated Site in Punjab (India)", in D.P. Shar-
ma and M. Sharma eds. Early Harappans and Indus-Sar-
asvati Covilization, vol. I. Kaveri Books, New Delhi. pp.
207-209.
Balbo, A.L., B. Rondelli, F.C. Conesa, C. Lancelotti, M.
Madella and P. Ajithprasad 2013. Contributions of geo-
archaeology and remote sensing to the study of Holocene
hunter-gatherer and agro-pastoral groups in arid margins:
The case of North Gujarat (Northwest India). Quaternary
International 308-309: 53-65.
- 41 -
Besenval, R. 1994. "The 1992-1993 field-seasons at Miri Qa-
lat: new contributions to the chronology of Protohistoric
settlement in Pakistani Makran", in A. Parpola and P. Ko-
skikallio eds. South Asian Archaeology 1993. Suomalainen
Tiedeakatemia, Helsinki. pp. 81-92.
Besenval, R. 1997. "The Chronology of Ancient Occupation
in Makran: Results of the 1994 Season at Miri Qalat,
Pakistan Makran", in F. Allchin and B. Allchin eds. South
Asian Archaeology 1995. The Ancient India and Iran Trust,
Cambridge. pp. 199-216.
Besenval, R. 2000. "New Data for the Chronology of the
Protohistory of Kech-Makran (Pakistan) from Miri Qalat
1996 and Shahi-Tump 1997 Field-Seasons", in M. Taddei
and G. De Marco eds. South Asian Archaeology 1997. Isti-
tuto Italiano per l'Africa e l'Oriente, Rome. pp. 161-187.
Besenval, R. and P. Marquis 1993. "Excavations in Miri Qalat
(Pakistani Makran) - Results of the First Field-Season
(1990)", in A. Gail and G.J.D. Mevissen eds. South Asian
Archaeology 1991. Franz Steiner Verlag, Stuttgart. pp. 31-
48.
Bhan, K.K. and P. Ajithprasad 2008. Excavations at Shikar-
pur 2007-2008: A Costal Port and Craft Production Center
of the Indus Civilization in Kutch, India. http://www.
harappa.com/goladhoro/:1-9.
Bhan, K.K. and P. Ajithprasad 2008. Excavations at Shikar-
pur, Gujarat 2008-2009. http://www.harappa.com/golad-
horo/:1-9.
Biagi, P. 1996. An AMS Radiocarbon Date from the Harap-
pan Flint Quarry-Pit 862 in the Rohri Hills (Sindh-Paki-
stan). Ancient Sindh 2: 81-84.
Biagi, P. and M. Cremaschi 1990. "Geoarchaeological Investi-
gations on the Rohri Hills (Sind, Pakistan)", in M. Taddei
ed. South Asian Archaeology 1987. IsMEO, Rome. pp. 31-
42.
Biagi, P., C. Ottomano, A. Pessina and N. Shaikh 1996. The
1994 Campaign on the Rohri Hills (Sindh-Pakistan): A
Preliminary Report. Ancient Sindh 2: 13-40.
Biagi, P. and A. Pessina 1994. Surveys and Excavations in the
Rohri Hills (Sindh-Pakistan): A Preliminary Report on
the 1993 Campaign. Ancient Sindh 1: 13-75.
Biagi, P. and N. Shaikh 1994. An Italo-Pakistani Joint Project
in the Rohri Hills (Sindh-Pakistan): Aims and perspec-
tives. Ancient Sindh 1: 1-12.
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology
Biagi, P. and N. Shaikh 1998-99. Preliminary Report of the
Surveys and Excavations Carried Out by Members of the
"Joint Rohri Hills Project" in January-February 2000. An-
cient Sindh 5: 65-75.
Biagi, P. and M. Veesar 1998-99. An Archaeological Survey in
the Neighbourhood of Thari in the Thar Desert. Ancient
Sindh 5: 93-118.
Bisht, R.S. 1977. Banawali: A Look Back into the Pre-Indus
and Indus Civilization. Haryana Government, Chandi-
garh.
Bisht, R.S. 1982. "Excavations at Banawali: 1974-77", in G.L.
Possehl ed. Harappan Civilization: a Contemporary Per-
spective. Oxford IBH and the American Institute of Indian
Studies, New Delhi. pp. 113-124.
Bisht, R.S. 1987. "Further Excavation at Banawali, 1983-84",
in in B.M. Pande and B.D. Chattopadhyaya eds. Archaeol-
ogy and History: Essays in Memory of Sh. A. Ghosh. Agam
Kala Prakashan, Delhi. pp. 135-156.
Bisht, R.S. 1997. "Dholavira Excavations: 1990-94", in J.P.
Joshi et al. eds. Facets of Indian Civilization. Aryan Books
International, New Delhi. pp. 107-120.
Bisht, R.S. and S. Asthana 1979. "Banawali and Some Other
Recently Excavated Harappan Sites in India", in M. Taddei
ed. South Asian Archaeology 1977. Istituto Universitario
Orientale, Naples. pp. 225-240.
Casal, J.-M. 1961. Fouilles de Mundigak. Librairie C. Klinck-
sieck, Paris.
Casal, J.-M. 1964. Fouilles D' Amri. Librarie C. Klincksieck,
Paris.
Chitalwala, Y.M. and P.K. Thomas 1978. Faunal Remains
from Khanpur and Their Bearing on the Culture, Econo-
my, and Environment. Bulletin of Deccan College Research
Institute 37: 11-14.
Conesa, F.C., N. Devanthery, A. Balbo, M. Madella and P.
Ajithprasad 2013. Identification of Seasonally Flooded
Areas in North Gujarat Using Radar Satellite Imagery:
Implications for Archaeology. Heritage: Journal of Multi-
disciplinary Studies in Archaeology 1: 344-355.
Conesa, F.C., N. Devanthéry, A.L. Balbo, M. Madella and
O. Monserrat 2014a. Use of Satellite SAR for Under-
standing Kibg-Term Human Occupation Dynamics in
the Monsoonal Semi-Arid Plains of North Gujarat, India.
Remote Sensing 6: 11420-11443.
- 42 -
Conesa, F.C., M. Madella, N. Galiatsatos, A.L. Balbo, S.V. Ra-
jesh and P. Ajithprasad 2014b. CORONA Photographs
in Monsoonal Semi-arid Environments: Addressing Ar-
chaeological Surveys and Historic Landscape Dynamics
over North Gujarat, India. Archaeological Prospection
(DOI: 10.1002/arp.1498).
Conesa, F.C., A. Lobo, J. Alcaina, A. Balbo, M. Madella,
Rajesh S.V., P. Ajithprasad 2017. Multi-proxy survey of
open-air surface scatters in drylands: Archaeological and
physico-chemical characterisation of fossilised dunes in
North Gujarat (India). Quaternary International (http://
dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2016.11.013).
Cortesi, E., M. Daszkiewicz, G. Schneider and U. Franke
2016. "Sohr Damb/Nal, Pakistan: Preliminary Results
of Archaeometric Analysis of Pottery", in V. Lefèvre, A.
Didier and B. Mutin eds. South Asian Archaeology and Art
2012, vol. 1: Man and Environment in Prehistoric and Pro-
tohistoric South Asia - New Perspectives. Brepols, Turnout.
pp. 63-80.
Courty, M.A. and V. Roux 1995. Identification of Wheel
Throwing on the basis of Ceramic Surface Features and
Microfabrics. Journal of Archaeological Science 22: 17-50.
Dales, G.F. 1965. New Investigations at Mohenjo-daro. Ar-
chaeology 18: 145-150.
Dales, G.F. 1974. Excavations at Balakot, Pakistan, 1973.
Journal of Field Archaeology 1: 3-22.
Dales, G.F. 1979. "The Balakot Project: Summary of Four
Years Excavations in Pakistan", in M. Taddei ed. South
Asian Archaeology 1977. Istituto Universitario Orientale,
Naples. pp. 241-274.
Dales, G.F. 1989. Excavation at Harappa 1988. Pakistan Ar-
chaeology 24: 68-176.
Dales, G.F. and J.M. Kenoyer 1986. Excavations at Mohenjo
Daro, Pakistan: The Pottery. The University Museum,
Philadelphia.
Dales, G.F. and J.M. Kenoyer 1992a. "Harappa 1989: Sum-
mary of the Fourth Season", in C. Jarrige ed. South Asian
Archaeology 1989. Prehistory Press, Wisconsin. pp. 57-67.
Dales, G.F. and J.M. Kenoyer 1992b. Excavation at Harappa.
Pakistan Archaeology 27: 31-88.
Dales, G.F. and J.M. Kenoyer 1993. "The Harappa Project
1986-1989: New Investigation at an Ancient Indus City",
in G.L. Possehl ed. Harappan Civilization: a Recent Per-
 Akinori Uesugi Current state of research and issues of Indus Archaeology
spective. Oxford IBH and the American Institute of Indian
Studies, New Delhi. pp. 469-520.
Dales, G.F. and C.P. Lippo 1992. Explorations on the Makran
Coast, Pakistan: A Search for Paradise. Contributions of
the University of California, Archaeological Research Fa-
cility 50. Archaeological Facility, University of California
at Berkeley, Berkeley.
Dangi, V. 2009a. Archaeology of the Ghaggar Basin: Settle-
ment Archaeology of Meham Block, Rohtak, Haryana,
India. Occasional Paper 8: Linguistics, Archaeology and
the Human Past. Indus Project, Research Institute for Hu-
manity and Nature, Kyoto.
Dangi, V. 2009b. "Recent exploration in the Chautang Basin
( Jind District, Haryana)", in T. Osada and A. Uesugi eds.
Occasional Paper 9: Linguistics, Archaeology and the Hu-
man Past. Indus Project, Research Institute for Humanity
and Nature, Kyoto. pp. 73-163.
Dangi, V. 2010. A Study of Proto-Historic Settlements in Upper
Ghaggar Basin. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. Maharshi
Dayanand University, Rohtak.
Dangi, V. 2011. Explorations along the Ghaggar River and
Sirhind Nala in Haryana and Punjab. Man and Environ-
ment 36(2): 66-87.
Dangi, V. and Parveen Kumar 2013. Archaeological Explora-
tions in Charkhi-Dadri-2 Block, District Bhiwani, Harya-
na. Man and Environment 38(1): 23-31.
Dangi, V. and Samunder 2013. New Evidences from the
Harappan Cemetery of Seman 6, District Rohtak, Hary-
ana. Heritage: Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies in Ar-
chaeology 1: 402-423.
Dangi, V. and A. Uesugi 2013. A Study on the Harappan
Painted Pottery from the Ghaggar Plains. Purātattva 43:
195-215.
Dangi, V., A. Uesugi, Manmohan Kumar, V. Shinde and Appu
2015. "Bedwa: A Mature and Late Harappan Necropolis
in the Upper Ghaggar Basin", in Manmohan Kumar and A.
Uesugi eds. Harappan Studies, vol. 1. Aryan Books Inter-
national, New Delhi. pp. 93-152.
Dani, A.H. 1970-71. Excavations in the Gomal Valley. An-
cient Pakistan 5: 1-177.
de Cardi, B. 1965. Excavations and Reconnaissance in Kalat,
West Pakistan: The Prehistoric Sequence in the Surab Re-
gion. Pakistan Archaeology 2: 86-182.
- 43 -
De Waele, A. and E. Haerinck 2006. Etched (carnelian) beads
from northeast and southeast Arabia. Arabian Archaeolo-
gy and Epigraphy 17(1): 31-40.
Department of Archaeology 1964. Excavations at Naru Waro
Dharo. Pakistan Archaeology 1: 43-44.
Dhavalikar, M.K., M.R. Raval and Y.M. Chitalwala 1996.
Kuntasi: A Harappan Emporium on West Coast. Deccan
College Post-Graduate Research Institute, Pune.
Didier, A., A. Bouquillon, Y. Coquinot, A.-S. Le Ho and
F. Mirambet 2016. "Polychrome Wares from Pakistan
Makran, Mehrgarh/Nausharo (Pakistan) and Mundigak
(Afghanistan) - First Results of the Archaeometric Stud-
ies", in V. Widorn, U. Franke and P. Latschenberger eds.
South Asian Archaeology and Art: Contextualizing Materi-
al Culture in South and Central Asia in Pre-Modern Times.
Brepols, Turnout. pp. 11-24.
Dikshit, K.N. 1980. The Excavation at Hulas and Further
Exploration of the Upper Ganga-Yamuna Doab. Man and
Environment 5: 70-76.
Dikshit, K.N. 1982. "Hulas and the Late Harappan Complex
in Western Uttar Pradesh", in G.L. Possehl ed. Harappan
Civilization: a Contemporary Perspective. Oxford IBH and
the American Institute of Indian Studies, New Delhi. pp.
399-411.
Dikshit, K.N. 1984. "The Sothi Complex: Old Records and
Fresh Observation", in B.B. Lal and S.P. Gupta eds. Front-
giers of the Indus Civilization: Sir Mortimer Wheeler Com-
memoration Volume. Books & Books, New Delhi. pp. 531-
537.
Dixit, Y., D.A. Hodell and C.A. Petrie 2014. Abrupt weak-
ening of the summer monsoon in northwest India - 4100
yr ago. Geology, published online on 24 February 2014 as
doi: 10.1130/G35236.1: .
Dupree, L. 1963. Deh Morasi Ghundai: a chalcolithic site in
south-central Afghanistan. Anthropological Papers of the
American Museum of Natural History 50: 59-135.
Durrani, F.A. 1988. Excavations in the Gomal Valley: Reh-
man Dheri Excavation Report No.1. Ancient Pakistan 6:
1-232.
Durrani, F.A, I. Ali and G. Erdosy 1991. Further Excavation
at Rehman Dheri. Ancient Pakistan 7: 61-151.
Fairservis, W.A.Jr. 1956. Excavations in the Quetta Valley,
West Pakistan. Anthropological Papers of the American
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology
Museum of Natural History 45(2): 165-402.
Fairservis, W.A.Jr. 1959. Archaeological Surveys in the Zhob
and Loralai Districts, West Pakistan. Anthropological
Papers of the American Museum of Natural History 47(2):
227-448.
Fairservis, W.A.Jr. 1979. Preliminary Report on Excavations
at Allahdino (First Season 1973). Pakistan Archaeology 9:
95-102.
Fairservis, W.A.Jr. 1982. "Allahdino: An Excavation of a
Small Harappan Site", in G.L. Possehl ed. Harappan Civi-
lization: a Contemporary Perspective. Oxford IBH and the
American Institute of Indian Studies, New Delhi. pp. 107-
112.
Farooqui, A., A.S. Gaur and V. Prasad 2013. Climate, Vegeta-
tion and Ecology during Harappan Period: Excavations at
Kanjetar and Kaj, Mid- Saurashtra Coast, Gujarat. Journal
of Archaeological Science 40(6): 2631-2647.
Flam, L. 1993. "Excavations at Ghazi Shah, Sindh, Pakistan",
in G.L. Possehl ed. Harappan Civilization: a Recent Per-
spective. Oxford IBH and the American Institute of Indian
Studies, New Delhi. pp. 457-467.
Francfort, H.-P. 1989. Fouilles de Shortughai: Recherches sur
L' Asie Central Protohistorique. Diffusion de Boccard, Par-
is.
Franke, U. and E. Cortesi 2015. Lost and Found: Prehistoric
Pottery Treasures from Baluchistan. Museum of Islamic
Art/Pergamon Museum, Berlin.
Franke-Vogt, A. 1991. "The Glyptic Art of the Harappa Cul-
ture", in M. Jansen, M. Mulloy and G. Urban eds. Forgotten
Cities on the Indus: Early Civilization in Pakistan from the
8th to the 2nd Millennium BC. Verlag Philipp von Zabern,
Mainz. pp. 179-187.
Franke-Vogt, U. 1997. "Reopening Research on Balakot: A
Summary of Perspectives and First Results", in F. Allchin
and B. Allchin eds. South Asian Archaeology 1995. The
Ancient India and Iran Trust, Cambridge. pp. 217-235.
Franke-Vogt, U. 2005a. "Excavations at Sohr Damb/Nal: Re-
sults of the 2002 and 2004 Seasons", in U. Franke-Vogt and
H.-J. Weishaar eds. South Asian Archaeology 2003. Linden
Soft Verlag e.K., Aachen. pp. 63-76.
Franke-Vogt, U. 2005b. Sohr Damb/Nal, Balučstan, Pakistan:
Ergebnisse der Grabungen 2001, 2002 und 2004. Archäol-
ogische Mitteilungen aus Iran und Turan 35-36: 83-141.
- 44 -
Frenez, D. and M. Vidale 2012. Harappan Chimeras as 'Sym-
bolic Hypertests'. Some Thoughts on Plato, Chimera and
the Indus Civilization. South Asian Studies 28(2): 107-
130.
Gadekar, C. 2015. Towards a New Direction in Lithic Stud-
ies. Man and Environment 40(1): 19-26.
Gadekar, C. and P. Ajithprasad 2018. "Lithic Blade Im-
plements and their Role in the Harappan Chalcolithic
Cultural Development in Gujarat", in D. Frenez, G.M.
Jamison, R.W. Law, M. Vidale and R.H. Meadow eds.
Walking with the Unicorn: Social Organization and Mate-
rial Culture in Ancient South Asia, Jonathan Mark Kenoy-
er Felicitation Volume. Archaeopress, Oxford. pp. 194-209.
Gadekar, C., P. Ajithprasad and M. Madella 2013. Crested
Ridge Technique and Lithic Assemblage from Datrana,
Gujarat. Heritage: Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies in
Archaeology 1: 16-28.
Gadekar, C., P. Ajithprasad, M. Madella, A. Balbo, S.V. Ra-
jesh, B. Rondelli, J.J. Garcia Granero, D. Rodriguez and
V. Yanitto 2014a. Continuation of a Tradition over Five
Thousand Years: Lithic Assemblage from Loteshwar,
North Gujarat, Western India.. Heritage: Journal of Multi-
disciplinary Studies in Archaeology 2: 283-304.
Gadekar, C., P. Ajithprasad and Rajesh S.V. 2015. A Com-
parison of Lithic Assemblages Belonging to Economically
Diverse Settlements Flourishing During Mid-third Mil-
lennium BCE Gujarat. Heritage: Journal of Multidiscipli-
nary Studies in Archaeology 3: 44-53.
Gadekar, C., S.V. Rajesh, S. Shaikh, B. Chase, Y.S. Rawat, A.
Patel, G.S. Abhayan, V. Vinod, Ajit Kumar and P. Ajith-
prasad. 2014b. Typological Analysis of Chalcolithic Lith-
ic Assemblage from Navinal, District Kachchh, Gujarat,
Western India. Man and Environment 39(1): 92-105.
Garge, T. 2005. Salvaging the Vanishing Harappans in Hary-
ana. Purātattva 35: 94-101.
Gaur, A.S., Sundaresh and P.P. Joglekar 2006. Excavations at
Bokhira (Porbandar) on the Saurashtra Coast. Man and
Environment 31(1): 33-39.
Gaur, A. S., Sundaresh and K.H. Vora 2005. Archaeology of
Bet Dwarka Island An Excavation Report. Aryan Books
International and National Institute of Oceanography,
New Delhi and Goa.
Gaur, R.C. 1983. Excavations at Atranjikhera. Motilal Banar-
 Akinori Uesugi Current state of research and issues of Indus Archaeology
sidass, Delhi.
Gaur, R.C. 1995. Excavations at Lal Qila – A Habitational
OCP Site & A Unique Copper-Hoard from Kiratpur. Pub-
lication Scheme, Jaipur.
Green, A.S. 2010. Reconstructing Operational Sequences:
A New Methodology for the Study of Seal Carving in the
Indus Civilization. Man and Environment 35(2): 15-34.
Halim, M.A. 1972a. Excavations at Sarai Khola, Part I. Paki-
stan Archaeology 7: 23-89.
Halim, M.A. 1972b. Excavations at Sarai Khola, Part II. Pa-
kistan Archaeology 8: 1-112.
Hegde, K.T.M, K.K. Bhan, V.H. Sonawane, K. Krishnan and
D.R. Shah 1990. Excavation at Nageshwar Gujarat A
Harappan Shell Working Site on the Gulf of Kutch. Ma-
haraja Sayajirao University Archaeology Series No. 18.
Department of Archaeology and Ancient History, the
Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda, Vadodara.
Hegde, K.T.M., V.H. Sonawane, D.R. Shah, K.K. Bhan,
Ajithprasad, K. Krishnan and S. Pratapa Chandran 1988.
Excavation at Nagwada - 1986 and 1987: A Preliminary
Report. Man and Environment 12: 55-65.
Heras, S.J.H. 1938. A Proto-Indian Sign from Vala. The
Quarterly Journal of the Mythic Society 28(3): 141-143.
Inizan, M.-L. 1993. "At the Dawn of Trade, Cornelian from
India to Mesopotamia in the Third Millennium: The Ex-
amples of Tello", in A. Gail and G.J.D. Mevissen eds. South
Asian Archaeology 1991. Franz Steiner Verlag, Stuttgart.
pp. 121-134.
Inizan, M.-L. and M. Lechevallier 1990. "A Techno-econom-
ic Approach to Lithics: Some Examples of Blade Pressure
Debitage in the Indo-Pakistani Subcontinent", in M. Tad-
dei ed. South Asian Archaeology 1987. IsMEO, Rome. pp.
43-59.
Inizan, M.-L. and M. Lechevallier 1995. Pressure Debitage
and Heat Treatment in the Microlithic Assemblage of
Bagor, Northwest India. Man and Environment 20(2): 17-
21.
Inizan, M.-L., M. Lechevallier and J. Pelegrin 1994. "The use
of metal in the lithics of Sheri Khan Tarakai, Pakistan:
evidence provided by the technological approach of pres-
sure debitage", in A. Parpola and P. Koskikallio eds. South
Asian Archaeology 1993. Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia,
Helsinki. pp. 245-256..
- 45 -
Jamison, G.M. 2013. Experimental and Ethnoarchaeological
Approaches to Indus Seal Production: Modeling Variation
in Manufacturing Techniques. Heritage: Journal of Multi-
disciplinary Studies in Archaeology 1: 222-243.
Jamison, G.M. 2016. "Seal Production in the Indus Civiliza-
tion: a Comparative Analysis of Regional Carving Tradi-
tions", in V. Widorn, U. Franke and P. Latschenberger eds.
South Asian Archaeology and Art: Contextualizing Materi-
al Culture in South and Central Asia in Pre-Modern Times.
Brepols, Turnout. pp. 79-89.
Jamison, G.M. 2018. "Exploring stylistic variation in in-
scribed steatite seals of the Indus civilization: a com-
parison of materials from sites in Gujarat and the Gh-
aggar-Hakra region", in A. Uesugi ed. Current Research
on Indus Archaeology. Research Group for South Asian
Archaeology, Archaeological Research Institute, Kansai
University, Osaka. pp. 169-194.
Jarrige, C., J.-F. Jarrige, R.H. Meadow and G. Quivron 1995.
Mehrgarh: Field reports 1974-1985. The Department of
Culture and Tourism, Government of Sindh, Pakistan in
collaboration with the French Ministry of Foreign Affairs,
Karachi.
Jarrige, J.-F. 1985. "Continuity and Change in the Northern
Kachi Plain (Baluchistan, Pakistan) at the Beginning of
the Second Millennium B.C.", in J. Schotsmans and M.
Taddei eds. South Asian Archaeology 1983. Istituto Univer-
sitario Orientale, Naples. pp. 35-68.
Jarrige, J.-F. 1986. Excavations at Mehrgarh-Nausharo. Paki-
stan Archaeology 10-22: 63-130.
Jarrige, J.-F. 1988. Excavations at Nausharo. Pakistan Archae-
ology 23: 149-203.
Jarrige, J.-F. 1989. Exacavation at Nausharo 1987-88. Pakistan
Archaeology 24: 21-67.
Jarrige, J.-F. 1990. Excavations at Nausharo; 1988-89. Paki-
stan Archaeology 25: 193-240.
Jarrige, J.-F. 1993. "The Question of the Beginning of the Ma-
ture Harappan Civilization as Seen from Nausharo Exca-
vations", in A. Gail and G.J.D. Mevissen eds. South Asian
Archaeology 1991. Franz Steiner Verlag, Stuttgart. pp. 149-
164.
Jarrige, J.-F. 1994. "The final phase of the Indus occupation at
Nausharo and its connection with the following cultural
complex of Mehrgarh VIII", in A. Parpola and P. Ko-
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology
skikallio eds. South Asian Archaeology 1993. Suomalainen
Tiedeakatemia, Helsinki. pp. 295-313.
Jarrige, J.-F. 1997. "From Nausharo to Pirak: Continuity and
Change in the Kachi/Bolan Region from the 3rd to the
2nd Millennium B.C.", in F. Allchin and B. Allchin eds.
South Asian Archaeology 1995. The Ancient India and Iran
Trust, Cambridge. pp. 11-32.
Jarrige, J.-F. and G. Quivron 2008. "The Indus Valley and
the Indo-Iranian Borderlands at the End of the 3rd Mil-
lennium and the Beginning of the 2nd Mullennium BC",
in E.M. Raven ed. South Asian Archaeology 1999. Egbert
Forsten, Groningen. pp. 61-83.
Jarrige, J.-F., G. Quivron and C. Jarrige eds. 2011. Nindowari:
The Kulli Culture Its origins and its relations with the In-
dus Civilization. Ginkgo éditeur, Paris.
Jarrige, J.-F., M. Santoni and J.-F. Enault 1979. Fouilles de Pi-
rak. Diffusion de Boccard, Paris.
Jenkins, P.C. 1994a. "Continuity and change in the ceramic
sequence at Harappa", in A. Parpola and P. Koskikal-
lio eds. South Asian Archaeolog y 1993. Suomalainen
Tiedeakatemia, Helsinki. pp. 315-328.
Jenkins, P.C. 1994b. "Harappan pottery from Cemetery
R37: New perspectives on style and chronology", in J.M.
Kenoyer ed. From Sumer to Meluhha: Contributions to
the Archaeology of South Asia and West Asia in Memory of
George F. Dales, Jr. Department of Anthropology, Univer-
sity of Wisconsin, Madison, Madison. pp. 105-112.
Jenkins, P.C. 2000. "The Pottery from Cemetery R37: Chro-
nology and the Changing Social Structure of Harappa
Society", in M. Taddei and G. De Marco eds. South Asian
Archaeology 1997. Istituto Italiano per l'Africa e l'Oriente,
Rome. pp. 35-53.
Jenkins, P.C. 2005. "Cemetery R37 and Harappa Site: A
Comparative Study of Mortuary and Domestic Pottery",
in C. Jarrige and V. Lefèvre eds. South Asian Archaeology
2001. Editions Recherche sur les Civilisations, Paris. pp.
143-150.
Joshi, J.P. ed. 1990. Excavation at Surkotada and Exploration
in Kutch. Memoirs of the Archaeological Survey of India
no.87. Archaeological Survey of India, New Delhi.
Joshi, J.P. ed. 1993. Excavation at Bhagwanpura 1975-76 and
Other Explorations & Excavations 1975-81 in Haryana,
Jammu & Kashmir and Punjab. Memoirs of the Archaeo-
- 46 -
logical Survey of India 89. Archaeological Survey of India,
New Delhi.
Joshi, J.P. and A. Parpola 1987. Corpus of Indus Seals
and Inscriptions 1. Collections in India. Suomalainen
Tiedeakatemia, Helsinki.
Kashyap, A. and S. Weber 2013. "Starch Grain Analysis and
Experiments Provide Insights into Harappan Cooking
Practices", in S.A. Abraham, P. Gullapalli, T.P. Raczek
and U.Z. Rizvi eds. Connections and Complexity: New Ap-
proaches to the Archaeology of South Asia. Left Coast Press,
Walnut Creek. pp. 177-193.
Kenoyer, J.M. 1985. The Indus Bead Technology: Contribu-
tions to Bead Technology. Ornament 10(1): 18-23.
Kenoyer, J.M. 1991. "Urban Process in the Indus Tradition:
A Preliminary Model from Harappa", in R.H. Meadow
ed. Harappa Excavations 1986-90: A multidisciplinary Ap-
proach to Third Millennium Urbanism. Prehistory Press,
Madison. pp. 29-60.
Kenoyer, J.M. 1991. Ornament Styles of the Indus Tradition:
Evidence from Recent Excavations in Pakistan and India.
Paléorient 17(2): 79-98.
Kenoyer, J.M. 1993. "Excavations on Mound E, Harappa: A
Systematic Approach to the Study of Indus Urbanism", in
A. Gail and G.J.D. Mevissen eds. South Asian Archaeology
1991. Franz Steiner Verlag, Stuttgart. pp. 165-194.
Kenoyer, J.M. 1995. "Interaction systems, specialised crafts
and culture change: The Indus Valley Tradition and the
Indo-Gangetic Tradition in South Asia", in Erdosy, G. ed.
The Indo-Aryans of Ancient South Asia: Language, Materi-
al Culture and Ethnicity. Walter de Gruyter, Berlin/New
York. pp. 215-257.
Kenoyer, J.M. 1997. Trade and technology of the Indus Val-
ley: new insights from Harappa, Pakistan. World Archae-
ology 29(2): 262-280.
Kenoyer, J.M. 2005. "Culture change during the Late Hara-
ppan period at Harappa: new insights on Vedic Aryan
issues", in E.F. Bryant and L.L. Patton ed. The Indo-Aryan
Controversy: Evidence and inference in Indian history.
Routledge, London/New York. pp. 21-49.
Kenoyer, J.M. 2005. "Bead Technologies at Harappa, 3300-
1900BC: A Comparative Summary", in C. Jarrige and V.
Lefèvre eds. South Asian Archaeology 2001. Editions Re-
cherche sur les Civilisations, Paris. pp. 157-170.
 Akinori Uesugi Current state of research and issues of Indus Archaeology
Kenoyer, J.M. 2013. "Iconography of the Indus Unicorn:
Origins and Legacy", in S.A. Abraham, P. Gullapalli, T.P.
Raczek and U.Z. Rizvi eds. Connections and Complexity:
New Approaches to the Archaeology of South Asia. Left
Coast Press, Walnut Creek. pp. 107-125.
Kenoyer, J.M. 2017. "Using SEM to Study Stone Bead Tech-
nology", in A.K. Kanungo ed. Stone Beads of South and
Southeast Asia: Archaeology, Ethnography and Global Con-
nections. Indian Institute of Technology, Gandhinagar/
Aryan Books International, Gandhinagar/New Delhi. pp.
409-436.
Kenoyer, J.M. and R.H. Meadow 2000. "The Ravi Phase: A
New Cultural Manifestation at Harappa", in M. Taddei
and G. De Marco eds. South Asian Archaeology 1997. Isti-
tuto Italiano per l'Africa e l'Oriente, Rome. pp. 55-76.
Kenoyer, J.M. and R.H. Meadow 2010. "Inscribed Objects
from Harappa Excavations 1986-2007", in A. Parpola,
B.M. Pande and P. Koskikallio eds. Corpus of Indus Seals
and Inscriptions, vol. 3. Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia, Hel-
sinki. pp. xliv-lviii.
Kenoyer, J.M. and R.H. Meadow 2016. "Excavations at Hara-
ppa, 1986-2010: New Indights on the Indus Civilization
and Harappan Burial Traditions", in Schug, G.R. and S.R.
Walimbe eds. A Companion to South Asia in the Past. John
Wiley and Sons, Inc., Chichester. pp. 145-168.
Kenoyer, J.M. and H.M.-L. Miller 1999. "Metal Technologies
of the Indus Valley Tradition in Pakistan and Western In-
dia", in V.C. Pigott ed. The Archaeometallurgy of the Asian
Old World. University Museum Press, Philadelphia. pp.
107-151.
Kenoyer, J.M. and M. Vidale 1992. “A New Look at Stone
Drills of the Indus Valley Tradition”, in P.B. Vandiver, J.R.
Druzik, G.S. Wheeler and I.C. Freestone eds. Materials
Issues in Art and Archaeology III. Materials Research Soci-
ety, Pittsburgh. pp. 495-518.
Kesarwani, A. 2001. Balu : A Fortified Rural Settlement in
Haryana. Purātattva 31: 140-152.
Kesarwani, A. 2002. Excavations at Balu (Distt. Kaithal -
Haryana). Nirmal Book Agency, Kurukshetra.
Khan, F., Knox, J.R. and Thomas, K.D. 1991. Explorations
and Excavations in Bannu District, North-West Frontier
Province, Pakistan, 1985-1988. Department of Oriental
Antiquities, London.
- 47 -
Khan, F., J.R. Knox and K.D. Thomas 2000a. Settlements
and Settlement Systems in the Southwest Gomal Plain in
the Proto-historic Period. Journal of Asian Civilizations
23(2): 7-23.
Khan, F., J.R. Knox and K.D. Thomas 2000b. Jhandi Babar, A
New Site in the Gomal Plain, and the Sheri Khan Tarakai
Culture Complex. Journal of Asian Civilizations 23(2):
25-50.
Khan, F.A. 1965. Excavations at Kot Diji. Pakistan Archaeolo-
gy 2: 13-85.
Kharakwal, J.S., Y.S. Rawat and T. Osada eds. 2012. Excava-
tions at Kanmer 2005-06 - 2008-09. Indus Project, Research
Institute for Humanity and Nature, Gujarat State Depart-
ment of Archaeology and Institute of Rajasthan Studies,
JRN Rajasthan Vidyapeeth., Kyoto.
Khatri, J.S. and M. Acharya 1995. Kunal: A New Indus-Sar-
aswati Site. Purātattva 25: 84-86.
Konasukawa, A. 2015. Comparative Analysis of the Seals
in the Pre-/Early Harappan Period and Harappan Seals
through SEM and PEAKIT (3D) Analysis. Purātattva 45:
143-153.
Konasukawa, A., H. Endo and A. Uesugi 2011a. "Minor
Objects from the Settlement Area", in V. Shinde, T. Osada
and Manmohan Kumar eds. Excavations at Farmana,
Rohtak District, Haryana, India 2006-2008. Indus Project,
Research Institute for Humanity and Nature, Kyoto. pp.
369-529.
Konasukawa, A., H. Shudai, S. Kimura, T. Ueno and H. Endo
2011b. Report on the Survey of the Archaeological Ma-
terials of Prehistoric Pakistan, stored in the Aichi Prefec-
tural Ceramic Museum. Part III: Emir Ware and Quetta
Style Pottery. Bulletin of Tsurumi University 48(4): 73-
110.
Konasukawa, A., H. Shudai, H. Endo and S. Kimura 2012.
Report on the Survey of the Archaeological Materials of
Prehistoric Pakistan stored in the Aichi Prefectural Ce-
ramic Museum, Part 4: Togau Ware, Kechi-Beg Ware and
Other Wares of Prehistoric Pottery of Balochistan. Bulle-
tin of Tsurumi University 49(4): 141-158.
Lal, B.B. 1954. Excavation at Hastinapura and Other Explo-
rations in the Upper Ganga and Sutlej Basins 1950-52.
Ancient India 10-11: 5-151.
Lal, B.B., J.P. Joshi, M. Bala, A.K. Sharma and K.S. Chandran
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology
2015. Excavations at Kalibangan: The Harappans (1960-
69), part 1. Memoirs of the Archaeological Survey of India
no. 110. Archaeological Survey of India, New Delhi.
Lal, B.B., J.P. Joshi, B.K. Thapar and Madhu Bala 2003. Exca-
vations at Kalibangan: The Early Harappans (1960-1969).
Memoirs of the Archaeological Survey of India no. 98.
Archaeological Survey of India, New Delhi.
Law, R.W. 2002. "Potential Steatite Sources for the Indus
Civilization", in M.A. Halim ed. Dialogue among Civili-
zations: Indus Valley Civilization. Ministry of Minorities,
Culture, Sports, Tourism & Youth Affairs, Government of
Pakistan/United Nations Educational Scientific & Cul-
tural Organization., Islamabad. pp. 158-167.
Law, R.W. 2005a. "Regional Interaction in the Prehistoric In-
dus Valley: Initial Results of Rock and Mineral Sourcing
Studies at Harappa", in C. Jarrige and V. Lefèvre eds. South
Asian Archaeology 2001. Editions Recherche sur les Civili-
sations, Paris. pp. 179-190.
Law, R. 2005b. "A Diachronic Examination of Lithic Ex-
change Networks During the Urban Transformation of
Harappa", in U. Franke-Vogt and H.-J Weishaar eds. South
Asian Archaeology 2003. Linden Soft Verlag e.K., Aachen.
pp. 111-121.
Law, R. 2006. "Moving Mountains: The Trade and Transport
of Rocks and Minerals within the Greater Indus Valley
Region", in E.C. Robertson, J.D. Seibert, D.C. Fernandez
and M.U. Zender eds. Space and Spatial Analysis in Ar-
chaeology. University of Calgary Press, Calgary. pp. 301-
313.
Law, R. 2008. No Stone Unturned: Trekking through dan-
gerous territory to unravel ancient Indus trade routes.
Archaeology, September/October 2008: 55-60.
Law, R.W. 2011. Inter-Regional Interaction and Urbanism in
the Ancient Indus Valley: A Geologic Provenience Study of
Harappa's Rock and Mineral Assemblage. Indus Project,
Research Institute for Humanity and Nature, Kyoto.
Law, R. 2012. "The Geologic Provenance of Steatite Artifacts
from Mehrgarh and Nausharo", in V. Lefèvre ed. Oriental-
ismes: De l’archéologie au musée: Mélanges offerts à Jean-
François Jarrige. Brepols, Turnout. pp. 227-236.
Law, R. and S.R.H. Baqri 2001. Black Chert Source Identi-
fied at Nammal Gorge, Salt Range. Ancient Pakistan 14:
34-40.
- 48 -
Law, R.W. and J.H. Burton 2006a. "Non-destructive Pb Iso-
tope Analysis of Harappan Lead Artifacts using Ethylen-
ediaminetetraacetic Acid and ICP-MS", in J. Perez-Aran-
tegui ed. Proceedings of the 34th International Symposium
on Archaeometry, Zaragoza, 3-7 May 2004. Institucion
Femando el Catolico, Zaragoza. pp. 181-185.
Law, R.W. and J.H. Burton 2006b. "A Technique for Deter-
mining the Provenance of Harappan Banded Limestone
"Ringstones" using ICP-AES", in J. Perez-Arantegui ed.
Proceedings of the 34th International Symposium on Archae-
ometry, Zaragoza, 3-7 May 2004. Institucion Femando el
Catolico, Zaragoza. pp. 309-314.
Law, R., J.H. Burton, J. Fournelle, H. Konishi and H. Xu
2016. "The Composition and Source of Lead-based
Cosmetics from Harappa", in V. Widorn, U. Franke and
P. Latschenberger eds. South Asian Archaeology and Art:
Contextualizing Material Culture in South and Central
Asia in Pre-Modern Times. Brepols, Turnout. pp. 67-77.
Law, R., A. Carter, K. Bhan, A. Malik and M.D. Glascock
2012. "INAA Agate Sources and Artifacts from the In-
dus, Helmand, and Thailand Regions", in D. Frenez and M.
Tosi eds. South Asian Archaeology 2007, vol. I: Prehistoric
Periods. BAR International Series, Oxford. pp. 177-184.
Mackay, E.J.H. 1938. Further Excavations at Mohenjo-daro.
Government of India Press, Delhi.
Mackay, E.J.H. 1943. Chanhu-Daro Excavations 1935-36.
American Oriental Society, New Haven.
Majumdar, A. 1999. A Ceramic Study of the Harappan Burials
from North Gujarat. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis. Depart-
ment of Archaeology and Ancient History, the Maharaja
Sayajirao University of Baroda, Vadodara.
Majumdar, A. and V.H. Sonawane 1996-97. Pre Harappan
Burial Pottery from Moti-Pipli: A New Dimension in the
Cultural Assemblage of North Gujarat. Prāgdharā 7: 11-
17.
Malik, D.S., Madhav Acharya and R.S. Dahiya 2007. "A Brief
Note on the Excavation at Jognakhera (Kurukshetra)", in
S.P. Shukla, R.S. Bisht, M.P.Joshi and Prashant Srivastava
eds. History and Heritage (In Honour of Prof. Kiran Ku-
mar Thaplyal). Agam Kala Prakashan, Delhi. pp. 85-90.
Manmohan Kumar 1984. "A Note on the Excavation at Burj
(1977), District Patiala", in K.V. Ramesh, Agam Prasad
and S.P. Tewari eds. Svasti Śri: Dr. B. Ch. Chhabra Felici-
 Akinori Uesugi Current state of research and issues of Indus Archaeology
tation Volume. Agam Kala Prakashan., Delhi. pp. 319-323.
Manmohan Kumar, A. Uesugi and V. Dangi eds. 2016. Exca-
vations at Madina, Distrcit Rohtak, Haryana. Archaeolog-
ical Research Institute, Kansai University, Osaka.
Manmohan Kumar, A. Uesugi, V. Dangi, Vijay Kumar and T.
Nagae 2012. Excavations at Mitathal, 2011-12. Purātatt-
va 42: 148-181.
Manmohan Kumar, A. Uesugi, V.S. Shinde, V. Dangi, Vijay
Kumar, Sajjan Kumar, A.K. Singh, R. Mann and Rajesh
Kumar 2011. Excavations at Mitathal, District Bhiwani
(Haryana) 2010-11: A Preliminary Report. Purātattva 41:
168-178.
Margabandhu, C. and G.S. Gaur 1987. Some Fresh Evidence
from Sanghol Excavations: 1986. Purātattva 16: 73-78.
Margabandhu, C. and G.S. Gaur 1988. Sanghol Excavations
1987: Some New Evidences. Purātattva 17: 1-4.
Marshall, J.H. 1931. Mohenjo-daro and the Indus Civiliza-
tion. Arthur Probsthain, London.
Meadow, R.H. ed. 1991. Harappa Excavations 1986-90: A
multidisciplinary Approach to Third Millennium Urban-
ism. Prehistory Press, Madison.
Meadow, R.H. and J.M. Kenoyer 1993. Excavation at Harap-
pa - 1992 and 1993. Pakistan Archaeology 28: 55-102.
Meadow, R.H. and J.M. Kenoyer 1994. "Harappa excavations
1993: the city wall and inscribed materials", in A. Parpola
and P. Koskikallio eds. South Asian Archaeology 1993.
Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia, Helsinki. pp. 451-470.
Meadow, R.H. and J.M. Kenoyer 1997. "Excavations at Hara-
ppa 1994-95: New Perspectives on the Indus Script, Craft
Activities, and City Organization", in F. Allchin and B.
Allchin eds. South Asian Archaeology 1995. The Ancient
India and Iran Trust, Cambridge. pp. 139-172.
Meadow, R.H. and J.M. Kenoyer 2000. "The 'Tiny Steatite
Seals' (Incised Steatite Tablets) of Harappa: Some Obser-
vations on Their Context and Dating", in M. Taddei and
G. De Marco eds. South Asian Archaeology 1997. Istituto
Italiano per l'Africa e l'Oriente, Rome. pp. 321-340.
Meadow, R.H. and J.M. Kenoyer 2005a. "Excavations at
Harappa 2000-2001: New Insights on Chronology and
City Organization", in C. Jarrige and V. Lefèvre eds. South
Asian Archaeology 2001. Editions Recherche sur les Civili-
sations, Paris. pp. 207-225.
Meadow, R.H. and J.M. Kenoyer 2005b. "Harappa Excava-
- 49 -
tions 1998-1999: New Evidence for the Development
and Manifestation of the Harappan Phenomenon", in U.
Franke-Vogt and H.-J Weishaar eds. South Asian Archaeol-
ogy 2003. Linden Soft Verlag e.K., Aachen. pp. 85-109.
Meadow, R.H. and J.M. Kenoyer 2008. "Harappa Excava-
tions 1998-1999: New Evidence for the Development and
Manifestation of the Harappan Phenomenon", in E.M.
Raven ed. South Asian Archaeology 1999. Egbert Forsten,
Groningen. pp. 85-109.
Meena, B.R. and Alok Triapthi 2000. Excavation at Ojiyana.
Purātattva 30: 67-73.
Mehta, R.N. 1984. "Valabhi - A Station of Harappan Cat-
tle-Breeders", in B.B. Lal and S.P. Gupta eds. Frontiers of
the Indus Civilization. Books and Books, New Delhi. pp.
227-230.
Mehta, R.N. and S.N. Chowdhary 1975. Excavation at Dhat-
va. The Maharaja Sayajirao University, Baroda.
Mehta, R.N., S.N. Chowdhary and K.T.M. Hedge 1971.
Excavations at Jokha. The Maharaja Sayajirao University,
Baroda.
Mehta, R.N., K.M. Momin and D.R. Shah 1980. Excavation
at Kanewal. The Maharaja Sayajirao University, Baroda.
Misra, V.N. 1997. Balathal: A Chalcolithic Settlement in
Mewar, Rajasthan, India: Results of First Three Seasons’
Excavation. South Asian Studies 13: 251-273.
Misra, V.N., V. Shinde, R.K. Mohanty, K. Dalal, A. Mishra, L.
Pandey and J. Kharakwal 1995. Excavations at Balathal:
Their Contribution to the Chalcolithic and Iron Age Cul-
tures of Mewar, Rajasthan. Man and Environment 20(1):
57-80.
Misra, V.N., V. Shinde, R.K. Mohanty, L. Pandey and J. Khar-
akwal 1997. Excavations at Balathal, Udaipur District,
Rajasthan (1995-97), with Special Reference to Chalco-
lithic Architecture. Man and Environment 22(2): 35-59.
Momin, K.N. 1983. Excavation at Zekhda. Purātattva 12:
120-125.
Mughal, M.R. 1972. Excavation at Jalilpur. Pakistan Archae-
ology 8: 117-124.
Mughal, M.R. 1974. New Evidence of the Early Harappan
Culture from Jalilpur. Archaeology 27: 106-113.
Mughal, M.R. 1992. "Jhukar and the Late Harappan Cultural
Mosaic of the Greater Indus Valley", in C. Jarrige ed. South
Asian Archaeology 1989. Prehistory Press, Wisconsin. pp.
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology
213-221.
Nagae, T. 2011. "Compositional and Microstructural Analy-
sis of Copper Wares excavated at Farmana", in V. Shinde, T.
Osada, and Manmohan Kumar eds. Excavations at Farma-
na, Rohtak District, Haryana, India 2006-2008. Indus Pro-
ject, Research Institute for Humanity and Nature, Kyoto.
pp. 801-807.
Nagae, T. 2018. "Indus Copper Wares: Study of Manufactur-
ing Process by Metallography", in A. Uesugi ed. Current
Research on Indus Archaeology. Research Group for South
Asian Archaeology, Archaeological Research Institute,
Kansai University, Osaka. pp. 195-213.
Nanavati, J.M., Mehta, M.N. and Chowdhary,S.N. 1971.
Somnath 1956. Department of Archaeolog y, Gujarat
State/Department of Archaeology and Ancient History,
Ahmedabad/Baroda.
Nath, A. 1998. Rakhigarhi: A Harappan Metropolis in the
Sarasvati-Drishadvati Divide. Purātattva 28: 39-45.
Nath, A. 1999. Further Excavations at Rakhigarhi. Purātattva
29: 46-49.
Nath, A. 2001. Rakhigarhi: 1999-2000. Purātattva 31: 43-46.
Nath, A., T. Garge and R. Law 2014a. Defining the Econom-
ical Space of Harappan Rakhigarhi: An Interface of Local
Subsistence Mechanism and Geologic Provenience Stud-
ies. Purātattva 44: 83-100.
Nath, A., R. Law and T. Garge 2014b. Initial Geologic
Provenance Studies of Stone and Metal Artefacts from
Rakhigarhi. Heritage: Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies
in Archaeology 2: 74-100.
Nath, J. and R.N. Kumaran 2017. Khirsara - A Harappan
Metropolis in Western Kachchh, Gujarat, India. Heritage:
Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies in Archaeology 5: 541-
555.
Nath, J., R.N. Kumaran, B. Chandra and R. Meena 2013.
Fortified Factory at Harappan Metropolis Khirsara,
Gujarat. Heritage: Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies in
Archaeology 1: 424-437.
Nath, J., R.N. Kumaran and A. Kulkarni 2012. Excavations
at Khirsara: A Harappan Outpost in Kachchh. Purātattva
42: 122-132.
Parikh, D. and C.A. Petrie 2016. "Urban-Rural Dynamics
and Indus Ceramic Production in Northwest India: A
Preliminary Analysis of the Pottery from Masudpur I and
- 50 -
Masudpur VII", in V. Lefèvre, A. Didier and B. Mutin eds.
South Asian Archaeology and Art 2012, vol. 1: Man and
Environment in Prehistoric and Protohistoric South Asia -
New Perspectives. Brepols, Turnout. pp. 221-241.
Parpola, A., B.M. Pande and P. Koskikallio eds. 2010. Cor-
pus of Indus Seals and Inscriptions vol.3: New material,
untraced objects and collections outside India and Pakistan.
Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia, Helsinki.
Patel, A., Rajesh S.V., B. Chase, S. Shaikh, Y.S. Rawat, Ab-
hayan, G.S., Ajith Kumar, Haseen Raja, R., Charusmita
Gadekar, A. Uesugi, P. Ajithprasad, P. Sukumaran and
Renjinimol M.N. 2014. Indications and Implications
of Copper Artifacts from Navinal, A Harappan Site in
Kachchh, Gujarat, Western India. Heritage: Journal of
Multidisciplinary Studies in Archaeology 2: 545-592.
Pelegrin, J. 1994. "Lithic technology in Harappan times", in A.
Parpola and P. Koskikallio eds. South Asian Archaeology
1993. Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia, Helsinki. pp. 587-598.
Petrie, C. ed. 2010. Sheri Khan Tarakai and early village life
in the borderlands of north-west Pakistan. Oxbow Books,
Oxford/Oakville.
Petrie, C.A ., R .N. Singh, C.A .I. French, J. Bates, C.
Lanchelotti, S. Neogi, A.K. Pandey, D. Parikh, V. Pawar
and D.I. Redhouse 2016. "Land, Water and Settlement
in Northwest India 2008-2012: A Review of Progress", in
V. Lefèvre, A. Didier and B. Mutin eds. South Asian Ar-
chaeology and Art 2012, vol. 1: Man and Environment in
Prehistoric and Protohistoric South Asia - New Perspectives.
Brepols, Turnout. pp. 243-255.
Petrie, C.A., R.N. Singh and A.K. Singh 2009. Investigating
Changing Settlement Dynamics on the Plains: The 2009
Survey and Excavations at Masudpur (Hissar District,
Haryana). Purātattva 39: 38-49.
Phogat, S.R. 1970. Archaeological remains at Kalayat. Kuruk-
shetra University Research Journal (Arts and Humanity) 4:
137-140.
Possehl, G.L. 1996. "Meluhha", in J. Reade ed. The Indian
Ocean in Antiquity. Kegan Paul International, London/
New York. pp. 154-157.
Possehl, G.L. 1999. Indus Age: The Beginnings. Oxford &
IBH Publishing Co., New Delhi.
Possehl, G.L. and M.H. Raval 1989. Harappan Civilization
and Rojdi. Oxford IBH and the American Institute of In-
 Akinori Uesugi Current state of research and issues of Indus Archaeology
dian Studies, New Delhi.
Prabhakar, V.N. 2013. Excavation of a Harappan Settlement
at Karanpura, Rajasthan. Purātattva 43: 90-99.
Prabhakar, V.N., R.S. Bisht, R.W. Law and J.M. Kenoyer
2012. Stone Drill Bits from Dholavira - A Multi-faceted
Analysis. Man and Environment 37(1): 8-25.
Prabhakar, V.N., T. Garge and R. Law 2010. Mitathal: New
Observations based on Surface Reconnaissance and Ge-
ologic Provenance Studies. Man and Environment 35(1):
54-61.
Pracchia, S. 1985. Excavations of a Bronze-Age Ceramic
Manufacturing Areas at Lal Shah. East and West 35(4):
458-468.
Pramanik, S. 2004. Excavation at Juni Kulan: 2003-2004 A
Preliminary Report. Purātattva 34: 45-57.
Prüfer, O.H. 1952. Report on the Trial Excavation Carried
Out at Khilokhiri. Jamia Milli Islamia Historical Research
Foundation, Calcutta.
Quivron, G. 1994. "The pottery sequence from 2700 to 2400
BC at Nausharo, Baluchistan", in A. Parpola and P. Ko-
skikallio eds. South Asian Archaeology 1993. Suomalainen
Tiedeakatemia, Helsinki. pp. 629-644.
Quivron, G. 2000. The Evolution on the Mature Indus Pot-
tery Style in the Light of the Excavations at Nausharo,
Pakistan. East and West 50(1-4): 147-190.
Quivron, G. 2008. "New Light on the Kulli Culture: A Re-
consideration of the Painted Pottery Uncovered by Sir
Aurel Stein at Kulli and Mehi in Southern Baluchistan",
in E.M. Raven ed. South Asian Archaeology 1999. Egbert
Forsten, Groningen. pp. 47-59.
Raczek, T.P. and V. Shinde 2010. The Gilund Project: Excava-
tions in Regional Context: Proceedings of the 19th Meeting
of the European Association of South Asian Archaeology in
Ravenna, Italy, July 2007. BAR, London.
Rajesh, S.V. and A. Patel 2007. A Gazetteer of Pre- and Pro-
tohistoric Sites in Gujarat. Man and Environment 32(2):
61-136.
Rajesh, S.V. and A. Patel 2010. Note on "A Gazetteer of Pre-
and Protohistoric Sites in Gujarat". Man and Environment
35(1): 112-117.
Rajesh, S.V., S, Shaikh, B. Chase, Y.S. Rawat, A. Patel, G.S.
Abhayan, A. Kumar, C. Gadekar, R.H. Raja, A. Uesugi,
V. Vinod, M.N. Renjinimol and P. Sukumaran 2015.
- 51 -
Craft Production at Navinal: A Harappan Settlement in
Kachchh District, Gujarat. Atulya Varso 8: 30-31.
Rao, L.S., Nandini, B. Sahu, P. Sahu, S. Diwan and U.A. Shas-
try 2004. New Light on the Excavation of Harappan
Settlement at Bhirrana. Purātattva 35: 60-68.
Rao, L.S., N.B. Sahu, P. Sahu, U.A. Shastry and S. Diwan
2003. Unearthing Harappan Settlement at Bhirrana.
Purātattva 34: 20-24.
Rao, L.S., N.B. Sahu, U.A. Shastry, Prabash Sahu and Samir
Diwan 2005. Bhirrana Excavations 2005-06. Purātattva
36: 45-49.
Rao, S.R. 1962. Excavation at Rangpur and other explora-
tions in Gujarat. Ancient India 18-19: 5-207.
Rao, S.R. 1979/1985. Lothal: a Harappan Port Town 1955-
62, 2 vols. Memoirs of the Archaeological Survey of India
no.78. Archaeological Survey of India, New Delhi.
Reade, J. 1979. Early etched beads and the Indus-Mesopotamia
trade. British Museum Occasional Paper 2. British Muse-
um Press, London.
Rissman, P.C. 1989. "The Organization of Seal Production in
the Harappan Civilization", in J.M. Kenoyer ed. Old Prob-
lems and New Perspectives in the Archaeology of South Asia.
Department of Anthropology, University of Wisconsin,
Madison, Madison. pp. 159-170.
Rissman, P.C. and Y.M. Chitalwala 1990. Harappan Civili-
zation and Oriyo Timbo. Oxford IBH and the American
Institute of Indian Studies, New Delhi.
Ross, R. 1946. A Chalcolithic Site in Northern Baluchistan.
Journal of Near Eastern Studies 5(4): 291-315.
Roux, V. 1994. The Wheel Throwing Technique: Definition
and Identification on the Basis of Ceramic Surface Fea-
tures. Man and Environment 19(1-2): 275-284.
Roux, V. and M.-A. Courty 1998. Identification of Wheel
Fashioning Methods: Technological Analysis of 4th-3rd
Millennium BC Oriental Ceramics. Journal of Archaeolog-
ical Science 25: 747-763.
Sahi, M.D.N. 1992. Jakhera: the earliest urban centre of the
Ganga Valley. Proceedings of the Indian History Congress:
101-110.
Sali, S.A. 1986. Daimabad 1976-79. Memoirs of the Archae-
ological Survey of India no. 83. Archaeological Survey of
India, New Delhi.
Sankalia, H.D. 1965. Excavations at Langhnaj: 1944-63 (Part
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology
I): Archaeology. Deccan College Postgraduate and Re-
search Institute, Pune.
Sankalia, H.D., Deo, S.B. and Ansari, Z.D. 1969. Excavations
at Ahar (Tambavati). Deccan College Postgraduate and
Research Institute, Poona.
Sant, U., T.J. Baidya, N.G. Nikoshey, N.K. Sinha, S. Nayan, J.K.
Tiwari and A. Arif 2005. Baror - A New Harappan Site
in Ghaggar Valley - A Preliminary Report. Purātattva 35:
50-59.
Sarianidi, V. 2007. Necropolis of Gonur. Kapon Editions, Ath-
ens.
Schuldenrein, J. 2002. "Geoarchaeological Perspectives on
the Harappan Sites of South Asia", in S. Settar and Ravi
Korisettar eds. Indian Archaeology in Retropsect, vol. II:
Protohistory. ICHR/Manohar, New Delhi. pp. 47-80.
Schuldenrein, J., R. Right and M.A. Khan 2006. "Harappan
Geoarchaeology Reconsidered: Holocene Landscapes and
Environments of the Greater Indus Plain", in E.C. Stone
ed. Settlement and Society: Essays Dedicated to Robert Mc-
Cormick Adams. Costen Institute of Archaeology, Univer-
sity of California/The Oriental Institute of the University
of Chicago, Los Angels/Chicago. pp. 83-116.
Shaffer, J.G. 1978. Prehistoric Baluchistan. B.R. Publishing
Corporation, New Delhi.
Shah, S.G.M. and A. Parpola 1991. Corpus of Indus Seals
and Inscriptions 2: Collections in Pakistan. Suomalainen
Tiedeakatemia, Helsinki.
Shaikh, N. and G.M. Veesar 2000-01. Bhando Qubo: A
Newly Discovered Site of Indus Civilization. Ancient
Sindh 6: 7-29.
Shaikh, N., G.M. Veesar and Q.H. Mallah 2007-08. The
Excavation of Indus Period Site of Lakhan-Jo-Daro 2006.
Ancient Sindh 8: 7-193.
Sharma, A.K. 1999. The Departed Harappans of Kalibangan.
Sundeep Prakashan, New Delhi.
Sharma, A.K. 2000. Early Man in Jammu Kashmir & Lada-
kh. Agam Kala Prakashan, Delhi.
Sharma, D.V., K.C. Nauriyal, V.N. Prabhakar and Vishnu
Kant 2004. Sanauli: A Late Harappan Burial Site in the
Yamuna-Hindon Doab. Purātattva 34: 35-44.
Sharma, D.V., K.C. Nauriyal, V.N. Prabhakar 2006. Excava-
tions at Sanauli 2005-06: A Harappan Necropolish in the
Upper Ganga-Yamuna Doab. Purātattva 36: 166-179.
- 52 -
Sharma, D.V., V.N. Prabhakar, R. Tewari and R.K. Srivastava
2000. Harappan Jewellery Hoard from Mandi. Purātattva
30: 36-41.
Sharma, G.B. 2014. "Excavations at Sanghol: Harappa-Bara
Phase", in Manmohan Kumar and A. Uesugi eds. Harap-
pan Studies, vol. 1. Aryan Books International, New Del-
hi. pp. 1-60.
Sharma, G.B. and Menmohand Kumar 1980-81. Excavation
at Rohira. Purātattva 12: 125-127.
Sharma, Y.D. 1955-56. Past Patterns in Living as Unfolded
by Excavations at Rupar. Lalit Kala 1-2: 121-129.
Sharma, Y.D. 1982. "Harappan Complex on the Sutlej
(India)", in G.L. Possehl ed. Harappan Civilization: a
Contemporary Perspective. Oxford IBH and the American
Institute of Indian Studies, New Delhi. pp. 141-165.
Sharma, Y.D. 1987. "Fresh Light on the Bara Culture from
Mahorana", in B.M. Pande and B.D. Chattopadhyay eds.
Archaeology and History: Essays in memory of A. Ghosh.
Agam Kala Prakashan, Delhi. pp. 157-176.
Sharma, Y.D. 2001. Harappan Remains at Ropar. Purātattva
31: 39-42.
Shinde, V. 1992. Padri and the Indus Civilization. South
Asian Studies 8: .
Shinde, V., T. Osada, M.M. Sharma, A. Uesugi, T. Uno, H.
Maemoku, P. Shirvalkar, S.S. Deshpande, A. Kulkarni, A.
Sarkar, A. Reddy, V. Rao and V. Dangi 2008a. "Explo-
ration in the Ghaggar Basin and excavations at Girawad,
Farmana (Rohtak District) and Mitathal (Bhiwani Dis-
trict), Haryana, India", in T. Osada and A. Uesugi eds. Oc-
casional Paper 3: Linguistics, Archaeology and the Human
Past. Indus Project, Research Institute for Humanity and
Nature, Kyoto. pp. 77-158.
Shinde, V., T. Osada, Manmohan Kumar and A. Uesugi
2008b. "A Report on Excavations at Farmana 2007-08", in
Occasional Paper 6: Linguistics, Archaeology and the Hu-
man Past. Indus Project, Research Institute for Humanity
and Nature, Kyoto. pp. 1-116.
Shinde, V, T. Osada and Manmohan Kumar eds. 2011a. Ex-
cavations at Girawad: Rohtak District, Haryana, India
2006. Indus Project, Research Institute for Humanity and
Nature, Kyoto.
Shinde, V., T. Osada and Manmohan Kumar eds. 2011b.
Excavations at Farmana, Rohtak District, Haryana, India
 Akinori Uesugi Current state of research and issues of Indus Archaeology
2006-2008. Indus Project, Research Institute for Humanity
and Nature, Kyoto.
Shinde, V. and G.L. Possehl 2005. "A Report on the Excava-
tions at Gilund, 1999-2001", in C. Jarrige and V. Lefèvre
eds. South Asian Archaeology 2001. Editions Recherche sur
les Civilisations, Paris. pp. 293-302.
Shinde, V., G.L. Possehl and M. Ameri 2005. "Excavations
at Gilund 2001-2003: The Seasl Impressions and Other
Finds", in U. Franke-Vogt and H.-J Weishaar eds. South
Asian Archaeology 2003. Linden Soft Verlag e.K., Aachen.
pp. 159-169.
Shirvalkar, P. and Y.S. Rawat 2016. A Problem Oriented
Excavations at Kotada Bhadli in Gujarat: A Small Site Ar-
chaeology. V. Lefèvre, A. Didier and B. Mutin eds. South
Asian Archaeology and Art 2012, vol. 1: Man and Envi-
ronment in Prehistoric and Protohistoric South Asia - New
Perspectives: 271-290.
Shudai, H., A. Konasukawa, H. Endo and S. Kimura 2009.
Report on the Survey of the Archaeological Materials of
Prehistoric Pakistan, stored in Aichi Prefectural Ceramic
Museum. Part 1: Painted Pottery of Nal Ware. Bulletin of
Tsurumi University 46(4): 75-108.
Shudai, H. A. Konasukawa, H. Endo, S. Kimura and T. Ueno
2010. Report on the Survey of the Archaeological Ma-
terials of Prehistoric Pakistan in the Aichi Prefectural
Ceramic Museum, Part 2: Kulli Ware. Bulletin of Tsurumi
University 47(4): 53-115.
Shudai, H., A. Konasukawa, S. Kimura and H. Endo 2013.
Report on the Survey of the Archaeological Materials
of Prehistoric Pakistan stored in the Aichi Prefectural
Ceramic Museum, Part 5: Archaeological Considerations
on the Pottery and Cultures in the Pre-/Protohistoric Ba-
lochistan. Bulletin of Tsurumi University 50(4): 81-123.
Shudai, H., A. Yoneyama, F. Shudai, A. Konasukawa, S. Ki-
mura and H. Endo 2015. Report on the Survey of the
Archaeological Materials of Prehistoric Pakistan stored in
the Aichi Prefectural Ceramic Museum, Part 6: Human
Figurines and Some Remarks on the Social Development
in the Prehistoric Balochistan. Bulletin of Tsurumi Univer-
sity 52(4): 7-29.
Singh, R.N., C.A. Petrie, C.A.I. French, J. Bates, A.K. Pandey,
D. Parikh, C. Lanchelotti and D.I. Redhouse 2012. Sur-
vey and Excavations at Dabli vas Chugta, Hanumangarh
- 53 -
District, Rajasthan. Purātattva 42: 133-147.
Singh, R.N., C.A. Petrie, C.A.I. French, A.S. Goudie, S. Gup-
ta, R. Tewari, A.K. Singh, R. Sinha, R. Srivastava, S. Yadav
and V.K. Singh 2008. Settlements in Context: Recon-
naissance in Western Uttar Pradesh and Haryana. Man
and Environment 33(2): 71-87.
Singh, R.N., C.A. Petrie, C.A.I. French, S. Neogi, A.K. Pan-
dey, D. Parikh and V. Pawar 2010a. Geoarchaeological
Survey and Excavations at Burj-2010, Fatehabad, Harya-
na. Purātattva 40: 94-101.
Singh, R.N., C.A. Petrie, P.P. Joglekar, S. Neogi, C. Lancelotti,
A.K. Pandey and A. Pathak 2013. Recent Excavations at
Alamgirpur, Meerut District: A Preliminary Report. Man
and Environment 38(1): 32-54.
Singh, R.N., C.A. Petrie, V. Pawar, A.K. Pandey, S. Neogi, M.
Singh, A.K. Singh, D. Parikh and C. Lancelotti 2010b.
Changing Patterns of Settlement in the Rise and Fall of
Harappan Urbanism and Beyond: a Preliminary Report
on the Rakhigarhi Hinterland Survey 2009. Man and En-
vironment 35(1): 37-53.
Singh, R.N., C.A. Petrie, V. Pawar, A.K. Pandey and D. Parikh
2011. New Insights into Settlement along the Ghaggar
and its Hinterland: a Preliminary Report on the Ghaggar
Hinterland Survey 2010. Man and Environment 36(2):
88-106.
Singh, R.N., D.P. Singh, A. Chowdhary and S. Chakraborty
2016. Report on Tin Metallurgy at Khanak: A Harappan
Site in Bhiwani, Haryana. Purātattva 46: 104-113.
Singh, U.V. 1977. "Late Harappan culture as revealed by the
excavations at Mirzapur and Daulatpur District Kuruk-
shetra (Haryana)", in B.B. Lal and S.C. Malik eds. Indus
Civilization: Problems and issues. Indian Institute of Ad-
vanced Study, Shimla. pp. 1-7.
Singh, U.V. and Suraj Bhan 1982. "A Note on the Excavation
at Balu, District Jind (Haryana)", in R.K. Sharma ed. Indi-
an Archaeology: New Perspectives. Agam Kala Prakashan,
Delhi. pp. 124-126.
Sonawane, V.H. and R.N. Mehta 1985. Vagad - a Rural Hara-
ppan Settlement in Gujarat. Man and Environment 9: 38-
44.
Sonawane, V.H., P. Ajithprasad, K.K. Bhan, K. Krishnan, S.
Prathapachandran, A. Majumdar, A.K. Patel and Jaya
Menon 2003. Excavations at Bagasra - 1996-2003: A Pre-
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology
liminary Report. Man and Environment 28(2): 21-50.
Soundara Rajan, K.V. 1984. "Kutch Harappan - A Corridor
of the Indus Phase", in B.B. Lal and S.P. Gupta eds. Fron-
tiers of the Indus Civilization. Books & Books, New Delhi.
pp. 217-226.
Stein, M.A. 1929. An Archaeological Tour in Waziristan and
Northern Baluchistan. Memoirs of the Archaeological
Survey of India 37. Government of India, Calcutta.
Stein, M.A. 1931. An Archaeological Tour of Gedrosia. Mem-
oirs of the Archaeological Survey of India 43. Government
of India, Calcutta.
Stein, A. 1943. An Archaeological Tour Along the Ghag-
gar-Hakra River, 1940-42. American Documentation In-
stitute Microfilm no. ADI-4861.
Stein, A. (S.P. Gupta ed.) 1989. An Archaeological Tour
Along the Ghaggar-Hakra River. Kusumanjali Prakashan,
Meerut.
Subbarao, B. 1958. Personality of India. Faculty of Arts, Ma-
haraja Sayajirao University of Baroda, Baroda.
Suraj Bhan 1967. New Light on the Ochre Coloured Ware
Culture. Research Bulletin (Arts), Punjab University 57(3):
1-9.
Suraj Bhan 1971-72. Siswal - a pre-Harappan site in Drisad-
vati valley. Purātattva 5: 44-46.
Suraj Bhan 1973. "The Sequence and Spread of Prehistoric
Cultures in the Upper Sarasvati Basin", in D.P. Agrawal
and A. Ghosh ed. Radiocarbon and Indian Archaeology.
Tata Institute of Fundamental Research, Mumbai. pp.
252-263.
Suraj Bhan 1975. Excavation at Mitathal (1968) and Other
Explorations in the Sutlej-Yamuna Divide. Kurukshetra
University, Kurukshetra.
Suraj Bhan and J.M. Shaffer 1978. New Discoveries in North-
ern Haryana. Man and Environment 2: 59-68.
Suryanarayan, A. in prep. Investigating cuisine and vessel-use
in Indus Civilisation settlements through ceramic residue
analysis.
Teramura, H. and T. Uno 2006. Spatial Analysis of Harappan
Urban Settlements. Ancient Asia 1: 73-79.
Tewari, R., R.K. Srivastava, K.K. Singh, K.S. Saraswat, I.B.
Singh, M.S. Chauhan, A.K. Pokharia, A. Saxena, V. Pras-
ad and M. Sharma 2006. Second Preliminary Report of
the excavations at Lahuradewa, District Sant Kabir Nagar,
- 54 -
U.P.: 2002-2003-2004 & 2005-2006. Prāgdharā 16: 35-68.
Thakran, R.C., Amar Singh, Narender and Vikas 2010. Man-
heru Excavations (2009) and Explorations in its Environs,
District Bhiwani, Haryana. Aitihya 1: 128-150.
Thakran, R.C., Amar Singh, Yespal, Vikas and Anju 2010.
Excavations at Harappan Site of Badli (2008-09). Purātat-
tva 39: 165-171.
Thakran, R.C., Amar Singh, Yashpal, Vikas and N. Parmar
2010-2011. Excavations at Harappan Site of Manheru
(2009), District Bhiwani, Haryana. Bulletin of the Deccan
College Research Institute 70/71: 1-14.
Thakran, R.C., Amar Singh, Yashpal, V. Pawar and N. Parmar
2013. Excavations at Khera near Meham (2009-10), Dis-
trict Rohtak, Haryana. Purātattva 43: 158-163.
Trivedi, P.K. 2009. Excavations at Tarkhanewala-Dera and
Chak 86 (2003-2004). Memoirs of the Archaeological Sur-
vey of India no. 99. Archaeological Survey of India, New
Delhi.
Uesugi, A. 2011a. "Pottery from the Settlement Area", in V.
Shinde, T. Osada, and Manmohan Kumar eds. Excava-
tions at Farmana, Rohtak District, Haryana, India 2006-
2008. Indus Project, Research Institute for Humanity and
Nature, Kyoto. pp. 168-368.
Uesugi, A. 2011b. "Pottery from the Cemetery Area", in V.
Shinde, T. Osada, and Manmohan Kumar eds. Excava-
tions at Farmana, Rohtak District, Haryana, India 2006-
2008. Indus Project, Research Institute for Humanity and
Nature, Kyoto. pp. 674-800.
Uesugi, A. 2011c. "Pottery", in V. Shinde, T. Osada and
Manmohan Kumar eds. Excavations at Girawad, Rohtak
District, Haryana, India 2006. Indus Project, Research In-
stitute for Humanity and Nature, Kyoto. pp. 40-239.
Uesugi, A. 2011d. "Development of the Inter-regional Inter-
action System in the Indus Valley and Beyond - A Hypo-
thetical View towards the Formation of an Urban Society
-", in T. Osada and M. Witzel eds. Cultural Relations
between the Indus and the Iranian Plateau during the Third
Millennium BCE. Harvard Oriental Series Opera Minora
vol.7. Department of South Asian Studies, Harvard Uni-
versity, Cambridge. pp. 359-380.
Uesugi, A. 2012. Pottery from Balochistan in Ancient Orient
Museum, Tokyo, Part 1: From the late fourth to the early
third millennia BCE. Bulletin of Ancient Orient Museum
 Akinori Uesugi Current state of research and issues of Indus Archaeology
32: 1-109.
Uesugi, A. 2013a. A Note on the Diachronic Changes of
the Harappan Pottery - A Preliminary Analysis. Heritage:
Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies in Archaeology 1: 356-
371.
Uesugi, A. 2013b. A Note on a Terracotta Ring-shaped Ob-
ject with Animal Figurines and a Miniature Pot of the
Balochistan Tradition in the Okayama Orient Museum.
Bulletin of the Okayama Orient Museum 27: 1-13.
Uesugi, A. 2013c. Pottery from Balochistan in Ancient Ori-
ent Museum Tokyo, Part 2: Late third millennium BCE.
Bulletin of Ancient Orient Museum 33: 1-74.
Uesugi, A. 2017. "Ceramic Sequence in the Ghaggar Plains
from Pre-Indus to Post-Urban Indus Periods", in V.
Lefèvre, A. Didier and B. Mutin eds. South Asian Ar-
chaeology and Art 2012, vol. 1: Man and Environment in
Prehistoric and Protohistoric South Asia - New Perspectives.
Brepols, Turnout. pp. 305-330.
Uesugi, A. 2018. Ceramics and Terracotta Figurines from Ba-
lochistan of the Katolec Collection. Katolec, Tokyo.
Uesugi, A. in press. A Study on the Painted Grey Ware. Her-
itage: Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies in Archaeology 6.
Uesugi, A. and V. Dangi 2017. "A Study on the Develop-
ments of the Bara Pottery in the Ghaggar Plains", in Ajit
Kumar, Rajesh S.V. and Abhayan G.S. eds. Kailashnath
Hetu: Essays in Prehistory, Protohistory and Historical
Archaeology (Festschrift to Shri. K.N. Dikshit), vol.1. New
Bharatiya Book Corporation, Delhi. pp. 177-197.
Uesugi, A., G. Jamison, V. Dangi and S. Nakayama 2017. A
Study on the Stylistic and Technological Aspects of Indus
Seals with a Focus on an Example from Bhirrana. Herit-
age: Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies in Archaeology 4:
1-17.
Uesugi, A., Manmohan Kumar and V. Dangi 2018. "Indus
Stone Beads in the Ghaggar Plain with a Focus on the
Evidence from Farmana and Mitathal", in D. Frenez, G.M.
Jamison, R.W. Law, M. Vidale and R.H. Meadow eds.
Walking with the Unicorn: Social Organization and Mate-
rial Culture in Ancient South Asia, Jonathan Mark Kenoy-
er Felicitation Volume. Archaeopress, Oxford. pp. 568-591.
Uesugi, A. and S. Meena 2012. "Pottery", in J.S. Kharakwal,
Y.S. Rawat and T. Osada eds. Excavations at Kanmer
2005-06 - 2008-09. Indus Project, Research Institute for
- 55 -
Humanity and Nature, Gujarat State Department of Ar-
chaeology and Institute of Rajasthan Studies, JRN Rajast-
han Vidyapeeth., Kyoto. pp. 219-480.
Uesugi, A., I. Nakai, Manmohan Kumar, K. Yamahana, Y.
Abe, J. Shirataki, K. Toyama and V. Dangi 2018. A Study
on Faience Objects in the Ghaggar Plains during the Ur-
ban and Post-Urban Indus Periods. Heritage: Journal of
Multidisciplinary Studies in Archaeology 5: 140-164.
Uesugi, A., Rajesh S.V., Abhayan, G.S., B. Chase, Y.S. Rawat, A,
Patel, Ajit Kumar and C. Gadekar 2016. Indus Ceramics
from Desalpur, Kachchh, Gujarat. Heritage: Journal of
Multidisciplinary Studies in Archaeology 3: 180-218.
Weisgerber, G. 1984. "Makkan and Meluhha - third millen-
nium BC copper production in Oman and the evidence
of contact with the Indus Valley", in B. Allchin ed. South
Asian Archaeology 1981. Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge. pp. 196-201.
Wheeler, R.E.M. 1947. Harappa 1946: The Defences and
Cemetery R37. Ancient India 3: 58-130.
Wright, R.P., J. Schuldenrein, M.A. Khan and M.R. Mughal
2005. "The Emergence of Satellite Communities along
the Beas Drainage: Preliminary Results from Lahoma
Lal Tibba and Chak Purbane Syal", in C. Jarrige and V.
Lefèvre eds. South Asian Archaeology 2001. Editions Re-
cherche sur les Civilisations, Paris. pp. 327-335.
Wright, R.P., J. Schuldenrein, M. Afzal Khan and S. Ma-
lin-Boyce 2005. "The Beas River Landscape and Settle-
ment Survey: Preliminary Results from the Site of Vainiw-
al", in U. Franke-Vogt and H.-J Weishaar eds. South Asian
Archaeology 2003. Linden Soft Verlag e.K., Aachen. pp.
101-110.
Wright, R. and C. Hritz 2012. "Satellite Remote Sensing Im-
agery: New Evidence for Site Distributions and Ecologies
in the Upper Indus", in D. Frenez and M. Tosi eds. South
Asian Archaeology 2007, vol. I: Prehistoric Periods. Brepols,
Turnout. pp. 315-321.
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology
Indus (Harappan) Civilization in the Ghaggar Basin
Vivek Dangi
(Department of History, All India Jat Heroes' Memorial College, Rohtak, Haryana)
INTRODUCTION
Haryana forms a portion of the Punjab plains and rep-
resents one of the most fertile states of India. Since the
formation of the present river system during the Pleis-
tocene epoch, it has been the most congenial plain for
human habitation due to the availability of flat fertile
land and water. Due to this reason, Haryana became a
home to the early farming communities known as the
Ghaggar-Hakra culture during the Pre-Harappan pe-
riod, which was later incorporated into the Harappan
culture.
Haryana has a rich archaeological heritage and
has been in the focus of many projects and studies
throughout the past decades (Tables 1, 2, 3 and 4).
Archaeological investigations in the area were initi-
ated during the latter half of the nineteenth century
by Sir Alexander Cunningham (1882). His explora-
tion included surveys of archaeological sites such as
Thanesar and Sugh that were referred in early Bud-
dhist literature. In the early 1950's, B.B. Lal started
an exploration in the region in order to identify the
sites mentioned in the Mahabharata epic (Lal 1954:
138-146). His survey led to the successful doscoveries
of a number of sites. The students of Department of
Ancient Indian History, Culture and Archaeology,
Punjab University, Chandigarh under the guidance
- 56 -
of Prof. Suraj Bhan were the pioneers of initiating the
Harappan studies in Haryana. Suraj Bhan's students
explored a number of sites in the Ambala district
(Malhotra 1964; Palahia 1964). Afterwards, Dr. Suraj
Bhan himself explored many parts of Haryana and
numerous new sites were added to the growing site
gazetteer (Suraj Bhan 1972). Later on, the research
scholars of Kurukshetra University, such as Silak
Ram (1972), Manmohan Kumar (1978), Amar Singh
(1981), D.S. Punia (1976), Mohinder Singh (1980)
and so on explored many parts of Haryana. The task
of conducting archaeological explorations later was
shifted to the Maharshi Dayanand University, Ro-
htak, and the research scholars and M.Phil students
carried out surveys that resulted in the discoveries of
thousands of archaeological sites (Rahar 2001; Dangi
2010; Joon 1989; Surender Kumar 1989; Kalish Ku-
mar 1989; Kalish Kumar 1989; Lamba 1989; Ashok
Kumar 1990; Dhankhar 1990; Gulab Singh 1990;
Kadian 1990; Kataria 1990; Sneh Lata 1990; Ashok
Kumar 1991; Yashvir Singh 1992; Dhaka 1993; Jai
Narian 1993; Rahar 1993; Surender Kumar 1999;
Vijay Kumar 2001; Ajay 2001; Parmod Kumar 2002;
Krishana 2008; Rajesh Kumar 2008).
J.P. Joshi and Madhu Bala ( Joshi 1993: 251-254;
Madhu Bala 1992) also explored a number of archaeo-
logical sites in Punjab and Haryana. The Archaeolog-
 Vivek Dangi Indus (Harappan) Civilization in the Ghaggar Basin

Table 1 Ph.D. theses for explorations

No. Researcher Districts Institute Topic Year
1 Silak Ram Rohtak and Hisar Kurukshetra University Archaeology of Rohtak and Hisar Districts 1972
(Haryana)
2 Suraj Bhan Entire Haryana Maharaja Sayajirao Prehistoric Archaeol-ogy of the Saraswati and 1972
University of Baroda Drishadvati Valley (Haryana)
3 Gurgaon and
D.S. Punia Kurukshetra University Archaeology of Gur-gaon and Mahender-garh 1976
Mahendergarh Districts (Haryana)
4 Manmohan Kumar Ambala and Ku- Archaeology of Ambala and Kurukshetra Dis-
Kurukshetra University 1978
rukshetra tricts (Haryana)
5 Braham Dutt Entire Haryana Kurukshetra University Settlements of Painted Grey Ware in Haryana 1980
6 Amar Singh Jind and Karnal Kurukshetra University Archaeology of Jind and Karnal Districts (Hary- 1981
ana)
7 Mohinder Singh
Gurgaon Kurukshetra University Archaeology of Gurgaon District Haryana 1990
Rewari and Ma- Maharshi Dayanand Archaeological Settle-ment Pattern of Mahen-
8 Jagdish Ra-har hendergarh University dergarh and Re-wari Districts (Har-yana)
2001

9 Yogeshwar Kumar Yamunanagar, Kurukshetra University Historical Study in North Haryana (from Earli- 2003
Ambala, Panchkula est Times to 12th Century A.D.)
10 Vivek Dangi North and North- Maharishi Dayanand A Study of Proto-Historic Settlements in Upper 2010
west Haryana University Ghaggar

Table 2 M.A. and M.Phil Dissertations for explorations

No. Researcher Block/Tehsil District Institute Year
1 P.S. Malhotra Naraingarh Ambala Punjab University, Chandigarh 1964
2 Kwatra Jaghadri Yamunanagar Punjab University, Chandigarh 1964
3 M.K. Palahia Ambala Ambala Punjab University, Chandigarh 1964
4 D.S. Dhattarwal Safidon Panipat Kurukshetra University, Kurukshetra 1978
5 Satdev Jind Jind Kurukshetra University, Kurukshetra 1980
6 Yogeshwar Kumar Naraingarh Ambala Kurukshetra University, Kurukshetra 1987
7 Rajiv Joon Dadri-2 Bhiwani Maharshi Dayanand University, Rohtak 1989
8 Surender Kumar Meham Rohtak Maharshi Dayanand University, Rohtak 1989
9 Kalish Kumar Rohatk Rohtak Maharshi Dayanand University, Rohtak 1989
10 Mani Ram Kalanaur Rohtak Maharshi Dayanand University, Rohtak 1989
11 Krishan Kumar Lakhan Majra Rohtak Maharshi Dayanand University, Rohtak 1990
12 Ashok Kumar Kathura Soniapt Maharshi Dayanand University, Rohtak 1990
13 Ramdhan Dhankhar Gohana Sonipat Maharshi Dayanand University, Rohtak 1990
14 Gulab Singh Mundlana Sonipat Maharshi Dayanand University, Rohtak 1990
15 Rai Kadian Beri Jhajjar Maharshi Dayanand University, Rohtak 1990
16 Rajiv Kataria Bahadurgarh Jhajjar Maharshi Dayanand University, Rohtak 1990
17 Sneh Lata Sampla Rohtak Maharshi Dayanand University, Rohtak 1990
18 Ashok Kumar Badli Jhajjar Maharshi Dayanand University, Rohtak 1991
19 Yashvir Singh Charkhi Da-dri-I Bhiwani Maharshi Dayanand University, Rohtak 1992
20 Surender Dhaka Salhawas Jhajjar Maharshi Dayanand University, Rohtak 1993
21 Jai Narian Mathanhail Jhajjar Maharshi Dayanand University, Rohtak 1993
22 Jagdish Rahar Jhajjar Jhajjar Maharshi Dayanand University, Rohtak 1993
23 Surender Kumar Bhiwani Bhiwani Maharshi Dayanand University, Rohtak 1999
24 Vijay Kumar Narnaund Hisar Maharshi Dayanand University, Rohtak 2001
25 Ajay Hansi-I Hisar Maharshi Dayanand University, Rohtak 2001
26 Parmod Kumar Agroha and Adampur Hisar Maharshi Dayanand University, Rohtak 2002
27 Vivek Dangi Meham Rohatk Kurukshetra University, Kurukshetra 2006
28 Sandeep Hansi-II Hisar Kurukshetra University, Kurukshetra 2006
29 Vinay Kumar Gohana Sonipat Kurukshetra University, Kurukshetra 2007
30 Krishana Ratia Fatehabad Maharshi Dayanand University, Rohtak 2008
31 Rajesh Kumar Hisar-I & Hisar-II Hisar Maharshi Dayanand University, Rohtak 2008

- 57 -
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology

Table 3 Major published work for explorations

No. Author Districts covered Title Year

1 A. Cunnigham Entire Haryana A Tour in Punjab in 1878-79 1882

2 B.B. Lal Entire Haryana Excavations at Hastinapura and Other Explorations in Uppar Ganga 1954
and Sutlej Basins
3 U.V. Singh Kurukshetra Explorations in the Vicinity of Thanesar 1976

4 Suraj Bhan and Jim G. North Haryana New Discoveries in Northern Haryana 1978
Shaffer

5 Dhoop Singh and Sirsa Exploration in District Sirsa (IAR 1983-84) 1984
Chanderpal Singh
Dhoop Singh and
6 Fatehabad Exploration in District Hisar (currently Fatehabad; IAR 1985-86) 1986
Chanderpal Singh
Excavation at Bhagwanpura 1975-76 and Other Explorations & Exca-
7 J.P. Joshi Entire Haryana 1993
vations 1975-81 in Haryana, Jammu & Kashmir and Punjab
8 Manmohan Kumar Entire Haryana Prehistoric Remains in Haryana 1995
9 Manmohan Kumar Entire Haryana Harappan Settlement Pattern in Ghaggar-Yamuna Divide 2009
10 R.C. Thakran Sonipat Dynamics of Settlement Archaeology (Haryana). 2000

11 Vivek Dangi Meham (Rohtak) Archaeology of Ghaggar Basin: Settlement Archaeology of Meham 2009a
Block, District Rohtak, Haryana
12 Vivek Dangi Jind Recent Explorations in the Chautang Basin (Jind District, Haryana) 2009b

13 Vivek Dangi and Bhiwani Archaeological Explorations in Charkhi Dadri-2 Block, District Bhi-
Parveen Kumar wani, Haryana 2013

14 Parveen Kumar, Raj Bhiwani Further Explorations in Southern Fringe of the Ghaggar Plains, Dis- 2014
Pal, and Vivek Dangi trict Bhiwani, Haryana
Changing Patterns of Settlements in the Rise and Fall of Harappan
15 R.N. Singh et al. Hisar and Jind Urbanism and Beyond: a Preliminary Report on the Rakhigarhi Hin- 2009
terland Survey 2009
D.K Chakarbarti and The Problem of the Sarasvati River and the Archaeological Geography
16 Sukhdev Saini Entire Haryana of Haryana and Indian Punjab 2009

Explorations along with River Ghaggar and Sirhind Nala (Haryana

17 Vivek Dangi Fatehabad and Punjab) 2011

In Tables 1 - 4, the major archaeological explorations have been discussed. Apart from these explorations, some scholars of the Ar-
chaeological survey of India, the Maharshi Dayanand University, Rohtak, Kurukshetra University, Kurukshetra and Department
of Archaeology and Museum, Haryana conducted some surreys. The details of them are available in various volumes of Indian Ar-
chaeology: A Review and other research journals.

ical Survey of India and Department of Archaeology
and Museums, Government of Haryana also did a few
random surveys and their brief reports can be found
in various volumes of Indian Archaeology - A Review.
These explorations resulted in documentation of hun-
dreds of sites in the region.
In addition to these explorations, 23 sites of var-
ious phases of the Harappan Civilization have been
excavated by the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI),
the Department of Archaeology and Museums, Gov-
ernment of Haryana and various universities (Table 4).
Despite all of these excavations, quite a limited num-
ber of excavated sites have been fully published. The
site whose detailed reports have been published are
the projects at Mitathal, Madina, Farmana, Girawad
and Bhagwanpur. This situation of limited publica-
tions leaves much to be desired when attempting to
understand the protohistoric inhabitants of the In-
do-Gangetic divide.
The explorations and excavations have yielded
enormous amounts of archaeological data that lends
itself to the reconstruction of patterns of ancient
habitations. At the moment, there are approximately
52 sites that have been identified as belonging to the
Pre-Harappan Ghaggar-Hakra culture. The rest are
as follows: 350 Early Harappan sites, 325 Harappan

- 58 -
 Vivek Dangi Indus (Harappan) Civilization in the Ghaggar Basin

Table 4 Excavated sites in Haryana

No. Site Year Instituion Cultural sequence References

1 Agroha 1978-79, 1979- Haryana State Archaeology PGW, H, M IAR 1978-79: 68-69, 1979-
80, 1980-81 80: 31, 1980-81: 15-16.
2 Autha 1964-65 ASI PGW, H IAR 1964-65: 33-34.
1978 to 1980,
3 Balu 1983 to 1987, Kurukshetra University EH, MH and LH Kesarwani 2002
1992 to 1995
4 Banawali 1983-84, 1986- Haryana State Archaeolog y EH, MH and LH Bisht 1982
88 and ASI
5 Bhagwanpura 1975-76 ASI PGW, LH Joshi 1993
1968-69, 1976- IAR 1968-69:8-9, 1976-77:
6 Daulatpur Kurukshetra University LH, PGW, H
77, 1977-78 19, 1977-78: 23.
7 Kasital 1975-76 ASI PGW, H Joshi 1993
8 Khokhrakot 1986-87 M.D. U, Roh-tak PGW, H, M IAR 1986-87: 34-36
1985-86, 1991-
9 Kunal 92, 1993-94, Haryana State Archaeology Hakra, EH, MH Khatri and Acharya 1995
1994-95
10 Mirzapur 1975-76 Kurukshetra University LH Singh 1977
IAR 1970-71:15-16, 1971-
11 Raja Karna ka Qila 1970 to 1976 Kurukshetra University PGW, H, M 72: 23-24, 1972-73: 12-13,
1974-75: 16, 1975-76:18.
1963-64, 1965- IAR 1963-64: 27-28, 1965-
12 Sugh 66 Punjab Univer-sity PGW, H 66: 35-36.
13 Thanesar 1987 to 1990 ASI PGW, H, M IAR 1987-88: 28-31, 1988-
89: 21-24, 1989-90: 27-32
Maharshi Dayanand Unibersity LH, PGW Manmohan Kumar et al.
14 Madina 2008 2009; Manmohan Kumar
and Deccan College et al. eds. 2016
Deccan College, Indus Project
15 Farmana 2007 to 2009 and Maharshi Dayanand Uni- MH Shinde et al. 2011a
versity
16 Girawad 2007 Deccan College, Indus Project Hakra, EH Shinde et al. 2011
and M.D. Uni-versity, Rohtak
17 Karsola 2011 ASI and Deccan College LH, PGW, H, M Shinde and Sengar 2011
Rao et al. 2004; Rao et al.
18 Bhirrana 2003 to 2007 ASI Hakra, EH, MH 2005; Rao et al. 2006
Banaras Hindu University and
19 Bhola 2012 University of Cambridge LH Not Published
Banaras Hindu University and
20 Masudpur 2009 University of Cambridge MH Petrie et al. 2009
Punjab University (1968),
Maharshi Dayanand Univer-si- Suraj Bhan 1975; Man-
21 Mitathal 1968, 2011, 2012 ty and Research Institute for MH, LH mohan Kumar et al. 2011,
Humanity and Nature (2011- 2012
2012)
Delhi University and Maharshi
22 Badali 2008 EH, MH Thakran et al. 2010
Dayanand University
Delhi University and Maharshi
23 Ganganagar 2009 LH, PGW Thakran et al. 2013
Dayanand University
Delhi University and Maharshi
24 Lohat 2011, 2012 MH Not Published
Dayanand University
Delhi University and Maharshi
25 Manheru 2010 Dayanand.D. University, Ro- EH, MH Thakran et al. 2010
htak
26 Siswal 1970 EH, MH Suraj Bhan 1972
27 Hatt 1980 M.D. Univer-sity, Rohtak PGW, Hist, M Not Published
28 Hansi 2005 ASI PGW, Hist, MEd Not Published
29 Jognakhera 2003 Haryana State Archaeology LH, PGW Malik et al. 2007
30 Burj 2010 Banaras Hindu University and EH, PGW, H Singh et al. 2010
University of Cambridge
31 Rakhigarhi 1998 to 2000 ASI EH, MH Nath 1998, 1999, 2001
33 Khatoli 1978 ASI LH Sharma 1982

- 59 -
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology
sites, 1120 Late Harappan sites and 627 Painted Grey
Ware Sites. These sites present a good basis to enhance
our understanding of the developments of socio-cul-
tural complexity in the Ghaggar plains.
GHAGGAR-HAKRA CULTURE
The earliest farming community in this area to date
has been identified as the Ghaggar-Hakra culture
(Dangi and Manmohan 2017). The evidences about
the settlement pattern came from three sites, viz.
Kunal (Khatri and Acharya 1995: 84-86), Bhirrana
(Rao et al. 2005: 60-68), Girawad (Shinde et al. 2008:
136-137) and Farmana (Shinde et al. 2008: 100-119).
At Girawad and Kunal (Figure 1), the inhabitants dug
dwelling pits in artificially raised platforms, whereas
at Bhirrana and Farmana the dwelling pits were cut
into natural soil. The excavators of Kunal encountered
four dwelling pits during the excavations, each with
an average diameter of 2 m and an average depth of
1.10 m (Khatri and Acharya 1995: 84). This average
size differs from the dwelling pits at Bhirrana, where
the four dwelling pits found had an average diameter
of 2.35 metres and a depth of 34 to 58 cm (Rao et
al. 2005: 60-68). Farmana yielded only one dwelling
pit with a diameter of 3.20 m and a depth of 90 cm
(Shinde et al. 2008: 136). Excavators at Girawad en-
countered a total of 13 dwelling pits with an average
diameter of 2 m (Shinde et al. 2008: 100-119). All of
the above-mentioned dwelling pits feature postholes
along their edges, indicating the existence of wattle-
Table 5 Showing General Chronology of Harappan Civilization
No. Cultural Phase
1 Pre-Harappan Period (Ghaggar-Hakra culture)
2 Early Harappan Period
3 Mature Harappan Period
4 Late Harappan Period
5 Ovelap phase between Late Harappan and Painted Grey Ware Cultures
6 Painted Grey Ware culture
- 60 -
and-daub super-structures. Both the walls and floors
of these pits were plastered.
At Bhirrana, Kunal and Girawad, some associated
pits were found along with these dwelling pits, which
were probably used as the garbage pits. These pits
yielded ash, charred bones and potsherds. The dwell-
ing pits at Bhirrana and Girawad contained hearths,
charred bones and pottery, indicating their possible
use as a kitchen or cooking area.
Closely examining the plans of dwelling pits in
Haryana, it is deemed difficult to make generalization
about the settlement arrangements of Ghaggar-Hakra
culture. These pits were dug randomly close to each
other in the sites. For the ceramics of this period, mud
appliqué, red ware, incised ware, bichrome ware and
black burnished or grey ware are common (Figure 2)
EARLY HARAPPAN PERIOD
The cultural phase that follows the Ghaggar-Hakra
culture is the Early Harappan Culture. The deposits of
this phase usually underlie the remains of the Mature
Harappan phase, sometime resulting in the limitation
for understanding the settlement structure of this
period. The settlements of this phase in Haryana have
been found at Balu, Banawali, Bhirrana, Farmana,
Kunal, Mitathal and Rakhigarhi during the excava-
tions. At Kunal, the Early Harappans constructed
well-plastered dwelling pits that were lined with ir-
regular bricks or clay lumps of various sizes. The next
phase of development marks a departure from the
Cultural Phase
4000 - 3000 BCE
3000 - 2500 BCE
2500 - 1900 BCE
1900 - 1500 BCE
1500 - 1300 BCE
1300 - 700 BCE
 Vivek Dangi Indus (Harappan) Civilization in the Ghaggar Basin

Harappa
Jalilpur

Kunal
Bhirrana
Rahigarhi

Girawad

Figure 1 Distribution of sites of the Ghaggar-Hakra culture (red dots represent the excavated sites)

Figure 2 Dwelling Pits, Kunal

(Courtesy: Department of Archaeology and Mueseum Government of Haryana, Panchkula)

- 61 -
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology

1 0 10cm 3
0 10cm 2

0 10cm

5 6
0 10cm 0 10cm
4
0 10cm

8
7 0 10cm
0 10cm

9
0 10cm

10
0 10cm

11 12
0 10cm
0 10cm

14
0 10cm

ANUPGARH

13
vdc_201002_027 Lakhmirwala 15
0 10cm
0 10cm

17
16 0 0 10cm 20cm
0 10cm

Figure 3 Ghaggar-Hakra Pottery (after Dangi 2010)

- 62 -
 Vivek Dangi Indus (Harappan) Civilization in the Ghaggar Basin
Harappa
Jalilpur
Kalibangan
Baror
Figure 4 Distribution of sites of the Early Harappan period (red dots represent the excavated sites)
previous dwelling patterns to a new pattern (Khatri
and Acharya 1995: 85).
The next phase of the Early Harappan phase sees
the introduction of rectangular bricks made according
to the ratio 1:2:3 (7 × 14 × 21 cm or 10 × 20 × 30
cm). The dimensions of the bricks are different at var-
ious sites, but the ratio 1:2:3 was meticulously stand-
ardized. At Banawali, bricks measuring 13 × 26 × 39
cm and 12 × 24 × 36 cm were common during the
Early Harappan period along with bricks of aberrant
size 24 × 24 cm were also found used in the structures
of this period (Bisht 1982: 115). At Mitathal, the ex-
cavators discovered bricks that measured 10 × 20 × 30
cm. Regarding Bhirrana and Balu, the excavators have
not provided the sizes of the bricks, but did report the
size ratio of 1:2:3.
The Early Harappan settlement at Banawali was
entirely surrounded by a single defence wall (Bisht
1982: 114). Kalibangan, a Harappan site located in
Rohira
Dhalewan
Burj Balu
Banawali Kunal
Bhirrana
Siswal
Sothi Rakhigarhi
Nohar
Girawad
Manheru
the central Ghaggar basin, was also fortified during
the Early Harappan period. The discovery of the forti-
fication wall at this site led to a controversy regarding
the introduction of fortification during the Early
Harappan period.
Not much evidence related to domestic structures,
lanes and streets have been reported from any site of
this period. Little information available for Banawali
indicates that houses were arranged in accordance
with the cardinal directions (Bisht 1999: 15). The ori-
entation of the Early Harappan settlement at Bhirrana
deviates 24° from north. The orientation of the Early
Harappan settlement at Bhirrana deviates 24° from
the north, and the excavations unearthed a house
complex consisting of six rooms and a central court-
yard (Rao et al. 2005: 63). Other excavated sites such
as Balu (Kesarwani and Arun 2002: 5-11), Dhalewan
(Bala 2000: 207-209), Farmana (Shinde et al. 2008b),
Kunal (Khatri and Achraya 1995: 85), Mitathal (Suraj
- 63 -
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology

Figure 5 Early Harappan pottery (Sothi-Siswal) from Kunal

(Photographed by the author with courtesy of Department of Archaeology and Museum, Haryana)

Figure 6 Bichrome pottery decorated with pipal leaf and peacock from Kunal
(Photographed by the author with courtesy of Department of Archaeology and Museum, Haryana)

- 64 -
 Vivek Dangi Indus (Harappan) Civilization in the Ghaggar Basin

Figure 7 Bichrome pottery decorated with animal motif from Kunal

(Photographed by the author with courtesy of Department of Archaeology and Museum, Haryana)

Figure 8 Copper arrow head from Kunal

(Photographed by the author with courtesy of Department of Archaeology and Museum, Haryana)

- 65 -
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology

10cm

Figure 9 Copper chisel from Kunal

(Photographed by the author with courtesy of Department of Archaeology and Museum, Haryana)

Figure 10 Silver disc shaped beads from Kunal

(Photographed by the author with courtesy of Department of Archaeology and Museum, Haryana)

- 66 -
 Vivek Dangi Indus (Harappan) Civilization in the Ghaggar Basin

10 cm

Figure 11 Silver crown from Kunal

(Photographed by the author with courtesy of Department of Archaeology and Museum, Haryana)

Bhan 1975: 12) and Rakhigarhi (Nath 1999: 46-59)
have given a very limited information about the settle-
ment pattern of the Early Harappan period.
The Sothi-Siswal ceramic tradition is the regional
variant of the Early Harappan culture in the region.
Red ware with black bands on rim and neck, mud ap-
pliqué for rustication below belly portion (Figure 3),
grey ware and incised decorations represent the conti-
nuity of the Ghaggar-Hakra ceramic traditions. In the
painted bichrome motifs, pipal leaf with black outline
and filled with a white pigment, birds and animals are
common (Figures 4 and 5).
Other materials, such as lithic tools, also indicate
a regional variation. Rohri chert from the Rohri Hills
in Sindh was used in the Ghaggar plain along with
local chert and agate/chalcedony for fabricating stone
blades. Copper was used for making tools (Figures 6
and 7) and ornaments. The excavations at Kunal yield-
ed a jewelry hoard, which contains beads, crown and
amulets of gold and silver (Figures 8 and 9).
MATURE HARAPPAN PERIOD
Town planning
This phase of the protohistoric period is marked by
the emergence of large, complex urban centers. The
striking feature of a typical Harappan town planning
is the presence of a citadel on a raised area of the city
and a lower town. All major Harappan urban centers
feature this division of the settlement, but there are re-
gional variations. Harappa and Kalibangan have a cit-
adel with a walled enclosure that is separate from the
rest of the settlement. Dholavira has three divisions;
a citadel, middle and lower towns. Likewise, Mitathal
also has a tripartite city layout, viz. citadel, lower town
and industrial area. Not only to the fortification, the
Harappans put an emphasis on the layouts of the
streets and lanes. The main features of the Harappan
town planning are discussed below.

- 67 -
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology

Dher Majra
Rupar
Kotla Nihan Khan
Rohira Chandigarh
Harappa Raja Sirkap
Mahorana

Balu
Hulas
Banawali Kunal
Kalibangan
Bhirrana
Tarkhanewala Dera Rakhigarhi

Baror
Karanpura Farmana Alamgirpur
Khanak Mitathal
Manheru

Badli Lohat

Ganeshwar
Jodhpura

Figure 12 Distribution of sites of the Mature Harappan period (red dots represent the excavated sites)

Fortification the example from Bhirrana (Rao et al. 2005) is rec-

The Harappan town planning features a distinction
between the 'citadel' and the 'lower town.' Harappa,
Mohenjodaro and Kalibangan have a citadel and low-
er town that are located some distance away from each
other, with separate fortification walls.
The Harappan towns in Haryana, however, often
feature a citadel and lower town that are surrounded
by a single defence wall and separated by an internal
fortification wall. At Banawali (Bisht 1982) and
Bhirrana (Rao et al. 2005), the entire settlement was
surrounded by a single defence wall and an internal
parametric wall separated the citadel from the lower
town. Numerous Harappan urban centres including
Mitathal, Banawali, Balu, Rakhigarhi and Bhirrana
have a citadel and a lower town.
The fortification wall at Banawali (Bisht 1982)
is trapezoidal in shape with two arms found either
parallel to each other or equal in length. In contrast,
tangular in shape. Balu is surrounded by a square wall
(Kesarwani 2002). Kalibangan situated in the Hanu-
mangarh district of Rajasthan has a pentagonal citadel
and a rectangular lower town.
At Rakhigarhi, the acropolis (RGR2) was sur-
rounded by a mud-brick wall (Nath 1999, 2001). The
internal or core of the wall was filled with the mud
bricks, whereas the interior and exterior were found
lined with burnt bricks. The northern and southern
arms of the defence wall were exposed up to 70 m. At
Mitathal, MTL-1 was found fortified (Manmohan
Kumar et al. 2012). The western arm of the fortifica-
tion wall was traced up to 90 m.
The fortification wall at Banawali (Bisht 1982) was
surrounded by a 'V'-shaped moat. This moat was dug
close to the defence wall and measured approximately
5.70 to 6.50 m wide at the top and 3.60 m in depth.
The excavator was able to locate the moat along the

- 68 -
 Pots

2C9

Vivek Dangi Indus (Harappan) Civilization in the Ghaggar Basin Structure no.1

2D9

1A7 1A6 1A5 1A4 1A3 1A2 1A1 1A

1A9

3B

3A

1B7 1B6 1B5 1B4 1B3 1B2 1B1 1B

3C 3D 2C
3E

2A
3F
Antechamber
3H of 3G PL.2

3I 2B

1C7 1C6 1C5 1C4 1C3 1C2 1C1 1C

MA
3G

IN
PL.1
3L

ST
1D7 1D6 1D5 1D4 1D3 1D2 1D1 1D

RE
PL.3
3J 2D

ET
Central Courtyard

3K
3M
1E7 1E6 1E5 1E4 1E3 1E2 1E1 1E

3N
3P 2E
3R 3Q

3O
3T
2F
1F7 1F6 1F5 3S 1F4 1F3 1F2 1F1 1F
3U

1 4B
no. 4C
3V NE
LA 4A
1G7 1G6 1G5 1G4 1G3 1G2 1G1 1G

4D

4E 2
no. 4G
NE
LA
4F
4I 4H

1H7 1H6 1H5 1H4 1H3 1H2 1H1 1H

0 10m

Figure 13 Town planning of Farmana (after Shinde et al. eds. 2011a)

Figure 14 Covered drain, Banawali (Courtesy: R.S. Bisht)

- 69 -
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology
eastern and northern arms of the fortification wall.
It is likely to have been filled with water. So far as its
function is concerned, it seems to have been a part of
a defence system. The space between the moat and
the wall was enough for the movement of the security
guards and others. It also served as a platform against
the water of moat and as a intermediary space be-
tween the moat and the fortification wall.
Street and lanes
Streets and lanes played an important role in the
urban planning of Harappan settlements. At most of
the excavated sites such as Mitathal (Manmohan Ku-
mar et al. 2012), Bhirrana (Rao et al. 2005), Farmana
(Shinde et al. 2011), Rakhigarhi (Nath 1999, 2001)
and Balu (Kesarwani 2002), streets and lanes intersect
with each other at a right angle.
At Farmana, the main street was about 4 m wide,
but later encroachments reduced it to 3.6 m. This
space was enough for the movement of bullock carts,
which was the only means of transportation during
the third millennium BCE. Some ruts of cart wheels
were also noticed at the southern end of the main
street. The average width of the lane is about 1.50 m,
and it intersects with the main street at right angle.
After it runs for 19 m straight towards southwest, it
turns at the right angle towards the south (Figure 10).
At Mitathal, one street measuring about 2 m and a
lane were found.
At Banawali (Bisht 1982), the streets and lanes
were oriented to the cardinal directions while inter-
secting at right angles. Streets and lanes were managed
in such a way that houses were separated into sectors.
No two houses had a common wall. This type of plan
was observed at the acropolis, whereas trapezoidal or
conventional parallelogram-shaped sectors of houses
were found in the lower town. Here, a number of
streets met at a point in a radial pattern. One place
near the main entrance saw the convergence of five
streets at a single point. Out of these streets, three
- 70 -
came from the interior of the town and two ran along
the outer fortification wall of the city.
The excavations at Bhirrana (Rao et al. 2005) en-
rich our knowledge about the streets and lanes of the
Harappan civilization. Here the major street running
from north to south was 4.80 m wide, whereas the
width of lanes varied from 1.60 m to 2.80 m.
Drainage system
Drainage system and refuse water management also
played a vital role in the urban planning of the Hara-
ppans. The sites like Banawali, Rakhigarhi, Bhirrana
and Farmana give us detailed information about the
Harappan drainage system.
At Banawali, some drains to let out rain water were
found piercing through the defence walls and under
gateways (Figure 11). A similar evidence has also
been noticed at Bhirrana where a public drain made
up of baked bricks was found, and water outlets from
houses were also observed. At Farmana, a drain built
of wedge-shaped burnt bricks was recovered running
from east to west. The excavations at Mitathal yielded
a drain made of terracotta pipes for the removal of
waste water.
The sanitary facility depended on the use of san-
itary jars, which served as wash-basins. Ceramic jars
were also used for soaking purposes. Bathing plat-
forms made of burnt bricks were also found. Examples
of Harappan sanitary practices can be observed at
Banawali, Rakhigarhi, Farmana and Bhirrana.
LATE HARAPPAN CULTURE
The last phase of the Harappan culture in the Ghaggar
basin is represented by the decadent phase knows as
the Late Harappan culture. This culture is dated to the
first quarter of the second millennium BCE. The evi-
dence regarding the settlement pattern of this culture
has come from a number of excavated sites, viz. Balu,
 Vivek Dangi Indus (Harappan) Civilization in the Ghaggar Basin

Sarangpur
Chandigarh
Nagar
Rupar
Katpalon Bara
Sanghol
Harappa Dadheri
Rohira

Burj Bhagwanpura Bargaon

Jogna Khera
Mirzapur Daulatpur
Bohala
Banawali Hulas Ambkheri
Balu

Karsola
Sanauli
Hastinapura
Ganganagar Alamgirpur
Mitathal
Lohat
Badli Lal Qila

Jakhera
Atranjikhera

Noh

Figure 15 Distribution of sites of the Late Harappan period (red dots represent the excavated sites)

Banawali, Burj, Daulatpur, Jogana Khera, Mirzapur,
and Mitathal.
The evidence of the streets and lanes were only
found at Mitathal. They varied from 1.50 m to 3.10
m in width. At Mitathal (Suraj Bhan 1975: 13), Balu
(Kesarwani 2002: 47) and Mirzapur (IAR 1974-
75: 16), bricks were used in construction of houses,
At Daulatpur (IAR 1978-79: 19), baked brickbats
were also used. At Banawali (Bisht 1982: 120) and
Bhagwanpura ( Joshi 1993: 39), bricks were not used
for building houses during the Late Harappan period,
and structures were made of mud walls.
The evidence of the drainage system has been re-
covered from numerous sites. At Mitathal (Suraj Bhan
1975: 13), a large storage jar with a hole in the bottom
seems to have been used for the purpose of soakage.
A diagonally running drain (13 cm wide) was traced
in trench KX3 at Balu (Kesarwani and Arun 2002:
47). The picture emerging from the evidence men-
tioned above indicates that the Late Harappan culture
appears to be the outcome of the process of cultural
transformation and the internal interactions of the
society due to the decline of the economy.
DISCUSSION
The antiquity of human occupations in Haryana can
be traced back to the prehistoric times, as is attested
by the discovery of stone tools of this period. Archae-
ological exploration in the upper reaches of Ghaggar
and Markanda river have revealed that the earliest
inhabitants of this region belong to the Stone Age.
Stone tools of the Lower Palaeolithic period are made
of quartzite, which include chopper/chopping tools,
cores, flakes and unfinished tools. Such tools were
reported from Dera Kharauni and Mansa Devi in the
Kalka Tehsil of the Panchkula district (Mohapatra

- 71 -
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology

Approximate height: 60 cm

Figure 16 ‘S’-shaped jar from Banawali

(Photographed by the author with courtesy of Department of Archaeology and Museum, Haryana)

1966: 221-237). Following the initial discovery, more
sites of the Stone Age were reported, viz. Suketri
(Chandigarh) opposite the Sukhana Lake and inside
the boundary of the Hindustan Machine Tools prem-
ises in Pinjor. The tools collected from these places
include scrapers, cores and flakes. A typical pear-
shaped Acheulian handaxe was found at the village
Kotla (Manmohan Kumar 1978: 241). Apart from the
Lower Palaeolothic tools, some tools of the Middle
and Upper Palaeolithic were also found in the area
under the present study (Manmohan Kumar 1995: 5).
Suketi (district Sirmur of Himachal Pradesh) situated
on the terrace of Markanda has yielded stone tools
and fossils. Some of the fossils are even preserved in
situ, in the fossil park of the same village (Manmohan
Kumar 1978: 241).
Chronologically, the Palaeolithic tools of Punjab
and Haryana have affinity with the Soan Culture
- Chopping complex belonging to the Middle Pleis-
tocene, c. 500,000 B.P. (Sankalia 1974: 15). Early hu-
mans of this period used to live on the river terraces,
as most of the tools were found on the terraces. The
economy of this period was totally based upon hunt-
ing. These stone tools were used for various purposes
such as hunting, chopping meat and blocks of wood,
and dressing with the skin of hunted animals.
In the alluvial plains of the area under the present
study, we have not found any Neolithic site. The next

- 72 -
 Vivek Dangi Indus (Harappan) Civilization in the Ghaggar Basin

0
frn_2007_7863
20cm 2
1
frn_2007_7899
0 20cm

4
5
3 FRN_2008_066
FRN_2008_058 0 20cm
0 10cm

FRN_2008-09_8358
0 10cm

0 20cm

Figure 17 Painted Harappan pottery from Farmana (after Uesugi 2011a)

frn_2008-09_8358
0 10cm

phase of the history of region is represented by the
Pre-Harappan culture. The early farming community
(first phase of Harappan Culture) in this area has been
identified as the Ghaggar-Hakra culture or Pre-Hara-
ppan culture (Dangi and Manmohan Kumar 2017).
The Pre-Harappans of the Upper Ghaggar basin
lived in a simple life, as it is evident from the remains
excavated at Kunal, Bhirrana and Girawad. The peo-
ple lived in pits which were covered by a roof of wattle
and daub. The settlements of this period seems to be
agro-pastoral. Some 'V'-shaped copper arrowhead and
fish-hooks recovered from Kunal indicate that hunt-
ing and fishing also played a part in their economic
activities. No botanical remains so far have been re-
ported from any sites, but the future studies shall help
understand the position of subsistence economy of
these people. Some trading activates were also a part
of their economic life. Beads of carnelian, agate and
lapis lazuli were found associated with the dwelling
pits at Bhirrana (Rao et al. 2005: 63), which indicates

- 73 -
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology
1 2
Figure 18 Painted Harappan pottery from Seman-7 (cemetery of Farmana) (after Uesugi 2011b; Dangi and Samunder ++++)
their long-distance trading contacts.
The cultural phase that succeeds the Pre-Harappan
culture in the region is represented by the Early Hara-
14
ppan culture. Based on C dates from Kalibangan
and Bhirrana, we can assign this cultural phase to the
early half of third millennium BCE. The people of
this culture introduced rectangular and square houses
for the first time. The concept of fortification was a
part of their town planning. The people of this period
made the technological developments which led to
the urbanization in the next phase.
The Sothi-Siswal ceramic tradition is the regional
variant of the Early Harappan culture in Haryana. The
Early Harappan people lived in the square and rectan-
gular houses made of mud bricks of various sizes. The
economy of this period depended mainly on agricul-
ture; however, trade was also a part of their economy.
The discoveries of a tilled field from Kalibangan
- 74 -
3 4
6
0 20cm
(Lal 1998: 61) and a terracotta model of plough from
Banawali (Bisht 1982: 13) give an idea about the
farming technology during this period. The field of
Kalibangan had two sets of furrows, one running from
north to south and the other from east to west. This
type of pattern of ploughing fields is still prevalent in
the region.
Terracotta cart-frames and bull figurines give an
idea about the type of transportation. The presence
of copper, agate, gold and lapis lazuli objects in this
area where the raw material source was not available,
tells us about their trade links with far-flung areas.
The seals found in the Early Harappan levels at Kunal
(Khatri and Acharya 1995: 85) also give the evidence
of trade. Typical Kot Diji-type pottery found in a con-
siderable quantity clearly indicates the interaction be-
tween Haryana and western Punjab during the Early
Harappan period. Graffiti marks found on potsherds
 Vivek Dangi Indus (Harappan) Civilization in the Ghaggar Basin

20 cm

Figure 19 Black Slipped jar from Banawali

(Photographed by the author with courtesy of Department of Archaeology and Museum, Haryana)

indicate the efforts of people to learn writing towards
the later phase of this period.
The excavations at Kunal (Khatri and Achraya
1995: 85-86) and Bhirrana (Rao et al. 2006: 47-48)
have proved that there was a transitional phase from
the Early Harappan to Mature Harappan periods. In
this phase, some classical Harappan shapes such as
perforated jars, goblets and painted motifs started
appearing in the pottery.
The next cultural phase in the region represents
the urban Harappan civilization. A total number of
325 sites related to this phase are found in the area
under the present study, which has yielded classical
Harappan pottery, such as 'S'-shaped jars, goblets,
perforated jars, dish-on-stands with long stem, and
antiquities such as chert blades, chert cubical weights,
beads of semi-precious stones, terracotta humped bull
figurine, terracotta triangular cakes, etc.
The urban Harappan people were versatile in town
planning as discussed earlier, and the fortified town-
ships and sanitary arrangements indicate some kind of
social stratification. Probably a ruling class or adminis-
trative class lived in the acropolis (the features of town
planning have been discussed above), whereas rich
traders and farmers were living in big houses of the
lower town and the working class was staying outside
the fortification wall as indicated by the excavations at
Bhirrana.

- 75 -
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology

2cm

Figure 20 Carnelian beads from Banawali

(Photographed by the author with courtesy of Department of Archaeology and Museum, Haryana)

2cm

Figure 21 Amazonite beads from Banawali

(Photographed by the author with courtesy of Department of Archaeology and Museum, Haryana)

- 76 -
 Vivek Dangi Indus (Harappan) Civilization in the Ghaggar Basin

Figure 22 Jewelry hoard from Pur, Bhiwani

(Photographed by the author with courtesy of Department of Archaeology and Museum, Haryana)

- 77 -
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology

Figure 23 Agate bull with gold horns from Pur, Bhiwani

(Photographed by the author with courtesy of Department of Archaeology and Museum, Haryana)

The excavations at Seman-7 (a cemetery site that
is associated with the settlement site of Farmana)
enrich our knowledge about the social stratification
of the Mature Harappans (Shinde et al. 2009; Shinde
et al. eds. 2011a). There is a variation in the quantity
of grave goods in burials. The number of pots and
ornaments indicates the social status of an individual
buried. In Burial no. 20, a skeleton of a female was
found wearing a spiral copper bangle in the wrist and
upper right arm while in the left arm shell bangles are
worn at both the places (Shinde et al. 2009: 89, PI.
51). Along with these ornaments, she was wearing
copper earrings, steatite necklaces and anklets of stea-
tite beads; it indicates that she belonged to an affluent
class. The excavators have concluded that the burial of
affluent class had more pots as graves goods, sometime
even up to 35; whereas the ordinary people had only a
few pots.
The Harappan pottery generally has a red surface
and is wheel-turned, although handmade specimens
are also present. The clay is well levitated. Both
smoothening and scraping techniques using fast
rotation were used for surface finishing. Paintings in
black pigment are invariably arranged in horizontal
registers on a carefully-prepared red-slipped ground.
Among the common shapes are dishes, jars, 'S'-shaped
jars, dish-on-stands, goblets, perforated jars and so on
(Figures 12, 13 and 14). The excavations at Banawali
yielded a typical black-slipped jar and such pottery is
rare in this region (Figure 15), while it is widely found
in the Gujarat region.
The use of seals is an indication not only of the
expert craftsmanship but also of trading activities.
The cubical gamesman-type weight made of stone
and ivory shows a high degree of precision and stand-
ardization. Their skill in metallurgy is evident from a
number of tools found in the excavations and explora-
tions.
Beads of semi-precious stones, such as carnelian,
agate, faience, jasper, amazonite and lapis lazuli were

- 78 -
 Vivek Dangi Indus (Harappan) Civilization in the Ghaggar Basin
Figure 24 Late Harappan pottery from Bedwa-2 (after Dangi et al. 2015)
found at almost all the excavated and explored sites
(Figures 16 and 17). These beads are very beautiful
and attractive in their shape and appearance. The wide
presence of these stone beads indicates the long-dis-
tance trade of the Harappans, as the sources of those
materiels are not located in this region.
The most noteworthy find in the region is a jew-
ellery hoard of the Harappan period from Pur, a site
located in the Bhiwani district in Haryana. This hoard
contains a large number of beads of carnelian, agate,
faience, jasper, amazonite along with rings of gold and
silver (Figure 18). Most striking artefact of this hoard
is a bull carved out of banded agate with horns made
of gold (Figure 19).
The fourth phase of the Harappan culture of the
region is distinguished by the Late Harappan culture
or the degeneration of the Harappan civilization.
During this phase, classical Harappan shapes trans-
formed into a new ceramic style with continuation of
its basic elements. The Late Harappan pottery types
are comprised of dish-on-stands with ribbed junction,
dish-on-stands with broad and short stand, vases with
projecting undercut rims, jars with wide and narrow
- 79 -
mouth, globular vases with flanged rim and flasks
treated with fine red slip (Figures 20 and 21).
To date, 1200 Late Harappan sites have been
reported in Haryana, which are almost four times as
numerous as Mature Harappan sites and most of the
sites are established on the fresh ground.
The economy of this period was based on the
agriculture with a limitedscale of long-distance trade.
The excavations at Daulatpur (IAR 1976-77: 19) and
Mitathal (Suraj Bhan 1975) provided the evidence of
charred grains, semi-precious stone beads and copper
objects, giving an idea about the economic life of the
Late Harappan period. The presence of stone beads
ate these sites indicates that some tranding activities
existed even in this period, although the scale of the
trades were distinctly smaller than the preceding ur-
ban phase. New types of copper tools appeared in this
period usually called Copper Hoard tools (Figure 22).
In Haryana, a number of sites yielded Copper Hoard
tools, and they were correlated with OCP which is
contemporary to the Late Harappans. The social con-
dition and organization of the Late Harappan period
are still unclear, although it is generally described as
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology

0 20cm

2 3 4 5

6 7 8
0 20cm

Figure 25 Late Harappan pottery from Bedwa-2 (after Dangi et al. 2015)

- 80 -
 Vivek Dangi Indus (Harappan) Civilization in the Ghaggar Basin

Figure 26 Copper hoard tools from Narnaund (Courtesy: Gurkul Museum, Jhajjar)

- 81 -
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology
the degenerated phase of the Harappan Civilization.
Further studies on this period are expected to reveal
how the urban society was transformed into the Late
Harappan society and what features made up of the
society.
The excavations at the site of Bhagwanpura threw
a new light on the relationship between the Late
Harappan and PGW using people. Sub-period IA at
Bhagwanpura is represented by the Late Harappan
culture, while the sub-period IB is marked by the con-
tinuous presence of the Late Harappans and the ap-
pearance of the PGW using people ( Joshi 1993: 27).
Similar evidence has been reported from Dadheri, Na-
gar, Manda and Katpalon ( Joshi 1993: 241-46). This
overlap of two different cultures and social groups
is very significant, as the PGW people are generally
believed to have been associated with the Aryans. A
similar situation has also been reported from a recent-
ly excavated site of Madina. The excavator of this site
does not claim an overlap betweenthe Late Harappan
and PGW, but notes that Late Harappan elements
like pottery and antiquities continued from the lowest
level to the upper level of PGW deposit (Manmohan
Kumar et al. 2009; Manmohan Kumar et al. eds.
2016). This overlap of cultures is very significant, as it
might bridge the gap between the Bronze Age and the
Iron Age. Since 200 sites has yielded remains of both
the Late Harappan and PGW affinities in the area
under the present study, there is a great potentiality to
reveal the socio-cultural transition in this area. Future
studies and researches must be oriented towards un-
folding the transition
Acknowledgments
It is my duty to acknowledge the help of many indi-
viduals who enlightened me during the research work.
I am grateful to Prof. Manmohan Kumar, Dr. Akinori
Uesugi, Dr. B.R. Mani, Dr. R.S. Bisht, and Dr. K.N.
Dikshit for valuable suggestions and encouragements.
- 82 -
I owe sincere thanks to Arvin Raj Mathur for helping
me in writing this article. I am also grateful to De-
partment of Archaeology and Museum, Haryana for
according me permission to study material recovered
from Kunal and Jogna Khera. Last but not least, I am
thankful to Prof. Fumitaka Yoneda and Kansai Uni-
versity, Osaka, Japan for inviting me to the University.
References
Ajay 2001. Archaeology and History of Hansi Block I, District
Hisar. M.Phil. dissertation. The Maharshi Dayanand Uni-
versity, Rohtak.
Amar Singh 1981. Archaeology of Jind and Karnal Districts
(Haryana). Ph.D. dissertation. Kurukshetra University,
Kurukshetra.
Ashok Kumar 1990. Archaeology and History of Kathu-
ra Block (Rohtak). M.Phil dissertation. The Maharshi
Dayanand University, Rohtak.
Ashok Kumar 1991. Archaeology and History of Badli Re-
gion (Dist. Rohtak). M.Phil dissertation. The Maharshi
Dayanand University, Rohtak.
Bala, Madhu 1992. Archaeolog y of Punjab. Agam Kala
Prakashan, New Delhi.
Bala, Madhu and Vishnu Kant 2000. Dhalewan - An Early
Harappan Site in Punjab. Purātattva 30: 42-44.
Bisht, R.S. 1982. "Excavations at Banawali: 1974-77", in G.L.
Possehl ed. Harappan Civilization: A Contemporary Per-
spective. Oxford & IBH Publishing Co., New Delhi.
Bisht, R.S. 1999. Dholavira and Banawali: Two Different
Paradigms of the Harappan Urbis Forma. Purātattva 29:
14-42.
Brehamdutt 1980. Settlements of Painted Grey Ware in Har-
yana. Ph.D. dissertation. Kurukshetra University, Kuruk-
shetra.
Chakarbarti, D.K. and Sukhdev Saini 2009. The Problem of
the Sarasvati River and Notes on the Archaeological Geogra-
phy of Haryana and Indian Punjab. Aryan Books Interna-
tional, New Delhi.
Cunnigham, A. 1882. A Tour in the Punjab in 1878-79. Ar-
chaeological Survey of India, Simla.
Dangi, Vivek 2006 Settlement Pattern of Meham Block Dis-
 Vivek Dangi Indus (Harappan) Civilization in the Ghaggar Basin
trict Rohtak. M.Phil dissertation. Kurukshetra University,
Kurukshetra.
Dangi, Vivek 2007. Recent Exploration in Meham, District
Rohtak’, Haryana. Purātattva 37: 205-212.
Dangi, Vivek 2009a. "Archaeology of Ghaggar Basin: Set-
tlement Archaeology of Meham Block, District Rohtak,
Haryana, India", in T. Osada and A. Uesugi eds. Occasional
Paper 7: Linguistics, Archaeology and the Human Past. In-
dus Project, Kyoto.
Dangi, Vivek 2009b. "Recent explorations in the Chautang
Basin ( Jind District, Haryana)", in T. Osada and A. Uesu-
gi eds. Occasional Paper 9: Linguistics, Archaeology and the
Human Past. Indus Project, Kyoto. pp. 73-163.
Dangi, Vivek 2010. A Study of Proto-Historic settlements in
Upper Ghaggar Basin. Ph.D. dissertation. The Maharshi
Dayanand University, Rohtak.
Dangi, Vivek 2011. Explorations along with River Ghaggar
and Sirhind Nala (Haryana and Punjab). Man and Envi-
ronment 36(2):66-87
Dangi, Vivek and Manmohan Kumar 2017. "Pre-Harappan
Culture of Ghaggar Basin: Recent Prespective", in Man-
mohan Kumar and Akinori Uesugi eds. Harappan Studies:
Recent Researches in South Asian Archaeology, vol. 2. Ary-
an Books Internationl, New Delhi. pp. 22-40.
Dangi, V., A. Uesugi, Manmohan Kumar, V. Shinde and Appu
2015. "Bedwa: A Mature and Late Harappan Necropolis
in the Upper Ghaggar Basin", in Manmohan Kumar and A.
Uesugi eds. Harappan Studies: Recent Researches in South
Asian Archaeology, vol. 1. Aryan Books International, New
Delhi. pp. 93-152.
Dhaka, Surender 1993. Archaeology and History of Salhawas
Block (Dist. Rohtak). M.Phil dissertation. The Maharshi
Dayanand University, Rohtak.
Dhankhar, Ramdhan 1990. Archaeology and History of Go-
hana Block (Rohtak). M.Phil. dissertation. The Maharshi
Dayanand University, Rohtak.
Dhattarwal, D.S. 1978. Archaeology of Safidon Tehsil (Dist.
Jind). M.Phil dissertation. Kurukshetra University, Ku-
rukshetra.
Gulab Singh 1990. Archaeology and History of Mundlana
Block (Dist. Rohtak). M.Phil. dissertation. The Maharshi
Dayanand University, Rohtak.
IAR: Indian Archaeology - A Review 1968-69: 8-9, 1976-77:
- 83 -
19, 1977-78: 23, 1963-64: 27-28, 1964-65: 33-34, 1965-
66: 35-36, 1968-69: 8-9, 1970-71: 15-16, 1971-72: 23-24,
1972-73: 12-13, 1974-75: 16, 1975-76: 18,1976-77: 19,
1977-78: 23, 1978-79: 68-69, 1979-80: 31, 1980-81:15-
16, 1983-84: 29-33, 1985-86: 25-29, 1986-87: 34-36,
1987-88:28-31, 1988-89:21-24, 1989-90: 27-32, 1991-92:
35-37.
Jai Narain 1993. Archaeolog y and History of Matanhail
Block (Dist. Rohtak). M.Phil. dissertation. The Maharshi
Dayanand University, Rohtak.
Joon, Rajiv 1989. Archaeology and History of Dadri Block-
II (District Bhiwani). M.Phil. dissertation. The Maharshi
Dayanand University, Rohtak.
Joshi, Jagat Pati 1993. Excavation at BhagwanPura 1975-76
and Other Explorations & Excavations 1975-81 in Har-
yana, Jammu & Kashmir and Punjab. Memoirs of the
Archaeological Survey of India no. 89. Archaeological
Survey of India, New Delhi.
Joshi, Yogeshwar Kumar 2003. Archaeo-Historical Study
in North Haryana ( from Earliest Times to 12th Century
A.D.). Ph.D. dissertation. Kurukshetra University, Kuruk-
shetra.
Kadian, Rai Singh 1990. Archaeology and History of Beri
Block (Dist. Rohtak). M.Phil dissertation. The Maharshi
Dayanand University, Rohtak.
Kailash Kumar 1989. Archaeology and History of Rohtak
Block (Dist. Rohtak). M.Phil dissertation. The Maharshi
Dayanand University, Rohtak.
Kataria, Rajiv 1990. Archaeology and History of Bahadurgarh
Block (Dist. Rohtak). M.Phil. dissertation. The Maharshi
Dayanand University, Rohtak.
Kesarwani, A. 2002. Excavation at Balu (Distt. Kaithal -
Haryana). Kurukshetra University, Kurukshetra.
Kesarwani, A. 2001. Balu: A Fortified Rural Settlement in
Haryana. Purātattva 31: 140-152.
Khatri, J.S. and M. Acharya 1995. Kunal: A New Indus Sar-
aswati Site. Purātattva no. 25: 84-86.
Krishan Kumar 1990. History and Archaeology of Lakhan
Majra Block (Rohtak). M.Phil. dissertation. The Maharshi
Dayanand University, Rohtak.
Krishana 2008. Archaeology and History of Ratia block,
District Fatehabad. M.Phil dissertation. The Maharshi
Dayanand University, Rohtak.
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology
Kwatra 1964. Exploration in Jaghadri Tehsil in Ambala Dis-
trict. M.A. dissertation. Punjab University, Chandigarh.
Lal, B.B. 1954. Excavations at Hastinapura and other Explo-
rations in Uppar Ganga and Sutluj Basins. Ancient India
10-11: 5-151.
Lal, B.B. 1998. India 1947-1997: New Light on the Indus Civi-
lization. Aryan Book International, New Delhi.
Lamba, Mani Ram 1989. Archaeology and History of Kala-
naur Block (Dist. Rohtak). M.Phil. dissertation. The Ma-
harshi Dayanand University, Rohtak.
Malhotra, P.S. 1964. Archaeology of Naraingarh Tehsil (Dist.
Ambala). M.A. dissertation. Punjab University, Chandi-
garh.
Malik, D.S., M. Acharya and R.S. Dahiya 2007. "A Brief Note
on the Excavation at Jognakhera (Kurukshetra)", in S.P.
Shukla, R.S. Bisht, M.P. Joshi and Prashant Srivastava eds.
History and Heritage (In Honour of Prof. Kiran Kumar
Thaplyal). Agam Kala Prakashan, Delhi. pp 85-90.
Manmohan Kumar 1978 Archaeology of Ambala and Kuruk-
shetra Districts (Haryana). Ph.D. dissertation. Kurukshet-
ra University, Kurukshetra.
Manmohan Kumar 1995. "Prehistoric Remains from Hary-
ana Region", in Ajay Mitra Shastri, Devendra Handa and
C.S. Gupta eds. Visvambhara: Probing in Orientology.
Harman Publishing House, New Delhi. pp.1-10.
Manmohan Kumar 2009. "Harappan Settlements in the Gh-
aggar-Yamuna Divide", in T. Osada and A. Uesugi eds. Oc-
casional Paper 7: Linguistics, Archaeology and the Human
Past. Indus Project, Kyoto. pp. 1-76.
Manmohan Kumar, Akinori Uesugi, Vasant Shinde, Vivek
Dangi, Vijay Kumar, Rajeev Maan and Arun Singh 2011.
Excavations at Mitathal, District Bhiwani (Haryana)
2010-11: A Preliminary Report. Purātattva 41: 168-178.
Manmohan Kumar, Akinori Uesugi, Vivek Dangi, Vijay Ku-
mar and Takekazu Nagae 2012. Excavations at Mitathal
2011-12. Purātattva 42: 168-178.
Manmohan Kumar, V. Shinde, A Uesugi, Vivek Dangi, Sajjan
Kumar and Vijay Kumar 2009. "Excavations at Madi-
na, District Rohtak, Haryana 2007-08: A Report", in T.
Osada and A. Uesugi eds. Occasional Paper 7: Linguistic
Archaeology and the Human Past. Indus Project, Kyoto. pp
77-177.
Manmohan Kumar, Akinori Uesugi and Vivek Dangi eds.
- 84 -
2016. Excavations at Madina, District Rohtak, Haryana,
India. Research group for South Asian Archaeology, Ar-
chaeological Research Institute, Kansai University, Osaka,
Japan
Mohapatra, G.C. 1966. Preliminary Report of the Excava-
tions and Excavations of the Stone Age Sites in Eastern
Punjab. Bulletin of Deccan College Research Institute:
221-237.
Mohinder Singh 1990. Settlement Archaeology of Gurgaon
District Haryana. Ph.D. dissertation. Kurukshetra Univer-
sity, Kurukshetra.
Nath, Amarendra 1998. Rakhigarhi: A Harappan Metropolis
in the Sarasvati-Drishadvati Divide. Purātattva 28: 39-45.
Nath, Amarendra 1999. Further Excavations at Rakhigarhi.
Purātattva 29: 46-49.
Nath, Amarendra 2001. Rakhigarhi : 1999-2000. Purātattva
31: 43-46.
Palahia, M.K. 1964. Archaeology of Ambala Tehsil. M.A. dis-
sertation, Punjab University, Chandigarh.
Parmod Kumar 2002. Archaeology and History of Agroha and
Adampur Blocks (Dist. Hisar). M.Phil dissertation. The
Maharshi Dayanand University, Rohtak.
Petrie, C.A., R.N. Singh and A.K. Singh Investigating Chang-
ing settlement Dynamics in the Plains: The 2009 Survey
and excavations at Masudpur (Hisar District, Haryana).
Purātattva 39: 38-49
Punia, D.S. 1976. Archaeology of Gurgaon and Mahendergarh
Districts (Haryana). Ph.D. dissertation. Kurukshetra Uni-
versity, Kurukshetra.
Rahar, Jagdish 2001. Archaeological Settlement Pattern of
Mahendergarh and Rewari Districts (Haryana). Ph.D. dis-
sertation. The Maharshi Dayanand University, Rohtak.
Rahar, Jagdish Singh 1993. Archaeology and History of Jhajjar
Block (Dist. Rohtak). M.Phil dissertation. The Maharshi
Dayanand University, Rohtak.
Rajesh Kumar 2008. History and Archaeology of Hisar Block
I & II. M.Phil dissertation. The Maharshi Dayanand Uni-
versity, Rohtak.
Rao, L.S., Nandhani. B. Sahu, U.A. Shastry Prabash Sahu
and Samir Diwan 2006. Bhirrana Excavations-2005-06.
Purātattva 36: 45-49.
Rao, L.S., N.B. Sahu, Prabash Sahu, Samir Diwan and U.A.
Shastry 2005. New Light on the Excavation of Harappan
 Vivek Dangi Indus (Harappan) Civilization in the Ghaggar Basin
Settlement at Bhirrana. Purātattva 35: 60-68.
Rao, L.S., N.B. Sahu, Prabash Sahu, U.A. Shastry and Samir
Diwan 2004. Unearthing Harappan Settlement at Bhir-
rana. Purātattva 34: 20-24.
Sandeep 2006. Archaeology of Hansi Block-II. M.Phil. Disser-
tation. Kurukshetra University, Kurukshetra, Haryana.
Satdev 1980 Archaeology of Jind Tehsil. M.Phil. Dissertation.
Kurukshetra University, Kurukshetra, Haryana.
Sharma, R.P. 1982. Khatoli: A Protohistoric site in Haryana.
Purātattva 11: 178-180.
Shinde, V., T. Osada and Manmohan Kumar 2011a. Excava-
tions at Farmana, District Rohtak, Haryana, India 2006-
2008. Indus Project, Kyoto.
Shinde, V.S, T. Osada and Manmohan Kumar 2011b. Exca-
vations at Girawad 2007: District Rohtak, Haryana, India.
Indus Project, Kyoto.
Shinde, V.S., Toshiki Osada, M.M. Sharma, Akinori Uesugi,
Takao Uno, Hideaki Maemoku, Prabodh Shirvalkar,
Shweta Sinha Deshpande, Amol Kulkarni, Amrita Sarkar,
anjana Reddy, Vinay Rao and Vivek Dangi 2008. "Explo-
rations Ghaggar Basin and excavations at Girawad, Farma-
na ( Rohtak District) and Mithathal (Bhiwani District),
Haryana, India", in T. Osada and A. Uesugi eds. Occasional
Paper 3: Linguistics, Archaeology and Human Past. Indus
Project, Kyoto. pp. 77-158.
Shinde, Vasant and P.B.S. Sengar 2011. Excavations at Karso-
la Khera. Ancient India, New Series 1: 179-212.
Silak Ram 1972. Archaeology of Rohtak and Hisar Districts
(Haryana). Ph.D. dissertation. Kurukshetra University,
Kurukshetra.
Singh, R.N., Petrie, C.A, C.A.I. French, S. Neogi, A.K. Pand-
ey, D. Parikh and V. Pawar 2010. Geoarchaeological Sur-
vey and Excavations at Burj-2010, Fatehabad, Haryana.
Purātattva 40: 94-101
Singh, R.N., C.A. Petrie, V. Pawar, A.K. Pandey, S. Neogi,
M. Singh, A.K. Singh, D. Parik and C. Lancelotti 2010.
Changing Patterns of Settlements in the Rise and Fall of
Harappan Urbanism and Beyond: a Preliminary Report
on the Rakhigarhi Hinterland Survey 2009. Man and En-
vironment 35(1): 37-53.
Singh, U.V. 1976. Explorations in the Vicinity of Thanesar.
Kurukshetra University Research Journal (Arts) 10.
Singh, U.V. 1977. "Late Harappan culture as revealed by the
- 85 -
excavations at Mirzapur and Daulatpur, District Kuruk-
shetra (Haryana)", in B.B. Lal and S.C. Malik eds. Indus
Civilization: Problems and Issues. Indian Institute of Ad-
vanced Study, Shimla. pp. 1-7.
Sneh Lata 1990. Archaeology and History of Sampla Block
(Dist. Rohtak). M.Phil. dissertation. The Maharshi
Dayanand University, Rohtak.
Suraj Bhan 1972a. Prehistoric Archaeology of the Saraswati
and Drishadvati Valley (Haryana). Ph.D. dissertation. The
Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda, Vadodara.
Suraj Bhan 1972b. Siswal - A Pre-Harappan site in Dris-
advati valley. Purātattva 5: 44-46.
Suraj Bhan 1975. Excavation at Mitathal (1968) and other
Exploration in Sutlej-Yamuna Divide. Kurukshetra Uni-
versity Press, Kurukshetra.
Suraj Bhan and Jim G. Shaffer 1978. New Discoveries in
Northern Haryana. Man and Environment 2: 59-68.
Surender Kumar 1999 Archaeology and History of Bhiwani
Block, District Bhiwani. M.Phil dissertation. The Maharshi
Dayanad University, Rohtak.
Thakran, R.C., Amar Singh, Yaspal, Vikas and Anju 2010.
Excavations at Harappan Site of Badli (2008-09). Purātat-
tva 39: 165-171.
Thakran R.C., Amar Singh, Yaspal, Vikas Pawar and Narender
Parmar 2013. Excavations at Khera near Meham (2009-
10), District Rohtak Haryana. Purātattva 43: 158-163.
Thakran, R.C. 2000. Dynamics of Settlement Archaeology
(Haryana). Gyan Prakashan, New Delhi.
Thakran, R.C., Amar Singh, Narender and Vikas 2010. Ex-
cavations on Manheru 2009 and Explorations in its Envi-
rons, District Bhiwani, Haryana. Aitihya 1:128-159.
Uesugi, A. 2011a. "Pottery from the Settlement Area", in V.
Shinde, T. Osada, and Manmohan Kumar eds. Excava-
tions at Farmana, Rohtak District, Haryana, India 2006-
2008. Indus Project, Research Institute for Humanity and
Nature, Kyoto. pp. 168-368.
Uesugi, A. 2011b. "Pottery from the Cemetery Area", in V.
Shinde, T. Osada, and Manmohan Kumar eds. Excava-
tions at Farmana, Rohtak District, Haryana, India 2006-
2008. Indus Project, Research Institute for Humanity and
Nature, Kyoto. pp. 674-800.
Vijay Kumar 2001. Archaeology and History of Narnaund
Block (Dist. Hisar). M.Phil. dissertation. Maharshi
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology

Dayanad University, Rohtak.

Yashvir Singh 1992. Archaeology and History of Charkhi
Dadri Block No. 1 (Dist. Bhiwani). M.Phil dissertation.
The Maharshi Dayanand University, Rohtak.
Yogeshwar Kumar 1987. Archaeology and History of Narain-
garh Tehsil. M.Phil dissertation. Kurukshetra University,
Kurukshetra.

- 86 -
 Rajesh S.V. Indus Archaeology in Gujarat
Indus Archaeology in Gujarat:
An expedition through space, time, materials and methods
Rajesh S.V.
(Department of Archaeology, University of Kerala)
INTRODUCTION
Chalcolithic researches of eighty-eight years in Gu-
jarat, Western India proved to be highly productive
of unexpected insights, new ideas, and lasting results
regarding the cultures/traditions of various phases of
the Harappan culture. The aspects discussed in this
paper include different explorations and excavations
conducted in Gujarat between 1930 and 2018. This
paper also deals with various dating methods em-
ployed in the Chalcolithic Archaeology of Gujarat
and its merits and demerits. The main aim of this pa-
per is to bring out the origin, existence, characteristic
features, extent and dispersal of the Harappan and
regional Chalcolithic cultures/traditions in Gujarat
in a summarized way. It further deals with identifying
the similarities and differences between the Regional
Chalcolithic cultures/traditions and the Sindhi/
Sorath Harappans in Gujarat to understand the role
played by these communities from the Pre-Urban
Harappan Phase to the Post-Urban Harappan Phase
through the Urban Harappan Phase.
GUJARAT: THE STUDY AREA
In the Harappan/Chalcolithic studies, only a limited
- 87 -
number of scholars attempted to define the term
region in which geographical and archaeological di-
visions sometimes does not fit properly. The greater
Indus region extends from Shortugai in Afghanistan
in the north to Daimabad on the bank of Pravara in
the south. Its western boundary is marked by Shahr-i
Sokhta on the west whereas Manpur marks its eastern
border (Figure 1). The overall area is approximately 1
million square kilometers (Possehl 1999). Joshi (1984:
51-54) divided the greater Indus region into six geo-
graphical regions/sectors namely northern (Punjab,
type site: Harappa), eastern (Rajasthan and Haryana
,type site: Kalibangan), central (Bahawalpur type
site: Ganveriwala), Southern (Sind, type site: Mohen-
jo-Daro), south-western (Baluchistan type site: Kulli
Harappan) and south-eastern (Gujarat, type site: Lo-
thal).
Possehl (1992: 237-244) divided the Harappan
cultural mosaic into six regions based on ceramics
and subsistence patterns, namely the Sindhi Harap-
pan (lower Indus Valley and Kachchh extending up
to Lothal), the Kulli Harappan (in the mountains
of Southern Baluchistan and Gedrosia), the Sorath
Harappan (Saurashtra), The Bahawalpur Harappan
(midst of the Cholistan desert), the East Punjab
Harappan (Banawali II in Haryana) and the Late Kot
Dijian (Northwest Frontier of Pakistan). However,
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology

Figure 1 Distribution of major sites in the Greater Indus Region (Adapted: Belcher 1998)

later Possehl (1999: 269) identified seven regions of
Indus Age, namely the Central Region, the Gedrosia
Region, the Southern Region, the Northwestern Re-
gion, the Northern Region, the Eastern Region and
the Hakra Region. The southern region of Indus Age
is coincident with the boundaries of the modern state
of Gujarat (Possehl 1999: 327).
Subbarao (1958) identified the differential growth
of regions in India that was marked by conflict
between centrifugal and centripetal forces across a
geographically and physiographically differentiated
landscape. Accordingly, he (1958: 12) divided the
country into three basic divisions under the titles of
the area of attraction, the areas of relative isolation
and the area of isolation and placed Gujarat under
the category of the area of relative isolation. Based on
geographical criteria and ethnic composition, Possehl
(1999: 328) divided Gujarat into four sub-regions:
the North Gujarat plain, South Gujarat, Kachchh
and Saurashtra. In earlier period, these regions were
known in names Anarta, Lata, Kaccha and Surastra
respectively (Sankalia 1941: 4-6; Subbarao 1958: 128;
Majumdar 1960: xvii-xviii).
Archaeological researches in Gujarat during the
last eighty-eight years showed that the Harappan and
other regional Chalcolithic communities distributed

- 88 -
 Rajesh S.V. Indus Archaeology in Gujarat
over various physiographic regions, ranging from arid
to humid conditions. Though main concentrations of
different cultures/traditions were in certain regions,
they also spread to other physiographic realms. This
shows the skill and adaptability of Chalcolithic com-
munities in adjusting themselves within different envi-
ronmental conditions. The selection of different plac-
es for settlement might be based on the availability of
food, potable water and accessibility to raw materials
and finished products. However, archaeological data
show that many of the regions preferred by the Chal-
colithic folk are not presently suitable for habitation.
EXPLORATIONS
The history of eighty-eight years of explorations to
identify and understand the nature of Harappan and
Chalcolithic sites in Gujarat can be divided into eight
stages and in each advancing period, research became
more and more scientific and problem-oriented. The
various stages of explorations are Period of Chance
Findings; Decade of Nationalism and Beginning of
Village to Village and River Valley Surveys; Decade
of the Entry of Foreign Schools; Decade of the Begin-
ning of District Surveys; Decade of the Introduction
of Grid Surveys; Decade of Surveys for Regional
Chalcolithic Sites and Introduction of GPS Surveys;
Decade of the Beginning of Digital Documentation
and Transect Survey of Sites; and Period of the Gu-
jarat Gazetteer Project and Landscape and Environ-
mental Approaches. All these explorations brought
to light more than 800 sites (Figure 2) in different re-
gions of Gujarat. Hundreds of newly discovered sites
await publication.
Period of Chance Findings
Before 1950, the Chalcolithic archaeology of Gu-
jarat was linked by stray finds and most of the sites
were discovered accidently. According to the present
- 89 -
understanding, Vallabhipur was the first noticed
Chalcolithic (Protohistoric) site in Gujarat in 1930
(Heras 1938). The Chalcolithic site at Rangpur came
to the notice in 1934 while digging the mound for
the construction of a road and M.S. Vats excavated
the site in 1935 (Rao 1963). In 1938, Father H. Heras
reported the presence of the ancient mound at Som-
nath. Langhnaj, a Mesolithic site having Chalcolithic
affinity was reported in 1941-42 by H.D. Sankalia of
Deccan College, Pune during the First Gujarat Prehis-
toric Expedition (Sankalia 1946, 1965).
Decade of Nationalism and Beginning of
Village to Village and River Valley Surveys
After the partition of India in 1947, due to the loss of
the well-known remains of its rich cultural heritage to
Pakistan and prompted by the feelings of nationalism,
Indian archaeologists conducted vigorous explora-
tions in various parts of India including Gujarat. Soon
after the partition, explorations in Gujarat were car-
ried out by the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI);
Department of Archaeology, Saurashtra; Department
of Archaeology Government of Gujarat; The Mahara-
ja Sayajirao University of Baroda and Deccan College,
Pune. This period is noted for the beginning of the
systematic village to village surveys. The archaeologi-
cal explorations in Gujarat during 1951-1960 by P.P.
Pandya (Bhadar Valley and various parts of Saurash-
tra), S.R. Rao (Bhal Region, Kachchh, Saurashtra,
Mahi and Tapi Valley) and K.V. Soundara Rajan
(Narmada Valley) resulted in the discovery of around
100 Chalcolithic sites in various regions except North
Gujarat (IAR 1953-54, 1954-55, 1955-56, 1956-57,
1957-58, 1958-59, 1959-60; Subbarao 1958).
Decade of the Entry of Foreign Schools
The period between 1961 and 1970 is remarkable for
the introduction of foreign scholars into the Harap-
pan studies of Gujarat. During this decade, Chalco-
lithic sites were also discovered by J.M. Nanavati of
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology

Figure 2 All the reported Chalcolithic sites in Gujarat

Figure 3 All the excavated Chalcolithic sites in Gujarat

- 90 -
 Rajesh S.V. Indus Archaeology in Gujarat
Department of Archaeology (Aji, Khelo, Kalubhar
and Kshetrunji river valleys in Amreli, Bhavnagar,
Jamnagar, Rajkot; Demi river valley Surendranagar;
Ahmedabad and Bannnaskantha), J.P. Joshi of the
ASI (Surendranagar, Kachchh), K.V. Soundara Rajan
of the ASI (Oldpad in Surat), R.N. Mehta of the
Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda (Surat), F.R.
Allchin and B. Allchin of University of Cambridge
and J.P. Joshi of the ASI (lower courses of Narmada
and Tapi and estuaries of Ambika, Auranga, Daman-
ganga, Kim, Mindola, Par and Purna rivers in Baroda,
Bharuch and Surat), and Ananda Sastry and H. K.
Chaturvedi of the ASI ( Jamnagar) (IAR 1960-61,
1961-62, 1962-63, 1963-64, 1964-65, 1965-66, 1966-
67, 1967-68, 1968-69, 1969-70; Rao 1963; Leshnik
1968a: 295-310).
Decade of the Beginning of District Surveys
This decade is notable for the introduction of district
surveys to discover Harappan sites by the ASI and the
research scholars from the Maharaja Sayajirao Uni-
versity of Baroda. During 1971-80, the explorations
of Department of Archaeology, Government of Gu-
jarat (Kachchh, Ahmadabad, Bhavnagar, Junagadh,
Rajkot and Amreli), G.L. Possehl and Department of
Archaeology, Government of Gujarat (Bhavnagar -
Umrala and Gadhda taluka), Suman Pandya (Bhavna-
gar Taluka), the Maharaja Sayajirao University of
Baroda (Banaskantha, Kheda, Jamnagar, Ahmedabad
and Bhavnagar and Mehsana districts), , Chitalwa-
la (Rajkot) and the ASI (Banaskantha, Mehsana,
Bhavnagar, Surendranagar and Ahmedabad) resulted
in the discovery of hundreds of sites in various parts
of Gujarat. The second half of this decade is notable
for the discovery of a considerable number of Chalco-
lithic sites in North Gujarat (IAR 1970-71, 1971-72,
1972-73, 1973-74, 1974-75, 1975-76, 1976-77, 1977-
78, 1978-79, 1979-80; Chitalwala 1979: 113-121;
Mehta and Chaudhary 1971, 1975; Mehta et al. 1980;
Mirchandani 1980; Momin 1974: 57-63, 1976a: 54-
- 91 -
56, 1976b: 51-54, 1979; Nanavati et al. 1971; Pandya
1973; Parikh 1977; Possehl 1980; Rao 1979).
Decade of the Introduction of Grid Surveys
In this period, different seasons of grid surveys were
conducted at sites like Dholavira prior to the excava-
tion. During 1981-1990, explorations for Chalcolithic
sites were conducted by the Department of Archae-
ology, Government of Gujarat (Kachchh, Rajkot,
Mehsana, Amreli and Bhavnagar), the Maharaja
Sayajirao University of Baroda (Bhavnagar, Jamnagar,
Mehsana, Surendranagar), Deccan College Pune
(Rajkot) and the ASI (Kachchh, Surat) (IAR 1980-
81, 1981-82, 1982-83, 1983-84, 1984-85, 1985-86,
1986-87, 1987-88, 1988-89, 1989-90; Bhan 1983;
Bhan 1986: 1-21; Bhan and Kenoyer 1984a: 115-120;
Bhan and Kenoyer 1984b: 67-80; Hegde et al. 1990;
Hegde and Sonawane 1986: 23-31; Jairath 1986; Joshi
1990; Mehta 1984: 227-230; Momin 1984: 231-234;
Possehl and Raval 1989; Rissman 1985; Rissman and
Chitalwala 1990; Sonawane and Mehta 1985: 38-44;
Sonawane 1990a, 1990b).
Decade of Surveys for Regional Chalcolith-
ic Sites and Introduction of GPS Surveys
During 1991-2000, most of the explorations were
conducted to identify regional Chalcolithic sites and
was mainly carried out by the Maharaja Sayajirao
University of Baroda. The explorations of the uni-
versity were concentrated in Mehsana, Banaskantha,
Surendranagar and Ahmedabad (Bhogavo, Bhadar
and Lilka river basins). The ASI explored parts of the
Kachchh, Junagadh and Vadodara districts. The lower
reaches of Shetrunji river in the Bhavnagar district
were explored by Deccan College Pune (IAR 1990-
91, 1991-92, 1992-93, 1993-94, 1994-95, 1995-96,
1996-97, 1997-98, 1998-99, 1999-2000; Ajithprasad
and Sonawane 1993; Ajithprasad and Sonawane 1994
(in press); Allchin et al. 1995; Dimri 1999; Majumdar
1999; Possehl 1994a: 193-204; Sonawane and Ajith-
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology
prasad 1994: 129-139).
Decade of the Beginning of Digital Docu-
mentation and Transect Survey of Sites
The period between 2001 and 2010 is noted for the
introduction of the use of electronic devices in the ex-
plorations. GPR surveys were carried out at sites like
Lothal (Bologna University and the ASI), Kanmer
(Rajasthan Vidyapeeth Udaipur, State Archaeology
Department Gujarat and Ressearch Institure for Hu-
manity and Nature (RIHN), Kyoto) and Shikarpur
(the Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda and
RIHN Kyoto). Total Station surveys and GIS data
generation were carried out at sites like Lothal (Bo-
logna University and the ASI), Kanmer (Rajasthan
Vidyapeeth Udaipur, State Archaeology Department
Gujarat and RIHN, Kyoto), Songadh, Jaidak, Shi-
karpur (the Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda)
and Loteshwar (the Maharaja Sayajirao University
of Baroda and CSIC, Spain). A small-scale transect
survey was carried out in Saurashtra by Mark Man-
ual of Durham University. Other explorations were
conducted by the Maharaja Sayajirao University of
Baroda (Rajkot - Maliya and Surendranagar- Halvad
and Drangadra, the coastal area of Surat and Bharuch,
Junagadh, Bhavnagar - Talaja, Ahmedabad - Dhand-
huka and Dholka, Jamnagar - around Jaidak), the ASI
( Junagadh and Banaskantha), Deccan College, Pune
(Bhavnagar and Amreli - Vallabhipur to Jafrabad
creek), National Institute of Oceanography (in the
area around Mul Dwarka in Saurashtra) and Depart-
ment of Archaeology, Government of Gujarat (Vasal
River valley, Surendranagar) (IAR 2000-01, 2001-02,
2002-03, 2003-04, 2004-05, 2005-06, 2006-07, 2007-
08, 2009-2010; Ajithprasad 2008b: 83-99; Bhagat
2001; Bhan et al. 2004: 153-158; Gaur et al. 2005;
Kharakwal et al. 2009: 147-164; Krishnan and Dimri
2005: 199-204; Shirvalkar 2008; Sen 2009; Sonawane
et al. 2003: 21-50).
- 92 -
Period of the Gujarat Gazetteer Project and
Landscape and Environmental Approaches
The period between 2011 and 2018 is mainly noted
for the landscape and environmental studies under
North Gujarat Archaeological Project (NoGAP)
(Madella et al. 2010). A joint team of the Maharaja
Sayajirao University of Baroda, CSIC, Spain and
Seismological Research Institute, Gandhinagar con-
ducted RTK Survey in North Gujarat to understand
land form changes and historical land use dynamics
through the Corona Image study (Conesa et al. 2014:
11420-11443; Conesa et al. 2015: 75-90). The Maha-
raja Sayajirao University of Baroda and CSIC, Spain
conducted a modern plant sampling transect survey
from Saurashtra to the Thar Desert. The sampling
covering the areas that characterize the semiarid ec-
otone was aimed at attesting the response of modern
vegetation to changes in water availability in this en-
vironment. Carbon and Nitrogen Stable Isotope anal-
ysis of modern plant specimens were conducted to
understand past monsoon changes and inferring what
the role of monsoon were on the socio-ecological
dynamics of North Gujarat (Madella et al. 2010; Ron-
delli et al. 2014: 482-492). The Maharaja Sayajirao
University of Baroda and CSIC, Spain also executed
geoarchaeological and remote sensing studies for the
reconstructions of human-environment interaction
for the past socio-ecological systems in North Gujarat
(Balbo et al. 2013: 53-65; Conesa et al. 2017: 57-75).
A joint team of Albion College, USA and the Maha-
raja Sayajirao University of Baroda used ethnography,
geoarchaeology and GIS potentials for the identifi-
cation of past human domestic activity through the
collection of plant samples and animal excreta from
selected areas in Saurashtra, Kachchh and North Gu-
jarat. The objective of this study was to understand the
pastoral land-use and social networking practices in
the context of Harappan Gujarat through the analyses
of biogenic isotopes of strontium, carbon, and oxygen
(Chase et al. 2014: 1-15). Apart from this, archaeolog-
 Rajesh S.V. Indus Archaeology in Gujarat
ical explorations for identifying new sites and for un-
derstanding the characteristics of reported sites were
done by the ASI in the Banaskantha district, Deccan
College, Pune in and around the site of Kotada Bhadli
in Kachchh, the Maharaja Sayajirao University of Bar-
oda and CSIC, Spain in North Gujarat, the Maharaja
Sayajirao University of Baroda in the Lilka River basin
and University of Kerala, Kachchh University and
Albion College in the Kachchh District and various
parts of Gujarat (Rajesh et al. 2015: 30-31). Another
noteworthy exploration was conducted by the Maha-
raja Sayajirao University of Baroda and RIHN, Kyoto
under the Gujarat Harappan Site Gazetteer Project.
Under this project all the reported Harappan sites
were revisited and recorded with the help of GPS and
Digital Camera (Ajithprasad, pers. comm.; IAR 2010-
11, 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14).
EXCAVATIONS
Various organizations like the ASI, State Archaeology
Department - Gujarat, Department of Archaeology
- Saurashtra, the Maharaja Sayajirao University of
Baroda - Vadodara, Deccan College Post Graduate
and Research Institute - Pune, Bombay University,
Rajasthan Vidyapeeth - Udaipur, National Institute of
Oceanography - Goa, Cambridge University - Cam-
bridge, University of Pennsylvania - USA, University
of Wisconsin-Madison, USA, Bradford University,
UK, University of Bologna - Italy, Research Institute
for Humanity and Nature - Kyoto, University of Wis-
consin, Madison and Spanish Council for Scientific
Research - Barcelona, IIT Gandhinagar - Gujarat and
University of Kerala -Thiruvananthapuram conducted
excavations in Gujarat. The excavations at 61 Chalco-
lithic sites (Figure 3) in different regions of Gujarat
provided the evidence for the existence of Classical
Harappan, Pre-Urban Harappan Burial Pottery tra-
dition and Regional Chalcolithic cultures/traditions
- 93 -
like Anarta, Padri, Pre-Prabhas, Sorath Harappan,
Micaceous Red, Prabhas, Lustrous Red, Malwa Ware
and Jorwe Ware assignable to Pre-Urban Harappan,
Urban Harappan and Post-Urban Harappan preriods
respectively.
Vallabhipur
The first excavated Chalcolithic site in Gujarat was
Vallabhipur (Vala) (22° 41' 15" N, 71° 38' 31" E) locat-
ed in eastern Saurashtra. The excavation was conduct-
ed in 1930 by Father Henry Heras of Bombay Univer-
sity and a few objects of the Protohistoric period were
unearthed from the lower level of the foundation of a
later Buddhist monastery. Other details regarding the
site are unknown except the mention of an excavated
Indus graffiti bearing potsherd (Heras 1938: 141-143;
Possehl 2007: 302).
Bet Dwarka
Hiranand Shastri excavated Bet Dwarka Island (22°
20' 00" N, 69° 05' 00" E) in the Okhamandal taluka
of the Jamnagar District also in 1930 and dated the
earliest occupation of the site to third century BC
(Rao 1987). However, further explorations (IAR
1969-70: 59) and excavations (Rao 1990: 59-98; Rao
and Gaur 1992: 42-47; Gaur and Sundaresh 2003:
57-66) proved the existence of human habitation in
the island from Chalcolithic/Post-Urban Harappan
times. The excavator's interpretation to the reason
which led to continuous habitation at the site was the
availability of marine shells, and, based on its location,
considered it as a safe harbor in the ancient past (Gaur
et al. 2005).
Rangpur
Rangpur (22° 23' 56" N, 71° 55' 19" E), the archaeo-
logical mound measuring 1100 m from north to south
by 850 m from east to west in the Surendranagar
district was first excavated by M.S. Vats of the ASI in
1934-35 (Dikshit 1950: 3-55) and, based on the arte-
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology
facts, the excavator suggested that the part of Rangpur
where he excavated might correspond to the late peri-
od of the Indus Civilization or probably fall between
that time and the period of Cemetery H at Harappa
(Vats 1937: 34-38). In 1936, excavations were con-
ducted at the site by G.S. Ghurye of the University
of Bombay and agreed with the evidence acquired by
the former (Ghurye 1939: 3-12). In order to ascertain
the nature of the site, the Rangpur mound was again
excavated under the guidance of H.D. Sankalia and
M.G. Dikshit in 1947 and, according to the excava-
tors, the ceramics of the Rangpur culture are basically
dissimilar from the Indus Valley pottery and that it
perhaps represents a late phase of the post-Harappan
period (Dikshit 1950: 14-16). Therefore, in 1953-54
a thorough and systematic excavation was undertaken
by S.R. Rao of the ASI and established convincingly
that Rangpur had Harappan contacts. In spite of se-
vere criticisms, Rao's ceramic sequencing at Rangpur
still stand as the base of relative dating of most Chal-
colithic sites discovered in Gujarat (Rao 1963: 1-207;
Misra 1965: 44-52; Sankalia 1974; Possehl 1980;
Bhattacharya 1991: 53-57; Herman 1995: 187-198;
Herman 1997: 77-112).
Langhnaj
In 1942 and in the following years, H.D. Sankalia of
Deccan College Post-graduate and Research Institute,
Poona, conducted a series of excavations at Langhnaj
(23° 27' 00" N, 72° 32' 00" E) in the Mehsana dis-
trict, a Mesolithic site having a Chalcolithic affinity,
and unearthed artefacts and burials. In 1953-54, the
Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda also un-
earthed microliths and human burials from the site.
With a view to restudying its archaeological content,
Langhnaj was excavated in 1963-64 by a joint team
from the University of Poona, the Maharaja Sayajirao
University of Baroda and the Government of Gujarat.
Some 21 burials were unearthed from the site through
different excavations and the comparative study of
- 94 -
skeletons from Langhnaj and Lothal (Harappan site)
indicated close similarities between the Harappans of
Lothal and hunter-gatherers of Langhnaj. It was fur-
ther attested by the recovery of a copper knife of 98%
purity from the middle phase of Langhnaj. Black-and-
Red Ware pottery of the Urban Harappan period and
steatite disc beads were also unearthed from the site.
Radiocarbon date obtained from the mid phase of
the site (2040 ± 110 BC) is also comparable with the
age of Lothal and many other Harappan sites in Gu-
jarat (IAR 1953-54: 8, 1963-64: 12; Karve-Corvinus
and Kennedy 1963-64: 44-57; Clutton-Brock 1965;
Ehrhardt and Kennedy 1965; Sankalia 1965; Agrawal
and Kusumgar 1969: 191; Possehl and Kennedy 1979:
592-593; Possehl 2002: 62-76).
Machiala-Mota
In 1953, S.R. Rao of the ASI excavated Machiala-Mo-
ta (Mota-Machiala) (21° 41' 00" N, 71° 14' 00" E)
in the Amreli taluka of the Amreli district. The site
revealed the evidence for Lustrous Red Ware, which
is similar to the pottery of the late levels of Rangpur
(RGP-III). Blades with short parallel sides of chal-
cedony were also recovered from the site (Rao 1963:
177).
Kanasutaria
S.R . Rao of the ASI excavated the Chalcolithic
mound at Kanasutaria (22° 47' 00" N, 72° 16' 00" E) in
the Dholka taluka of the Ahmedabad district in 1954-
55. Two cultural periods were noticed at the site. Pe-
riod I was the habitation deposit of Microliths-using
communities, and it was followed by a stratigraphical
break. Period II was the Chalcolithic cultural deposit
of about 1.8 m to 2.4 m and the ceramics unearthed
from this deposit include Lustrous Red Ware, Coarse
Red Ware, Coarse Buff Ware and Black-and-Red
Ware. The ceramics from the site showed an affinity to
Rangpur IIC and III ceramics (Rao 1963: 188-189).
 Rajesh S.V. Indus Archaeology in Gujarat
Figure 4 General view of Lothal (Courtesy: Google Earth)
Lothal
In 1955 - 1962, S.R. Rao of the ASI excavated the for-
tified and stratified site of 7.5 hectares at Lothal (22°
31' 25" N, 72° 14' 59" E) in the Ahmedabad district
and clearly established that the Harappan culture did
not confine itself to north-west India (Rao 1956: 82-
89, 1962: 14-30, 1965: 30-37). The site was a carefully
planned one with a citadel comprising two public
buildings and a lower town consisting of a domestic
quarter, workshops and market place. On the eastern
side of the habitation area is a large brick-lined rectan-
gular enclosure and Rao termed it as a dockyard (Fig-
ure 4) intended to harbour ships (Rao 1979; Bindra
2003). Leshnik (1968a: 911-922) argued that it was
a tank meant to impound water for irrigation and
domestic use. To the west of the citadel, between the
peripheral wall and river, lies the cemetery (Rao 1973,
1979, 1985). Regional Chalcolithic ceramics were the
dominant artefacts of the early stage of the site. In the
last stage, there was decline in all aspects of town plan-
ning and artefacts underwent changes. From the ar-
- 95 -
tefacts of Lothal, it becomes clear that the settlement
was a commercial and manufacturing centre, the pro-
ductive capacity of the settlement was far greater than
the needs of the small number of inhabitants of the
site, or it had an exchange relationship with a group of
people who procured raw materials and traded them
for the surplus finished products from the settlement
(Possehl and Kennedy 1979: 592-593). According to
Rao (1979), the site was destroyed five times by floods
and Pandya (1987: 177-186) divided them into usu-
al-type floods and devastating-type floods. In order
to understand the significance of Lothal as a major
centre of local and long distance trades, the 'Lothal
Revisitation Project' was initiated jointly by the ASI
and University of Bologna, Italy and a preliminary
magnetic survey (2008) and excavations (2009) were
conducted at the site (Frenez and Tosi 2010).
Lakhabaval
In 1955-56, an excavation was carried out at Lakhaba-
val (22° 24' 00" N, 70° 00' 00" E) in the Jamnagar
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology
district jointly by the Department of Archaeology
Saurashtra and the Maharaja Sayajirao University
of Baroda, under P.P. Pandya and B. Subbarao re-
spectively to find out the cultural sequence and the
characteristics of the Harappan culture in Saurashtra.
The archaeological mound located about 100 meters
to the north of the Lakhabawal village on the western
bank of the rivulet called Nagamati, measured ap-
proximately 150 m × 100 m. The excavation revealed
a habitation deposit of three distinct cultural periods
of which Period I represented Harappan/Chalcolithic
phase associated with Rangpur IIB termed as the
Late Kathiawad Harappan (Subbarao 1958), Period
II belongs to the Kshatrapa period while Period III is
characterized by the material and structural remains
of Medieval period (IAR 1955-56; Rao 1963).
Amra
The excavation at Amra (22° 16' 00" N, 69° 56' 00"
E) in the Jamnagar district in 1955-56, jointly by
the Department of Archaeology, Saurashtra and the
Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda, under P.P.
Pandya and B. Subbarao respectively revealed three
fold cultural sequences namely, Periods I, II and III.
Period I is the Post-Urban Harappan phase associated
with Rangpur IIC and III termed as Post-Kathiawad
Harappan (Subbarao 1958). Period II yielded Early
Historic cultural materials and Period III is later in
date (IAR 1955-56).
Prabhas Patan/Somnath
The archaeological mound at Prabhas Patan/Som-
nath (20° 53' 00" N, 70° 24' 00" E) locally known as
Naghera in the Gir Somnath district was first report-
ed in 1938 by Father Heras of Bombay University.
The excavations at the site in 1955-56 and 1956-57,
by the Department of Archaeology, Saurashtra and
the Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda, under
P.P. Pandya and B. Subbarao respectively revealed
six periods beginning from Post-Urban Harappan to
- 96 -
Medieval. To understand the cultural aspects of the
site, excavations were conducted in 1971-72, 1975-76
and 1976-77 at the site by the Department of Archae-
ology, Saurashtra and Deccan College Post Graduate
and Research Institute, Pune under J.M. Nanavati and
H.D. Sankalia. The site revealed a sequence of five
cultural periods datable from 3000 BC - 600 AD. The
importance of the site lays in the fact that for the first
time it unveiled the existence of two regional Chal-
colithic traditions in Gujarat namely Pre-Prabhas As-
semblage (3000 - 2500 BC) and Prabhas Ware (2300
- 1750 BC) (IAR 1955-56, 1956-57; Nanavati et al.
1971; Dhavalikar and Possehl 1992).
Bhagatrav
Bhagatrav (21° 29' 00" N, 72° 42' 00" E) located in
the Bharuch district was excavated by S.R. Rao of the
ASI in 1957-58. Excavations at the mound of 2.25 m
high revealed two cultural periods namely Periods I
and II. Period I is divided into two sub-periods, IA
and IB representing respectively the Urban Harappan
and Post-Urban Harappan phases of the Harappan
culture. Period IB revealed Post-Urban Harappan
pottery forms like dish with a short projected rim
and small jar with slightly elongated neck and Period
II is Medieval (IAR 1957-58; Rao 1963). The site
was re-excavated in 2015 by the IIT Gandhinagar
(Kanungo, pers. comm.).
Mehgam
Mehgam (21° 42' 00" N, 72° 45' 00" E), near Bhar-
uch on the Narmada estuary, was subjected to a trial
excavation by S.R. Rao of the ASI in 1957-58. This
Chalcolithic site yielded Urban (Sorath) and Post-Ur-
ban Harappan (Late Sorath) ceramics and no struc-
tures were reported. In 1959-60, from this site, K. V.
Soundara Rajan discovered microlithic tools typolog-
ically equitable with those found at the lowest levels at
Rangpur and stone points formed a major type in the
collection (IAR 1957-58, 1959-60; Rao 1963).
 Rajesh S.V. Indus Archaeology in Gujarat
Telod
Telod (21° 42' 00" N, 72° 46' 00" E) in the Bharuch
district was excavated in 1957-58 by the ASI. The
low-lying mound situated on the south bank of the
river Narmada yielded storage jars and bowls with
straight sides. The chief ceramic group from the site
was sturdy Red Ware painted in black. The excavator
relatively dated the site to the late phase of Rangpur
IIB (IAR 1957-58; Rao 1963).
Rojdi
The Chalcolithic mound at Rojdi (21° 51' 47" N, 70°
55' 08" E) situated on the bank of the river Bhadar
in the Rajkot district was excavated in 1957-58 and
1958-59 by P.P. Pandya of Department of Archaeol-
ogy, Saurashtra. In the excavations, pottery similar to
Pre-Prabhas Ware and Prabhas Ware were stratigraph-
ically reported along with the Harappan ceramics.
Early Historic artefacts were also reported from the
site. In 1962-63, the site was again excavated by J.M.
Nanavati of Department of Archaeology, Government
of Gujarat, and he noticed the Harappan and Mica-
ceous Red Ware, Prabhas ware, Early Historic and
Medieval levels in the site. In 1964-65, the Depart-
ment of Archaeology, Government of Gujarat, during
an exploration, recovered five hundred and twenty
microbeads of steatite and eight bicone barrel beads
of gold, belonging to a necklace below a structure of
Prabhas level. In 1982-83, the Department of Archae-
ology, Government of Gujarat carried out excavations
at Rojdi and recovered Harappan and non-Harappan
artefacts. The excavations from 1983 to 1986 and
1992 to 1994 by a joint team of the Department of
Archaeology, Government of Gujarat and the Univer-
sity of Pennsylvania, USA, under Gregory L. Possehl,
threw much light on the site and its chronolog y.
However, in the excavation report and articles he has
not mentioned Micaceous Red Ware in its name or
the pottery similar to the Pre-Prabhas type which
was noticed at the site by the earlier excavator. Based
- 97 -
on the differences from the Classical Harappans in
movable and immovable antiquities, Possehl termed
its material culture as the Sorath Harappan and based
on 14C dates, he divided the occupational strata of
the site into three periods, namely Rojdi A, Rojdi B
and Rojdi C corresponding to the Rangpur sequence.
As a relative dating technique, the Rojdi sequence is
gaining popularity (Possehl et al. 1984; Possehl and
Chitalwala 1985: 80-100; Possehl 1986: 467-468;
Possehl 2004: 80-88; Possehl and Rawal 1989; Weber
1989, 1990: 333-348, 1991, 1999: 813-26; Fairservis
1991: 108-113; Bedigian 2004: 329-353; IAR 1957-
58, 1985-86, 1992-93, 1993-94).
Adkot
The trial excavation at Adkot (22° 00' 00" N, 71° 05'
00" E) in the Rajkot district by P.P. Pandya of Depart-
ment of Archaeology Saurashtra in 1957-58 revealed
5ft occupational deposits representing the Harappan
culture. Among the Classical Harappan and Sorath
Harappan artefacts unearthed from the site, black
painted designs of a human figure feeding a pet on a
potsherd is noteworthy (IAR 1957-58).
Pithadia/Pitharia
The trial digging at Pithadia (Pitharia) (21° 46' 00" N,
70° 40' 00" E) in the Rajkot/Jamnagar district by P.P.
Pandya of Department of Archaeology, Saurashtra
in 1957-58 revealed two periods of occupation, viz.
the Urban Harappan (Bowls of Rangpur IIB) and
Post Urban Harappan elements (lamps, flat dish of
Rangpur IIC and Lustrous Red Ware) respectively
representing the material inventory of both the peri-
ods (IAR 1957-58).
Motidharai
The trial excavations at Motidharai (21° 58' 00" N, 71°
57' 00" E) in the Bhavnagar district by P.P. Pandya of
Department of Archaeology, Saurashtra in 1957-58
revealed two periods of occupation, with a considera-
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology
ble gap in between. Period I was characterized by the
Harappan elements, while Period II was distinguished
by Early Historic artefacts (IAR 1957-58).
Kanjetar
In 1958, S.R. Rao of the ASI excavated the Chalco-
lithic site at Kanjetar (20° 45' 00" N, 70° 40' 00" E) in
the Kodinar taluka, the Amreli district. The site meas-
uring 150 m × 150 m revealed a habitation deposit of
1.8 m. The site revealed almost all Harappan ceramic
types and a few evolved shapes in the Sturdy Red
Ware and the Buff Ware. The paintings executed on
pottery include black over Red Ware and chocolate
over Buff Ware. The vessel shapes recovered from the
site include bowls, dishes and jars. The site can be rela-
tively dated to Rangpur IIB and IIC (Rao 1963). The
site was re-excavated in 2011 by National Institute of
Oceanology, Goa (Farooqi et al. 2013: 2631-47).
Randaliyo
In 1958-59, Randaliyo (21° 48' 00" N, 71° 03' 00" E)
in Randal Dadwa of the Rajkot district was excavated
by P.P. Pandya of Department of Archaeology, Sau-
rashtra. The site contained a cemetery and one of the
graves excavated exposed an extended skeleton. Frag-
ments of Harappan ceramics were recovered from the
vicinity of the skeleton (IAR 1958-59: 19).
Nagal
The excavation at Nagal (21° 34' 00" N, 72° 53 ' 00" E)
in the Bharuch district in 1961-62 by K.V. Soundara
Rajan of the ASI revealed a Chalcolithic cultural
occupation.Vestiges of microlithic industry associ-
ated with Black-and-Red Ware and small fragments
of Ochrous Red Ware similar to the ceramics from
Maheswar and Nasik - Jorwe were recovered from
the mound. In the lowest level of the trench, a north-
south oriented extended human burial was noticed
but its cultural affiliation is unclear. Based on the lo-
cation and nature of occupation, the excavator opines
- 98 -
that Nagal would bridge the gap between the late and
Post-Harappan Chalcolithic sites in South Gujarat
(IAR 1961-62).
Warthan
The trial excavation at Warthan (21° 22' 00" N, 72°
51' 00" E) in 1961-62 by K.V. Soundara Rajan of
the ASI revealed two-fold cultural sequences. The
earliest of these was represented by the occurrence of
Black-Painted Red Ware. The upper one which fol-
lowed after a desertion was marked by the occurrence
of plain Black-and-Red Ware similar to that found
at Nagal. According to the excavator (IAR 1961-62),
the site, however, continued in occupation until the
beginning of the Christian era, as evidenced by pot-
tery and other finds. The painted pottery from the site
was mainly characterised by concave sided carinated
dishes decorated with series of oblique slashes, grids,
honeycombs, etc., on the red slipped convex exterior.
A thicker pottery in sturdy fabric with painted designs
both in black and chocolate pigments was excavated
from the site. Potsherds bearing graffiti and a few
stone flakes were also unearthed from the site (IAR
1961-62).
Andhi
The trial excavation at the site of Andhi (21° 23' 00" N,
72° 47' 00" E) in 1961-62 by K.V. Soundara Rajan of
the ASI yielded Chalcolithic Black Painted Red and
plain Black-and Red Wares, besides a number of flut-
ed cores and flakes of microlithic order. The cultural
sequence at the site revealed that in the upper levels of
the Chalcolithic strata, the Black-Painted Red Ware
was overlapped by the plain Black-and-Red Ware (IAR
1961-62).
Desalpur
K.V. Soundara Rajan of the ASI excavated the for-
tified Harappan site of Desalpur (Gunthli) (23° 25'
00" N, 60° 10' 00" E) measuring 130 m × 100 m ×
 Rajesh S.V. Indus Archaeology in Gujarat
Figure 5 Ceramics from Desalpar (after Uesugi et al. 2015)
3 m, located on the northern bank of the stream
Bamu-Chela, a tributary of the river Dhrub in the
taluka Nakhtrana of the district Kachchh in 1963-64.
Among the two cultural periods assigned to the site,
Period I comprised two sub-phases - Period IA (Urban
Harappan) and Period IB (Post-Urban Harappan).
Period II is Early Historic assignable to the Rang-Ma-
hal complex. Both stone and mud brick structures of
the Harappan period were exposed from the site and
three structural phases were reported from Period IA.
Apart from the Harappan ceramics (Figure 5) (Uesugi
et al. 2015: 180-218), Micaceous Red Ware was also
reported from the site. Most notable finds from the
site are two script bearing seals, one on steatite and
the other on copper, lettered terracotta sealing, jasper
and terracotta weights, copper knives, chisels, rods
and rings, terracotta cart frames and animal figurines.
Based on the comparative study of artefacts, the exca-
vator relatively dated Period I of Desalpur to 2000 -
1600 BC (IAR 1963-64; Soundara Rajan 1984: 217-
226).
- 99 -
Jokha
In 1966-67, R.N. Mehta and S.N. Chowdhary of the
Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda undertook
the excavation at Jokha (21° 17' 00" N, 73° 00' 00" E)
in the Surat district. The site measuring about 150
m × 100 m × 2 m revealed three cultural periods.
Period I (circa 1500 - 1000 BC) was marked by the
occurrence of Post-Urban Harappan ceramics, Mal-
wa Ware and Jorwe Ware, etched beads, fragment of
copper celt, microlithic cores, flakes, blades, lunates,
triangles and trapezes and terracotta objects. The most
noteworthy find from this period was a Neolithic celt.
Two other celts were also obtained from the surface of
the mound. Based on the ceramic evidence, the exca-
vators identify Jokha as the junction of three cultures:
the Harappan from the north, the Malwa Chalcolith-
ic from the east and the Deccan Chalcolithic from the
west. Based on ceramics, Period II is dated to the circa
6th century BC - 1st century AD and Period III to
the circa 1st to 6th century AD (IAR 1966-67; Mehta
and Chaudhary 1971).
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology
Dhatva
In 1967-68, the Maharaja Sayajirao University of Bar-
oda conducted the excavation at Dhatva (21° 09' 00"
N, 72° 46' 00" E) in the Surat district to determine the
extent of the Chalcolithic cultures in South Gujarat.
The site revealed two cultural periods; Period I (circa
1500 - 1000 BC) was characterised by the Chalco-
lithic pottery showing affinities with similar cultures
of Saurashtra and Malwa and stone tools like lunates,
scrapers and blades of jasper, agate and chert. Period
II (circa 500 BC - AD 200) was characterised by Early
Historic antiquities such as punch-marked coins and
Red Polished Ware. Based on a limited quantity and
variety of Chalcolithic pottery, the excavators suggest-
ed that this site was just a small village settlement (IAR
1967-68; Mehta and Chaudhary 1975).
Malvan
In 1969-70, F.R. Allchin of Cambridge University
and J.P. Joshi of the ASI undertook an excavation at
Malvan (21° 06' 00" N, 72° 43' 00" E) in the Surat dis-
trict. The 1.3 m thick habitation deposit yielded evi-
dence of two cultural periods; Period I is assignable to
the Post-Harappan culture and Period II to the Early
Medieval times. Apart from the Chalcolithic ceramic,
blades of jasper, agate, chalcedony and bloodstone,
cores, flake blades, objects of copper or bronze (small
rod and bangle), terracotta humped bulls, circular or
bun-shaped terracotta cakes, beads of carnelian and
bones of animals like cattle, goat, sheep, dog, pig,
deer, barasingha, birds and fishes were also unearthed.
The structural remains of Period I are comprised of a
ditch (18 m × 1.5 m × 1.1 m) cut into the natural soil,
running in the east-west direction. The sides of the
structure were found to be inclined at an angle of 30o
and gradually widen towards the eastern side. A mud
brick structure was present on the northern side and
the size of the brick was 27 cm × 17 cm × 9 cm. The
occupation of Period II was temporary in nature and
was distinguished by the occurrence of Black Ware
- 100 -
ascribable to the end of the first millennium AD (IAR
1969-70; Allchin et al. 1995).
Surkotada
In 1970-71 and 1971-72, J.P. Joshi of the ASI under-
took excavations at Surkotada (23° 37' 00" N, 70° 50'
00" E) in Kachchh. The excavation brought to light
the remains of Harappan culture divided into three
sub-periods, namely IA, IB and IC. The inhabitants of
Period IA was the Urban Harappan with some traits
of an antecedent culture and significant feature of the
period was the occurrence of steatite seal, beads, long
blades of chert and four different ceramic industries
along with the Harappan, namely non-Harappan
Sturdy Red Ware, Polychrome Ware with designs
painted in purple, white and black showing wavy
lines, vertically grouped latticed arches, bands with
chequered patterns, etc., fine Cream Slipped Ware
bearing painted designs showing chain loop patterns,
oblique slashes within borders and Reserved Slip
Ware. During Period IB, the Harappan elements con-
tinued in a decreasing order along with non-Harappan
painted Coarse Red Ware, Reserved Slip Ware, Cream
Slipped Ware and Polychrome Ware. Other impor-
tant antiquities recovered from the period were a flat
copper celt and a chisel. The occurrence of a thick
layer of ash marked the end of Sub-Period IB. Period
IC was characterised by white painted Black-and-Red
Ware mainly represented by bowls with or without
carination, Stud-handles and an inscribed seal. Hara-
ppan elements continued in a restricted manner. The
fortified settlement consisted of a citadel, lower town
and a cemetery to the south-west. Another important
feature of the site is the provision of a rectangular
barbican with a ramp, steps and guard rooms in front
of the southern gate of the citadel and the addition of
rectangular bastions at the corners of the structures.
The noteworthy point about Surkotada is the occur-
rence of a few bones of horse (?) (IAR 1970-71, 1971-
72; Joshi 1966: 62-69, 1972a: 21-35, 1972b: 98-144,
 Rajesh S.V. Indus Archaeology in Gujarat
1979: 59-64; Joshi 1990; Bökönyi 1997: 297-307;
Meadow and Patel 1997: 308-315).
Khanpur
In 1976-77, Chitalwala and Thomas conducted some
section scrapings at the Chalcolithic mound at Khan-
pur (22° 44' 00" N, 70° 41' 30" E) in the Morbi taluka
of the Rajkot district to collect animal bones. The ar-
tifacts were collected from the sections of a number of
neatly cut shallow trenches dug for the construction
of a pond. Based on the ceramic evidence, the site was
divided into two chronological horizons correspond-
ing to Rangpur IIB and IIC respectively. Bones of
cattle, sheep, goat, pig, gazelle, turtle and mollusca
shells were the major biological finds from the site
(Chitalwala and Thomas 1978).
Zekhada
In 1977-78, the Maharaja Sayajirao University of
Baroda, conducted an excavation at the Chalcolithic
site with a deposit of 1.5 m thick, known differently as
Hamasari, Harpasari or Amasari no Tekro (23° 51' 00"
N, 71° 28' 00" E) in the Zekhada/Jekhda village of the
Santalpur taluka, to investigate its cultural content.
The excavations revealed evidence for the existence
of eleven wattle and daub circular huts, occasionally
provided with porch. The floorings of the huts were
made of rammed earth. The ceramics recovered from
this site include Gritty Red Ware, Coarse Red Ware,
Coarse Gray Ware, Buff Ware, Black-and-Red Ware
and Lustrous Red Ware. These ceramics showed
similarities with those from Harappan and Post-Hara-
ppan sites like Rangpur, Surkotada and Ahar. Other
antiquities from the site include stone beads, cores,
blades; copper bangles, awl, wires of copper, terracotta
cakes of triangular and rectangular shapes and balls.
Bones of cow, buffalo, goat/sheep, pig, nilgai, camel,
mongoose and fish represent the animal remains from
the site (IAR 1977-78; Momin 1983: 120-125; Bhat-
tacharya 1981; Chatterjee 1995).
- 101 -
Kanewal
In 1977-78, the Maharaja Sayajirao University of
Baroda carried out excavations on two mounds
known as Kesrisimha-no-Tekro and Sai-no-Tekro
situated on the bank of the lake at the Kanewal (22°
27' 00" N, 72° 30' 00" E) village in the Anand district.
Kesarisimha-no-Tekro comprised of a single culture
occupation belonging to the Chalcolithic period, di-
visible into two phases, A and B. Two circular huts of
wattle and daub having rammed earth floorings were
encountered at different levels and from these huts,
household articles such as pots, quern, terracotta lamp
and twenty-two complete terracotta balls were re-
covered. The ceramic industry showed affinities with
Lothal B, Rangpur IIA, IIB, IIC and III. At the Sai-
no-Tekro mound, the Chalcolithic occupation was
preceded by Mesolithic people. In the Chalcolithic
levels, two circular huts, similar to those found at Ke-
sarisimha-no-Tekro, were exposed. Two fragments of
dish-on-stand, dish, miniature pots, vases and bowls
in plain and painted red ware were recovered from the
huts and the pottery in its form and fabric is compa-
rable to the ceramics from Rangpur IIB and IIC (IAR
1977-78; Mehta et al. 1980).
Pabumath
The Department of Archaeology, Government of Gu-
jarat carried out excavations at Pabumath (23° 37' 00"
N, 70° 31' 40" E) in the Rapar taluka of the Kachchh
district during 1977-78, 1978-79 and 1980-81. The
excavation revealed a 5 m thick cultural deposit
belonging to the Urban and Post-Urban Harappan
periods separated by a burning activity. Apart from a
building complex, ceramics of both the periods, in-
scribed steatite seal, stone beads, shell bangles, ear ring
and beads of the bones and copper awl, arrow head,
bangle, needle and antimony rods were also unearthed
from the site (IAR 1977-78, 1978-79, 1980-81).
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology
Taraghda
In 1978-79, the Department of Archaeology, Govern-
ment of Gujarat carried out a small scale excavation at
Taraghda (21° 44' 00" N, 70° 26' 00" E) in the Rajkot
district to ascertain its cultural sequence. The Hara-
ppan mound was disturbed to a depth of 1 meter by
the intensive digging of local people. The single-cul-
tural-period site has not revealed structural remains.
According to the excavators, the ceramics showed sim-
ilarity with the ceramics from Prabhas Patan. Other
artefacts recovered from the site include shell objects,
copper ring, carnelian beads and weights (IAR 1978-
79).
Valabhi
In 1979-80, the Maharaja Sayajirao University of Bar-
oda conducted an excavation of the Harappan (Urban
Harappan and Post Urban Harappan) site at Valabhi/
Nesadi (21° 53' 00" N, 71° 55' 00" E) in the Bhavnagar
district. The small site with 0.5 m thick deposit re-
vealed evidence for the existence of circular huts. The
ceramic types are represented by red, Buff, Lustrous
Red and Black-and-Red Wares. Vessel shapes from the
site include dish-on-stand, bowl (with or without stud
handle), goblet, basin, lamp and dish. A few other
antiquities from the site include terracotta bull figu-
rines, beads, lamps, spindle whorls, toy cart wheels,
discs and scrapers. Based on the artefact evidence, the
settlement is roughly dated to the time bracket of the
second-third millennium BC (IAR 1979-80; Mehta
1984).
Dwarka
In 1979-80, S.R. Rao of the ASI carried out an exca-
vation in the forecourt of the Dwarakadhish temple
at Dwarka (22° 13' 00" N, 69° 00' 00" E) in the Jam-
nagar district to ascertain the antiquity of the site.
Four trenches were excavated at the site and 10.10 m
deposit revealed evidence for eight successive stages
of habitation. The earliest inhabitants of the site were
- 102 -
the Post-Urban Harappan and Lustrous Red Ware-us-
ing communities relatively datable to the 15th - 14th
centuries BC. The second stage of the site was marked
by house floors and thin black-on-red ware pottery
datable to 900 - 500 BC and the rest of the stages are
later in date (IAR 1979-80).
Oriyo Timbo
Department of Archaeology, Gujarat State and Uni-
versity of Pennsylvania conducted an excavation at
Oriyo Timbo (21° 54' 00" N, 71° 32' 00" E) near the
Chiroda village of the Gadhada taluka in the Bhavan-
agar district in 1981-82. The excavations at the Chal-
colithic mound measuring 175 m × 250 m revealed
two periods of occupation with microliths-using in-
habitants preceding a pastoral camp of Lustrous Red
Ware-using community. The site contained deep stor-
age pits, chuhlas and hearths. The artifacts from the
Chalcolithic period include terracotta bead/pendant
with incised geometric design and ceramic forms like
pots, jars, bowls and basins. Remains of got, sheep,
gazelle, antelope, blue bull and rhinoceros were also
recovered from the site. In 1989-90, Department of
Archaeology, Gujarat State and University of Pennsyl-
vania resumed the excavations at Oriyo Timbo with a
view to confirming the sequence, gathering additional
radiocarbon dating samples, investigating the nature
of the microlithic and Lustous Red Ware settlement
and expanding the samples of palaeobotanical remains
for both periods. The findings from the Chalcolithic
level include chulhas, hearths, storage pits, tandoor
and ceramics. A true microlithic component was not
found during the excavation, even though the new
trenches were laid directly next to the trenches exca-
vated in the earlier period (IAR 1989-90; Rissman
and Chitalwala 1990).
Vagad
Vagad (22° 19' 00" N, 71° 52' 00" E), a Chalcolthic
site, is located on the right bank of the Bhadar river in
 Rajesh S.V. Indus Archaeology in Gujarat
the Dhandhuka taluka of the Ahmedabad district. The
mound locally known as Kedio Timbo excavated by
the Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda in 1981-
1982 covers an area of 450 m from north to south and
300 m from east to west and rises to a height of 2 m
from the surrounding plain. The single-cultural-peri-
od site is divided into three sub-periods, viz. Period
IA, IB and IC based on three successive structural
levels. Six circular hut remains were unearthed from
the site. Yajna vedikas/fire pits were also unearthed
from the site. The ceramics excavated from the site in-
clude Sturdy Red Ware, Buff Ware, Chocolate Slipped
Ware, Micaceous Red Ware, Crude Red Ware, Crude
Grey Ware and white painted Black-and-Red Ware.
Other finds from the site include terracotta and stone
weights, pulley-shaped terracotta ear ornaments,
beads of various materials, shell bangles with chevron
motif, toy cart wheels, discs, spindle whorls, crucibles,
copper objects, saddle querns, pestles, rubber stones
and sling balls. Faunal remains recovered from the site
are of animals like the cow, buffalo, goat, sheep, dog,
spotted deer, gazelle, black buck, blue bull, pig and
14
rat. Calibrated C date of Vagad Period IA is 2190
- 2080 BC and Period IB is 1800 - 1600 BC; Period
IC must be later in date (Sonawane and Mehta 1985;
Krishnan 1986; Dimri 1994).
Nageshwar
In 1983-84, the Maharaja Sayajirao University of
Baroda conducted an excavation at shell object-man-
ufacturing Harappan settlement situated near a large
sweet water lake in the Nageshwar village (22° 20'
00" N, 69° 03' 00" E), the Okhamandal taluka of
the Jamnagar district. The Pindara and Poshitra Bay
coasts which are rich in Turbinella pyrum and Chico-
reus ramosus shells, raw materials for manufacturing
various objects, are in close proximity of the site. The
site destroyed in 1976 by local earthwork contractors'
revealed evidence of Harappan culture divisible into
two phases, Period IA (0.70 - 1.20 m deposit) and IB
- 103 -
(1.30 - 1.40 m deposit). Period IA yielded Harappan
artefacts and Period IB was represented by structures
made of stone slab paved floors and rubble walls, fire
altar (?)/ pottery kiln and other artefacts. Apart from
Classical Harappan ceramics and one stud handled
bowl, shell objects such as bangles, pendants, broken
ladles, inlays, beads and debitage, stone objects con-
sisting of weight, beads, blades and polishers, folded
copper sheet and terracotta objects such as triangular
cakes, bangles and toy cart frames were recovered
from the site. Animal remains from the site include
those of cow, goat, sheep, buffalo, blue bull, antelope,
spotted deer, sambar and marine fish (IAR 1983-84;
Bhan and Kenoyer 1984a: 115-120, 1984b: 67-80;
Hegde et al. 1985: 3-20; Hegde et al. 1990a).
Ratanpura
In 1984-85, the Maharaja Sayajirao University of
Baroda carried out an excavation at the Post-Urban
Harappan settlement located in the Ratanpura village
(23° 28 N, 71° 48 E), the Sami taluka of the Patan
district. The site comprising four mounds was divided
into 10 sq m grids and soil samples were collected
from alternate grids for phosphate analysis to deter-
mine the relative intensity of human intervention
in different parts of the site and based on its results
twelve trenches were dug, one each in Mounds I and
III, seven in Mound II and three in Mound IV. The
excavation in Mound I revealed Post-Urban Harap-
pan ceramics. Mound II revealed a cultural deposit of
85 to 95 cm thick broadly comparable with Rangpur
IIC. A number of rammed earth floors of circular huts
with U-shaped chullah of mud built on the floor were
the structural remains. Antiquities from the mound
include ceramic wares like the Harappan, plain and
painted sturdy Red Ware, Buff Ware, Lustrous Red
Ware, white painted and plain Black-and-Red Ware,
Coarse Grey Ware and Coarse Red Ware, pestle
stones, saddle querns and beads of carnelian, steatite,
paste, shell and terracotta. Mound III revealed large
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology
quantities of bone fragments along with Mesolithic
tools such as fluted cores, flakes of chert, chalcedony
and was devoid of pottery. The excavation at Mound
IV brought to light three circular pits containing ash,
charcoal, charred and uncharred bone pieces, pottery,
fragments of terracotta sealings and terracotta lumps
with or without thread mark (IAR 1984-85).
Nagwada
During 1985-86 to 1989-90, the Maharaja Sayajirao
University of Baroda carried out excavations at the
Harappan settlement locally known as Godh (23° 18'
15" N, 71° 42' 45" E) in the Nagwada Village, the Das-
ada taluk of the Surendranagar district. The mound
was divided into 10 m × 10 m grids and soil samples
were obtained from each grid for phosphate analysis.
Based on its results, trenches were selected for excava-
tions. The 1 m thick deposit revealed four structural
levels of the Harappan period divisible into two Peri-
ods IA (layer 5) and IB (layer 1-4). A few burials, both
inhumation and symbolic, represented Period IA and
the ceramics associated with the burials showed affin-
ity to the Pre-Harappan pottery from Amri, Nal and
Kot Diji. The first phase of structural activity in the
site was marked by post-holes that went into natural
soil in the fifth layer. Rectangular structures made of
undressed stones were observed in the second phase
and rectangular structures of moulded mud bricks
represented the third phase. Rectangular structures
constructed out of rubble stones were observed in the
fourth phase. Classical Harappan ceramics were less in
quantity in comparison to the Anarta pottery; white
painted Black-and-Red Ware was also encountered.
The site revealed the evidence for craft activities like
shell working and stone bead making. An inscribed
steatite seal/pendant, terracotta sealing, female figu-
rine, agate weights, gold beads and copper celts were
14
the noteworthy findings. The C date for the upper
level of Period IB is 2180+/-80 BC (IAR 1985-86,
1986-87, 1987-88, 1988-89, 1989-90; Hegde et al.
- 104 -
1988: 55-65, 1990b: 191-195).
Shikarpur
The Harappan site at Shikarpur (23° 07' 00" N, 70° 35'
00" E) locally known as Valamiyo Timbo located in
the Bhachau taluka of the district Kachchh was first
excavated by Department of Archaeology, Govern-
ment of Gujarat during 1987-1990. According to the
excavators, the layers 1 to 9 at Shikarpur represent Ur-
ban Harappan and layers 10 to 19 belong to Pre-Ur-
ban Harappan. Harappan ceramics, terracotta animal
figurines, toy carts, bangles and triangular cakes, shell
beads and bangles, semi-precious stone objects like
pendants and beads, copper objects like rings, bangles
and chisels, chert blades and bone objects were un-
earthed from the site. The faunal remains from the site
were of cattle, buffalo, sheep, goat, pig, dog, blue bull,
blackbuck, jackal, hare and rhinoceros. During 2007-
08 to 2013-14, the fortified settlement was re-exca-
vated by the Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda
with a view to establishing the cultural sequence as
well as the settlement features in terms of the function
of the site. After preparing the contour map of the
site using total station, site was divided into 5 m × 5
m grids or excavation units. The excavation revealed a
habitation deposit of 6.40 m thick divisible into three
phases of Harappan occupation. Phase I was marked
by artifacts of the Claasical Harappan, Anarta and
Sorath Harappan (very few from mid-level onwards);
Phase II by the Sorath Harappan, Classical Harappan
and Anarta; and Phase III by the Post-Urban Sorath
Harappan. Both mud brick and stone structures were
unearthed with an open place in the middle of the
site. Apart from the ceramics, the major artefacts
recovered from the site include terracotta tablet, seal,
sealings, steatite pendant, female and male figurines,
animal figurines, cart frames (Figure 6), copper celt,
Rohri chert core and blades, weights, beads and drill
bits (IAR 1987-88, 1988-89, 1989-90; Bhan and
Ajithprasad 2008: 1-9, 2009: 1-9; Chase et al. 2014:
 Rajesh S.V. Indus Archaeology in Gujarat
Figure 6 Terracotta objects from Shikarpur (Courtesy: Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda)
63-78).
Kuntasi
During 1987-88 to 1989-90, Deccan College, Pune
and Department of Archaeology, Government of Gu-
jarat carried out excavations at the fortified Harappan
settlement locally known as Bibi-no-Timbo (22° 50'
40" N, 70° 37' 30" E) located in the Kuntasi village of
the Rajkot district. The excavations of 7 m habitation
deposit revealed two main cultural periods at the site;
Urban Harappan and Post-Urban Harappan respec-
tively. The fortification encloses an area about 125 m
square. Though the lower town is absent at the site,
there were a few houses outside the fortification. The
houses inside the fortification were arranged along
four sides leaving an open area at the centre. Both
stone and mud-brick structures are present at the site.
Period I yielded Harappan ceramics, terracotta toy
- 105 -
cart frames, beads of carnelian, faience and steatite,
cubical chert weights and a square faience seal. Anoth-
er discovery was that of a small pot embedded in one
of the rooms of a house, containing thousands of ste-
atite micro-beads, some copper bangles and two rings
of copper. Period II showed signs of decadence in the
area of the settlement. Some of the Harappan ceramic
shapes continued and the stud of the bowls became
longer. The occurrence of the Ahar type of Black-and-
Red Ware was another noteworthy feature. Based on
the local traditions, artifact remains and location of
the site, the excavators believe that Kuntasi may have
functioned as a high tide estuarine port. (IAR 1987-
88, 1988-89, 1989-90; Dhavalikar 1992: 73-82, 1994;
Dhavalikar et al. 1996).
Dholavira
Dholavira (23° 53' 10" N, 70° 13' 00" E) excavated
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology
Figure 7 Late Sorath Harappan stone structure from Dholavira (Courtesy: Archaeological Survey of India)
in 1989-90 to 2003-2004 by R.S. Bisht of the ASI
is one among the five largest Harappan cities in the
subcontinent and is located in the Bhachau taluka of
the Kachchh district. Ruins of the site are spread over
an area of about 100 hectares on the Khadir Island.
Two seasonal water channels Manhar and Mansar are
flowing on the south and north of the walled settle-
ment. The site is remarkable for its exquisite planning,
monumental structures, aesthetic architecture, effi-
cient water harvesting system and funerary architec-
ture. The excavator identified seven stages of cultural
change at the site. The first settlement that was raised
at the site in stage I was a fortress now lying buried in
the citadel mound and in stage II, a residential area
was added to the north of the walled settlement. Stage
III was the most creative and important phase during
which the fortress was made into a formidable castle
and another walled sub division, viz. bailey, was added
- 106 -
to it from the west. In the north, the residential area
of stage II was cleared of its structures for carving out
a ground. Further north, an extensive walled town, i.e.
middle town was founded. Reservoirs were created
on the south, west and north of the built-up divisions.
An outer fortification was also constructed during this
stage. During stage III, the settlement was damaged
by a natural catastrophe and repairs were undertaken
and the lower town was added. Stage IV belonged
to the Classical Harappan phase and almost all the
salient features of the city planning were maintained
along with the monumental structures such as the
gateways, fortification, and drainage system. Stage V
is characterised by the general decline, particularly in
the maintenance of the city, was followed by a tem-
porary desertion of the site. The stage VI is a state of
transformed Harappan Culture, i.e. the Post-Urban
Harappan phase. Domestic buildings were laid out
 Rajesh S.V. Indus Archaeology in Gujarat
in a different planning and probably, after a century
the Post-Urban Harappans of stage VI abandoned
the settlement. The new comers of stage VII did not
use the Classical Harappan ceramics. They built their
houses in the circular form and no planning as such
was followed (Figure 7). The site was never occupied
once the people of stage VII left. The funerary struc-
tures which were found in a cemetery that lay to the
west of the city are also remarkable for the density of
structures. The excavations also brought to light the
existence of large tumulis which were circular in the
plan and these hemispherical structures were made of
mud bricks. The site has yielded an inscription widely
known as the signboard made up of ten large-sized
signs of the Indus script and fragment of a large slab
engraved with three large Indus signs. Apart from
the huge amount of Chalcolithic pottery, human and
animal figurines, chert blades, stone weights, copper
objects, steatite seals, terracotta sealings, beads of
semiprecious stones and drill bits were also unearthed
from the site. According to the excavator, the seven
cultural stages of Dholavira can be dated between
3500 - 1700 BC (IAR 1989-90, 1990-91, 1991-92,
1992-93, 1993-94, 1996-97, 1997-98, 1998-99, 1999-
00, 2000-01; Bisht 1989a: 397-408, 1989b: 265-272,
1991: 71-82, 1994, 1997: 107-120, 1998-99: 14-37,
2000: 11-23, 2004: 35-48, 2006: 283-338, 2010: 75-
76).
Babar Kot
The fortified Harappan settlement at Babar Kot (22°
16' 30" N, 71° 34' 00" E) located in the Paliyad village,
the Botad taluka of the Bhavnagar district was exca-
vated in 1990-91 by Gregory L. Possehl of University
of Pennsylvania and M.H. Raval of the Department
of Archaeology, Gujarat. The mound measuring 190
m × 140 m × 2.5 m was divided into small grids and
25 trenches located in different parts of the site were
excavated. The topmost strata represented artefacts
of both Early Historic and Medieval periods. Three
- 107 -
structural phases were noticed at Babar Kot and the
first was represented by the remains of walls oriented
in cardinal directions. The noteworthy feature of
this phase was the bowl-shaped pit, resting on the
occupational surface. Phase II was associated with
Rojdi C. The stone walls running either from north
to south or from east to west, meeting with each other
without any intersection, were the main feature of
this phase. Remnants of floor having a complete pot
and a grinding stone were noticed from this phase.
Remains of a hearth were also found in the northwest
corner of the floor. The last building activity at the
site was associated with the historical period. Apart
from the ceramics, microlithic blades, grinding stones
and chipped stones were recovered from the site. Both
wild and domestic animal bones and plant remains
were also recovered from the site. Based on the ceram-
ic evidence, the Harappan settlement at Babar Kot
can be dated equivalent to that of Rojdi B, i.e. c. 2200
- 1700 BC (IAR 1990-91; Possehl 1994b: 193-204).
Padri
During 1990-91 to 1995-96, Deccan College, Pune
excavated the Chalcolithic mound at Padri (21° 20'
21" N, 72° 06' 32" E) locally known as Kerala no
Dhoro located in the Talaja taluka of the Bhavnagar
district. The site revealed four-fold cultural sequence,
i.e. the Pre-Urban Harappan (Padri Ware), Urban
Harappan (Phase I and II), Post-Urban Harappan
and Early Historic. Period I was represented by the re-
mains of a mud pressed structure, Padri Ware, Sorath
Harappan sherds and steatite beads. The 14C dates for
the Pre-Urban Harappan phase at Padri go back to a
fourth millennium BC (3800 BC). The Urban Hara-
ppan period yielded a large amount of fine painted
and coarse pottery, which is similar to Rangpur IIB
and Rojdi B, and 14C date for the uppermost levels
of this Phase is 2300 BC. Period III yielded ceramics
akin to Rangpur IIC and Early Historic period was
marked by Red Polished Ware (IAR 1990-91, 1991-
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology
Figure 8 DEM of Chalcolithic mound at Loteshwar (Courtesy: NoGAP)
92, 1993-94, 1995-96; Shinde 1991: 87-89, 1992a:
79-86, 1992b: 55-66, 1998: 173-182, 2006: 151-158;
Shinde and Kar 1992: 105-110; Shinde and Thomas
1993: 145-147; Pathak 1992: 87-89; Bhagat 2001;
Shirvalkar 2008).
Loteshwar
In 1990-91, the Maharaja Sayajirao University of
Baroda and in 2009-10, under the direction of P.
Ajithprasad of the Maharaja Sayajirao University
of Baroda and Marco Madella of CSIC, Barcelona,
Spain, carried out excavations at Loteshwar (23° 36'
00" N, 71° 51' 00" E) in the Sami taluka, the Patan
district. The site, locally known as Khari-no-Timbo,
is located on a high sand dune (Figure 8) close to
the left bank of Khari Nadi, tributary of the Rupen
river. The excavation revealed a habitation deposit of
1.8 m in thickness divisible into two periods. Period
I belong to the Mesolithic Culture and Period II to
the Harappan-affiliated Chalcolithic culture. Period I
was represented by a 1 m thick habitation deposit of
microlith-using community. The occupational debris
of the microlithic period included both geometric
- 108 -
and non-geometric tool types, lithic debitage, grind-
ing/pallet stones, hammer stones and animal bones.
One human skeleton belonging to this period was
unearthed from one of the trenches. The Chalcolithic
period was represented by the Anarta pottery, a few
Harappan sherds, blades, beads, bangle pieces of shell
and copper, copper punch (?), grinding/pallet stones,
hammer stones, terracotta pellets, terracotta female
figurine (?) and spindle whorls. No structural remains
were unearthed from the site and an important fea-
ture noticed at the site was the occurrence of a large
number of pits, which were dug during this period.
Their size is about 2 m in diameter and 0.5 m to 2 m
in depth in diameter, and they were filled with ash,
charcoal, pottery, animal bones and microliths. This
period also revealed one human burial. The earliest
14
C date for the Mesolithic occupation at the site is
7300 BC and the Chalcolithic deposit can be dated
between 3700 - 2200 BC (IAR 1990-91; Mahida
1992, 1995: 85-87; Patel 1992; Brahmbhatt 2000;
Ajithprasad 2002: 129-158; Yadav 2005; Patel 2008:
123-134, 2009: 173-188; Rajesh 2011; Rajesh et al.
2013b: 10-45).
 Rajesh S.V. Indus Archaeology in Gujarat
Jaidak
During 1991-92, 2005-06 and 2006-07, the Maharaja
Sayajirao University of Baroda carried out an excava-
tion at fortified bipartite Sorath Harappan settlement
at Jaidak/Pithad (22° 41' 00" N, 70° 35' 00" E) locally
known as Jaidak no Timbo in the Jodiya taluka of the
district Jamnagar. The site has two mounds; Jaidak-1,
the larger one measuring 300 m × 150 m with a height
of about 5 m from the surrounding plain and Jaidak-2,
probably an extension of the first mound, measures
140 m × 90 m. In 1991-92, an excavation was carried
out on the Jaidak-2 mound and revealed a 1.40 m hab-
itation deposit belonging to two distinctive periods.
Of these, Period I belongs to the Mesolithic/micro-
lithic culture and Period II is the Sorath Harappan.
During 2005-06 and 2006-07, an excavation was car-
ried out at Jaidak-1 mound and revealed two phases
of Period II (Sorath Harappan) and flimsy evidence
for a medieval occupation. Period IIA is noted for
the construction of the fortification and many stone
structures within it. The ceramics of this period bear
close similarity with pottery from the sites of Rangpur
IIB, Rojdi B, Kuntasi IA and IB, and Bagasra III. Oth-
er antiquities from this period include stone beads,
copper ornaments, terracotta beads, perforated and
imperforated pottery discs and bull figurine. Period
IIB represents the economic decline of the occupants
of the site. The ceramics recovered from this period
bears close resemblance to those from Rangpur IIC,
Rojdi C and Bagasra IV (IAR 1991-92; Ajithprasad
2008b: 83-99; Dwivedi 2009; Sen 2009).
Moti Pipli
In 1992-93, the Maharaja Sayajirao University of
Baroda conducted an excavation at Moti Pipli (23° 49'
00" N, 71° 32' 00" E) in the Radhnapur taluka of the
Banaskantha district. The site locally known as Shak-
tari no Timbo is situated next to a large inter-dunal
depression known by the name Shaktari Talav. The
excavation at the site of 600 m × 120 m in size yielded
- 109 -
a 90 cm thick habitational deposit of the Mesolithic,
Harappan-affiliated Chalcolithic and Historic peri-
ods. The Chalcolithic period has a deposit of about
50 cm, and it was concentrated in the southern part
of the mound. No structural remains were unearthed
from the site. The ceramics from the site include
Gritty Red Ware and Fine Red Ware of the Anarta
tradition, Black-and-Red Ware and the Pre-Harappan
Burial pottery similar to those from Amri, Nal, Kot
Diji and Balakot. Other antiquities found in the exca-
vation constitute copper/bronze nail, folded strip of
copper, fish hook, chert blades, beads of chalcedony,
steatite, lapis lazuli, terracotta, shell and faience, ter-
racotta lumps and triangular cakes. The artefacts of
late Early Historic (5th - 6th centuries AD) and late
Medieval period were also unearthed from the site
in a limited quantity (IAR 1992-93; Majumdar and
Sonawane 1996-97: 11-17; Majumdar 2006: 159-166,
Majumdar 1999).
Santhli
In 1993-94, the Maharaja Sayajirao University of Bar-
oda carried out an excavation at Santhli locally known
as Gachi no Thumdo (Santhli II) (23° 54' 00" N, 71°
29' 10" E) in the Radhanpur taluka of the Banaskan-
tha district. The site measuring 120 m × 90 m revealed
a 40 cm habitation deposit belonging to two cultural
periods. Period I at the site is Mesolithic having a 25
- 30cm deposit and Period II is Chalcolithic of a 10
- 15cm cultural deposit. Mesolithic artefacts of ge-
ometric and non-geometric nature including lunates,
triangles, trapezes, crescents, points, backed blades
along with blade cores, flake cores and lithic debitage
were excavated from the site. A number of small piec-
es of flat sandstone slabs or palette stones were also
unearthed from the site. This level also yielded a large
quantity of skeletal remains of the animals. Period II
was represented by a few ceramic sherds, stone and
shell beads, shell bangles and two inhumation burials.
One of them was double burial and associated with
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology
five ceramic vessels of different shapes. The second
burial was of a child, also associated with a few vessels.
The noteworthy feature of the site is the lone presence
of Pre-Urban Harappan Burial pottery types (IAR
1993-94; Majumdar 1999; Ajithprasad 2002: 129-
158).
Datrana
During 1993-94 and 1994-95, the Maharaja Saya-
jirao University of Baroda and in 2010-11 under the
direction of Ajithprasad of the Maharaja Sayajirao
University of Baroda and Marco Madella of CSIC,
Barcelona, Spain, carried out excavations at Datrana
(Mounds II, IV and V) (23° 46' 00" N, 71° 06' 00" E)
in the Santalpur talukaof the Banaskantha district.
The spread of artefacts consisting of stone blades,
lithic debitage and a few potsherds covered an area of
about 50 hectares. Mound IV locally known as Hadka
walu Khetar revealed a total habitation deposit of 75 -
90 cm incorporating two cultural periods, Period I be-
ing Mesolithic and Period II being Chalcolithic. The
Chalcolithic period was represented by long crested
ridged blades (Figure 9), prismatic blade cores (Figure
10), stone beads and rough-outs, copper punch point
and ceramics. The ceramics from the mound include
Pre-Prabhas, Anarta and Pre-Urban Harappan Burial
pottery. The occurrence of the Anarta and Pre-Urban
Harappan Burial pottery in the upper level close to
the surface indicates that the Pre-Prabhas pottery-us-
ing community were the earliest Chalcolithic inhab-
itants at the site. Datrana V locally known as Patel
no Khetar revealed a cultural deposit of 70 - 90 cm
belonging to the Mesolithic and Chalcolithic periods.
The Chalcolithic deposit of 15 - 20 cm thick revealed
Pre-Urban Harappan Burial pottery and long chalced-
ony blades. Datrana II locally known as Ravechi Mata
no Timbo revealed a single period of the Chalcolithic
occupation. The habitation deposit in this mound was
confined to pits of different dimensions; the largest
one with a diameter of about 2 m and a depth of 1 m,
- 110 -
while the smaller ones measured about half a meter.
The pits yielded Sorath Harappan pottery analogous
to the Rojdi A and B types. One of the pits yielded a
number of Lustrous Red Ware bowls and dishes. Most
of the pottery recovered from another pit was of the
Anarta tradition. Another interesting find was that of
a pottery kiln stacked with Sorath Harappan pottery
(IAR 1993-94; Ajithprasad 2002; Rajesh et al. 2013a:
181-209).
Mathutra
In 1994-95, Abhijit Majumdar of the Maharaja
Sayajirao University of Baroda conducted a trial exca-
vation at Mathutra I (Madhavya no Timbo) (23° 44'
00" N, 71° 05' 00" E) in the Santalpur taluka of the
Banaskantha district. The excavation in the northern
part of the mound revealed that the spread of pottery
was mainly on the surface except disc bases of bowl
and pot and a grinding stone that were found bur-
ied in the trench. The shreds showed affinity to the
Pre-Urban Harappan Burial pottery. The excavation at
the centre of the mound revealed three vessel bases as-
sociated with human teeth. The surface finds from the
site include Anarta pottery and Post-Urban Harappan
ceramics (Majumdar 1999).
Bagasra
During 1995-96 to 2004-2005, the Maharaja Saya-
jirao University of Baroda conducted excavations
at fortified Harappan settlement at Bagasra, locally
known as Gola Dhoro (23° 03' 30" N, 70° 37' 10" E)
in the Maliya taluka of the Rajkot district. The site
measuring 160 × 120 m is roughly rectangular in
layout. The excavations at the site uncovered a 7.75 m
thick deposit of habitation belonging to four distinct
phases; Phase I to Phase IV. Phase I represents the ear-
ly stage of the Urban Harappan along with the Anarta
pottery. Phase II is demarcated by the construction of
a fortification. As in Phase I, this phase incorporates
both Classical/Urban Harappan remains and Anarta
 Rajesh S.V. Indus Archaeology in Gujarat

Figure 9 Stone blades from Datrana IV (Courtesy: NoGAP)

Figure 10 Blade cores from Datrana IV (Courtesy: NoGAP)

pottery. In addition to these, isolated sherds of the
Sorath Harappan pottery were also found in the up-
per layers of this phase. Phase III is remarkable for the
predominance of the Sorath Harappan pottery over
the Classical Harappan and a general disorganisation
of construction activities at the site. Phase IV is the
Post-Urban Harappan habitation and is characterised
by a group of the Sorath Harappan pottery resembling
Rangpur IIC and Rojdi C pottery and by the absence
of Classical/Sindhi Harappan artefacts in the deposit.
The material remains unearthed from the site include
blades, cores, grinding stones, polishers, skin rubbers,

- 111 -
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology

Figure 11 Copper objects from Bagasra (Courtesy: Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda)

Figure 12 Stone beads from Bagasra (Courtesy: Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda)

- 112 -
 Rajesh S.V. Indus Archaeology in Gujarat
Figure 13 Shell workshop, Bagasra (Courtesy: Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda)
weights, beads and drill bits of various stones; copper
objects, namely chisels, knives (Figure 11), bangles,
beads (Figure 12); shell objects such as ladle, circlets,
beads, bangles, inlay pieces, balls; steatite beads, seals;
faience bangles and beads; bones and bone points,
scrapers; otoliths; clay objects, namely sealings, balls,
clay lumps with reed impressions, and varieties of ter-
racotta objects like animal figurines, toy-cart frames
and wheels with projected hubs, spindle whorls, tops,
pottery, pottery rings, pottery discs, triangular cakes,
bangles, beads, pendants, ear-studs and inlay pieces.
The site provided the clear evidence for shell work-
ing (Figure 13), stone bead manufacturing, faience
making and copper working (IAR 1995-96, 1996-97,
1997-98, 1999-00; Sonawane et al. 2003: 21-50; Bhan
et al. 2004: 153-158; Chase et al. 2014: 63-78).
Juni Kuran
The Harappan settlement at Juni Kuran (23° 27' 00"
- 113 -
N, 69° 47' 00" E) located on the northeastern corner
of the Pascham Beyt island in the Bhuj taluk of the
Kachchh district was excavated under Shubra Praman-
ik of the ASI during 2003-04 to 2005-06. The roughly
rectangular-shaped settlement covers an area of 410
m × 350 m with an average deposit of 7 m. Structures
made of mud brick and stone were observed contin-
uously from the Urban Harappan to the Post-Urban
Harappan levels. The excavations also unearthed a
fortified city with gateways, a middle town and two
stadiums. The pottery recovered from the excavation
includes Reserved Slip Ware, Cream Slipped Ware,
Grey Ware, Incised Red Ware and plain and painted
Red Ware. Jar, dish-on-stand, vase, handi, dish, basin
and goblet are the main vessel forms. Shell bangles
and inlay pieces, terracotta objects like animal figu-
rines, balls, hopscotch, blades of semi-precious stones,
copper objects like the arrowheads, wire and fish hook
were also recovered. Burials were also unearthed from
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology
the site (Pramanik 2004: 45-67).
Bokhira
Excavations at Bokhira (21° 39' 20" N, 69° 36' 10"
E) in the Porbandar district by Marine Archaeology
Centre, National Institute of Oceanography, Goa in
2005 revealed a protohistoric settlement dating back
to the mid-3rd millennium BC. Four trenches laid
in the agricultural land located on the western side
of the Porbandar creek revealed a habitation deposit
of 50 cm thick. A large quantity of pottery, animal
bones and other antiquities recovered from the site is
akin to the material remains of Rojdi and Rangpur.
One of the trenches revealed a rubble structure. The
main pottery types are Red Ware, Buff Ware and Grey
Ware. Major shapes are bowls, jars, lids, basins and
pots. Paintings on the potsherds are roundels, wavy
lines, cross lines and thick bands. Other antiquities
from the site include stone tools, terracotta beads, clay
balls, sling balls and a copper ring (Gaur et al. 2006:
33-39).
Kanmer
During 2005-06 to 2008-09 and 2013-14 to 2014-15,
JRN Rajasthan Vidyapeeth, Udaipur, Gujarat State
Department of Archaeology and Research Institute
for Humanity and Nature, Kyoto, Japan jointly exca-
vated the fortified Harappan settlement at Kanmer
(23° 23' 00" N, 70° 52' 00" E) locally known as Bakar
Kot situated 35 km east of Rapar in the Kachchh dis-
trict. The fortified site measuring 115 m × 155 m × 10
m revealed fivefold cultural sequence namely KMR-I
- Pre-Urban Harappan (2888 - 2623 BC), KMR-II -
Urban Harappan (IIa: 2130 - 1785 BC and IIb: 2470
- 2149 BC), KMR-III - Post-Urban Harappan, KMR-
IV - Early Historic and KMR V - Medieval. Period
I (Pre-fortification level) revealed a 40 cm deposit
and Period II (Urban Harappan) is divided into two
phases based on the changes in ceramics and a 10 cm
thick layer of whitish material. Phase IIa is ashy in
- 114 -
nature and the thickness of deposit varies from 2.5 m
to 1.8 m. The thickness of the Phase IIB varies from
2.0 m to 3.5 m. The average thickness of Period III
(Post-Urban Harappan) varies from 40 cm to 100 cm.
Period IV (Early Historic) has a deposit of 1.5 m and
a large number of pits measuring 2 m deep dug during
this time disturbed the Harappan level. Period IV is
marked by a flimsy medieval deposit of 20 cm. Ar-
chitectural elements recovered from the site include
fortification walls and residential structures. Although
stone was widely used as the building material, mud-
brick constructions are also present in the site. The
ceramics from the Harappan levels include Black-
and-Red Ware, Anarta pottery and other Harappan
pottery types. Antiquities from the site include beads
of steatite, faience, semiprecious stones, terracotta,
shell and gold, steatite and terracotta seals, sealings,
terracotta cakes, dices, gamesman, amulets, polishers,
drill bits, roughouts, bangles of shell, copper and ter-
racotta and weights. Remains of wild and domestic
animals and plants were also recovered from the site
(Kharakwal et al. 2005: 115-123, 2007: 21-46, 2008:
5-23, 2009: 147-164, 2012; Agrawal et al. 2010: 1-2).
Khirsara
Khirsara (Gadhwalivadi) (23° 50' 00" N, 69° 05' 00"
E) is a small village situated at a distance of about 7
km south of Ravapar on the Bhuj - Narayan Sarovar
State Highway and 5 km north of Netra in the dis-
trict Kachchh, Gujarat. The archaeological site is
situated 2 km east of the village and is bordered by
two seasonal streams on the northern and southern
sides which drain into the river Khari flowing at a dis-
tance of around 400 m away. The fortified settlement
measures 310 m × 230 m. The excavations by the ASI
during 2009 - 2013 has yielded a rich cultural deposit
belonging to the Urban Harappan period. The evi-
dence from the site shows five structural phases and
damages caused by flood in successive phases (Nath
et al. 2012: 122-132). The site revealed evidence of
 Rajesh S.V. Indus Archaeology in Gujarat
Figure 14 Pottery kiln, Khirsara (Courtesy: J. Nath and R.N. Kumaran)
residential structures, factory area, ware-house, kilns
(Figure 14) and well. Noteworthy findings from the
site are steatite seals, sealings, shell bangles, gold beads
(Figure 15), stone beads and drill bits. In 1978-79, the
Department of Archaeology, Government of Gujarat
discovered a seal bearing Harappan characters from
the site (IAR 1978-79; Jam 2010; Nath et al. 2015:
272-282).
Kotada Bhadli
Kotada Bhadli (23° 20' 00" N, 69° 25' 00" E) is locat-
ed in the Nakhatrana taluka of the Kachchh district
in Gujarat. It was first discovered by J.P. Joshi (IAR
1965-66). The site measuring approximately 1.5
hectares is intact and is marked by fortification walls
on all sides. This site was subjected to excavation for
three seasons, i.e. from 2010-11 to 2012-13 by Deccan
College, Post Graduate and Research Institute and
Gujarat State Department of Archaeology, Gandhi-
nagar. The site of Kotada Bhadli has yielded evidences
of the Sorath Harappan, Late Sorath Harappan and
- 115 -
a few Classical Harappan ceramics. Stone weights,
beads, terracotta beads, spindle whorls, pottery discs,
pottery rings and stone blades were unearthed from
the site. It has yielded structural evidences in the form
of a residential complex (Shirvalkar and Rawat 2012:
182-201, 2012-13: 70-77; Shirvalkar 2012-13: 55-68).
Ranod
Vaharvo Timho in the Ranod (23° 33' 17.05" N; 71°
48' 12.01" E) village is large oblong sand dune by
the side of a very large inter-dunal depression on its
northeast. There are three sand dunes and Vaharvo
Timbo is the largest and richest among these in terms
of artefacts exposed on the surface. A few potsherds
found in the surface collection were un-diagnostic
and non-descript. Although too fragmentary, they
are closer to the Anarta pottery of North Gujarat. Be-
sides, a number of animal skeletal remains especially
long bones and horn-cores of wild bovids and cervids
were found at the site. Many of the bones showed
silicification suggesting the substantial antiquity. Dur-
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology

Figure 15 Gold beads from Khirsara (Courtesy: J. Nath and R.N. Kumaran)

ing 2011-12, under the direction of Ajithprasad of the Kaj

Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda and Marco
Madella of CSIC, Barcelona, Spain, carried out an ex-
cavation at the site. The excavation revealed artefacts
of the Mesolithic period and an Early Harappan child
burial. Pre-Urban Harappan Sindh type ceramics were
used as burial goods (Mushrif-Tripathy et al. 2014: 45-
51).
The village Kaj is located about 10 km east of the
Kodinar town on the Dwarka Bhavnagar highway.
The ancient mound locally known as Juna Kaj is
situated further 2-3 km east of the village. Only an
area of 100 m × 100 m remains undisturbed and the
rest of the site is an agricultural land very close to a
creek. A small-scale excavation at the site in 2011 by
the National Institute of Oceanography, Goa revealed

- 116 -
 Rajesh S.V. Indus Archaeology in Gujarat
Sorath Harappan and Late Sorath Harappan ceramics
(Farooqui et al. 2013: 2631-47).
Navinal
Located in the forest land on the margins of Gulf
of Kachchh in the Mundra taluka of the Kachchh
district, Navinal (22° 49' 17.5" N, 69° 35' 49.9" E) is a
site showing cultural remains of the Integration and
Localization eras of Indus Civilization. The site was
discovered in 1950s by P.P. Pandya of Department
of Archaeology, Saurashtra. It was first reported by
S.R. Rao in 1963 and was assigned to the Rangpur
IIB phase of the Harappan culture of Gujarat. Later
in 2011, the site was explored by P. Ajithprasad of
the Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda and in
2012 by A.S. Gaur of National Institute of Oceanog-
raphy. In 2013, the site was explored by a joint team
from the University of Kerala, Kachchh University,
Albion College - USA, Gujarat State Archaeology
Department and the Maharaja Sayajirao University
of Baroda to understand its archaeological potentials.
A long-term multidisciplinary international research
project entitled 'Archaeological Excavation at Navinal
in Mundra Taluka, District Kachchh and Exploration
in Kachchh District, Gujarat' has been launched with
the financial support from University of Kerala and
the Archaeological Research and Conservation Pro-
gram: India and Pakistan (ARCPIP). This project has
been launched with such objectives as to understand
the level of integration which existed among the Re-
gional Chalcolithic Cultures and Classical Harappans
found at the site and to understand the economic
production and inter-regional interaction network
that existed during the Urban Harappan phase in
Kachchh. Two trial trenches (1 m × 1 m) excavated
under the project at Navinal have revealed remains
of ceramic assemblage belonging to the Integration
and Localization Eras (c. 2200 - 1600 BC). Animal
figurines, toy cart frames, hubbed wheels and other
terracotta objects; complete shells and shell objects;
- 117 -
varieties of beads of stone, shell and terracotta; button
seal, stone amulet; grinding stones; hammer stones;
lithic tools and associated debitage and large number
of copper tools were collected from the surface of the
site. Many structural parts of stone and indicators
of craft production (pottery production, stone tool
production (Figure 16), copper working and shell
working (Figure 17)) are visible at various parts of the
site. A number of animal skeletal remains found at the
site show salt and calcium encrustation suggesting the
substantial antiquity. A large number of charred and
uncharred otoliths of variety of fishes and fish verte-
brae were also collected from the site. Huge quantities
of complete and broken small shells (probably edible)
and lithic debitage are found scattered all over the
surface of partially disturbed site (Rajesh et al. 2015:
30-31).
Vejalka
Vejalka (22° 15' 05" N; 71° 51' 41" E) is a small
Harappan site located in the Ranpur taluka of Botad
district, Gujarat. The site was excavated in 2014-15
and 2015-16 by the Maharaja Sayajirao University of
Baroda. The excavation at the site has revealed clear
evidence of mud houses, Harappan and regional
Chalcolithic ceramics (Sorath Harappan, Late Sorath
Harappan, Micaceous Red Ware and Lustrous Red
Ware), semi-precious stone beads, some terracotta ob-
jects and animal bones. The site can be relatively dated
between c. 2300 - 1600 BC (Krishnan, pers. comm.).
Dhaneti
Dhaneti (23° 15' 01" N; 69° 54' 47" E) is an Early
Harappan Burial site located in the Bhuj taluka of the
Kachchh district, Gujarat. The site was excavated in
2016-17 and 2017-18 by the Maharaja Sayajirao Uni-
versity of Baroda. The burial site revealed some skel-
etal remains and burial goods. The burial goods from
the site include vessels similar to Pre-Urban Harappan
Sindh type ceramics, Reserved Slip Ware and shell
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology

Figure 16 Stone tools from Navinal

Figure 17 Copper nodules from Navinal

Bangles. The site can be relatively dated between c. CLASSICAL HARAPPAN ENIGMA AND
3000 to 2600 BC (Ajithprasad, pers. comm.). REGIONAL CHALCOLITHIC TRADITIONS

As most of the reported Chalcolithic sites in Gujarat

had elements of the Harappan culture, without any
doubt or second thought, all of them were labelled

- 118 -
 Rajesh S.V. Indus Archaeology in Gujarat
under the same and until the first half of 1980s.
Chalcolithic settlements of Gujarat were synonymous
with the Harappan culture with very few exceptions.
The distinctive features of the material culture of the
Chalcolithic site(s) in Gujarat in the early stage was
observed by a few scholars like Vats (1937), Dik-
shit (1950), Subbarao (1958), Nanavati (1962) and
Wheeler (1959, 1966). Vats (1937) suggested that the
part he excavated at Rangpur in Saurashtra might cor-
respond to the Late period of the Indus Civilization
or probably fall between that time and Cemetery H at
Harappa. Thus began the belief that Chalcolithic sites
in Saurashtra are Late Harappan (Possehl 2007: 303).
In 1958, Subbarao categorized the excavated Chal-
colithic sites of Gujarat into three, viz. Kathiawad
Harappan (Lothal and Rangpur IIA), Late Kathiawad
Harappan (Rangpur IIB, Somnath IA and IB and
Lakhabawal I) and Post-Kathiawad Harappan (Rang-
pur IIC and III, Somnath II and Amra I). Though he
did not given any explanation for this classification,
it can be viewed as a division based on the concept of
geographical region and differences in artifacts. Sub-
barao (1958: 132-133) also identified the typical re-
gional ceramic type known as the Prabhas Ware along
with the Harapppan ceramics at Somnath.
Wheeler (1959: 38) identified the distinctive char-
acter of the Chalcolithic sites in Kathiawar, and he
called them as a sub-Indus or a provisional variant of
the Indus Civilization. Nanavati (1962) suggested the
possibility of Lothal being a regional variation of the
Harappan culture in Gujarat, which may have dissoci-
ated from the parental one at an early stage and took
a course of development. Rao (1963) suggested the
probable existence of an indigenous Micaceous Red
pottery-using Chalcolithic community at Lothal prior
to the Harappan occupation. Wheeler (1966: 87) also
used the term Saurashtrian Indus to denote a late and
the developing branch of the Indus civilization.
The ceramics similar to those of the Jorwe and
Malwa culture were recovered from a few excavated
- 119 -
sites in south Gujarat along with the Post-Urban
Harappan pottery (IAR 1961-62, 1966-67; Mehta and
Chaudhary 1971). Joshi (1972b: 122-126) noticed the
variation of certain ceramics found associated with the
Harappan pottery from Surkotada. Sankalia (1972:
171-172) regarded the trends observed through the
material remains at Rangpur and Somnath as region-
al, ethnic and cultural forces which clearly differed
from the Harappan way of life. He also suggested that
changes in pottery shapes, techniques and decoration
cannot be indigenously evolved without some external
influence (Sankalia 1974: 381). Pandya (1983: 59-63)
based on the evidence of the Rangpur excavations by
Dikshit (1950) and Rao (1963) argued that the local
Chalcolithic communities may have preceded as well
as co-existed with the Harappans. Allchin (1990: 30)
suggested that the local settlements with a distinctive
regional character were already established in Gujarat
even before the arrival of the Harappans and later in
time Post-Urban Harappan features blend with the
re-emerging local cultural style.
Possehl and Herman (1990) noticed significant
variations from the Classical Harappan in the ma-
terial culture of Rojdi and many sites in Saurashtra.
Possehl and Herman (1990: 314) termed this regional
manifestation of the Harappan urban phase as Sorath
Harappan, which is stylistically different from the
Sindhi Harappan (urban phase sites in Kachchh, Sind
and Punjab) and clearly a part of the Harappan larger
cultural whole. Allchin and Allchin (1997: 160-161)
suggested the term Local Harappan instead of Sorath
Harappan to this regional manifestation. Shinde
(1992a, 1992b) identified a new regional Chalcolithic
assemblage at the lowest levels of Padri and termed
it as Padri Ware/Padri Culture. The re-analysis of
ceramics from Prabhas Patan (Dhavalikar and Possehl
1992) in Saurashtra and the exploration of Janan in
Kachchh also revealed the evidence for the existence
of a regional Chalcolithic population well represented
by the ceramic assemblage named as the Pre-Prabhas.
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology
The excavations and explorations in various parts of
north Gujarat by the Maharaja Sayajirao University
of Baroda clearly established the evidence of another
regional Chalcolithic population termed as the Anar-
ta (Ajithprasad and Sonawane 1993; Sonawane and
Ajithprasad 1994). The sites in North Gujarat and
Saurashtra also revealed ceramics similar to those from
Early Harappan levels at Amri, Nal, Kot Diji, Balakot
and Damb Sadaat (Hegde et al. 1988; Majumdar and
Sonawane 1996-1997). Brief descriptions of various
Chalcolithic cultures/traditions in Gujarat are given
in following pragraphs.
Anarta Tradition
The Anarta Assemblage is a Regional Chalcolithic
tradition first reported as a distinctive ceramic group
from North Gujarat. Its regional trait was first recog-
nized in 1985 during the excavations at Nagwada in
the Surendrnagar district where the regional ceramics
were found associated with Urban Harappan ele-
ments. However, its independent nature as a Pre-Ur-
ban Harappan ceramic tradition of North Gujarat was
established only after the excavations at Loteshwar
in the Mehsana district in 1991-92 (Ajithprasad and
Sonawane 1993; Sonawane and Ajithprasad 1994).
It also found associated with Pre-Urban Harappan
Burial pottery (Amri-Nal type) at sites like Moti Pipli
and Datrana and with Pre-Prabhas pottery at Datra-
na. This pottery tradition is represented by Gritty
Red Ware, Fine Red Ware, Burnished Red Ware and
Burnished Grey/Black wares. The vessels are hand/
slow-wheel made, and the forms include straight or
convex sided bowls with incurved rims, basins with
thick flaring rim, pots/jars with flaring rim, constrict-
ed neck and bulbous body (Figures 18 - 22). They are
treated with a red slip with paintings in red, black and
white (Ajithprasad and Sonawane 1993; Sonawane
and Ajithprasad 1994; Ajithprasad 2002). Apart from
many sites in North Gujarat, it is also found associat-
ed with Urban Harappan artifacts at Shikarpur (Bhan
- 120 -
and Ajithprasad 2008: 1-9, 2009: 1-9) and Kanmer
(Kharakwal et al. 2012) in Kachchh and Bagasra in
Saurashtra (Sonawane et al. 2003; Bhan et al. 2004).
The non-Harappan ceramic tradition from all the pe-
riods (IA, IB and IC) of Surkotada is analogous with
Anarta pottery. This tradition can be dated between
3900 - 1700 BC (Rajesh 2011; Rajesh et al. 2013b:
10-45).
Padri Ware/Padri Culture
Another Chalcolithic ceramic showing non-Harap-
pan features is the Padri Ware reported from Padri
Gohil Ni in the Talaja taluka of the Bhavnagar district
(Shinde 1992a, 1992b, 1998; Shinde and Kar 1992;
Paul et al. 1997; Paul and Shinde 1998-99; Joglekar
1996-97; Bhagat 2001; Shirvalkar 2008). At Padri,
this hand/slow-wheel-made coarse ceramic having
a thick red slip with black paintings occurs during
Pre-Urban Harappan and Urban Harappan periods
(3600 - 2000 BC). The important vessel shapes are
bowls with straight/incurved/convex sides, stud-han-
dle bowls, basins, globular pots, dish-on-stands and
perforated jars (Shinde 1992a, 1998; Shinde and
Kar 1992; Sonawane and Ajithprasad 1994). Other
ceramic types occurring in the Pre-Urban Harappan
level at Padri are Coarse Red/Grey Ware, White
Painted Ware, Bichrome Ware, Plain Handmade
Ware and Red Painted Ware (Figures 23 - 27) (Shinde
1992a, 1998). A resemblance of the Padri ware with
the ceramics from North Gujarat (Anarta) (Shinde
1992b; Shinde and Kar 1992; Sonawane and Ajith-
prasad 1994) and Pre-Urban Harappan pottery from
Dholavira (Bicrhome ware) (Shinde 1998) has been
mentioned. It is also reported from 12 other explored
sites in the lower Shetrunji river basin in the Bhavna-
gar district along with Harappan ceramics (Paul et al.
1997; Shirvalkar 2008).
Pre-Prabhas Assemblage
Pre-Prabhas pottery is the non-Harappan assemblage
 Rajesh S.V. Indus Archaeology in Gujarat

Figure 18 Anarta pottery from Loteshwar (Courtesy: Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda)

Figure 19 Anarta pottery from Loteshwar (Courtesy: Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda)

first unearthed in 1956-57 excavation at Prabhas
Patan (Somnath) in the Junagadh district. Period I
at Prabhas Patan dated to 3000 - 2800 BC was char-
acterised by the occurrence of corrugated or broadly
incised ware along with a blade industry of agate
and chalcedony with crested ridges (IAR 1956-57;
Subbarao 1958; Dhavalikar and Possehl 1992) and
suggested similarities with Rangpur IIB (IAR 1956-
57). It is characterised by the handmade pottery
consisting of Red Ware, Incised Red Ware, Black-and-
Red Ware and Grey Ware (Figures 28 and 29). The
forms represented are wide-mouthed jars, deep or
shallow basins, flat bottomed basin with flaring sides
and incised rims (IAR 1971-72). Though Pre-Prabhas
level was identified during the re-excavations in 1970s,
the details of this ceramic type were published only in

- 121 -
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology

Figure 20 Anarta pottery from Loteshwar (Courtesy: Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda)

Figure 21 Anarta pottery from Loteshwar (Courtesy: Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda)

Figure 22 Anarta pottery from Loteshwar (Courtesy: Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda)

1992 (Dhavalikar and Possehl 1992). The excavations
at Datrana in the Banaskantha district of North Guja-
rat also revealed Pre-Prabhas pottery (Figures 30 - 32)
in association with Anarta pottery, Pre-Urban Hara-
ppan Burial pottery, crested ridge blades and cores of
chalcedony, agate, jasper and chert and copper/bronze
punch (Ajithprasad 2002). Pre-Prabhas pottery was
also reported from Janan in the Kachchh district
(Figures 33 and 34). During the excavation of 1957-
58 at Rojdi, crude corrugated ware of the type found
in Period IA at Somnath was noticed (IAR 1957-
58). The coarse corrugated ware of the Rojdi-Prabhas

- 122 -
 Rajesh S.V. Indus Archaeology in Gujarat

Figure 23 Ceramics from Padri (after Shirvalkar 2008)

Patan type was also reported from Old Alatala, Ma-
hadevayo, Modhera, Ranigam, Makavana, Khanderio,
Jivani, Lakhan Timbo, Tarana, Gadhada I, Gadhada
III and Khakhara Bela I (IAR 1953-54, 1956-57,
1960-61). But the archaeological data from the later
excavations at Rojdi (Possehl and Raval 1989) and the
re-explorations at above-mentioned sites clearly show
that the crude corrugated ware from these sites belong
to the Sorath Harappan culture of the Urban Hara-
ppan Phase. Wheel making is another feature of the
Sorath Harappan coarse corrugated ware. The exact
time-period of the origin of the Pre-Prabhas Assem-
blage in Gujarat is not clear and the two recalibrated
14
C dates (Reimer et al. 2009) from Prabhas Patan/
Somnath for this phase is in the range of 3122 - 2548
BC (Possehl 1994b; Rajesh et al. 2013a: 181-209).
The 14C dates from Datrana is in the range of 3353
- 3095 BC. No chronometric date is available from
Janan. Based on the chronometric dates from Datrana
and Prabhas Patan, the relative dates for the ceramics
of the Anarta Tradition and the Pre-Urban Harappan
Sindh type ceramics, the Pre-Prabhas Assemblage at
Datrana can be roughly dated between c. 3300 - 2600
BC (Rajesh et al. 2013a: 181-209).
Early Harappan Burial Pottery/
Pre Urban Harappan Sindh Related Pottery
This kind of pottery was first reported during the
excavations at Nagwada in 1985 (Ajithprasad 2002:
144). Both inhumation and symbolic burials were

- 123 -
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology

Figure 24 Ceramics from Padri (after Shirvalkar 2008)

Figure 25 Ceramics from Padri (after Shirvalkar 2008)

noticed in Period IA of the site. Red Ware, Pinkish
Buff Ware and Grey Ware represented the symbolic
burials. The vessels were made of well-elutriated clay
and the ceramics were slipped and painted (Majum-
dar and Sonawane 1996-1997: 16). The major shapes
in this group are large bulbous pot with narrow flat
base, a short and straight neck and flat rim, flasks or
beaker shaped vases with sides converging into a nar-
row opening, beakers with slightly flaring rim, dish-
on-stand with upturned rim, dish with no carination
and shallow bowls (Figure 35) (Ajithprasad 2002:
145). The bulbous pot is painted at the rim with a
thick dark band and at the shoulder with horizontal
and wavy lines. Pipal leaf motif on one of the large

- 124 -
 Rajesh S.V. Indus Archaeology in Gujarat

Figure 26 Ceramics from Padri (after Shirvalkar 2008)

Figure 27 Ceramics from Padri (after Shirvalkar 2008)

pots is an important feature. These burial ceramics
resemble the vessels recovered from the Pre-Urban
Harappan levels at Kot Diji, Amri, Damb Bhuti, Nal
and Balakot (Hegde et al. 1988: 58; Ajithprasad 2002:
145). Such ceramics are also present in the cemetery
at Surkotada (Figure 36) in Kachchh ( Joshi 1990;
Possehl 1997: 81-87). The subsequent excavations at
Santhli, Datrana and Moti Pipli in North Gujarat also
revealed these ceramics along with Anarta pottery.
At Datrana, in the upper levels, it was also found
associated with Pre-Prabhas assemblage. Ajithprasad
(2008a: 41, 2010) also reported these ceramics from
three sites (Warodra, Shapur and Lohij) in Saurashtra.
Dhavalikar (Dhavalikar 1984; IAR 1971-72) report-

- 125 -
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology

Figure 28 Pre-Prabhas pottery from Somnath (after Dhavalikar and Possehl 1992)

Figure 29 Pre-Prabhas pottery from Somnath (after Dhavalikar and Possehl 1992)

ed the presence of Harappan-like ceramics in the
Pre-Prabhas level at Prabhas patan. Based on the finds
from Warodra, Shapur and Lohij, Ajithprasad (2008a:
41) suggests that the Harappan-like ceramics reported
from the Pre-Prabhas level at Prabhan Patan may be
the Early Harappan Sind-related pottery. Burial sites
such as Dhaneti and Janan in Kachchh also revealed
the presence of these ceramics. The pottery from
these sites are hand/slow wheel-made and are found
associated with Reserved Slip Ware. The relative
time-period assigned to the burial ceramic is the be-
ginning of the third millennium BC (Majumdar and
Sonawane 1996-1997: 20; Ajithprasad 2002: 147).
Majumdar (1999: 194) based on the evidence from

- 126 -
 Rajesh S.V. Indus Archaeology in Gujarat

Figure 30 Pre-Prabhas pottery from Datrana IV (Courtesy: Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda)

Figure 31 Pre-Prabhas pottery from Datrana IV (Courtesy: Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda)

- 127 -
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology

Figure 32 Pre-Prabhas pottery from Datrana IV (Courtesy: Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda)

Nagwada, Moti Pipli, Datrana and Surkotada suggest
a time bracket of 3000 BC to 2550 BC for the spread
of Pre-Urban Harappan Sindh-related pottery and its
authors to Kachchh and North Gujarat.
Black-and-Red Ware
In India, the Black-and-Red Ware ceramics are report-
ed from Chalcolithic, Megalithic and Early Historic
contexts (Dey 2003: 131-136). According to many
scholars, the dual colour in the ceramic is the result
of inverted firing technique (Wheeler 1947; Sharma
1960; Subbarao 1961; Rao 1963). Black-and-Red
Ware ceramics are reported from most of the Chal-
colithic sites in Gujarat (Figure 37), and it was first
reported from Rangpur (Dikshit 1950: 18-19). At
Rangpur, these ceramics were reported from all the
periods and the major shapes include bowl, jar and
dish and some of the bowls were painted using a white
colour (Rao 1963). The Black-and-Red Ware ceram-
ics are found associated with Micaceous Red Ware
(Rao 1985), Classical Harappan (Rao 1985), Prabhas
Ware (Rao 1985), Sorath Harappan (Sen 2009), Early
Harappan Burial/Pre Urban Harappan Sindh-related
pottery (Majumdar 1999), Pre-Prabhas Assemblage
(Dhavalikar and Possehl 1992), Anarta Tradition
(Ajithprasad and Sonawane 1994; Ajithprasad 2002),
Lustrous Red Ware (Rao 1963; Rissman and Chital-
wala 1990), Malwa Ware (Mehta and Chaudhary

- 128 -
 Rajesh S.V. Indus Archaeology in Gujarat

Figure 33 Pre-Prabhas pottery from Janan

Figure 34 Pre-Prabhas pottery from Janan

- 129 -
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology

Figure 35 Pre-Urban Harappan Sindh-Type pottery (Burial Pottery) from Moti Pipli (after Majumdar 1999)

- 130 -
 Rajesh S.V. Indus Archaeology in Gujarat

Figure 36 Pre-Urban Harappan Sindh-Type pottery from Surkotada (after Joshi 1990)

1971) and Jorwe Ware (IAR 1961-62). There were
certain similarities and dissimilarities in the shape and
fabric of Black-and-Red Ware in different periods and
cultures/traditions. In Chalcolithic Gujarat, chrono-
logically it can be roughly placed between 3900 - 1000
BC (Rajesh et al. 2016).
Reserved Slip Ware
Reserved Slip Ware was first reported during the ex-
cavation of Mohenjodaro and the term was used by
the excavators to describe a kind of low-fired ceramics
(Mackay 1938: 184). The term reserved slip refers to a
particular kind of surface treatment given to the pre-
fired ceramics by applying two slip layers to the surface

- 131 -
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology
Figure 37 Black-and-Red Ware from Nagwada (Courtesy: Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda)
of the vessel and later by skillfully removing the upper
slip through gently combing the surface thus leaving
two contrasting colours, in either a straight or a wavy
line pattern. There are different kinds of this ceramics;
“Glazed” Reserved Slip Ware, “Ungalzed” Reserved
Slip Ware and Periano Reserve Ware (Shinde et al.
2008: 85). Glazed Reserved Slip Ware was character-
ized by a well-defined, glossy and hard surface layer,
whereas the surface of Unglazed Reserved Slip Ware is
matt and soft (Krishnan et al. 2005: 692). Periano Re-
serve Ware which is totally different from the Glazed
and Unglazed Reserved Slip Ware was first identified
at Periano Ghundai by Fairservis and it is recovered
from many sites in the Greater Indus Region includ-
ing Kalibangan, Girawad and Farmana. The surface
treatment of this ware includes the application of
sandy clay coating or a slip on the surface of the leath-
er hard vessel to give the appearance of a very smooth
exterior surface over which broad wavy and horizontal
parallel grooves in low relief are executed (Shinde et
al. 2008: 85). Glazed and Ungalzed Reserved Slip
- 132 -
sherds are reported from both Pre-Urban Harappan
and Urban Harappan sites in Gujarat and its main
concentration is in the Kachchh region (Figure 38).
In Gujarat, it can be dated between 3900 - 1900 BC.
At this stage of research, it is very difficult to pinpoint
the authors of this ware.
Micaceous Red Ware
S.R. Rao in 1963 described the possible existence of
an indigenous Micaceous Red pottery-using Chal-
colithic population at Lothal prior to the Harappan
occupation (Rao 1963; Ajithprasad 2002). In spite of
several efforts, he has not found a stratum exclusively
of Micaceous Red Ware (Rao 1985). This pottery type
was found to increase in quantity in the lower levels of
Lothal A but it was always associated with Harappan
ceramics (IAR 1961-62). In fabric, surface treatment,
forms and modelling, this pottery shows non-Hara-
ppan features (Rao 1963; Dhavalikar and Possehl
1992; Herman and Krishnan 1994; Sonawane and
Ajithprasad 1994). This hand/mould-made pottery
 Rajesh S.V. Indus Archaeology in Gujarat

Figure 38 Reserved Slip Ware from Kanmer (Courtesy: Kharakwal et al. 2012)

- 133 -
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology

Figure 39 Micaceous Red Ware from Lothal (after Rao 1985)

has a thick pink to light brown/grey glossy slip with
smooth surface and appears as dusted with tiny mica
particles. The vessel forms represented are convex-sid-
ed bowl with or with stud handle, shallow dish-basin,
globular jar, lamp, bottle and perforated jar (Figure
39). Similar pottery was also reported from Rangpur
(Rao 1963). The excavations at Kanewal (Mehta et al.
1980) and Vagad (Sonawane and Mehta 1985) in the
Bhal region strengthened the theory of the existence
of Micaceous Red ware-using community in the area
around the Gulf of Khambhat. The later explorations
(Dimri 1998-99; Dimri 1999, 2005; Krishnan and
Dimri 2005) in the Bhogava, Sukha Bhadar and Lilka
river basins also provided the supporting evidence in
the form of similar pottery. It is also reported in small
quantities from excavated Chalcolithic sites like Roj-
di, Nageshwar and Bagasra in Saurashtra, Desalpur in
Kachchh and Ratanpura in North Gujarat (Herman
and Krishnan 1994; Dimri 1999). Chronologically
it can be placed between 2600 BC (Lothal A Phase I

- 134 -
 Rajesh S.V. Indus Archaeology in Gujarat

Figure 40 Black Slipped Jars from Bagasra (Courtesy: Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda)

- 135 -
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology

Figure 41 Copper objects from Shikarpur (Courtesy: Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda)

Figure 42 Seals from Dholavira (Courtesy: Archaeological Survey of India)

- 136 -
 Rajesh S.V. Indus Archaeology in Gujarat

Figure 43 Sealings from Kanmer (after Kharakwal et al. 2012)

Figure 44 Rohri chert blades from Shikarpur (Courtesy: Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda)

- 137 -
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology

Figure 45 Stone weights from Dholavira (Courtesy: Archaeological Survey of India)

Figure 46 Terracotta triangular cakes from Dholavira (Courtesy: Archaeological Survey of India)

and Rojdi A) to 1600 BC (Vagad IB) (Rajesh 2011).
Classical Harappan
Classical Harappan sites are mainly concentrated in
the Kachchh region and represented by the excavated
settlements of Dholavira, Desalpur, Surkotada, Pa-
bumath, Kanmer, Juni Kuran, Shikarpur and Khiras-
ara, Lothal, Rangpur IIA, Nageswar and Bagasra in
Saurashtra, Nagwada and Zekhda in North Gujarat
and these sites have Classical Harappan features apart
from the artefacts of regional Chalcolithic cultures/
traditions (Bhan 1994: 79). Possehl (1992) called the
Classical Harappan settlements as Sindhi Harappan.
According to Sen (2009: 1), “the term 'Sindhi Hara-
ppan' used by Possehl, although originally meant to
refer characteristic cultural traits generally found asso-

- 138 -
 Rajesh S.V. Indus Archaeology in Gujarat
Figure 47 Sorath Harappan ceramics from Jaidak (after Sen 2009)
ciated with the urban sites of the Harappan culture in
the entire Indus valley, by default refers only to that of
the Sindh region because the word Sindh/Sindhi has
regional/ethnic connotations. The urban Harappan
features are found not only in the Indus valley proper
but also in the adjoining regions in the east, south and
west”. Many of the Classical Harappan sites in Gujarat
were associated with the manufacture of specialized
items of semi-precious stone, steatite, faience, shell
and copper (Sonawane 2000: 141). The size of the
sites varies from 60 hectares to less than 0.5 hectare.
A number of Classical Harappan settlements are
fortified and the bipartite division is also present in
some of them. Classical Harappan remains from the
sites of Gujarat include goblets, beakers, black slipped
jars (Figure 40), S-profile jar, copper tools (Figure 41),
architecture with standardized sun-dried/kiln-baked
bricks and dressed stone, seals with script and figures
and sealings (Figures 42 and 43), long parallel chert
- 139 -
blades of Rohri chert (Figure 44), stone weights (Fig-
ure 45), and terracotta triangular cakes (Figure 46)
(Sonawane 2000: 141). Based on absolute and relative
chronology, Classical Harappan sites can be dated
between 2600 - 1900 BC (Rajesh 2011).
Sorath Harappan
The regional manifestation of the Urban Harappan
phase in Saurashtra is popularly known as Sorath
Harappan period (Possehl and Herman 1990). Ra-
diocarbon dates from Rojdi A and B showed that all
the sites in Saurashtra having the pottery similar to
these two phases should be dated to the Urban Phase
Harappan and not to the Post-Urban Phase (Possehl
1992: 129). Ceramics and other tools associated with
the sites of Rojdi A and B type are quite different in
detail from those of the Urban-Phase Harappans in
Kachchh and Sindh. In the Sorath Harappan, the ves-
sel shapes were much alike the Harappans in the Sindh
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology

Figure 48 Sorath Harappan ceramics from Jaidak (after Sen 2009)

region. The classic black on red painting style is absent
in them. Though there are no seals and little writing,
there are weights and measures, etched carnelian beads
and copper implements of the Harappan type (Possehl
1992: 129). Apart from Saurashtra, Sorath Harappan
artefacts are recovered from sites in Kachchh and
North Gujarat. The average size of these settlements is
estimated to 5.3 hectares (Possehl 1980) and these set-
tlements are devoid of elaborate architecture showing
a proper plan and layout (Ajithprasad 2002: 85). Like
the Classical Harapan settlements, some of the Sorath
Harappan settlements are fortified and the bipartite
division is also present in some of them (Ajithprasad
2008a: 83). According to Ajithprasad (2008a), the

- 140 -
 Rajesh S.V. Indus Archaeology in Gujarat

Figure 49 Sorath Harappan ceramics from Jaidak (after Sen 2009)

thickness of Sorath Harappan fortification walls are
much lesser in comparison to the Classical Harappans
and curvilinear and polygonal structures seem to be
not the norm in Classical Urban Harappan sites. Till
the beginning of 1990s, Sorath Harappan sites were
considered as Late Harappan or Post-Urban Harap-
pan, and they were classified to Period IIB-C or III of
the Rangpur Sequence. Possehl divided the Rangpur
IIB sites as Sorath Harappan (Figures 47 - 49), the
Rangpur IIC as Late Sorath Harappan (Figures 50 -
52) and the Rangpur III as Lustrous Red Ware sites
(c.f. Varma and Menon 1999: 9; Possehl 1999). Based
on the absolute dates from Rojdi, the Sorath Harap-
pan can be placed between 2600 - 1700 BC. However,
the radiocarbon dates from Padri suggest an earlier
date of 3600 BC to the Sorath Harappan.
Prabhas Assemblage
Period II at Prabhas Patan was marked by a different
set of ceramics known as the Prabhas Ware and this

- 141 -
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology

Figure 50 Late Sorath Harappan ceramics from Jaidak (after Sen 2009)

was unearthed during the excavation in 1956 (Sub-
barao 1958; Nanavati et al. 1971; Dhavalikar and Pos-
sehl 1992).The characteristic features of the Prabhas
Ware is hemispherical bowls with slightly incurved
and bevelled rim (Figure 53) and medium size jars/
pots with an everted short rim, incipient neck, wide
shoulder and globular body (Ajithprasad 2002: 134).
It is made of fine clay and treated with a thin greenish
grey slip. It is decorated with faint violet or purple
pigments and the decorative patterns, generally ge-
ometric forms like horizontal and vertical lines, dots
and other forms were executed in horizontal panels or
registers at the rim or at the shoulder (Nanavati et al.
1971). This assemblage was associated with Black-and-
Red Ware, Sorath Harappan and Classical Harappan
pottery. Remains of stone structures, copper imple-

- 142 -
 Rajesh S.V. Indus Archaeology in Gujarat

Figure 51 Late Sorath Harappan ceramics from Jaidak (after Sen 2009)

- 143 -
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology

Figure 52 Late Sorath Harappan ceramics from Jaidak (after Sen 2009)

ments including a celt, steatite and faience beads, and
a carved stone seal bearing images of several stylized
deer indicate the Harappan influence (Ajithprasad
2002: 134). Prabhas pottery has a wide distribution
in Saurashtra, and it was reported from the sites like
Lothal, Rojdi, Amra and Lakhabaval. This assemblage
is dated between 2200 BC to 1700 BC (Dhavalikar
and Possehl 1992: 72).
Lustrous Red Ware
The Lustrous Res Ware ceramics are first reported dur-
ing the excavations at Rangpur (Dikshit 1950: 3-55;
Rao 1963). At this site, this ceramic type made its first
appearance in Period IIC in a limited quantity and Pe-
riod III is noted for its exuberance (Rao 1963). These
ceramics were later reported from many explored and
excavated sites in Saurashtra, Kachchh, North Gujarat
and South Gujarat. Generally, the fabric of Lustrous
Red Ware is coarse with the rare occurrence of a fine

- 144 -
 Rajesh S.V. Indus Archaeology in Gujarat

Figure 53 Prabhas Ware from Somnath (after Nanavati et al. 1971)

variety (Rao 1963). These ceramics are treated with
bright slip and are highly burnished, which results in a
very shiny surface. The colour of these ceramics ranges
from tan, orange, bright red and purple (Rissman and
Chitalwala 1990). The major shapes in this ceramics
are bowl, basin, dish, pot/jar and dish-on-stand (Fig-
ure 54). In many sites, it is associated with painted
Black-and-Red Ware and Coarse Red Ware (Bhan
1994: 82). Based on the absolute and relative chronol-
ogy, this ceramic group can be placed between 1900 -
1300 BC (Bhan 1994: 82; Sonawane 2002: 168).
Malwa Ware
Malwa culture was spread over a large part of central
India in general, and in Malwa, the western part of
Madhya Pradesh in particular (Ansari and Dhavalikar

- 145 -
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology

Figure 54 Lustrous Red Ware from Rangpur (after Rao 1963)

- 146 -
 Rajesh S.V. Indus Archaeology in Gujarat
Figure 55 Malwa Ware (after Agrawal and Kharakwal 2003)
1971: 345). More than hundred sites of this culture
were located in the valleys of Chambal, Narmada and
Betwa and its tributaries (Misra 2001: 515). Some
ceramics showing affinity to the Malwa culture are
unearthed from Jokha and Dhatva in South Gujarat
and these sites are relatively dated to the 15th - 10th
centuries BC. A few ceramics from Jokha showed
resemblance to the Malwa Ware reported from Nav-
datoli (Figure 55) (Mehta and Chaudhary 1971: 14).
At Jokha, Malwa Ware was associated with Jorwe
Ware, Painted Red Ware, Buff Ware, Black-and-
Red Ware and Painted Red Ware with black bands
on white background. At Dhatva, Malwa Ware was
associated with Post-Urban Harappan artifacts and
Black-and-Red Ware. A few sherds of the globular
pots having flaring rim, medium fabric, cream colour
and black painting were recovered from the site. The
designs were mainly bands and wavy lines (Mehta and
Chaudhary 1975: 29-31). Some of the sherds have
corrugations on their exterior (Mehta et al. 1975: 34).
At Dhatwa, Malwa Ware was associated with Black-
on-Red Ware and Black-and-Red Ware (Mehta and
Chaudhary 1975: 31). The radiocarbon dates from
- 147 -
Navdatoli suggest a period of 1700 - 1450 BC for the
duration of the Malwa culture.
Jorwe Ware
The Jorwe culture is represented at more than 200
sites from the Tapi valley in the north to the Bhima
valley in the south of western Maharashtra (Misra
2001: 517; Dhavalikar 1979: 251, 1984: 63-80). The
Jorwe culture is divided into two phases, the early Jor-
we (1500 - 1200 BC) and the late Jorwe (1200 - 900
BC) based on structures, subsistence economy and
materials used. As per Dhavalikar (1979: 251), the
Jorwe people had contacts with the Late Harappans
and the Lustrous Red Ware users of Gujarat. At Jokha,
Period I (circa 1500 - 1000 BC) was marked by the
occurrence of Jorwe Ware (Figure 56) (IAR 1966-67).
From Nagal, microlithic tools associated with Black-
and-Red Ware and small fragments of Ochrous Red
Ware similar to the ceramics from Jorwe were also
recovered (IAR 1961-62).
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology

Figure 56 Jorwe Ware (after Agrawal and Kharakwal 2003)

DATING IN GUJARAT two main categories, namely chronometric (radiocar-

Archaeologists working on the Harappan culture in
Gujarat make use of an array of dating techniques
similar to those used in other parts of the world. The
dating techniques used in Gujarat can be divided into
bon and thermo-luminescence dating) and relative
(contextual and typological/seriation). Chronometric
dates are available for the sites like Dholavira (Bisht
2000; IAR 1993-94), Surkotada ( Joshi 1990), Kan-
mer (Kharakwal et al. 2011, 2012), Loteshwar (Patel

- 148 -
 Rajesh S.V. Indus Archaeology in Gujarat
2008), Datrana (Garcia-Granero et al. 2017), Ratan-
pura (IAR 1984-85; Herman 1997), Nagwada (Hegde
et al. 1988; Hegde et al. 1990b; Possehl 1994b),
Langhnaj (Sankalia 1965), Bagasra (Sonawane et al.
2003; Chase 2007, 2010), Kuntasi (Dhavalikar et al.
1996), Jaidak (Sen 2009), Bet Dwarka (Gaur et al.
2005), Nageshwar (Hegde et al. 1990a), Somnath
(Dhavalikar and Possehl 1992), Padri (Shinde and
Kar 1992; Ajithprasad 2002), Rojdi (Possehl and
Raval 1989), Oriyo Timbo (Rissman and Chitalwala
1990), Babarkot (Possehl 1994a), Vagad (Sonawane
and Mehta 1985), Lothal (Rao 1979, 1985), Malvan
(Allchin et al. 1995), Bokhira (Gaur et al. 2006; Gaur
and Sundaresh 2013), Kaj (Farooqui et al. 2013),
Kanjetar (Farooqui et al. 2013), Khirsara (Nath 2012)
and Navinal (Rajesh et al. 2015).
Radiocarbon Dating
As other parts of the world, the radiocarbon dating is
the backbone of Gujarat's Chalcolithic archaeology
with a limited number of dated sites. Among them,
many dates have never been published, either by
excavators or by laboratories; hence it is difficult to
develop a full list. Sites like Loteshwar (Patel 2008;
Sonawane and Ajithprasad 1994; Bhan 1994), Rojdi
(Possehl and Raval 1989) and Kanmer (Kharakwal
et al. 2011, 2012) have comprehensive suites of dates
for individual stratigraphic sequences or for cultural
periods. However, many sites have only one or two ra-
diocarbon dates and it prevents the assessment of the
reliability of individual dates. As a result, it is difficult
to explain the occupational history of these sites au-
thentically. It also leads to unjustified assumptions of
continuity of equivalent site-use over many centuries
or millenniums (Bird and Frankel 1991). Calibration
of radiocarbon determinations is also ignored for
some sites of Gujarat. According to Agraval and Yada-
va (1995), the effect of calibration is important where
comparative rates of change are discussed and where
radiocarbon dates used in combination with other
- 149 -
radiometric techniques. As the Chalcolithic studies in
Gujarat become more problem-oriented in the recent
years, there is a growing tendency to collect a series of
samples from all occupational levels of every sites to
get more accurate dates.
Thermo-luminescence Dating
Though archaeologists of Gujarat normally operate
within the radiocarbon method as the chronometric
dating system; the thermo-luminescence (TL) dating
is also used in sites like Langhnaj, the Mesolithic site
having Chalcolithic affinity (Sankalia 1965; Clut-
ton-Brock 1965), Bet Dwarka (Gaur et al. 2005) and
Bokhira (Gaur et al. 2006; Gaur and Sundaresh 2013),
the Post-Urban Harappan sites. Almost all samples
from Bet Dwarka provided accurate results except one
sample which exhibited a TL fading factor of more
than 20 % and created doubt upon the reliability of
the final age computed (Gaur et al. 2005). Similarly,
Bokhira (Gaur et al. 2006) also provided unreliable
TL dates.
Relative Dates
The majority of the reported sites are dated using
the relative dating techniques. The Rangpur phase
sequence (Rao 1963), Rojdi phase sequence (Possehl
and Raval 1989) and phase sequences of sites like
Lothal (Rao 1979, 1985), Surkotada ( Joshi 1990),
Kuntasi (Dhavalikar et al. 1996), Amra (IAR 1955-
56), Lakhabawal (IAR 1955-56), Nageshwar (Hegde
et al. 1990a) and Somnath (Nanavati et al. 1971; Dha-
valikar and Possehl 1992) in the Gujarat and Sindh
regions are commonly used to fix the approximate
chronology of the occupation of sites. For instance,
the Pre-Urban Harappan Sindh-Type pottery known
as Burial pottery recovered from certain sites in Guja-
rat is comparable to those from the Pre-Urban Harap-
pan levels of the sites like Kot Diji (Khan 1965), Amri
(Casal 1964) and Balakot (Dales 1974) located in
modern Pakistan. The relatively dated sites altogether
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology

Figure 57 Probability plot of recalibrated radiocarbon dates from excavated sites in Gujarat

- 150 -
 Rajesh S.V. Indus Archaeology in Gujarat
represent three phases of Chalcolithic culture in Guja-
rat, i.e. the period covering the time-period from 3950
BC to 900 BC. Many of these excavated sites showed
evidences for the existence of a preceding Mesolithic
culture and succeeding periods like Early Historic,
Medieval and Modern, sometimes with a perceived
gap.
Contextual Dating
The excavation strategy determines the contents of as-
semblages and so inextricably links dating and expla-
nation (Frankel 1988). In many excavated sites in Gu-
jarat, site's sequences are divided into chronological
units with duration of thousands of years and it denies
the possibility of demonstrating significant variation
in site-use. In Gujarat, one major problem due to the
contextual dating is the poorly understood concept
of continuity of site use. In many sites in North Guja-
rat, the Chalcolithic culture follows the Mesolithic/
Microlithic culture without any visible break. In the
same way, the Urban Harappan period is followed by
the Post-Urban Harappan Phase without a significant
gap. Likewise, in many sites, sterile deposits of even 5
cm in thickness differentiate Mesolithic and Chalco-
lithic cultures and excavators put them in chronologi-
cal frameworks based on their convenience. As a result
of this, it is very difficult to determine the processes
which lead to the culmination of different culture(s).
Typological Dating/Seriation
In Gujarat, Chalcolithic artifacts can be classified into
generally accepted technological and morphological
types as many similarities can be identified in excavat-
ed and explored Chalcolithic assemblages. Based on
the archaeological data from Lothal, Rangpur, Som-
nath, Amra, Lakhabawal, Vadnagar, Ahar, Maheshwar,
Navdatoli and Nevasa, a provisional relative sequence
for protohistoric cultures of Western and Central In-
dia was suggested by Subbarao (1958). He also iden-
tified the differences between the Harappan artifacts
- 151 -
from the Sindh region and Saurashtra, and called the
Saurashtran Harappans as the Kathiawad Harappans
(Kathiawad Harappan, Late Kathiawad Harappan
and Post-Kathiawad Harappan). In the 1950s, most
of the excavated and explored artifacts from Gujarat
were typologically compared with those from the site
of Somnath/Prabhas Patan.
Rangpur Phase Sequence
On the basis of architecture, flooding layers and
seriation of ceramics and other finds from Rangpur,
Rao (1963) proposed a new relative dating technique
for Chalcolithic sites in Gujarat. The majority of
the Chalcolithic sites in Gujarat are relatively dated
based on these four-fold Rangpur phase sequence, i.e.
RGP IIA (Harappa Culture: 2000 - 1500 BC), RGP
IIB (Late Harappa Culture: 1500 - 1100 BC), RGP
IIC (Transitional Phase of Harappa Culture: 1100 -
1000 BC), and RGP III (Lustrous Red Ware Culture:
1000 - 800 BC) (Rao 1963). Through this sequence,
Rao established the presence of Harappan culture at
Rangpur which gradually evolved into a new region-
al culture characterized by the Lustrous Red Ware
(Rao 1963; Herman 1997). Though the Rao's dating
technique was criticised by many scholars (Possehl
1980; Allchin and Allchin 1982; Sankalia 1974; Mis-
ra 1965; Herman 1997), it still remains as the most
popular relative dating technique. According to Her-
man (1997), the Rao's investigations for the first time
provided the material evidence and framework of the
transformation of the Harappan Culture down to
the Post-Harappan times. Misra (1965) classified the
Chalcolithic sequence at Rangpur into two. Period
IIA, which incorporated Rangpur IIA and IIB, was
termed as Late Impoverished Harappan Settlement
and Period IIB which included Rangpur IIC and III
was termed as Lustrous Red Ware-related Post-Hara-
ppan Settlement. But this classification scheme was
not adopted by the scholars of Gujarat. Misra (1965)
pointed out that the Rangpur phase sequence is not
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology
completely vertical but also lateral; the sequence is
primarily based on architecture followed by flooding
layers and lastly on pottery and other finds; the ce-
ramics of RGP IIA and IIB does not reveal clear dif-
ferences in wares, shapes or decorations but have dif-
ferences with RGP IIC and RGP III in fabrics, shapes,
rim profiles and decorations; the Rao's proposition of
the existence of Mature Harappan lithic technology at
the site was based on a single blade fragment; and the
division between RGP IIC and RGP III are problem-
atic, though Lustrous Red Ware is ubiquitous in RGP
IIC, only period III is characterized as Lustrous Red
Ware cultural deposit. Sankalia (1974) considered
the pre-structural layers in trench RGP-3 in Rangpur
IIA with Micaceous Red Ware, Buff Ware and Coarse
Grey Ware as Period I: Pre-Harappan culture, the rest
of Rangpur IIA, IIB and IIC as Period II: Harappan
culture and Rangpur III as Period III: Post-Harappan
culture. But this classification scheme was also not
applied in the sites of Gujarat. Possehl (1980) called
Rangpur IIA as the Urban Harappan and IIB, IIC
and III as the Post-Urban Harappan.
Rojdi Phase Sequence
By the end of the 1980s, Possehl and Raval (1989)
classified the artifacts of Rojdi based on absolute dates
and ceramic seriation. The Rojdi phase sequence is the
second popular relative dating technique commonly
used to date the Sorath Harappan and Late Sorath
Harappan sites in Gujarat since 1990. The ceramics
sequence at Rojdi developed out of the systematic
analysis of pottery relied on the fabric, form, decora-
tion and statistical data of ceramics showed a change
in the Sorath Harappan ceramic tradition similar to
the one noticed at Rangpur (Possehl and Raval 1989;
Possehl and Herman 1990). The ceramics from vari-
ous occupation levels at Rojdi organized into three-
fold scheme namely Rojdi A, B and C can generally
be compared to Rangpur IIA, IIB and IIC. As per the
recalibrated radiocarbon dates, Rojdi A, Rojdi B and
- 152 -
Rojdi C are equitable to 2600 - 2200 BC, 2200 - 1900
BC and 1900 - 1600 BC respectively (Possehl and
Raval 1989; Possehl and Herman 1990).
The proposed phase sequences however were used
without much caution at times to interpret the cul-
tural periods of certain explored sites. For instance,
due to the similarities in the features of Pre-Urban
Harappan Padri Ware which was recovered from the
earliest levels of Padri and the Padri Ware affiliated
to Rangpur IIB and IIC which were recovered from
explorations of a few other sites were termed by the
explorers as Pre-Urban Harappan sites (Paul et al.
1997). Similarly, the sites belonging to regional Chal-
colithic cultures/traditions like Anarta Tradition
(based on Loteshwar/Nagwada), Padri Ware (based
on Padri), Pre-Prabhas and Prabhas Assemblage (based
on Somnath), Micaceous Red Ware (based on Lothal/
Rangpur/Vagad) and Pre-Urban Harppan Burial
Pottery (based on Santhli/Moti Pipli/Nagwada) are
dated. Ajithprasad (2004) proposed a chronological
sequence and stratigraphical structure for the Meso-
lithic and Chalcolithic assemblages of North Gujarat
based on the artifacts and absolute and relative dates
from important excavated sites in North Gujarat.
Though typological dating helps us to fit the material
assemblages of various sites into broader time frames,
it has a series of discrepancies. Chalcolithic research-
es in Gujarat brought to light the evidences for the
existence of various regional cultures or traditions
which survived for millennia without any directly
visible change in their material culture. If one follows
the typological dating system in these sites, errors of
thousands of years may occur. Similarly, the typologi-
cal dating presents serious problems in incorporating
the surface finds which make up the bulk of Gujarat's
archaeological record.
Chronological Sequences
Based on the archaeological data from excavated sites
 Rajesh S.V. Indus Archaeology in Gujarat
like Lothal (IAR 1954-55), Rangpur (IAR 1953-
54), Somnath (IAR 1955-56), Amra (IAR 1955-56),
Lakhabawal (IAR 1955-56) and Vadnagar (Subbarao
and Mehta 1955) and explored sites in Gujarat, Sub-
barao (1958) created the widely accepted cultural se-
quence of Gujarat covering the time-period from the
Palaeolithic to the Early Medieval. At the time of the
creation of the sequence, there were very limited exca-
vated sites in Gujarat (Nanavati 1962). Chronometric
dates for the sites were also absent.
Herman (1997) tried to chronologically arrange
various Chalcolithic sites reported and dated based
on the Rangpur phase sequence occurring in different
parts of Gujarat with the help of the cultural remains
from various excavated sites and the chronometric
dates. This study revealed that the Kachchh region
and the Saurasthra region have different time-frames
and paces of urbanization. Ajithprasad (2004) pro-
posed a chronological sequence and stratigraphical
structure for the Mesolithic and Chalcolithic assem-
blages of North Gujarat based on the artifacts and
chronometric and relative dates from five excavated
sites in North Gujarat. Harris (2011) proposed a
relative chronology of Gujarat based on the ceramic
distribution and chronometric and relative dates
from selected excavated sites in and outside Gujarat
(Loteshwar, Padri, Amri, Santhli, Datrana, Moti Pipli,
Nagwada, Prabhas Patan, Lothal, Rangpur, Surkota-
da, Ahar, Rojdi, Langhnaj, Zekhda, Ratanpura and
Kanewal). All chronological sequences proposed
for Gujarat were prepared using data from a limited
number of sites; hence, in the presence of new radio-
carbon dates and more excavated sites in the region,
a review of these sequences was necessary. Therefore,
Rajesh (2011) created the chronological sequence
and regional stratigraphy of Gujarat based on the re-
calibrated chronometric dates and relative dates from
all the excavated Chalcolithic sites in Gujarat. The
creation of new regional stratigraphy was based on the
assumption that the new chronological synopsis of all
- 153 -
excavated Chalcolithic/Chalcolithic-affiliated Meso-
lithic sites in Gujarat can help the researchers to test
the validity of earlier propositions of the presence of
cultural gaps and can also help to understand the cul-
tural changes that took place in different sub-regions
in Gujarat during various time-periods (Rajesh et al.
2012a, 2012b).
CHRONOLOGICAL SYNOPSIS
OF GUJARAT
From the data available from excavated sites, it is ap-
parent that the Chalcolithic cultures in Gujarat were
preceded by the Mesolithic culture. As per the AMS
dates from Loteshwar and Datrana, the beginning of
the Mesolithic period in Gujarat can be traced back
to the mid-8th millennium BC (Figure 57). The date
of the aceramic Mesolithic phase from Loteshwar is
earlier or contemporary with the aceramic Neolithic
levels of Mehrgarh and earlier than the Mesolithic
period of Bagor (Patel 2008). In Gujarat, like in many
other parts of the Indian subcontinent, the dates of
many Mesolithic/Microliths yielding sites continue
to the beginning of the Early Historic period. Thus, in
the similar fashion, a large number of Mesolithic sites
located in different parts of Gujarat are contemporary
with all the major transformations that took place in
the region including the origin, development and de-
cline of the first complex urban society (Patel 2008).
While considering all the Chalcolithic sites in
Gujarat, 26 revealed evidences for its existence during
the Pre-Urban Harappan period, 546 for the Urban
Harappan period and 429 during the Post-Urban
Harappan period. Among these, certain sites showed
cultural continuation from the Pre-Urban Harappan
to Post-Urban Harappan periods through the Urban
Harappan Period, while a few sites had any two of
them together. A few sites showed the existence of
Pre-Urban or Urban or Post-Urban Harappan periods
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology
only. In many of the excavated sites, the Chalcolithic
cultures/traditions were followed by cultures of the
Early Historic or Medieval periods with clear/pro-
posed gaps of certain time-periods in different sub-re-
gions. But in the explored sites, it is almost impossible
to know the presence of any cultural gap or continua-
tion of cultures.
The earliest dated Chalcolithic site in Gujarat is
Loteshwar (c. 3900 BC) in North Gujarat followed by
Padri (c. 3800 BC) in Saurashtra. The dates of a few
other sites in Kachchh, North Gujarat and Saurashtra
are also in the range of 3300 - 2600 BC. But none of
the Chalcolithic sites in the South Gujarat is dated
earlier than 2600 BC. A large number of sites from all
the sub-regions can be broadly dated between c. 2600
- 1900 BC (Urban Harappan period) and c. 1900 -
1600 BC (Post-Urban Harappan period). Lustrous
Red Ware sites occur in all sub-regions and they can
be dated between 1900 - 1250 BC. In South Gujarat,
the date of Post-Urban Harappan period represented
by Malwa Ware and Jorwe Ware goes even up to c.
1000 BC (Figure 57). These dates suggest that, even
after the extinction of Post-Urban Harappans in
Kachchh, North Gujarat and Saurashtra, it continued
in South Gujarat for almost 500 years.
CONCLUSION
The reasons for the initial preference of arid and
semi-arid North Gujarat instead of the fertile South
Gujarat by the Mesolithic and Chalcolithic com-
munities and the establishment of a large number
of settlements in the Saurashtra region in the Urban
Harappan period need proper understanding. The
presence of the Mesolithic remains prior to the Chal-
colithic occupation and its coexistence with the Chal-
colithic communities at many sites in North Gujarat
and Saurashtra probably indicates the evolution of the
Chalcolithic cultures/traditions from the Mesolithic
- 154 -
communities. South Gujarat and Kachchh does not
show the evolution of the Chalcolithic communities
from the Mesolithic people and suggests the possible
occupation of these areas by the Chalcolithic commu-
nities at a later date compared to North Gujarat and
Saurashtra. The reasons for occurrence of Chalcolithic
remains towards the end of second millennium BC
and the beginning of first millennium BC in South
Gujarat may be due to the cultural contacts of the
Chalcolithic communities of the sub-region with the
Deccan Chalcolithic people or the ecological pref-
erences of the people in relation with habitation and
economy.
In the beginning, the regional Chalcolithic cul-
tures/traditions that evolved from the Mesolithic
communities of Gujarat around c. 4000 BC probably
had an independent existence and had some contacts
with the Mesolithic/Microliths-using communities
within the nearby areas, although, the evidence for
these contacts are scanty. Similarly, the ceramic types
from Santhli (Majumdar 1999) and Mathutra (Ma-
jumdar 1999) suggest an evidence of an earlier contact
with the Sindh region (Pre-Urban Harappan). By c.
3000 BC, there are clear evidence for the contacts
between different regional cultures in Gujarat and
cultures of the Sindh region.
Towards the end of Pre-Urban Harappan Phase,
i.e. c. 2600 BC, the regional Chalcolithic Anarta
Tradition and the Padri Culture integrated into the
Classical Harappans whose predecessors started the
cultural contacts with the indigenous communities
of Gujarat by the end of the fourth millennium BC.
During this period, the material evidence for the
cultural contacts becomes clearer. The Pre-Prabhas
assemblage which existed in the Pre-Urban Harappan
Phase at Datrana-IV and Somnath did not continue
during the Urban Harappan phase and the reasons for
their decline is not clear. The Reserved Slip Ware and
Black-and-Red Ware technique continued during the
Urban Harappan Phase. The evidence for the integra-
 Rajesh S.V. Indus Archaeology in Gujarat
tion can be inferred from the data recovered from the
excavations at Loteshwar (Ajithprasad 2002, Yadav
2005), Bagasra (Sonawane et al. 2003; Bhan et al.
2004; Chase 2010), Shikarpur (Bhan and Ajithprasad
2009), Padri (Shinde 1998; Bhagat 2001; Shirvalkar
2008), and Nagwada (Hegde et al. 1988).
The Urban Harappan Period in Gujarat (2600
- 1900 BC) is noted for the continuation of old cul-
tures/traditions and the beginning of new cultures/
traditions/ wares. The first regional Chalcolithic
tradition/ceramic type emerged during this period
was the Micaceous Red Ware, whose quantities were
found to increase in the lower levels at Lothal (Rao
1979, 1985). It occurred along with Classical and Sor-
ath Harappan ceramics at Lothal (Rao 1979, 1985),
Rangpur (Rao 1963), Rojdi (Possehl and Rawal
1989), Vagad (Sonawane and Mehta 1985), Kanewal
(Mehta et al. 1980) and Desalpur (Soundara Rajan
1984). Another regional culture of this period is the
Sorath Harappan which is widely distributed all over
Gujarat. It can be divided into two phases, i.e. Sorath
Harappan and Late Sorath Harappan. The Sorath
Harappan ceramics were reported along with Padri
Ware at Pre-Urban Harappan levels (Shinde and Kar
1992; Bhagat 2001) but the evidence from the site are
doubtful to support its early origin. The middle of Ur-
ban Harappan period witnessed the origin of another
regional ceramic type known as Prabhas Ware. This
was also found along with Classical Harappan and
Sorath Harappan artefacts. The Chalcolithic cultures
of this period had some cultural contacts with the
Mesolithic population which existed during this peri-
od. This is indicated by the occurrence of Chalcolithic
artefacts like copper objects and ceramics at Langhnaj.
All the regional cultures/traditions of this period ex-
cept the Sorath Harappan are identified based on the
ceramics originated in the Saurashtra region and they
are found associated with other cultures/traditions.
Towards the end of Urban Harappan phase around
c. 2000/1900 BC, the Anarta Tradition underwent a
- 155 -
complete transformation due to which its identifiable
parameters changed and the reasons for the same are
not sure. Similarly the Reserved Slip Ware, which
originated in the Pre-Urban Harappan period also
came to an end. The Sorath Harappan also underwent
changes and continued in the next phase as the Late
Sorath Harappan. According to the excavator, the
Padri Ware became extinct at Padri by the end of the
Urban Harappan period and the site was deserted till
the Early Historic period (Shinde 1998; Shirvalkar
2008). But the reanalysis of ceramics from Padri by
the present researcher shows its continuation till the
Post-Urban Harappan period.
The Post-Urban Harappan period in Gujarat
(1900 - 1000 BC) is noted for the emergence of new
traditions and the extinction of certain Chalcolithic
traditions which existed in the earlier phases. The
Micaceous Red Ware which emerged during the be-
ginning of the Urban Harappan period continued up
to 1700/1600 BC (Herman and Krishnan 1994). The
Prabhas Ware which came into existence in 2200 BC
became extinct in 1700 BC. The Sorath Harappan
ceramics evolved into new shapes and were called as
Late Sorath Harappan (c. 1900 - 1700 BC). The new
ceramic type which emerged during this period is
the Lustrous Red Ware and it continued from 1900
BC to 1300 BC or a little later (Rao 1963; Rissman
and Chitalwala 1990). The Malwa Ware which was
common in the Deccan region also appeared at a very
few sites in the time-period between 1700 - 1500
BC (Mehta and Chaudhary 1975). The Jorwe Ware
also showed its presence at a very few sites in South
Gujarat and it is dated in between 1500 - 1000 BC
(Mehta and Chaudhary 1971). Black-and-Red Ware
which appeared in the beginning of Pre-Urban Hara-
ppan phase continued to the Early Historic period.
The shapes of the Black-and-Red Ware vessels varied
in different periods and the manufacturing technique
probably remained the same.
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology
Acknowledgements
Sincere acknowledgements are due to the University
of Kerala for its constant support. I would like to ac-
knowledge Dr. Akinori Uesugi, for his great support
and inspiration in various stages of preparation of this
paper. I am thankful to Prof. K. Krishnan, Prof. Ajith-
prasad and Prof. K.K. Bhan, Department of Archae-
ology and Ancient History, the Maharaja Sayajirao
University of Baroda for their help and support.
References
Agrawal, D.P. and J.S. Kharakwal. 2003. Bronze and Iron
Ages in South Asia (Archaeology of South Asia - II). Aryan
Books International, New Delhi.
Agrawal, D.P., J.S. Kharakwal, Y.S. Rawat, T. Osada and P.
Goyal. 2010. Redefining the Harappan Hinterland. An-
tiquity 84(323) Project Gallery: 1-2.
Agrawal, D.P. and S. Kusumgar. 1969. Tata Institute Radio-
carbon Date List 6. Radiocarbon 11: 191.
Agrawal, D.P. and M.G. Yadava. 1995. Dating the Human
Past. ISPQS Monograph Series no. 1. Indian Society for
Prehistoric and Quaternary Studies. Department of Ar-
chaeology. Deccan College, Pune.
Ajithprasad, P. 2002. "The Pre Harappan Cultures of Guja-
rat", in S. Setter and R. Korisetter eds. Indian Archaeology
in Retrospect, vol. II Protohistory - Archaeology of the Hara-
ppan Civilization. Manohar Publishers and distributors,
New Delhi. pp. 129-158.
Ajithprasad, P. 2004. "Holocene Adaptations of the Meso-
lithic and Chalcolithic Settlements in North Gujarat", in
Y. Yasuda and V. Shinde eds. Monsoon and Civilization.
Lustre Press, Roli Books, New Delhi. pp. 115-132.
Ajithprasad, P. 2008a. Cultural Patterns and the Early Hara-
ppan Interactions in Gujarat (abstract). Paper Presented
at the International Conference on Cultural Relations Be-
tween The Indus and the Iranian Plateau During the Third
Millennium BCE. Research Institute for Humanity and
Nature, Kyoto. pp. 37-42.
Ajithprasad, P. 2008b. "Jaidak (Pithad): a Sorath Harappan
site in Jamnagar district, Gujarat and its architectural fea-
tures", in T. Osada and A. Uesugi eds. Occasional Paper 4:
- 156 -
Linguistics, Archaeology and the Human Past. Indus Pro-
ject, Research Institute for Humanity and Nature, Kyoto.
pp. 83-99.
Ajithprasad, P. 2010. The Pre-Prabhas Pottery and the Early
Chalcolithic Cultural Developments in North Gujarat.
Paper presented at the Bhuj Round Table, International
Conference on Gujarat Harappans and Chalcolithic Cul-
tures. Research Institute for Humanity and Nature, Kyoto,
Gujarat State Department of Archaeology, Gandhina-
gar and Institute of Rajasthan Studies, JRN Rajasthan
Vidyapeeth, Udaipur.
Ajithprasad, P. and V.H. Sonawane 1993. Harappan Culture
in North Gujarat: A Regional Paradigm. Paper presented
at the Conference on Harappans in Gujarat: Problems and
Prospects. Deccan College, Pune.
Ajithprasad, P and V.H. Sonawane. 1994 (in press). "The
Harappan Culture in North Gujarat: A Regional Para-
digm", in G.L. Possehl and V. Shinde eds. Harappa Culture
and Gujarat.
Allchin, B. and F.R. Allchin 1982. The Rise of Civilization in
India and Pakistan. Cambridge University Press, Cam-
bridge.
Allchin, B. and F. R. Allchin 1997. Origins of a Civilization:
The Prehistory and Early Archaeology of India. Penguin
Books India, New Delhi.
Allchin, F.R. 1990. The End of the Harappan Phase and its
Aftermath. Ancient Ceylon 10: 25-40.
Allchin, F.R., J.P. Joshi, A.K. Sharma, K.R. Alur, J.P. Srivasta-
va, K.T. M. Hegde, V. Mittre and D. Shah 1995. Excava-
tions at Malvan. Memoirs of the Archaeological Survey of
India no. 92. Archaeological Survey of India, New Delhi.
Ansari, Z.D. and M.K. Dhavalikar 1971. New Light on the
Prehistoric Cultures of Central India. World Archaeology
2(3): 337-346.
Balbo, A.L., B. Rondelli, F.C. Conesa, C. Lancelotti, M.
Madella, and P. Ajithprasad 2013. Contributions of
geoarchaeology and remote sensing to the study of Hol-
ocene hunther-gatherer and agro-pastoral groups in arid
margins: the case of North Gujarat in Northwest India.
Quaternary International 308-309: 53-65.
Bedigian, D. 2004. History and Lore of Sesame in Southwest
Asia. Economic Botany 58 (3): 329-353.
Bhagat, S. 2001. A Study of the Harappan Pottery Tradition
 Rajesh S.V. Indus Archaeology in Gujarat
in Saurashtra (with Special Reference to Padri and Tarsara,
Bhavnagar District, Gujarat). Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis.
Department of Archaeology, Deccan College Post-Grad-
uate and Research Institute, Pune.
Bhan, K.K. 1983. Archaeology of Jamnagar District (Gujarat)
Upto 1300 AD. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis. Department of
Archaeology and Ancient History, the Maharaja Sayajirao
University of Baroda, Vadodara.
Bhan, K.K. 1986. Recent Exploration in the Jamnagar Dis-
trict of Saurashtra. Man and Environment X: 1-21.
Bhan, K.K. 1994. Cultural Development of the Prehistoric
period in North Gujarat with Reference to Western India.
South Asian Studies 10: 71-90.
Bhan, K.K. and P. Ajithprasad 2008. Excavations at Shi-
karpur 2007-2008: A Costal Port and Craft Production
Center of the Indus Civilization in Kutch, India. http://
www.harappa.com/goladhoro/:1-9.
Bhan, K.K. and P. Ajithprasad 2009. Excavations at Shikar-
pur, Gujarat 2008-2009. http://www.harappa.com/golad-
horo/:1-9.
Bhan, K.K. and J.M. Kenoyer 1984a. Nageshwar, an Industri-
al Centre of Chalcolithic Period. Purātattva 12: 115-120.
Bhan, K.K. and J.M. Kenoyer 1984b. Nageswara: A Mature
Harappan Shell Working Site on the Gulf of Kutch, Guja-
rat. Journal of the Oriental Institute XXXIV (1-2): 67-80.
Bhan, K.K., V.H. Sonawane, P. Ajithprasad and S. Prata-
pachandran 2004. Excavations of an Important Harap-
pan Trading and Craft Production Center at Gola Dhoro
(Bagasra) on the Gulf of Kutch, Gujarat, India. Journal of
Interdisciplinary Studies in History and Archaeology 1(2):
153-158.
Bhattacharya, B. 1981. Animal Remains from Zekhada. Un-
published M.A. Dissertation. Department of Archaeology
and Ancient History, the Maharaja Sayajirao University of
Baroda. Vadodara.
Bhattacharya, R. 1991. Rangpur Seal-Probable Egyptian
Connection of the Harappan Civilization. Man and Envi-
ronment XV (1): 53-57.
Bindra S.C. 2003. Lothal: A Harappan port town revisited.
Purātattva 33: 1-22.
Bird, C.F.M. and D. Frankel 1991. Problems in Constructing
a Prehistoric Regional Sequence: Holocene Southeast
Australia. World Archaeology 23 (2): 179-192.
- 157 -
Bisht R.S. 1989a. "A New Model of the Harappan Town
Planning as Revealed at Dholavira in Kutch: A Surface
Study of its Plan and Architecture", in Bhaskar Chatterjee
ed. History and Archaeology (Prof. Sankalia Felicitation
Volume). Ramanand Vidya Bhawan, New Delhi. pp. 397-
408.
Bisht, R.S. 1989b. The Harappan Colonisation of Kutch: An
ergonomic Study with Reference to Dholavira and Surko-
tada. Krishna Deva and Lallanji Gopal eds. History and
Art. Ramanand Vidya Bhawan, Delhi. pp. 265-272.
Bisht, R.S. 1991. Dholavira: A New horizon of the Indus
Civilization. Purātattva 20: 71-82.
Bisht, R.S. 1994. Urban Planning at Dholavira: A Harappan
City. Seminar on the City and the Stars: Cosmic Urban Ge-
ometrics of India. Indira Gandhi National Centre for the
Arts, New Delhi.
Bisht, R.S. 1997. "Dholavira Excavations: 1990-94", in J.P.
Joshi, D.K. Sinha, S.C. Saran, C.B. Mishra and G.S. Gaur
eds. Facets of Indian Civilization - Recent perspectives -
(Essays in Honour of Prof. B. B. Lal), vol. I (Prehistory and
Rock-Art, Proto History). Aryan Books International, New
Delhi. pp. 107-120.
Bisht, R.S. 1998-99. Dholavira and Banawali: Two different
Paradigms of the Urbis Forma. Purātattva 29: 14-37.
Bisht, R.S. 2000. "Urban Planning at Dholavira: A Harappan
City", in J.M. Malville and L.M. Gujral eds. Ancient Cit-
ies, Sacred Skies: Cosmic Geometrics and City Planning in
Ancient India. Aryan Books International, New Delhi. pp.
11-23.
Bisht, R.S. 2004. "Dholavira and Kachchh in Integrated
Tourism Development", in A. Maira ed. Heritage Tour-
ism-Exploring the Future (Seminar on Heritage Tourism).
Government of Gujarat, Gandhinagar. pp. 35-48.
Bisht, R.S. 2006. "Harappans and the Rigveda", in D.P. Shar-
ma and M. Sharma eds. Early Harappan and Indus-Sar-
asvati Civilization, vol. II. Kaveri Books, New Delhi. pp.
283-338.
Bisht, R.S. 2010. "Does Dholavira Sheds New Light on the
Antiquity of the Buddhist Stupa Architecture?", in I.A.
Khan, R. Barret and R. Trivedi eds. Abstracts - Interna-
tional Seminar on Buddhist Heritage, Gujarat ( January
15-17, 2010). The Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda
and Government of Gujarat, Vadodara. pp. 75-76.
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology
Bökönyi, S. 1997. Horse Remains from the Prehistoric Site of
Surkotada, Kutch, Late 3rd Millennium B. C. South Asian
Studies 17: 297-307.
Brahmbhatt, R.M. 2000. Morphological Analysis of Flakes
Artifacts from Loteshwar, North Gujarat: A Preliminary
Study. Unpublished M.A. Dissertation. Department of
Archaeology and Ancient History, the Maharaja Sayajirao
University of Baroda. Vadodara.
Casal, J.M. 1964. Fresh Digging at Amri. Pakistan Archaeolo-
gy 1: 57-65.
Chase, B.A. 2007. Meat Provisioning and the Integration of
the Indus Civilization: A Perspective from Gujarat (India).
Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis. University of Wisconsin,
Madison.
Chase, B.A. 2010. Social Change at the Harappan Settlement
of Gola Dhoro: A Reading from Animal Bones. Antiquity
84: 528-543.
Chase, B., P. Ajithprasad, S.V. Rajesh, Ambika Patel and Bha-
nu Sharma 2014. Materializing Harappan Identities:
Unity and Diversity in the Borderlands of the Indus Civi-
lization. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 35: 63-78.
Chase, B., D. Meiggs, P. Ajithprasad and P.A. Slater 2014.
Pastoral Land-use of the Indus Civilization in Gujarat:
Faunal Analyses and Biogenic Isotopes at Bagasra. Journal
of Archaeological Science 50: 1-15.
Chatterjee, D. 1995. Harappan Culture and the Ceramic
Assemblage of Zekhda. Unpublished M. A. Dissertation.
Department of Archaeology and Ancient History, the
Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda, Vadodara.
Chitalwala, Y.M. 1979. "Harappan and Post-Harappan Set-
tlement Patterns in the Rajkot District of Saurashtra", in
D.P. Agrawal and D.K. Chakarabarti eds. Essays in Indian
Protohistory. B.R. Publishing Corporation, New Delhi.
pp. 113-121.
Chitalwala, Y.M. and P.K. Thomas 1978. Faunal Remains
from Khanpur and Their Bearing on the Culture, Econo-
my, and Environment. Bulletin of Deccan College Research
Institute 37: 11-14.
Clutton-Brock, J. 1965. Excavations at Langhnaj: 1944-63
(Part II) - The Fauna. Deccan College Postgraduate and
Research Institute, Poona.
Conesa, F.C., N. Devanthery, A.L. Balbo, M. Madella and O.
Monserrat 2014. Use of Satellite SAR for Understanding
- 158 -
Long-Term Human Occupation Dynamics in the Mon-
soonal Semi-Arid Plains of North Gujarat, India. Remote
Sensing 6: 11420-11443.
Conesa, F.C., A. Lobo, J. Alcaina, A. Balbo, M. Madella, S.V.
Rajesh and P. Ajithprasad 2017. Multi-proxy survey of
open-air surface scatters in drylands: Archaeological and
physico-chemical characterisation of fossilised dunes in
North Gujarat (India). Quaternary International 436: 57-
75.
Conesa, F.C., M. Madella, N. Galiat Satos, A. Balbo, S.V. Ra-
jesh and P. Ajithprasad 2015. CORONA Photographs in
Monsoonal Semiarid Environments: Addressing Archae-
ological Surveys and Historic Landscape Dynamics over
North Gujarat, India. Archaeological Prospection 22(2):
75-90.
Dales, G.F. 1974. Excavations at Balakot, Pakistan 1973. Jour-
nal of Field Archaeology 1: 3-22.
Dey, S.K. 2003. Black and Red Ware: A Metrical Analysis of
Two Different Cultures (Chalcolithic Culture and Mega-
lithic Culture of India). Anthropologist 5 (2): 131-136.
Dhavalikar, M.K. 1979. "Early Farming Cultures of Central
India", in D.P. Agrawal and D.K. Chakravarti eds. Essays in
Indian Protohistory. B.R. Publishing Corporation, Delhi.
pp. 229-245.
Dhavalikar, M.K. 1984. "Sub-Indus Cultures of Central and
Western India", in B.B. Lal and S.P. Gupta eds. Frontiers of
the Indus Civilization. Books and Books, Delhi. pp. 243-
251.
Dhavalikar, M.K. 1992. "Kuntasi: A Harappan Port in West-
ern India", in C. Jarriage ed. South Asian Arachaeology
1989. Prehistory Press, Madison. pp. 73-82.
Dhavalikar, M.K. 1994. Cultural Imperialism (Indus Civili-
zation in Western India). Books and Books: New Delhi.
Dhavalikar, M.K. and G.L. Possehl 1992. The Pre-Harappan
Period at Prabhas Patan and the Pre-Harappan Phase in
Gujarat. Man and Environment XVII (1): 72-78.
Dhavalikar, M.K., M.R. Raval and Y.M. Chitalwala 1996.
Kuntasi: A Harappan Emporium on West Coast. Deccan
College Post Graduate and Research Institute, Pune.
Dikshit, M.G. 1950. Excavations at Rangpur: 1947. Bulletin
of the Deccan College Post-Graduate and Research Institute
XI (1): 3-55.
Dimri, K. 1994. Ceramic Variability at Vagad with Special
 Rajesh S.V. Indus Archaeology in Gujarat
Emphasis to Micaceous Red Ware - A Petrographic Ap-
proach. Unpublished M. A. Dissertation, Department of
Archaeology and Ancient History, the Maharaja Sayajirao
University of Baroda. Vadodara.
Dimri, K. 1998-1999. Assessing the Distribution of Harap-
pan Culture in North-Eastern Saurashtra: A Preliminary
Report. Prāgdharā 9: 27-44.
Dimri, K. 1999. Chalcolithic Settlements in Bhogava and
Sukha Bhadar Valley. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis. Depart-
ment of Archaeology and Ancient History, the Maharaja
Sayajirao University of Baroda, Vadodara.
Dimri, K. 2005. "Mature Harappan Transitional Phase Set-
tlements in Central Saurashtra Region", in G. Patel and B.
Shelat eds. Rasik Bharati- Prof. R.C. Parikh Commemora-
tion Volume. Sanskrit Sahitya Academy, Gandhinagar. pp.
377-386.
Dwivedi, M. 2009. Lithic Implements from Jaidak (Pithad).
Unpublished M.A. Dissertation. Department of Archae-
ology and Ancient History, the Maharaja Sayajirao Uni-
versity of Baroda, Vadodara.
Ehrhardt, S. and K.A.R. Kennedy 1965. Excavations at
Langhnaj: 1944-63 (Part II) The Human Remains. Deccan
College Postgraduate and Research Institute, Poona.
Fairservis, Jr. W.A. 1991. G. L. Possehl’s and M. H. Raval’s
Harappan Civilization and Rojdi. Journal of the American
Oriental Society 111(1): 108-113.
Farooqui, A., A.S. Gaur and V. Prasad 2013. Climate, Vegeta-
tion and Ecology during Harappan Period: Excavations at
Kanjetar and Kaj, Mid- Saurashtra Coast, Gujarat. Journal
of Archaeological Science 40 (6): 2631-2647.
Frankel, D. 1988. Characterising Change in Prehistoric Se-
quences: a View from Australia. Archaeology in Oceania
23: 41-48.
Frenez, D. and M. Tosi 2010. The “Lothal Revisitation Pro-
ject”. A Multidisciplinary Research Program Designed to
Reconsider the South-easternmost Hub of the Indus Civ-
ilization on the Arabian Sea. Paper presented at the Bhuj
Round Table, International Conference on Gujarat Hara-
ppans and Chalcolithic Cultures. Research Institute for
Humanity and Nature, Kyoto, Gujarat State Department
of Archaeology, Gandhinagar and Institute of Rajastha
Studies, JRN Rajasthan Vidyapeeth, Udaipur. Bhuj.
García-Granero, J.J., C. Gadekar, I. Esteban, C. Lancelotti, M.
- 159 -
Madella,, and P. Ajithprasad 2017. What is on the Crafts-
men’s Menu? Plant Consumption at Datrana, a 5000 Year
Old Lithic Blade Workshop in North Gujarat, India. Ar-
chaeological and Anthropological Sciences 9: 251-263.
Gaur, A.S. And Sundaresh. 2003. Onshore Excavation at Bet
Dwarka Island, in the Gulf of Kachchh, Gujarat. Man and
Environment XXVIII (1): 57-66.
Gaur, A. S. and Sundaresh 2013. Maritime Archaeology
Around Porbandar - A Report on the Excavations at Bokh-
ira and Underwater Archaeological Explorations around
Porbandar. Aryan Books International and CSIR, Na-
tional Institute of Oceanography, New Delhi and Goa.
Gaur, A.S., Sundaresh and P.P. Joglekar 2006. Excavations at
Bokhira (Porbandar) on the Saurashtra Coast. Man and
Environment XXXI (1): 33-39.
Gaur, A. S., Sundaresh and K.H. Vora 2005. Archaeology of
Bet Dwarka Island An Excavation Report. Aryan Books
International and National Institute of Oceanography,
New Delhi and Goa.
Ghurye, G.S. 1939. Two Old Sites in Kathiawar. Jounral of
the University of Bombay VIII (1): 3-12.
Harris, S. 2011. Mobility and Variation in Chalcolithic North
Gujarat, India (ca 3600 –1800 BC). Unpublished Ph.D.
Thesis (Publicly accessible Penn Dissertations. Paper 359.
http://repository.upenn.edu/ edissertations/ 359). Uni-
versity of Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania.
Hegde, K.T.M., K.K. Bhan and V.H. Sonawane 1985. Exca-
vations at Nageswar-1984. Journal of the Maharaja Saya-
jirao university of Baroda (Humanities) XXXIII-XXXIV
(1): 3-20.
Hegde, K.T.M, K.K. Bhan, V.H. Sonawane, K. Krishnan and
D.R. Shah 1990a. Excavation at Nageshwar Gujarat A
Harappan Shell Working Site on the Gulf of Kutch. Ma-
haraja Sayajirao University Archaeology Series No. 18.
Department of Archaeology and Ancient History, The
Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda, Vadodara.
Hegde, K.T.M., V.H. Sonawane, K.K. Bhan, P. Ajithprasad
and K. Krishnan 1990b. Excavation at Nagwada - 1987-
88 A Preliminary Report. Adaptation and Other Essays:
Proceedings of the Annual Conference of IAS, ISPQS and
IHCS -1988 (Research Publications VI). Visva-Bharati,
Santiniketan. pp. 191-195.
Hegde, K.T.M and V.H. Sonawane 1986. Landscape and
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology
Settlement pattern of Harappan Culture Villages in the
Rupen Estuary. Man and Environment X, pp. 23-31.
Hegde, K.T.M., V.H. Sonawane, D.R. Shah, K.K. Bhan, P.
Ajithprasad, K. Krishnan and S. Pratapchandran 1988.
Excavation at Nagwada 1986 and 87: A preliminary Re-
port. Man and Environment XII: 55-65.
Heras, S.J.H. 1938. A Proto-Indian Sign from Vala. The
Quarterly Journal of the Mythic Society XXVIII (3): 141-
143.
Herman, C.F. 1995. "The Rangpur Sequence of “Harappan”
Gujarat (India): A Re-assessment", in R. Allchin and B.
Allchin eds. South Asian Archaeology 1995, vol I. Science
Publishers, Inc. USA and Oxford and IBH Publishing Co.
Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi, Calcutta. pp. 187-198.
Herman, C.F. 1997. "Harappan" Gujarat: The Archaeology -
Chronology Connection. Paléorient 22(2): 77-112.
Herman, C.F. and K. Krishnan 1994. "Micaceous Red Ware:
A Gujarat Proto-Historic Cultural Complex or just Ce-
ramic?", in A. Parpola and P. Koskikallio eds. South Asian
Archaeology 1993, vol. I. Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia,
Helsinki. pp. 225-43.
IAR 1953-54. A. Ghosh ed. 1954. Indian Archaeology - A Re-
view 1953-54. Archaeological Survey of India, New Delhi.
IAR 1954-55. A. Ghosh ed. 1955. Indian Archaeology - A
Review 1954-55. Archaeological Survey of India, New
Delhi.
IAR 1955-56. A. Ghosh ed. 1956. Indian Archaeology - A
Review 1955-56. Archaeological Survey of India, New
Delhi.
IAR 1956-57. A. Ghosh ed. 1957. Indian Archaeology - A
Review 1956-57. Archaeological Survey of India, New
Delhi.
IAR 1957-58. A. Ghosh ed. 1958. Indian Archaeology - A
Review 1957-58. Archaeological Survey of India, New
Delhi.
IAR 1958-59. A. Ghosh ed. 1959. Indian Archaeology - A
Review 1958-59. Archaeological Survey of India, New
Delhi.
IAR 1959-60. A. Ghosh ed. 1960. Indian Archaeology - A
Review 1959-60. Archaeological Survey of India, New
Delhi.
IAR 1960-61. A. Ghosh ed. 1961. Indian Archaeology - A
Review 1960-61. Archaeological Survey of India, New
- 160 -
Delhi.
IAR 1961-62. A. Ghosh ed. 1964. Indian Archaeology - A
Review 1961-62. Archaeological Survey of India, New
Delhi.
IAR 1962-63. A. Ghosh ed. 1965. Indian Archaeology - A
Review 1962-63. Archaeological Survey of India, New
Delhi.
IAR 1963-64. A. Ghosh ed. 1967. Indian Archaeology - A
Review 1963-64. Archaeological Survey of India, New
Delhi.
IAR 1964-65. A. Ghosh ed. 1969. Indian Archaeology - A
Review 1964-65. Archaeological Survey of India, New
Delhi.
IAR 1965-66. A. Ghosh ed. 1973. Indian Archaeology - A
Review 1965-66. Archaeological Survey of India, New
Delhi.
IAR 1966-67. M.N. Deshpande ed. 1975. Indian Archaeol-
ogy - A Review 1966-67. Archaeological Survey of India,
New Delhi.
IAR 1967-68. B.B. Lal ed. 1968. Indian Archaeology - A Re-
view 1967-68. Archaeological Survey of India, New Delhi.
IAR 1968-69. B.B. Lal ed. 1971. Indian Archaeology - A Re-
view 1968-69. Archaeological Survey of India, New Delhi.
IAR 1969-70. B.B. Lal ed. 1973. Indian Archaeology - A Re-
view 1969-70. Archaeological Survey of India, New Delhi.
IAR 1970-71. M.N. Deshpande ed. 1974. Indian Archaeol-
ogy - A Review 1970-71. Archaeological Survey of India,
New Delhi.
IAR 1971-72. M.N. Deshpande ed. 1975. Indian Archaeol-
ogy - A Review 1971-72. Archaeological Survey of India,
New Delhi.
IAR 1972-73. M.N. Deshpande ed. 1978. Indian Archaeol-
ogy - A Review 1972-73. Archaeological Survey of India,
New Delhi.
IAR 1973-74. B.K. Thapar ed. 1979. Indian Archaeology -
A Review 1973-74. Archaeological Survey of India, New
Delhi.
IAR 1974-75. B.K. Thapar ed. 1979. Indian Archaeology -
A Review 1974-75. Archaeological Survey of India, New
Delhi.
IAR 1975-76. B.K. Thapar ed. 1979. Indian Archaeology -
A Review 1975-76. Archaeological Survey of India, New
Delhi.
 Rajesh S.V. Indus Archaeology in Gujarat
IAR 1976-77. B.K. Thapar ed. 1980. Indian Archaeology -
A Review 1976-77. Archaeological Survey of India, New
Delhi.
IAR 1977-78. B.K. Thapar ed. 1980. Indian Archaeology -
A Review 1977-78. Archaeological Survey of India, New
Delhi.
IAR 1978-79. B.K. Thapar ed. 1981. Indian Archaeology -
A Review 1978-79. Archaeological Survey of India, New
Delhi.
IAR 1979-80. D. Mitra ed. 1983. Indian Archaeology - A Re-
view 1979-80. Archaeological Survey of India, New Delhi.
IAR 1980-81. D. Mitra ed. 1983. Indian Archaeology - A Re-
view 1980-81. Archaeological Survey of India, New Delhi.
IAR 1981-82. D. Mitra ed. 1984. Indian Archaeology - A Re-
view 1981-82. Archaeological Survey of India, New Delhi.
IAR 1982-83. M.S.N. Rao ed. 1985. Indian Archaeology -
A Review 1982-83. Archaeological Survey of India, New
Delhi.
IAR 1983-84. M.S.N. Rao ed. 1986. Indian Archaeology -
A Review 1983-84. Archaeological Survey of India, New
Delhi.
IAR 1984-85. R.C. Tripathi ed. 1987. Indian Archaeology -
A Review 1984-85. Archaeological Survey of India, New
Delhi.
IAR 1985-86. J.P. Joshi ed. 1990. Indian Archaeology - A Re-
view 1985-86. Archaeological Survey of India, New Delhi.
IAR 1986-87. M.C. Joshi ed. 1992. Indian Archaeology - A
Review 1986-87. Archaeological Survey of India, New
Delhi.
IAR 1987-88. M.C. Joshi ed. 1993. Indian Archaeology - A
Review 1987-88. Archaeological Survey of India, New
Delhi.
IAR 1988-89. M.C. Joshi ed. 1993. Indian Archaeology - A
Review 1988-89. Archaeological Survey of India, New
Delhi.
IAR 1989-90. S.K. Mahapatra ed. 1994. Indian Archaeology
- A Review 1989-90. Archaeological Survey of India, New
Delhi.
IAR 1990-91. S.K. Mahapatra ed. 1995. Indian Archaeology
- A Review 1990-91. Archaeological Survey of India, New
Delhi.
IAR 1991-92. B.P. Singh ed. 1996. Indian Archaeology - A
Review 1991-92. Archaeological Survey of India, New
- 161 -
Delhi.
IAR 1992-93. A. Shankar ed. 1997. Indian Archaeology -
A Review 1992-93. Archaeological Survey of India, New
Delhi.
IAR 1993-94. R.S. Bisht, C. Dorje and A. Banerji ed. 2000.
Indian Archaeology - A Review 1993-94. Archaeological
Survey of India, New Delhi.
IAR 1994-95. H. Manjhi, C. Dorje and A. Banerji ed. 2000.
Indian Archaeology - A Review 1994-95. Archaeological
Survey of India, New Delhi.
IAR 1995-96. K.G. Menon ed. 2002. Indian Archaeology -
A Review 1995-96. Archaeological Survey of India, New
Delhi.
IAR 1996-97. K.G. Menon ed. 2002. Indian Archaeology -
A Review 1996-97. Archaeological Survey of India, New
Delhi.
IAR 1997-98. K.G. Menon ed. 2003. Indian Archaeology -
A Review 1997-98. Archaeological Survey of India, New
Delhi.
IAR 1998-99. R.C. Misra ed. 2004. Indian Archaeology - A
Review 1998-99. Archaeological Survey of India, New
Delhi.
IAR 1999-00. C.B. Rajeev ed. 2005. Indian Archaeology -
A Review 1999-00. Archaeological Survey of India, New
Delhi.
IAR 2000-01. C.B. Rajeev ed. 2006. Indian Archaeology -
A Review 2000-01. Archaeological Survey of India, New
Delhi.
IAR 2001-02. C.B. Rajeev ed. 2008. Indian Archaeology -
A Review 2001-02. Archaeological Survey of India, New
Delhi.
IAR 2002-03. K.N. Srivastava ed. 2009. Indian Archaeology
- A Review 2002-03. Archaeological Survey of India, New
Delhi.
IAR 2003-04. G. Sengupta ed. 2011. Indian Archaeology -
A Review 2003-04. Archaeological Survey of India, New
Delhi.
IAR 2004-05. R. Tewari ed. 2014. Indian Archaeology - A
Review 2004-05. Archaeological Survey of India, New
Delhi.
IAR 2005-06. R. Tewari ed. 2016. Indian Archaeology - A
Review 2005-06. Archaeological Survey of India, New
Delhi.
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology
IAR 2006-07. R. Tewari ed. 2016. Indian Archaeology - A
Review 2006-07. Archaeological Survey of India, New
Delhi.
IAR 2007-08. R. Tewari ed. 2016. Indian Archaeology - A
Review 2007-08. Archaeological Survey of India, New
Delhi.
IAR 2008-09. R. Tewari ed. 2015. Indian Archaeology - A
Review 2008-09. Archaeological Survey of India, New
Delhi.
IAR 2009-10. R. Tewari ed. 2016. Indian Archaeology - A
Review 2009-10. Archaeological Survey of India, New
Delhi.
IAR 2010-11. R. Tewari ed. 2016. Indian Archaeology - A Re-
view 2010-11. Archaeological Survey of India, New Delhi.
IAR 2011-12. R. Tewari ed. 2016. Indian Archaeology - A Re-
view 2011-12. Archaeological Survey of India, New Delhi.
IAR 2012-13. R. Tewari ed. 2015. Indian Archaeology - A
Review 2012-13. Archaeological Survey of India, New
Delhi.
IAR 2013-14. R. Tewari ed. 2016. Indian Archaeology - A
Review 2013-14. Archaeological Survey of India, New
Delhi.
Jairath, V.K. 1986. Archaeolog y of the Northern Part of
Bhavnagar District, Gujarat State upto C. 15th Century
AD. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis. Department of Archaeol-
ogy and Ancient History, the Maharaja Sayajirao Univer-
sity of Baroda, Vadodara.
Jam, S. 2010. Fortification of Excavated Harappan Sites in
Gujarat. Unpublished M.A. Dissertation. Department of
Archaeology and Ancient History, the Maharaja Sayajirao
University of Baroda, Vadodara.
Joglekar, P.P. 1996-97. Faunal Remains from Padri: Second
Preliminary Report. Bulletin of the Deccan College 56-57:
55-68.
Joshi, J.P. 1966. Exploration in Northern Kutch. Journal of
Oriental Institute 16 (1) : pp. 62-69.
Joshi, J.P. 1972a. "Fresh Light on the archaeology of Kutch",
in S.B. Deo ed. Archaeological Congress and Seminar Pa-
pers. Nagpur University, Nagpur. pp. 21-35.
Joshi, J.P. 1972b. Exploration in Kutch and Excavation at
Surkotada and New Light on Harappan Migration. Jour-
nal of Oriental Institute 22(1-2): pp. 98-144.
Joshi, J.P. 1979. "The Nature of Settlement at Surkotada", in
- 162 -
D. P. Agrawal and D. K. Chakrabarti eds. Essays in Indian
Proto History. B.R. Publishing Corporation, Delhi. (Pub-
lished on behalf of the Indian Society for Prehistoric and
Quaternary Studies). pp. 59-64.
Joshi, J.P. 1984. Harappa Culture: Emergence of a New Pic-
ture. Purātattva 13-14: 51-54.
Joshi, J.P. 1990. Excavations at Surkotada 1971-72 and Explo-
ration in Kutch. Memoirs of the Archaeological Survey of
India no. 87. Archaeological Survey of India, New Delhi.
Karve-Corvinus, G. and K.A.R. Kennedy 1963-64. Prelim-
inary Report on Langhnaj. Bulletin of Deccan College Re-
search Institute XXXIV: 44-57.
Khan, F.A. 1965. Excavations at Kot Diji. Pakistan Archaeolo-
gy 2: 11-85.
Kharakwal, J.S., Y.S. Rawat and T. Osada 2005. "Harappan
Sites in Kachchh and New Opportunities of Tourism",
in A. Maira ed. Heritage Tourism Exploring the Future
(Seminar on Heritage Tourism). Government of Gujarat,
Gandhinagar. pp. 115-123.
Kharakwal, J.S., Y.S. Rawat and T. Osada 2007. "Preliminary
Observations on the Excavation at Kanmer, Kachchh,
India 2006-2007", in T. Osada ed. Occasional Paper 2:
Linguistics, Archaeology and the Human Past. Research
Institute for Humanity and Nature, Kyoto. pp. 21-46.
Kharakwal, J.S., Y.S. Rawat and T. Osada 2008. "Preliminary
Observations on the Excavation at Kanmer, Kachchh, In-
dia 2006-2007", in T. Osada and A. Uesugi eds. Occasional
Paper 5: Linguistics, Archaeology and the Human Past.
Research Institute for Humanity and Nature, Kyoto. pp.
5-23.
Kharakwal, J.S., Y.S. Rawat and T. Osada 2009. Excava-
tions at Kanmer: A Harappan Site in Kachchh, Gujarat.
Purātattva 39: 147-164.
Kharakwal, J.S., Y.S. Rawat and T. Osada 2011. "Annual Re-
port of Excavation at Kanmer: 2007-08 and 2008-09", in T.
Osada and A. Uesugi eds. Occasional Paper 10: Linguistics,
Archaeology and the Human Past. Research Institute for
Humanity and Nature, Kyoto. pp. 71-104.
Kharakwal, J.S., Y.S. Rawat and T. Osada eds. 2012. Excava-
tion at Kanmer 2005-06 – 2008-09, Kanmer Archaeological
Research Project – An Indo-Japanese Collaboration. Re-
search Institute for Humanity and Nature, Kyoto/Gujarat
State Department of Archaeology, Gandhinagar/Institute
 Rajesh S.V. Indus Archaeology in Gujarat
of Rajasthan Studies, JRN Rajasthan Vidyapeeth, Udai-
pur.
Krishnan, K. 1986. Chemical and Petrological Studies in An-
cient Indian Pottery. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis. Depart-
ment of Archaeology and Ancient History, the Maharaja
Sayajirao University of Baroda, Vadodara.
Krishnan, K. and K. Dimri. 2005. "Exploration in the Lilka
River-basin in Saurashtra, Gujarat: A Preliminary Report",
in K.K. Chakravarty and G.L. Badam eds. River Valley
Cultures of India. Indira Gandhi Rashtriya Manav Sangra-
halaya and Aryan Books International, Bhopal and New
Delhi. pp. 199-204.
Krishnan, K., I.C. Freestone and A.C. Middleton. 2005. The
Technology of 'Glazed' Reserved Slip Ware - A Fine Ce-
ramic of the Harappan Period. Archaeometry 47 (4): 691-
703.
Leshnik, L.S. 1968a. Prehistoric Explorations in North Gu-
jarat and parts of Rajasthan. East and West 18 (3-4): 295-
310.
Leshnik, L.S. 1968b. The Harappan Port at Lothal: Another
View. American Anthropologist 70 (5): 911-922.
Mackay, E.J.H. 1938. Further Excavations at Mohenjo-Daro.
Government of India Press, New Delhi.
Madella, M, P. Ajithprasad, C. Lancelotti, B. Rondelli, A. Bal-
bo, C. French, D. Rodríguez, J.J. García-Granero, V. Yan-
nitto, S.V. Rajesh, C.S. Gadekar and I. Briz 2010. Social
and Environmental Transitions in Arid Zones: the North
Gujarat Archaeological Project - NoGAP. Antiquity 84
(325) Project Gallery : 1-7.
Mahida, B. 1992. Chalcolithic Settlements of North Gujarat (A
Study of the Regional Tradition in the Rupen Estuary). Un-
published M.A. Dissertation. Department of Archaeology
and Ancient History, the Maharaja Sayajirao University of
Baroda, Vadodara.
Mahida, B. 1995. Loteshwar: A Chalcolithic Regional Ce-
ramic Tradition Site of North Gujarat. Journal of the Ori-
ental Institute 1995-96 XLV: 85-87.
Majumdar, A. 1999. A Ceramic Study of the Harappan Burials
from North Gujarat. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis. Depart-
ment of Archaeology and Ancient History, the Maharaja
Sayajirao University of Baroda, Vadodara.
Majumdar, A. 2006. "Early Harappans in Gujarat", in D.P.
Sharma and M. Sharma eds. Early Harappan and In-
- 163 -
dus-Sarasvati Civilization, vol. I. Kaveri Books, New Del-
hi. pp. 159-166.
Majumdar, A. and V.H. Sonawane 1996-1997. Pre Harappan
Burial Pottery from Moti-Pipli: A New Dimension in the
Cultural Assemblage of North Gujarat. Prāgdharā 7: 11-
17.
Majumdar, M.R. 1960. Historical and Cultural Chronology of
Gujarat (From Earliest Times to 942 A.D.). The Maharaja
Sayajirao University of Baroda, Vadodara.
Meadow, R.H. and A. Patel. 1997. A Comment on “Horse
Remains from Surkotada” by Sandor Bökönyi. South
Asian Studies 17: 308-315.
Mehta, R.N. 1984. "Valabhi - A Station of Harappan Cat-
tle-Breeders", in B.B. Lal and S.P. Gupta eds. Frontiers of
the Indus Civilization. Books and Books, New Delhi. pp.
227-230.
Mehta, R.N. and S.N. Chaudhary 1971. Excavation at Jokha.
Maharaja Sayajirao University Archaeology Series no.11.
Department of Archaeology and Ancient History, the
Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda, Vadodara.
Mehta, R.N. and S.N. Chaudhary 1975. Excavation at Dhat-
wa. Department of Archaeology and Ancient History, the
Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda, Vadodara.
Mehta, R.N., K.N. Momin and D.R. Shah 1980. Excavation
at Kanewal, Maharaja Sayajirao University Archaeology
Series no.17. Department of Archaeology and Ancient
History, The Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda,
Vadodara.
Mirchandani, R.M. 1980. Archaeological Survey of Ah-
medabad District Upto 1300 AD. Unpublished Ph.D. The-
sis. Department of Archaeology and Ancient History, the
Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda, Vadodara.
Misra, V.N. 1965. Book Review: Ancient India (Bulletin of
the Archaeological Survey of India) 18 & 19 (1962-63)
1963. The Eastern Anthropologist 18 (1): 44-52.
Misra, V.N. 2001. Prehistoric Human Colonization of India.
Journal of Biosciences 26 (4): 491-531.
Momin, K.N. 1974. Chalcolithic Settlements in Bhalbara
Taluka, Cambay, Gujarat. Journal of the M. S. University of
Baroda (Humanities) 20(1) - 21(1), 1971-72: 57-63.
Momin, K.N. 1976a. The Chalcolithic Settlements in Khaira
District, Gujarat State. Journal of the M. S. University of
Baroda 22(1) - 23(1): 54-56.
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology
Momin, K.N. 1976b. "Chalcolithic Settlements in Bhalbara
Taluka, Cambay, Gujarat", in U.V. Singh ed. Archaeological
Congress and Seminar 1972. B.N. Chakravarty University,
Kurukshetra. pp. 51-54.
Momin, K.N. 1979. Archaeology of the Kheda District (Gu-
jarat) Upto 1300 AD. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis. Depart-
ment of Archaeology and Ancient History, the Maharaja
Sayajirao University of Baroda, Vadodara.
Momin, K.N. 1983. Excavation at Zekhda. Purātattva 12:
120-125.
Momin, K.N. 1984. "Village Harappans in Kheda District of
Gujarat", in B.B. Lal and S.P. Gupta eds. Frontiers of the
Indus Civilization. Books and Books, New Delhi. pp. 231-
234.
Mushrif-Tripathy, V., P. Ajithprasad, M. Madella, J.L. Mate-
os, S.V. Rajesh, B. Rondelli, J.C. Saiz, C. Lancelotti, C.
Gadekar, and J.J. Garcia Granero 2014. Osteological
Study of Human Skeleton Excavated from Vaharvo
Timbo, District Patan, Gujarat. Man and Environment
XXXIX(1): 45-51.
Nanavati, J.M. 1962. Problems of Chronology of Harappan
Sites in Gujarat. Journal of the Oriental Institute 11 (4):
421-427.
Nanavati, J.M., R.N. Mehta and S.N. Chowdhary 1971. Som-
nath - 1956. Monograph I. Department of Archaeology,
Gujarat State and the Maharaja Sayajirao University of
Baroda, Ahmedabad and Vadodara.
Nath, J., R.N. Kumaran and B. Chandra 2015. Domestic
Hearths and Industrial Furnaces from Khirsara. Heritage:
Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies in Archaeology 2: 272-
282.
Nath, J., R.N. Kumaran and A. Kulkarni 2012. Excavations
at Khirsara: A Harappan Outpost in Kachchh. Purātattva
42: 122-132.
Pandya, S. 1973. An Ethno-Archaelogical Study of the Hara-
ppan and Post-Harappan Cultures of Saurashtra. Unpub-
lished Ph.D. Thesis. Department of Archaeology, Deccan
College Post-Graduate and Research Institute, Pune.
Pandya, S. 1987. "Protohistoric Floods at Lothal: A Critical
Study", in B.M. Pande and B.D. Chattopadhyaya eds. Ar-
chaeology and History, Essays in Memory of Shri A. Ghosh,
vol. I. Agam Kala Prakashan, Delhi. pp. 177-186.
Pandya, S.H. 1983. Recent Advances in Protohistoric Guja-
- 164 -
rat. Purātattva 12: 59-63.
Parikh, R.T. 1977. Archaeology of Banaskantha District Upto
1500 AD. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis. Department of Ar-
chaeology and Ancient History, the Maharaja Sayajirao
University of Baroda, Vadodara.
Patel, A.K. 2008. "New Radiocarbon Determinations from
Loteshwar and Their Implications for Understanding
Holocene Settlement and Subsistence in North Gujarat
and Adjoining Areas", in E.M. Raven ed. South Asian Ar-
chaeology 1999. Egbert Forsten, Groningen. pp. 123-134.
Patel, A.K. 2009. Occupational Histories, Settlements, and
Subsistence in Western India: What Bones and Genes can
tell us about the Origins and Spread of Pastoralism. An-
thropozoologica 44(1): 173-188.
Patel, B. 1992. The Reappraisal of Chalcolithic Culture in
North Gujarat. Unpublished M.A. Dissertation. Depart-
ment of Archaeology and Ancient History, the Maharaja
Sayajirao University of Baroda, Vadodara.
Pathak, V.S. 1992. Buffalo-Horned Human Figure on the
Harappan Jar at Padri - A Note. Man and Environment
XVII (1): 87-89.
Paul, A.B. and V. Shinde 1998-1999. Archaeological Inves-
tigations in the Lower Shetrunji River Basin, District
Bhavnagar, Gujarat. Bulletin of the Deccan College 58-59:
141-148.
Paul, A.B., B. Tripathy and V. Shinde 1997. "New Archae-
ological Discoveries in the Lower Shetrunji River Basin,
Bhavnagar District, Gujarat", in B.M. Khanduri and
Vinod Nautiyal eds. Him-Kanti Archaeology, Art and
History Prof. K.P. Nautiyal Felicitation Volume. Book India
Publishing Co., Delhi. pp. 53-63.
Possehl, G.L. 1980. Indus Civilization in Saurashtra. B.R.
Publishing Corporation, New Delhi.
Possehl, G.L. 1986. Rojdi: The Investigation of a Prehistoric
Town in India. American Journal of Archaeology 90 (4):
467-468.
Possehl, G.L. 1992. "The Harappan Cultural Mosaic: Ecol-
ogy Revisited", in C. Jarriage ed. South Asian Archaeology
1989. Prehistory Press: Madison. pp. 237-244.
Possehl, G.L. 1994a. "Govindbhai-no Vadi: A Modern
Farmer’s Garden in Gujarat and Its Ethnoarchaeological
Significance", in B. Allchin ed. Living Traditions Studies in
the Ethnoarchaeology of South Asia. Oxford and IBH Pub-
 Rajesh S.V. Indus Archaeology in Gujarat
lishing Co. Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi, Bombay and Calcutta.
pp. 193-204.
Possehl, G.L. 1994b. Radiometric Dates for South Asian Ar-
chaeology. An Occasional Publication of the Asia Section.
University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and
Anthropology, Philadelphia.
Possehl, G.L. 1997. "The Date of the Surkotada Cemetery: A
Reassessment in Light of Recent Archaeological Work in
Gujarat", in J.P. Joshi, D.K. Sinha, S.C. Saran, C.B. Mishra
and G.S. Gaur eds. Facets of Indus Civilization – Recent
Perspectives- (Essays in Honour of Prof. B. B. Lal), Vol. I.
pp. 81-87. Aryan Books International, New Delhi.
Possehl, G.L. 1999. Indus Age: The Beginnings. University of
Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia.
Possehl, G.L. 2002. "Harappans and Hunters: Economic In-
teraction and Specialization in Prehistoric India", in K.D.
Morrison and L.L. Junker eds. Forager-Traders in South
and Southeast Asia Long-Term Histories. Cambridge Uni-
versity Press, Cambridge. pp. 62-76.
Possehl, G.L. 2004. Rojdi: A Sorath Harappan Settlement in
Saurashtra. Marg 55 (3): 80-88.
Possehl, G.L. 2007. "The Harappan Settlement of Gujarat",
in E.C. Stone ed. Settlement and Society - Essays Dedicated
to Rober McCormick Adams. Costen Institute of Archae-
ology, University of California and the Oriental Institute
of the University of Chicago, California and Chicago. pp.
297-328.
Possehl, G.L. and Y.M. Chitalwala 1985. Preliminary Report
on the Second Season of Excavations at Rojdi: 1983-84.
Man and Environment IX: 80-100.
Possehl, G.L., Y.M. Chitalwala, P.C. Rissman, G.E. Wagner
1984. Excavation at Rojdi: 1982-83. Purātattva 13-14:
153-63.
Possehl, G.L. and C.F. Herman 1990. "The Sorath Harappan
A New Regional Manifestation of the Indus Urban Phase",
in M. Taddei ed. South Asian Archaeology 1987. Istituto
Italiano per il Medio ed Estremo Oriente, Rome. pp.
295‰319.
Possehl, G.L. and K.A.R. Kennedy 1979. Hunter-Gatherer/
Agriculturalist Exchange in Prehistory: An Indian Exam-
ple. Current Anthropology 20 (3): 592-593.
Possehl, G.L. and M.H. Raval 1989. Harappan Civilization
and Rojdi. Oxford, IBH Publishing Co. and American
- 165 -
Institute of Indian Studies, New Delhi, Bombay and Cal-
cutta:
Pramanik, S. 2004. Excavation at Juni Kuran 2003-2004: A
Preliminary Report. Purātattva 34: 45-67.
Rajesh, S.V. 2011. A Comprehensive Study of Regional Chal-
colithic Cultures of Gujarat. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis.
Department of Archaeology and Ancient History, the
Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda, Vadodara.
Rajesh, S.V., K. Krishnan, P. Ajithprasad and M. Madella
2013a. Pre-Prabhas Assemblage from Gujarat, Western
India. Heritage: Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies in Ar-
chaeology 1: 181-209.
Rajesh, S.V., K. Krishnan, P. Ajithprasad and V.H. Sonawane
2013b. Evaluating the Anarta Tradition in the Light of
Material Culture from Loteshwar and other Sites in Guja-
rat. Man and Environment XXXVIII (2):10-45.
Rajesh, S.V., K. Krishnan, A.L. Balbo 2012a. Chronologi-
cal Synopsis of Chalcolithic Gujarat: Indications from
Chronometric and Relative Dates of Excavated Sites.
Paper presented at the ICHR Sponsored International
Seminar on Harappan Sites in Western India (Gujarat)
(22nd - 24th March). Department of Archaeology, Deccan
College, Pune.
Rajesh, S.V., K. Krishnan, A.L. Balbo. S. Ullah 2012b. Spatial
and Temporal Distribution of Chalcolithic Sites in Gu-
jarat, Western India. Paper presented at the International
Conference on Rediscovering the Silk Route (5th - 7th Sep-
tember). Department of Archaeology, Hazara University,
Mansehra, Pakistan and Higher Education Department,
Islamabad, Mansehra.
Rajesh, S.V., P. Sukumaran and K. Krishnan 2016. Scenario
of Chalcolithic Site Surveys in Gujarat. Pakistan Heritage
VII: 1-34.
Rajesh, S.V., S, Shaikh, B. Chase, Y.S. Rawat, A. Patel, G.S.
Abhayan, A. Kumar, C. Gadekar, R.H. Raja, A. Uesugi,
V. Vinod, M.N. Renjinimol and P. Sukumaran 2015.
Craft Production at Navinal: A Harappan Settlement in
Kachchh District, Gujarat. Atulya Varso 8: 30-31.
Rao, S.R. 1956. Excavations at Lothal. Lalit Kala 3-4: 82-89.
Rao, S.R. 1963. Excavation at Rangpur and Other Explora-
tions in Gujarat. Ancient India 18-19: 1-207.
Rao, S.R. 1965. Shipping and Maritime Trade of the Indus
People. Expedition 7 (3): 30-37.
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology
Rao, S.R. 1973. Lothal and the Indus Civilization. Asia Pub-
lishing House, Bombay.
Rao, S.R. 1979. Lothal: A Harappan Port Town, 1955-62, vol.
1. Memoirs of Archaeological Survey of India no. 78. Ar-
chaeological Survey of India, New Delhi.
Rao, S.R. 1985. Lothal: A Harappan Port Town, 1955-62, vol.
2. Memoirs of Archaeological Survey of India no. 78. Ar-
chaeological Survey of India, New Delhi.
Rao, S.R. 1987. Progress and Prospects of Marine Archaeology
in India. National Institute of Oceanography, Goa.
Rao, S.R. 1990. Excavation of the Legendary City of Dwarka
in the Arabian Sea. Journal of Marine Archaeology 1: 59-
98.
Rao, S.R. and A.S. Gaur 1992. Excavation at Bet Dwarka.
Journal of Marine Archaeology 3: 42-47.
Reimer, P.J., M.G. L. Baillie, E. Bard, A. Bayliss, J.W. Beck, P.G.
Blackwell, C. Bronk Ramsey, C.E. Buck, G.S. Burr, R.L.
Edwards, M. Friedrich, P.M. Grootes, T.P. Guilderson,
I. Hajdas, T.J. Heaton, A.G. Hogg, K.A. Hughen, K.F.
Kaiser, B. Kromer, F.G. McCormac, S.W. Manning, R.W.
Reimer, D.A. Richards, J.R. Southon, S. Talamo, C.S.M.
Turney, J. van der Plicht and C. E.Weyhenmeyer. 2009.
IntCal09 and Marine09: Radiocarbon Age Calibration
Curves, 0-50,000 Years cal BP. Radiocarbon 51: 1111-
1150.
Rissman, P.C. 1985. Migratory pastoralism in the Western
India in the Second Millennium B.C: The evidence From
Oriyo Timbo (Chiroda). Ph.D. Thesis Submitted to the
University of Pennsylvannia, University of Pennsylvannia,
Philadelphia.
Rissman, P.C. and Y.M. Chitalwala 1990. Harappan Civili-
zation and Oriyo Timbo. Oxford and IBH Publishing Co.
Pvt. Ltd. and American Institute of Indian Studies, New
Delhi.
Rondelli, B., C. Lancelotti, M. Madella, A. Pecci, A. Balbo,
J.R. Pérez, F. Inserra, C. Gadekar, M.Á.C. Ontiveros and
P. Ajithprasad 2014. Anthropic Activity Markers and
Spatial Variability: an Ethnoarchaeological Experiment in
a Domestic Unit of Northern Gujarat (India). Journal of
Archaeological Science 41: 482-492.
Sankalia, H.D. 1941. The Archaeology of Gujarat (Including
Kathiawar). Natwarlal and Co., Bombay.
Sankalia, H.D. 1946. Investigations into Prehistoric Archaeol-
- 166 -
ogy of Gujarat. Baroda State Press, Baroda.
Sankalia, H.D. 1965. Excavations at Langhnaj: 1944-63 (Part
I) Archaeology. Deccan College Postgraduate and Re-
search Institute, Poona.
Sankalia, H.D. 1972. "The Chalcolithic Cultures of India", in
S.B. Deo ed. Archaeological Congress and Seminar Papaers.
Nagpur University, Nagpur. pp. 157-177.
Sankalia, H.D. ed. 1974. The Prehistory and Protohistory
of India and Pakistan, second edition. Deccan College
Post-Graduate and Research Institute, Pune.
Sen, B. 2009. A Study of the Harappan and Sorath Harappan
Settlement Features at Pithad in Jamnagar District with
Special Reference to Other Harappan Settlements in Sau-
rashtra, Gujarat. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis. Department
of Archaeology and Ancient History, the Maharaja Saya-
jirao University of Baroda, Vadodara.
Sharma, G.R. 1960. The Excavation at Kausambi. University
of Allahabad, Allahabad.
Shinde, V. 1991. A Horn-Headed Human Figure on a Hara-
ppan Jar from Padri, Gujarat. Man and Environment XVI
(2): 87-89.
Shinde, V. 1992a. Excavations at Padri- 1990-91: A prelimi-
nary Report. Man and Envitronment XVII (1): 79-86.
Shinde, V. 1992b. Padri and the Indus Civilization. South
Asian Studies 8: 55-66.
Shinde, V. 1998. Pre-Harappan Padri Culture in Saurashtra:
The Recent Discovery. South Asian Studies 14: 173-182.
Shinde, V. 2006. Padri: The Early Harappan Site in Gujarat.
in D.P. Sharma and M. Sharma eds. Early Harappan and
Indus-Sarasvati Civilization, vol. I. Kaveri Books, New
Delhi. pp. 151-158.
Shinde, V and S.B. Kar 1992. Padri Ware: a New Painted Ce-
ramic Found in the Harappan Levels at Padri in Gujarat.
Man and Environment XVII (2): 105-110.
Shinde, V., T. Osada, A. Uesugi and Manmohan Kumar 2008.
A Report on Excavations at Farmana 2007-08. Occasinal
Paper 6: Linguistics, Archaeology and the Human Past.
Indus Project, Research Institute for Humanity and Na-
ture, Kyoto.
Shinde, V.S. and E. Thomas 1993. A Unique Harappan Cop-
per Fish Hook from Padri, Gujarat. Man and Environ-
ment XVIII: 145-147.
Shirvalkar, P. 2008. Pre- and Early Harappan Cultures of Sau-
 Rajesh S.V. Indus Archaeology in Gujarat
rashtra with Special Reference to Gulf of Cambay Region.
Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis. Deccan College Post Graduate
and Research Institute, Pune.
Shirvalkar, P. 2012-2013. A Preliminary Report of Exca-
vations at Kotada Bhadli, Gujarat: 2010-11. Bulletin of
Deccan College Post Graduate and Research Institute 72-73:
55-68.
Shirvalkar, P. and Y.S. Rawat 2012. Excavations at Kotada
Bhadli, District Kachchh, Gujarat: A Preliminary Report.
Purātattva 42: 182-201.
Shirvalkar, P. and Y.S. Rawat 2012-13. Kotada Bhadli: A For-
tified Harappan Settlement. Heritage India 5 (4): 70-77.
Sonawane, V.H. 1990a. Harappan Gold Ornaments from
Nagwada, Gujarat. Paper presented at the Annual Confer-
ence of ISPQS. Kanyakumari.
Sonawane, V.H. 1990b. Harappan Settlements of Rupen Es-
tuary. Paper presented at the Conference on "Rising Trends
in Palaeoanthropology: Environmental Change and the
Human Responses". Deccan College, Pune.
Sonawane, V.H. 2000. "Early Farming Communities of
Gujarat, India", in P. Bellwood, D. Bowdery, D. Bulbeck,
D. Baer, V. Shinde, R. Shutler and G. Summerhayes eds.
Bulletin of the Indo-Pacific Prehistoric Association 19 (Pro-
ceedings of the 16th Congress of the Indo-Pacific Prehistory
Association, Melaka, 1 to 7 July 1998). Indo-Pacific Prehis-
tory Association, Australian national University, Canber-
ra. pp. 137-146.
Sonawane, V.H. 2002. "Post-Urban Harappan Culture in
Gujarat", in S. Setter and R. Korisetter eds. Indian Archae-
ology in Retrospect, vol. II Protohistory - Archaeology of the
Harappan Civilization. Manohar Publishers and distribu-
tors, New Delhi. pp. 159-172.
Sonawane, V.H. and P. Ajithprasad 1994. Harappan Culture
and Gujarat. Man and Environment XIX (1-2): 129-139.
Sonawane, V.H., P. Ajithprasad, K.K. Bhan, K. Krishnan, S.
Pratapachandran, A. Majumdar, A.K. Patel and J. Menon
2003. Excavations at Bagasra 1996-2003: A Preliminary
Report. Man and Environment XXVIII(2): 21-50.
Sonawane, V.H. and R.N. Mehta 1985. Vagad - A Rural
Harappan Settlement. Man and Environment IX: 38-44.
Soundara Rajan, K.V. 1984. "Kutch Harappan - A Corridor
of the Indus Phase", in B.B. Lal and S.P. Gupta eds. Fron-
tiers of the Indus Civilization. Books and Books, New Del-
- 167 -
hi. pp. 217-226.
Subbarao, B. 1958. The Personality of India - Pre and Pro-
to-Historic Foundation of India and Pakistan. M. S.
University Archaeology Series no. 3. Maharaja Sayajirao
University of Baroda, Vadodara.
Subbarao, B. 1961. The Problem of the Black and Red Ware
of North India and Their Bearing on the South. Paper
presented at the International Conference of the Asian Ar-
chaeology. New Delhi.
Subbarao, B. and R.N. Mehta. 1955. Excavation at Vadnagar.
Journal of Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda, Vol.
IV(1): 19-35.
Uesugi, A., S.V. Rajesh., G.S. Abhayan, B. Chase, Y.S. Rawat, A.
Patel, A. Kumar and C. Gadekar 2015. Indus Ceramics
from Desalpur, Kachchh, Gujarat. Heritage: Journal of
Multidisciplinary Studies in Archaeology 3: 180-218.
Varma, S. and J. Menon 1999. The Development of "Harap-
pan Culture" as an Archaeological Label: A Case Study of
Kathiawar. Indian Historical Review XXVI: 1-22.
Vats, M.S. 1937. Trial Excavations at Rangpur, Limbdi State,
Kathiawar.Annual Report of the Archaeological Survey of
India 1934-35: 34-38.
Weber, S.A. 1989. Plants and Harappan Subsistence: An Ex-
ample of Stability and Change from Rojdi. Unpublished
Ph.D. Thesis. University of Pennsylvania, PennSylvania.
Weber, S.A. 1990. "Millets in South Asia: Rojdi as a Case
Study", in M. Taddei ed. South Asian Archaeology 1987.
Istituto Italino Per il Medio ed Estremo, Rome. pp. 333-
348.
Weber, S.A. 1991. Plants and Harappan Subsistence: An Ex-
ample of Stability and Change from Rojdi. Westview Press,
Boulder.
Weber, S.A. 1999. Seeds of Urbanism: Palaeoethnobotany
and the Indus Civilization. Antiquity 73: 813-826.
Wheeler, R.E.M. 1947. Brahmagiri and Chadravalli Mega-
lithic and Other Cultures in Mysore State. Ancient India 4:
180-310.
Wheeler, R.E.M. 1959. Early India and Pakistan. Thames
and Hudson, London.
Wheeler, R.E.M. 1966. Civilizations of the Indus Valley and
Beyond. Thames and Hudson, London.
Yadav, M. 2005. A Typological Study of Chalcolithic Ceramic
Assemblage from Loteshwar, North Gujarat. Unpublished
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology

M.A. Dissertation. Department of Archaeology and An-

cient History, the Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baro-
da, Vadodara.

- 168 -
 Gregg Jamison Exploring stylistic variation in inscribed steatite seals of the Indus civilization
Exploring stylistic variation in
inscribed steatite seals of the Indus civilization:
a comparison of materials from sites in Gujarat and the Ghaggar-Hakra region
Gregg Jamison
(University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee at Waukesha)
INTRODUCTION
Inscribed steatite seals are some of the most well-
known and emblematic artifacts of the Indus civiliza-
tion, often used to identify the presence of a Harap-
pan site. Their discovery heralded the announcement
of a new civilization (Marshall 1924), and they have
fascinated scholars and the general public alike ever
since. These small, carved steatite objects have been
recovered from many sites throughout the Indus and
beyond, and are often engraved with a short inscrip-
tion and animal motif. Current evidence suggests
that the presence of iconographic motifs and writing,
which has yet to be deciphered, would have encoded
and transmitted culturally significant information
throughout the region, used in a variety of differ-
ent contexts (Kenoyer 2006). Among their many
functions, inscribed steatite seals would have been
used by ruling elites as symbols of wealth and power,
legitimizing the social order within and among Indus
settlements (Kenoyer 2000). Since they can be seen as
symbols of elite power and control, it follows that by
studying them we can learn more about Indus social
and political structures.
Yet in spite of their significance, there are unan-
swered questions concerning where and how they
were produced, and how this would have varied
- 169 -
throughout time and space. Traditionally there has
been an assumption that Indus seals are highly stand-
ardized and uniform.
This can be traced back to the original excavator
of Mohenjo-daro, Sir John Marshall, who stated “seals
from the different levels are so alike in style, material,
form, and technique that it is impractical to distin-
guish between them” (Marshall 1931: 103). Another
problem is that very few steatite workshops have been
systematically excavated at any Indus sites, and even
fewer can be directly connected with seal production.
Because of these factors, and the historical trend that
has emphasized research on the script over studies of
the seals themselves, only a few studies have analyzed
variation in inscribed steatite seals in any meaningful
manner (Ameri 2011, 2013, 2018; Franke-Vogt 1991,
1992; Green 2010, 2016; Jamison 2011, 2012, 2013,
2016, 2017, 2018a, 2018b; Kenoyer 2003, 2005,
2006, 2013; Kenoyer and Meadow 2010; Konasuka-
wa 2013; Rissman 1989; Uesugi 2011; Uesugi et al.
2016).
This paper explores stylistic and technological
variation in inscribed steatite seals through a compar-
ative analysis of published materials from various sites
in Gujarat and the greater Ghaggar-Hakra region.
Using formal stylistic (attribute) and metric analysis,
it has been possible to identify patterned variation in
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology

Shortughai

Harappa

Banawali
Nausharo Kalibangan
Bhirrana
Rakhigarhi

Baror Farmana

Ganweriwala

Lakhanjo-daro

Mohenjo-daro

Sutkagen-dor

Dholavira

Gujarat
Kanmer
Bagasra
Lothal

Sites with seals mentioned in this article

Urban centers

Sites of the Urban period

Figure 1 Map of Indus sites (Courtesy: A. Uesugi)

production techniques and styles that can be linked
with different workshops where seals would have been
produced. The results of this study, part of a larger
project examining variability in inscribed steatite seals
throughout the Indus, have clearly revealed significant
differences in the ways in which these objects were
produced and adorned between the two regions.
These data not only underscore the diversity present
within this important class of Indus artifacts, they also
highlight the utility of comparative analyses to identi-
fy seals that can be linked with different workshops.
The identification of distinct carving or workshop
styles throughout the Indus is significant for a number
of reasons. In the absence of stratigraphically excavat-
ed workshops, detailed studies of the seals themselves
represent the best method for understanding how
production was organized and varied. It also provides
a method to examine material connections between

- 170 -
 Gregg Jamison Exploring stylistic variation in inscribed steatite seals of the Indus civilization
different sites and regions in the Indus, which were
crucial for the integration of the cultural system as a
whole. More broadly, this research provides additional
support for interpretations concerning regional varia-
tion in certain forms of Indus material culture in Gu-
jarat, the greater Ghaggar-Hakra region, and beyond.
BACKGROUND AND METHODOLOGY
Although seals are often used to identify the Harap-
pan character of a site, they are diverse in form and
function. Collectively, Indus seals are found in nu-
merous shapes and sizes, fashioned from different raw
materials, and would have been crafted using a variety
of different technological processes. They also served
different purposes, based on the fact that some were
clearly used as stamp seals, while others were not;
and inscriptions are not present on all of them. The
most common types at many Indus sites are inscribed
seals, usually made from fired steatite, a soft and easily
workable stone composed primarily of talc, which
becomes considerably harder through the application
of heat. Inscribed seals have been found at numerous
sites throughout the Indus culture area and beyond.
A small but important number of these sites are
found in Gujarat and the greater Ghaggar-Hakra
region of Haryana and Punjab in northwestern India
(Figure 1). These diverse regions are separated by
nearly 1000 kilometers, and the geographic and envi-
ronmental backgrounds for each have been thorough-
ly discussed elsewhere (Rao 1985; Shinde et al. 2011).
Systematic excavations at a few sites over the last 20
years have provided new insights into the nature and
character of Indus settlement planning and material
culture. Among other things, these investigations have
identified significant variability in settlement layout
and architecture, subsistence, and various forms of
material culture (Ajithprasad 2008; Bisht 1990, 2005,
2015; Bhan and Gowda 2003; Herman 1997; Possehl
- 171 -
2007; Possehl and Herman 1990; Rao et al. 2005;
Sant et al. 2005; Shinde 1998; Shinde and Kar 1992;
Shinde et al. 2011; Sonawane 1992, 1999; Sonawane
and Ajithprasad 1994, Uesugi 2011). Significantly,
multiple sites in each region have also yielded varying
quantities of inscribed steatite seals, though to date
very few studies have attempted to investigate stylistic
and technological aspects of production, or undertake
comparative analyses with seals from other regions
that can help define the nature of variation in Indus
seal carving traditions.
The methodology used to conduct this research
has been thoroughly discussed elsewhere ( Jamison
2017). It consists of formal stylistic (attribute) and
metric analysis of various elements of Indus seal an-
imal iconography to identify patterned variation in
carving styles (Table 1). Stylistic variants of selected
compositional elements of animal iconography have
been distinguished on the basis of morphology and
the number, placement, and orientation of carving
strokes used to create them. For example, many seals
contain animals with necks that are decorated with
incised or hatched lines on their necks (Figure 2). The
number and placement of these features varies con-
siderably, and are therefore useful for distinguishing
stylistic variability. Another important consideration
in the selection of attributes for analysis was to only
select those that have discrete, or finite, variability.
The total number of attributes chosen for any given
seal was based on the animal motif preset, its state of
preservation, and quality of published image. Each
distinct attribute style was given a unique number and
recorded for each seal. Comparative analyses followed
and these studies were supplemented by formal metric
analysis to identify further patterning.
Metric analysis included recording measurements
of various elements of the animal motifs present
on the seals (Figure 3). As these values are heavily
dependent on the size of the seal and amount of avail-
able space for carving, ratios of maximum length to
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology

Harappa (H-412) Mohanjo-daro (M-595) Mohenjo-daro (M-675)

Figure 2 Indus seals with variable neck carving styles

Table 1 List of stylistic attributes analyzed in the study

Stylistic Attributes

Head Neck Rear Legs

Eye Halter Rear Hooves

Ear Front Legs Tail

Snout/Mouth Front Hooves Upper Offering Stand

Horn Pizzle Lower Offering Stand

Figure 3 Metric attributes of the unicorn motif

chosen for analysis

maximum width have also been calculated and used
for comparative analyses. Since these data vary con-
tinuously and the sample is not large, they have been
used to supplement the patterns identified through
formal attribute analysis. Taken together both lines of
evidence have been used to distinguish clear differenc-
es in the stylistic and metric properties of a sample of
published seals from both regions.
As mentioned above, all material analyzed in this
study has been undertaken using published photo-
graphs of seals recovered from different sites in Guja-
rat and the greater Ghaggar-Hakra regions. A total of
138 inscribed steatite seals from 10 sites were analyzed
in this study, including all published photographs of
seals sufficiently preserved for analysis. These include
a wide variety of sizes and animal motifs that are not
distributed equally between the two regions. The
sample is dominated by materials from Lothal and
Kalibangan, followed by Banawali. The remaining
seals are comprised of smaller collections from the
sites of Dholavira, Bagasra, Kanmer, and Surkotada
in Gujarat, and Baror and Bhirrana in the greater
Ghaggar-Hakra region. Although none of these sites
except Dholavira has produced more than 10 seals,
they are still important as they provide crucial data for
understanding variation within and between the two
regions.
The sample does not contain the full corpus of

- 172 -
 Gregg Jamison Exploring stylistic variation in inscribed steatite seals of the Indus civilization
published seals from each site, either because of pres-
ervation or publication issues. After completing the
analysis on each seal in the sample, comparative analy-
sis was undertaken. Based on earlier research ( Jamison
2013), seals found to have at least 7 shared stylistic
attributes were classified into groups for further anal-
ysis. Additionally, basic patterns and characteristics
were identified for the sample as a whole, and within
and between the two regions.
RESULTS
Two of the most basic patterns indentified in this
study support interpretations already published
elsewhere. The first is that the seals from the Gh-
aggar-Hakra region are dominated by animals that
face right on the engraved face. This has already
been extensively discussed elsewhere (Kenoyer and
Meadow 2010, Konasukawa 2013, Uesugi, in press).
In contrast, none of the seals from Gujarat analyzed
in this study have right-facing animals. Uesugi has
posited three hypotheses to explain the dominance of
right-facing animals on seals from the Ghaggar-Hakra
region. These include the presence of a distinct re-
gional carving tradition in the Ghaggar-Hakra region
(dominated by right-facing animals engraved with
an angular carving style), the possibility that these
materials represent an early carving style, or that seals
of this type were made in distinct workshops and dis-
tributed throughout the Indus in varying quantities
(Uesugi, in press). Based on current evidence, the first
of these seems most probable, though more data is
needed to test all three hypotheses.
Another general pattern observed is that the
distribution of animal motifs on seals from the two
regions is unequal. Seals from Gujarat are charac-
terized primarily by unicorns, while those from the
Ghaggar-Hakra depict the unicorn less frequently, by
count and proportion. This has also been discussed
- 173 -
elsewhere (Ameri 2011), and may reflect regional
styles or preferences by different social groups that
made and used seals. According to Ameri, these differ-
ences can also be seen in the carving styles, placement,
and orientation of the animal motifs engraved on seals
between the two regions.
To this I would add that there is as much stylistic
and metric variability within the seals from each re-
gion is there is between them. Although some of the
seals studied here demonstrate clear links with materi-
als from other sites, within and between each region,
collectively the sample is quite variable regardless of
site or region. This is significant in that it highlights
the fact that inscribed steatite seals are stylistically
and proportionately variable regardless of where they
are from. This likely relates to the fact that they were
made by hand and produced by different individuals
and workshops. So while both regions do have seals
that are distinct, and groups (usually pairs) that likely
represent distinct workshop carving styles, overall
there is as much variation within each region as there
is between.
Seals from Gujarat
Of the 68 seals from Gujarat analyzed in this study,
a total of 6 groups comprised of 14 seals have been
identified that may represent local or regional carving
styles (Table 2). Most of these groups are small (less
than 5 seals) and restricted to only one or two sites in
Gujarat. A few other groups, discussed in greater de-
tail below, demonstrate links between a site in Gujarat
and either Mohenjo-daro or Harappa ( Jamison 2017,
Table 3). All but one of them depict the unicorn, as
these are the most common type in the sample from
this region. In fact, 56 of the 68 seals from Gujarat de-
pict the unicorn (82.4%). Of the remaining seals, no
other animal motif appears in more than 3 cases.
Lothal Group #1
One of the most important discoveries to support the
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology

Table 2 Stylistic seal groups from sites in Gujarat

Stylistic Group Seal Count CISI/Other Number

Lothal #1 4 L10, L11, L12, L28

Lothal #2 2 L7, L18

Bagasra #1 2 BSR 7191, BSR 8288

Dholavira #1 2 DHR 34, DHR 40

Lothal-Bagasra 2 L39, BSR 2037

Lothal-Surkotada 2 L38, SKTD1

Figure 4 Lothal Seal Group #1 (Lothal Revisitation Project)

hypothesis that there are distinct local and regional
carving styles among the seals from Gujarat was the
discovery of a stylistic group comprised of 4 seals from
Lothal (Figure 4). These 4 seals contain shared styles
of at least 7 attributes of the unicorn motif when
present. Though one is fragmentary and two others
are damaged, there are clear parallels in the number
and placement of incised or hatched lines on the neck
and halter. Similarities can also be seen in the shape
and proportions of the ear, pizzle, and rear legs and

- 174 -
 Gregg Jamison Exploring stylistic variation in inscribed steatite seals of the Indus civilization
hooves. Though only three of the seals depict the of-
fering stand in front of the animal, these are also alike,
both proportionately and in the fact that they do not
contain any decoration in the form of incised lines or
other features.
Proportions of various elements of the unicorn
are also comparable, including body length/width,
head length/width (when present), and neck length
to width. The outline of the animal’s body below the
neck is also carved in a similar fashion, rising from
left to right and culminating at the rear flank, which
is the highest part of the body. Though not present
on all the seals in this group, the tail and horn are also
stylistically alike in both placement and orientation,
and both elements appear to have been engraved from
top to bottom. All of these factors support the inter-
pretation that these represent a local carving style, as
well as the fact that stylistically and proportionately
comparable seals have not been recovered from any
other sites to date.
The distribution of these seals at Lothal is some-
what difficult to disentangle, because two of the seals
are not provenienced. The remaining three seals are
from three different phases according to the original
report (Rao 1985), all of which belong to Period A
(Mature Harappan). Purportedly they were recovered
from different depths, not surprising considering they
were found in different levels and phases. Two of the
seals at least were found in the same grid, Block B.
This portion of the site, located in the Acropolis, also
produced a wide variety of other cultural materials
and structural remains. The recovery of unfinished
seals and a variety of implements that could have been
used to make them also suggests that they were made
locally at the site.
Bagasra Group #1
The sample of seals from Bagasra is small but im-
portant for a number of reasons. Two of the seven
inscribed steatite seals from the site appear to rep-
- 175 -
resent a local or regional carving style (Figure 5).
This is interesting in light of the fact that Bagasra is a
small site that only yielded a few seals. Similarities in
a number of stylistic attributes of the unicorn motif
are clearly visible, including the ears, legs and hooves,
pizzles, and offering stands. The presence of a single
incised line near the rear flank of the animal’s body on
both seals is also interesting and unique; these are not
common features on most unicorn seals. The place-
ment and orientation of incised lines on the necks and
halters are also comparable; the only difference is the
total number present, which varies by only one stroke
between them.
Proportionately the two seals are also quite alike,
especially in regards to the body, neck, head, and both
aspects of the offering stand. The latter are significant
in that they are among the most variable attributes
that I have analyzed so far, and the fact that both
seals depict offering stands that are stylistically and
proportionately alike supports the interpretation that
they may represent a local or regional carving style.
Although no evidence for steatite production was
discovered at Bagasra, there was ample evidence for
the manufacture of other crafts, including shell and
metal-working (Bhan et al. 2005).
Overall these two seals are distinct from any other
examples identified so far in as much as they con-
tain unique combinations of stylistic attributes and
comparable proportions of length/width for several
elements of the unicorn and offering stand. The distri-
bution of these two seals at the site is compatible with
most of the others found during excavations; both
were recovered within the fortified portion of the site
(Bhan et al. 2005: Jamison et al. 2017). While there
is not a strong contextual relationship between them,
overall it is comparable to the distribution of seals
from most Indus sites; they are usually found either
within fortified areas of sites or near gateways and en-
trances (Kenoyer 1998).
These two brief examples highlight the fact that
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology
Figure 5 Bagasra Seal Group #1 (Department of Archaeology and Ancient History, M.S. University of Baroda)
there is patterned variation in the stylistic and metric
properties of inscribed steatite seals. Generally, seals
from Gujarat are not only variable in these regards;
they are comparatively distinct from those found in
other regions in several other ways. First and foremost,
the carving styles of the animals, offering stands (when
present), and inscriptions are of a poorer quality than
those found at other Indus sites. Many of the unicorn
seals in particular lack the fine details present in pub-
lished examples from elsewhere, especially the major
urban centers of Harappa and Mohenjo-daro. At
Lothal in particular there are several seals that appear
to have been crudely carved or unfinished, and there
is an example of this from Bagasra as well (Figure 6).
This is not to say that there aren’t finely carved seals
from these sites, there certainly are. A few of these ap-
pear to demonstrate links between different sites and
regions as well.
- 176 -
Seals from Gujarat with links to
multiple sites and regions
Comparative analyses of seals from Gujarat with
materials from other sites and regions have revealed
patterns that may represent links between people
living in different places. A total of five additional seal
groups have been identified that represent potential
links between multiple sites, between Gujarat and
Mohenjo-daro or Harappa (Table 3). It is important
to reiterate that the seals in these groups are not
identical copies, in most cases minor differences exist,
likely the result of the fact they were carved by hand,
and it is difficult (if not impossible) to replicate small,
finely engraved details of the unicorn and offering
stand identically without the aid of mechanized
forms of production. Nonetheless, all of the seals in
these groups contain unique combinations of stylistic
attributes not seen elsewhere, and for the most part
 Gregg Jamison Exploring stylistic variation in inscribed steatite seals of the Indus civilization

Lothal (L-23) Bagasra (BSR-6952)

Figure 6 Poorly carved unicorn seals from Lothal and Bagasra

(Lothal Revisitation Project; Department or Archaeology and Ancient History, M.S. University of Baroda)

Table 3 Stylistic seal groups from sites in Gujarat with links to sites in other regions

Stylistic Group Seal Count CISI/Other Number

Lothal-Mohenjo-daro #1 2 L1, M28

Lothal-Mohenjo-daro #2 3 L5, M730, M731

Bagasra-Mohenjo-daro 2 BSR6719, M104

Harappa-Lothal 2 H502, L42

Harappa-Dholavira 2 H37, DHR349

are stylistically and proportionately so alike that they
probably represent distinct carving styles.
Lothal-Bagasra Group
As Lothal yielded the largest quantity of seals from
any of the sites in Gujarat, it is not surprising that
most of the seals that demonstrate links with other
sites and regions come from there. For example, a uni-
corn seal from Lothal bears strong stylistic similarities
with a unicorn seal from Bagasra (Figure 7). They are
stylistically and proportionately nearly identical, with
the exception of the lack of a pizzle on the seal from
Bagasra. The incised line present on the rear flanks
of both seals is also not common, though there is an-
other pair from Bagasra that depicts the same feature.
Thorough comparative analysis of the group has been
presented elsewhere ( Jamison 2017), it is important
to note here that the pair may represent a local or
regional carving style from Gujarat. Unfortunately, it
is not possible to identify any patterning in the distri-
bution of this pair or seals due to the lack of reliable
contextual information for the seal from Lothal.
Lothal-Mohenjo-daro Groups #1 & 2
There are two other groups of unicorn seals that
demonstrate stylistic links between Lothal and Mo-
henjo-daro (Figure 8). The first one consists of only
two seals, one from each site. There are clear parallels

- 177 -
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology

Lothal (L-39) Bagasra (BSR-2037)

Figure 7 Lothal-Bagasra Seal Group

(Lothal Revisitation Project; Department of Archaeology and Ancient History, M.S. University of Baroda)

in the stylistic attributes of a number of unicorn at- Bagasra-Mohenjo-daro Group

tributes, including the head, neck, ear, horn, halter,
pizzle, legs, and hooves. Though the offering stands
are decorated differently, proportionately they are
nearly identical. There are also other similarities in
the ratio of length to width for most elements of the
unicorn’s body. The pattern of three incised lines on
the upper portion of the neck in both seals is also a
unique feature. The second group consists of three
seals, one from Lothal and two from Mohenjo-daro.
They also contain a majority of shared unicorn attrib-
ute styles and proportions, and the offering stands are
also comparable both stylistically and proportionately.
Again there are minor differences among the seals in
both of these groups, but, as discussed above, these are
neither significant nor unexpected. These groups have
also been discussed in detail in earlier work ( Jami-
son 2017) and unfortunately do not provide strong
evidence of contextual patterning due to the lack of
stratigraphic controls in the original excavations at
both sites.
Another important discovery during the course of
analysis was a pair of seals from Bagasra and Mohen-
jo-daro that are stylistically and proportionately alike
(Figure 9). In fact, the proportions of length to width
for all attributes of the unicorn analyzed are nearly
identical, as are both aspects of the offering stand.
Most stylistic attributes are also similar, and the ab-
sence of any decoration on the neck on both seals is
also distinct and uncommon. Compared to the other
seals from Bagasra, this one is of a finer quality. The
edges of the engraved surfaces are smoother, and the
small details on both the unicorn’s body and the offer-
ing stand are finer and carved with greater precision.
Considering the small quantity of seals recovered
from Bagasra, and the lack of evidence for production
at the site, it is possible that this seal was produced at
Mohenjo-daro and sent to Bagasra via exchange net-
works, or with an individual who traveled there.
Lothal-Harappa Group
During the course of analysis a pair of seals from
Harappa and Lothal was discovered that may repre-

- 178 -
 Gregg Jamison Exploring stylistic variation in inscribed steatite seals of the Indus civilization

Lothal-Mohenjo-daro Group #1

Mohenjo-daro (M-28) Lothal (L-1)

Lothal (L-5) Mohenjo-daro (M-730) Mohenjo-daro (M-731)

Lothal-Mohenjo-daro Group #2
Figure 8 Lothal-Mohenjo-daro Seal Groups #1 & 2 ( Joshi and Parpola 1987; Shah and Parpola 1991)

sent links between the two sites. Both seals depict
left-facing unicorns with offering stands below the
head and short inscriptions above the animal (Figure
10). They are grouped together based on shared sty-
listic attributes and proportions of length to width
for five elements of the unicorn and offering stand.
Both are small and worn, but all elements under anal-
ysis here are preserved. Though several elements are
engraved with common stylistic types, at present the
combinations are unique. If these two seals do rep-
resent a workshop or artisan style, they demonstrate
connections between sites located at much greater
distances than those already discussed above.
Stylistic parallels between the two seals can eas-
ily be seen in the heads, horns, ears, necks, halters,
legs, hooves, and pizzles. Though the number and
placement of incised lines present in both registers
of the offering stands vary, morphologically they are
also alike. They also have very similar proportions of
length to width for six of the seven elements of the
unicorn and offering stand studied. These include
the head and neck, body, pizzle, and both registers of
the offering stand. More broadly, the seals are nearly
the same size (approximately 1.6 cm2) and also have

- 179 -
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology

Mohenjo-daro (M-104) Bagasra (BSR-6719)

Figure 9 Bagasra-Mohenjo-daro Seal Group

(Department of Archaeology and Ancient History, M.S. University of Baroda; Joshi and Parpola 1987)

Harappa (H-502) Lothal (L-42)

Figure 10 Lothal-Harappa Seal Group ( Joshi and Parpola 1987; Shah and Parpola 1991)

comparable proportions of the total engraved surface.
Since they are not large, several of the smaller ele-
ments, particularly the eye, are somewhat difficult to
identify and analyze using photographs alone.
It is difficult to confidently determine if there are
any contextual relationships between the seals, due
to problems with stratigraphy and association in the
reports where they were originally published. Fur-
ther, it is not possible to determine where they were
produced, because only one seal from each site has so
far been classified to this group and both have yield-
ed unfinished seals that represent local production.
Nonetheless, this finding is still significant because it
demonstrates that seals from Gujarat can be linked to
multiple sites located in different regions of the Indus.
A similar pattern holds true for the materials from the

- 180 -
 Gregg Jamison Exploring stylistic variation in inscribed steatite seals of the Indus civilization

greater Ghaggar-Hakra region.
Seals from the greater Ghaggar-Hakra
region
The most interesting pattern among the seals from
the greater Ghaggar-Hakra is the higher proportion
of right-facing animals and lower frequency of the
unicorn motif. These differences characterize the seals
from the Ghaggar-Hakra when compared to the In-
dus as a whole, but are particularly prominent when
measured against the materials from sites in Gujarat
discussed above (Table 3). As this has already been
discussed (Konasukawa 2013; Uesugi, in press), the
goal here is to present additional patterning that sup-
ports these earlier studies and highlight new findings
that link seals between sites in the Ghaggar-Hakra
region. The current study has also uncovered evidence
of stylistically and proportionately similar seals from
sites in the Ghaggar-Hakra with materials recovered
outside of the region. Taken together, the analysis of
seals from the Ghaggar-Hakra has provided new in-
sights into the scale and nature of variation present, as
well as potential links with seals from other sites.
Of the 70 seals from the greater Ghaggar-Hakra
region analyzed in this study, a total of 3 groups
comprised of 6 seals have been identified that may
represent local or regional carving styles (Table 4).
As with the materials discussed above from Gujarat,
these groups are based on shared attribute styles and
metric proportions. For the most part, the specific
combinations of these attributes are unique, even if
individual element styles are more common. It is also
worth noting that two of the groups are from one site
(Kalibangan), the other from two sites (Banawali and
Bhirrana). As with the stylistic groups from Gujarat,
there are other groups (7) that contain seals from the
Ghaggar-Hakra and sites in other regions, principally
Mohenjo-daro (Table 5).
The difference is that there are more multi-region-
al stylistic groups that contain at least one seal from a
Ghaggar-Hakra site (7 groups comprised of 16 seals)
than there are regional groups (3 groups comprised of

Table 4 Stylistic seal groups from sites in the Ghaggar-Hakra region

Stylistic Group Seal Count CISI/Other Number

Kalibangan #1 2 K4, K8

Kalibangan #2 2 K13, K22

Banawali-Bhirrana 2 B10, BHR 1

Table 5 Stylistic seal groups from sites in the Ghaggar-Hakra region with links to sites in other regions

Stylistic Group Seal Count CISI/Other Number

Banawali-Farmana-Mohenjo-daro 3 B7, FMN1, M269

Harappa-Kalibangan #1 2 H408, K5

Harappa-Kalibangan #2 2 H475, K19

Kalibangan-Mohenjo-daro #1 2 K15, M732

Kalibangan-Mohenjo-daro #2 2 K17, M738

Bhirrana-Mohenjo-daro 2 BHR1, M977

Banawali-Balakot 3 B4, B5, BLK5

- 181 -
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology
6 seals), while in Gujarat the numbers are more equal
(6 regional, Gujarat-based stylistic groups comprised
of 14 seals, 5 multi-regional stylistic groups comprised
of 11 seals, with at least one seal from a Gujarati site).
However, none of these numbers are statistically sig-
nificant, and more data is necessary to determine if
these differences represent broader cultural trends be-
tween the two regions. At present, the differences in
multi-regional distribution patterns between stylistic
groups from Gujarat and the Ghaggar-Hakra can pri-
marily be explained by the frequency of multi-regional
groups that contain at least one seal from Kalibangan.
Kalibangan Group #1
This group consists of two seals, both of which depict
left-facing animals with offering stands in front of the
unicorn’s body (Figure 11). This group has been pre-
sented earlier ( Jamison 2017) but is worth discussing
again here as it provides the best evidence of a local,
site-based carving style from a site in the greater Gh-
aggar-Hakra region. Simple visual inspection confirms
that the seals have shared styles of nearly all attribute
styles under consideration here. These are most visible
in the styles of eyes, ears, necks, halters, and offering
stands. The eyes and ears in particular are distinct and
unique, both in terms of their placement and orien-
tation and in the number of carving strokes used to
engrave them. There are also clear parallels in the legs
and hooves and tails, and the placement and orien-
tation of the pizzles are also comparable, even if the
carving strokes are distinct. Though some of these ele-
ment styles are common (neck and halter), others are
not, and to date I have not identified any other seals
with these specific combinations of stylistic attributes.
The proportions of length to width for most of the
elements of the unicorn and offering stand studied in
this research are also comparable, though not identi-
cal. The most glaring discrepancy is in the proportions
of the neck, but this can likely be explained by the
fact that the seals were carved by hand and one of
- 182 -
them (KLB-4) appears to have been effected by the
placement of the upper register of the offering stand.
Overall, the ratios of length to width for the body, ear,
head, pizzle, and lower register of the offering stand
are very similar. Unfortunately, it is not possible to
untangle any contextual relationship between the two
seals at present, as this data is awaiting publication.
However, based on the clear stylistic similarities, and
the carving style and orientation of the inscription, it
is likely that the seals have similar temporal affiliation.
More importantly, to date no other seals with these
attribute combinations have been identified from any
other sites.
Kalibangan Group #2
This group also consists of a pair of unicorn seals
with left-facing animals and offering stands in front
of the body (Figure 12). As with group #1 from
Kalibangan, at present they represent unique stylistic
attribute combinations, and therefore may represent
a local carving style. This hypothesis is strengthened
by the fact that Kalibangan is one of only a few sites
to have yielded unfinished seals ( Joshi and Parpola
1987). Though one of the seals (KLB-22) is worn and
damaged around the edges, there are still visible sim-
ilarities in many stylistic elements, including the eye,
horn, neck, halter, pizzle, tail, and both registers of the
offering stand. Most other elements vary only slightly
in placement and orientation, some of which appear
to have been influenced by the presence of other fea-
tures, especially the inscriptions and offering stands.
The ratio of length to width for five of the seven
metric attributes studied is also comparable, with only
minor variance observed. The most obvious difference
in proportions between the two seals in this group
is the neck. Again this may be partially due to the
placement of the upper register of the offering stand.
Another discrepancy can be seen in the proportion of
the ears. Since these are among the smallest elements
of unicorn iconography, they generally demonstrate
 Gregg Jamison Exploring stylistic variation in inscribed steatite seals of the Indus civilization

Kalibangan (K-4) Kalibangan (K-8)

Figure 11 Kalibangan Seal Group #1 ( Joshi and Parpola 1987)

Kalibangan (K-13) Kalibangan (K-22)

Figure 12 Kalibangan Seal Group #2 ( Joshi and Parpola 1987)

more metric variation than others. In spite of these
minor differences, the proportions of the head, body,
pizzle, and both aspects of the offering stand are very
similar. Based on current evidence, this pair may also
represent a local or regional carving style as discussed
above.
Seals from the Ghaggar-Hakra with links
to other sites and regions
Though collectively the seals from the Ghaggar-Hakra
are stylistically distinct from most found at other
sites and regions, there are a few examples of groups
(primarily pairs) that have shared attribute styles and
proportions of length to width. While most of these
demonstrate links between a single site in the Ghag-

- 183 -
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology
gar-Hakra and either Harappa or Mohenjo-daro, there
are also 7 groups that are distributed among multiple
sites in the former region. While it is possible that
these may represent regional carving styles centered
in the Ghaggar-Hakra, much more work is necessary
to evaluate this hypothesis. In any case, these findings
are comparable to those discussed above for Gujarat
and highlight the fact that both regions contain seals
that are stylistically distinct as well as ones that have
parallels at other sites throughout the Indus.
Banwali-Farmana-Mohenjo-daro Group
This group actually consists of three seals, one each
from Banawali and Farmana, and the third from Mo-
henjo-daro. All three seals depict right-facing buffalos,
engraved in a bold, angular style (Figure 13). To date,
these are among the only examples of right-facing
buffalo seals that have been published from any site.
Although they are not identical copies, they have very
similar styles of horns, eyes, pizzles, legs, and hooves.
The parallel, incised lines on the animal’s body are
also quite similar. Though the seal from Banawali is
damaged and does not have incised lines on the body,
the two from Farmana and Mohenjo-daro do depict
these features. All three also bear short inscriptions
that are fairly linear in orientation and engraved with
an angular carving style. While most buffalo seals are
left facing with a manger or feeding trough in front
of the animal’s head, none of the three in this group
contain these features. There are also a number of
clear similarities in the proportions of the three seals.
These are most visible in the horns, body, legs, and
pizzles. Whether these seals were actually produced
at one of the Ghaggar-Hakra sites remains uncertain,
but for now they can be characterized as representing
a distinct regional style centered there.
Banawali-Bhirrana Group
This group consists of two seals, one from each site.
They represent one of the strongest links among seals
- 184 -
from the Ghaggar-Hakra sites, and are so alike both
stylistically and proportionately that they may have
been carved by the same hands. Both seals depict
right-facing markhors with upturned heads, a char-
acter of the Indus script below the head where the
offering stand is usually placed, and short inscriptions
comprised of the same characters (Figure 14). The
markhor is one of the least common animals engraved
on Indus seals, and the fact that it appears facing right
on two seals from the Ghaggar-Hakra is interesting
in and of itself. When we analyze the compositional
elements of the animal, however, the overwhelming
similarities between the two seals become even clearer.
For example, both animals are engraved with
the same number of parallel lines on the neck and
shoulder, and each has a large, prominent eyeball that
occupies most of the engraved surface on the head.
Clear parallels can also be seen in the position and
orientation of the horns, pizzles, legs, and hooves; and
both contain a single incised line near the animal’s
rear flank. This feature has already been discussed in
regard to some of the other groups above, and appears
to be more common on seals with right facing animals
from the Ghaggar-Hakra. Another striking similarity
is seen in the tails of both animals, which extends
upward vertically from the rump and contains three
roughly perpendicular incised lines near the tip. Of
equal significance is the fact that both depict the same
inscribed character below the head, which is nearly
identical in placement and proportion.
The two seals have nearly identical proportions of
most other elements of the animal’s body too, includ-
ing the head, neck, body, and pizzle. Even the inscrip-
tions are similar, in that both are comprised of short
vertical lines that are parallel and not linear; they rise
from left to right on the original seals towards the top
of the engraved face. If not for the fact that one con-
tains seven of these and the other six and they demon-
strate different wear patterns it would be difficult
to distinguish between them based on photographs
 Gregg Jamison Exploring stylistic variation in inscribed steatite seals of the Indus civilization

Farmana (FMN-1) Banawali (B-7) Mohenjo-daro (M-269)

Figure 13 Banawali-Farmana-Mohenjo-daro Seal Group ( Joshi and Parpola 1987; Shinde et al. 2011)

Banawali (B-10) Bhirrana (BHR-2)

Figure 14 Banawali-Bhirrana Seal Group
(Line drawings based on the photos published in Joshi and Parpola 1987 and Rao et al. 2004)

alone. As with most of the other groups, it is not pos-
sible to identify any contextual relationships based on
current published data, but they are so obviously alike
that it seems probable they were carved by the same
artisans and are therefore likely contemporary from
an archaeological perspective.
Harappa-Kalibangan Groups #1 & 2
There are two groups of seals that highlight links
between Harappa and Kalibangan. Both contain two
seals, one from each site. They depict left-facing uni-
corns with offering stands in front of the animal’s head
and inscriptions of varying lengths (Figure 15). As
both groups have been discussed elsewhere ( Jamison
2017), little else needs to be said here beyond reiterat-
ing that both pairs are characterized by at least seven
shared stylistic attributes and five ratios of length
to width for various elements of the unicorn motif.
Although the first group does contain fairly common
element styles, the combinations of them are unique
thus far. The second group is more unique stylistically,
with uncommon styles of the heads, eyes, and offering
stands. To date parallel styles of these features have
not been identified on other seals.
At present it is not possible to determine where
the seals in these groups were produced. Since both

- 185 -
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology

Harappa-Kalibangan Group #1

Harappa (H-408) Kalibangan (K-5)

Harappa (H-475) Kalibangan (K-19)

Harappa-Kalibangan Group #2
Figure 15 Harappa-Kalibangan Seal Groups #1 & 2 ( Joshi and Parpola 1987; Shah and Parpola 1991)

sites have yielded evidence of seal production and the
form of unfinished seals, as well as stylistically distinct
seals, it is possible that they could have been made at
either. The fact that there is only one seal from both
sites in each group is also problematic in determining
the source. Regardless, it is probable that both repre-
sent a regional carving style centered at either one of
the sites, as no parallels have been identified anywhere
else. This provisional interpretation supports earlier
research concerning the distribution of regional carv-
ing styles throughout the Indus (Rissman 1989).
As detailed contextual information concerning the

- 186 -
 Gregg Jamison Exploring stylistic variation in inscribed steatite seals of the Indus civilization
Kalibangan (K-15)
Figure 16 Kalibangan-Mohenjo-daro Seal Group #1 ( Joshi and Parpola 1987; Shah and Parpola 1991)
distribution of seals from Kalibangan has not been
published, it is useful to examine the distribution of
the two seals from Harappa to try and unravel spatial
and chronological patterning there. Unfortunately
both seals were recovered before the initiation of the
Harappa Archaeological Research Project (HARP),
which has exercised more rigorous stratigraphic exca-
vations at the site than earlier investigations. Based on
the available evidence, all that can be confidently stat-
ed is that the two seals were recovered from different
mounds and stratigraphic layers at the site. Consid-
ering that the two seals from Harappa are stylistically
distinct, and current evidence indicates that specific
craft technologies were taking place throughout dif-
ferent areas at the site (Kenoyer and Miller 2007); this
is neither surprising nor unexpected.
Kalibangan-Mohenjo-daro Group #1
One of the most significant and unexpected findings
of this study was the identification of a pair of sty-
listically similar seals from Kalibangan and Mohen-
jo-daro. Both depict left-facing unicorns with offering
stands below the head and inscriptions of varying
length, including a longer one on the seal from Kali-
- 187 -
Mohenjo-daro (M-732)
bangan that is engraved in two registers (Figure 16).
Although the seal from Mohenjo-daro is fractured,
all of the elements under analysis in this research are
still present. A cursory glance at both seals reveals that
they are quite similar, and many of the attributes are
engraved and decorated in unique ways.
There are a number of obvious stylistic similarities
between the two seals. The pattern of incised lines on
the neck is the same, as are the total number present
on each. Each halter is engraved with a single curvilin-
ear line at the front and two parallel lines at the back,
and both have a single incised line near the rear flank,
above the leg. Both depict prominent drilled eyeballs
with a single brow above, and the faces have promi-
nent snouts and what appears to be a single incised
line that represents a mouth. The legs, hooves, pizzles,
tails, and ears are so alike that it is possible they were
engraved by the same hand. Even the elements that are
slightly disparate, including the incised lines on the
face and offering stands, are still comparable morpho-
logically and proportionately. Both seals also depict
horns with a series of finely engraved perpendicular
incised lines.
Further evidence of commonalities between the
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology
Bhirrana (BHR-1)
Figure 17 Bhirrana-Mohenjo-daro Seal Group (Shah and Parpola 1991; Uesugi et al. 2016)
two seals can also be seen in the ratios of length to
width for all seven attributes of the unicorn motif and
offering stand under analysis. Most of the groups dis-
cussed above contain some metric diversity in one or
a few categories, but the amount of variance between
these two is minimal. Considering that analysis was
conducted on photographs rather than the actual
seals, it is possible that there is even less present than
observed here. The dimensions of the seals themselves
are also comparable (they are nearly the same size),
as are the proportions of the total engraved surface.
Overall, the level of standardization between the two
seals is remarkable, especially in light of the fact they
were carved by hand. This, in concert with the fact
they contain unique attribute styles, most of which
are engraved with fine detail, suggests that both may
have been produced by the same skilled artisans.
Unfortunately it is not possible at present to de-
termine whether there are any strong contextual rela-
tionships between the two, since this information has
not been published for Kalibangan and is problematic
for Mohenjo-daro due to issues with stratigraphy and
chronology. Since both sites have yielded evidence
- 188 -
Mohenjo-daro (M-977)
of local production in the form of unfinished seals,
and there is only one example from both sites, it is
also not possible at present to determine where they
were produced. Based on the overwhelming evidence
presented above, however, it seems likely that they
are contemporary, and likely represent the products
of a single workshop. More broadly, these two seals
represent the best evidence uncovered to date of
inter-regional seal connections among Indus sites.
Though I have identified several other examples of
this, these two seals remain the best example of links
between different regions because of the strong and
clear similarities among all attribute categories under
consideration.
Bhirrana-Mohenjo-daro Group
The last group consists of a pair of seals from Bhirrana
and Mohenjo-daro. Both seals depict right-facing
unicorns carved in a distinctive, angular style (Figure
17). Although the seal from Mohenjo-daro is frag-
mentary and several elements are missing, the seals
have been grouped based on shared stylistic attributes
and proportions of the unicorn that are present. These
 Gregg Jamison Exploring stylistic variation in inscribed steatite seals of the Indus civilization
are clearly visible in the styles of eyes, necks, legs and
hooves, and pizzles. Though the ears and horns are
not decorated in the same manner, there are parallels
in their placements and orientations. Both unicorns
also depict comparable patterns of incised lines on
their necks and rear flanks. One of the most unique
shared features is an incised line that is oriented per-
pendicular to the front legs, which is not common on
most other unicorn seals.
The seal from Bhirrana has already been examined
(Uesugi et al. 2016) and described in detail. Propor-
tionately some of the elements are alike between the
two, but it is difficult to adequately compare all the
various elements since the object from Mohenjo-daro
is broken. Beyond the similarities already mentioned,
the seal from Mohenjo-daro is also noteworthy be-
cause it is one of only a few from the site that depicts
a right-facing unicorn. The fact that it demonstrates
links with this seal from Bhirrana is also significant,
because these two sites are separated by considerable
distance and currently represent the best potential ev-
idence for seal connections between a Ghaggar-Hakra
site and one from Sindh. As the seal from Bhirrana
has already been extensively studied, including the
use of scanning electron microscope, the potential
relationship between these two seals can be further
investigated by conducting similar research on the seal
from Mohenjo-daro.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION
The results of this study have clearly revealed that
although inscribed square stamp seals are highly var-
iable between the two regions, at least some of this
variation is patterned. There are groups of seals from
both areas that are stylistically and proportionately
similar (within each region, not between them). I
argue that these likely represent the products of indi-
vidual workshops and artisans, based on the idea that
- 189 -
since these objects are small and were carved by hand,
different craftspeople would have produced them
using their own unique carving styles and techniques.
This hypothesis is based on earlier research ( Jamison
2013, 2017) with modern steatite carvers, replicating
aspects of Indus seal production. Another analogy is
hand-writing: everyone does it a little bit differently,
even when writing the same thing.
The fact that it is possible to find seal groups that
are distinct from others is significant for a number
of reasons. It highlights the utility of formal anal-
ysis (stylistic and metric) to identify patterns that
relate to the carving styles of individual artisans and
workshops. More importantly, the distribution of
these groups indicates that seal production and use in
the Indus was not restricted to only the large urban
centers, that they were likely produced in multiple
workshops throughout the Indus, including in Guja-
rat and the greater Ghaggar-Hakra region. The results
of this study also suggest that the finished products of
these different workshops were distributed through
multiple exchange networks. Even in this brief study it
has been possible to identify groups that are restricted
to single sites, others to either Gujarat or the Ghag-
gar-Hakra, and others that demonstrate links between
multiple regions.
All of this evidence points towards a complex pat-
tern of seal manufacture and use in the Indus, which
can be characterized as a decentralized form of pro-
duction. Under this system we expect to see evidence
for seal production in multiple workshops within and
among different settlements, with different workshops
using variable carving styles, techniques, and tools.
It is only through detailed comparative analysis that
we can identify the patterns that support this, and
the preliminary results discussed here are promising.
Further testing is necessary to evaluate all of the in-
terpretations presented in this paper, but can easily
be accomplished through analysis of more seals from
more sites.
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology
Another important avenue for future research
has to do with chronological changes in seal carving
styles. Though most of the seals in the groups dis-
cussed in this paper do not have reliable stratigraphic
contexts, it is possible to hypothesize which periods
they may belong to using a comparative approach.
Excavations by the Harappa Archaeological Research
Project (HARP) have uncovered various seals from
sound stratigraphic contexts, allowing the creation of
a seal chronology for that site (Kenoyer 2006; Kenoy-
er and Meadow 2010). Recent excavations at sites in
the Ghaggar-Hakra region (Shinde et al. 2011) and
analyses of recovered seals (Konasukawa 2013; Uesugi
2011; Useugi et al. 2016) have also provided insights
into changes in seal carving styles and techniques over
time. Using this research as a comparative framework,
it has been possible to make some preliminary obser-
vations about chronological patterning among the seal
groups discussed in this work, though these should be
viewed as hypotheses for future studies as opposed to
strong inferences and interpretations.
The following three preliminary observations have
been made about chronological affiliations of the seal
groups identified from sites in the Ghaggar-Hakra and
Gujarat:
1. Based on comparative analyses, at least some of the
groups from the Ghaggar-Hakra appear to represent
early carving styles, correlated with Period A of the
Harappa Phase (2600-2450 BCE). They are charac-
terized by right-facing animals, bold, angular carving
styles, and short, angular inscriptions (Kenoyer 2006).
At least three of these groups also demonstrate stylis-
tic links with seals from Mohenjo-daro.
2. Early carving styles are absent from sites in Gujarat,
suggesting that regional seal carving began later there,
or that to date no examples of early carving styles
have been discovered. In contrast, the majority of the
groups from Gujarat appear to represent Period 3B
- 190 -
(2450-2200 BCE) or 3C (2200-1900 BCE) carving
styles. These contain left-facing animals with more
smooth, naturalized carving styles and variable in-
scription characteristics (Kenoyer 2006; Kenoyer and
Meadow 2010).
3. Overall, the comparative analysis of carving styles,
though preliminary, supports the HARP seal chronol-
ogy, highlighting change over time. At least some of
the variation identified in this study can be correlated
with this, though further study is required to support
or challenge these preliminary findings.
Another long-term goal is to examine the seals
themselves as opposed to published photographs. The
use of the scanning electron microscope to examine
tool marks and engraved surfaces made with different
tools has proved to be a powerful technique for inves-
tigation technical aspects of production that are not
possible using photographs ( Jamison 2013; Kenoyer
2003, 2005; Konasukawa 2013; Shinde et al. 2011;
Uesugi et al. 2016). Future research utilizing this
technique on the seal groups identified in this study
will allow us to identify additional patterns that will
strengthen or refute the conclusions presented here.
In spite of the significance of inscribed steatite
seals in the Indus civilization, it is still unclear how
and where they were made, and how production
varied within and among different sites and regions.
This study has identified evidence of clear variation
among seals from sites in Gujarat and the greater Gh-
aggar-Hakra region, in terms of iconography, carving
styles, and metric proportions. But it is also important
to note that there is as much variability among the
seals from each region as there is between them. More
importantly, using formal attribute (stylistic) and met-
ric analysis, it has been possible to identify groups of
seals that were likely made in the same workshops. In
the absence of stratigraphically excavated seal work-
shops at most Indus sites, analysis of the seals them-
selves using these methods represents the best way to
 Gregg Jamison Exploring stylistic variation in inscribed steatite seals of the Indus civilization
try and understand how production was organized
and varied.
Current evidence suggests that seal production
and use was taking place at multiple sites throughout
the Indus, and they were moving between different
sites and regions through multiple exchange net-
works. This pattern supports earlier research focusing
on material variability in the Indus as a whole and
Gujarat and the greater Ghaggar-Hakra region more
specifically. Considering that seals were used as sym-
bols of wealth and power by ruling elites (Kenoyer
2000), they can be viewed as markers of socio-politi-
cal organization and control. The results of this study
support a decentralized form of seal production, in
which elite groups are commissioning seals that are
made in a variety of different workshops, within and
among settlements. This will of course require further
testing, but the methods and results discussed in this
paper provide a baseline for doing so. Such studies are
crucial for advancing our awareness and understand-
ing of one of the most well-known and important
craft traditions of the Indus civilization.
Acknowledgments
I am grateful to Dr. Akinori Uesugi for including
this paper in this volume and for his assistance with
editing and images. Thanks also go to Professors
Ajithprasad and Bhan of the Department of Archae-
ology and Ancient History and the M.S. University of
Baroda for providing me with images of the seals from
Bagasra used in this analysis. Professor Asko Parpola
graciously allowed me to analyze archival materials
used to create the Corpus of Indus Seals and Inscrip-
tions, which was invaluable during this analysis. Final-
ly, I am most grateful to Professor J. Mark Kenoyer for
his long-term support of my research. In spite of all
the assistance I have received, any errors or omissions
are entirely my own.
- 191 -
Bibliography
Ajithprasad, P. 2008. "Jaidak (Pitad): A Sorath Harappan
Site in Jamnagar District, Gujarat and Its Architectural
Features", in T. Osada and A. Uesugi eds. Occasional Paper
4: Linguistics, Archaeology and the Human Past. Research
Institute for Humanity and Nature, . Kyoto. pp. 83-99.
Ameri, M. 2011. Sealing at the Edge of the Middle Asian In-
teraction Sphere: The View from Gilund, Rajasthan, India.
Unpublished PhD Thesis, Institute of Fine Arts, New
York University.
Ameri, M. 2013. "Regional variation in the Harappan world:
the evidence from the seals", in S. Abraham, P. Gullapali, T.
Raczek and U. Z. Rizvi eds. Connections and Complexity:
New Approaches to the Archaeology of South and Central
Asia. Left Coast Press, Walnut Creek, CA. pp. 355-375.
Ameri, M. 2018. "Letting the Pictures Speak: An Image-based
Approach to the Mythological and Narrative Imagery of
the Harappan World", in M. Ameri, S.K. Costello, G. Jam-
ison, and S.J. Scott eds. Seals and Sealing in the Ancient
World: Case Studies from the Near East, Egypt, the Aegean,
and South Asia. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
pp. 144-166.
Bhan, K.K. and D. Gowda 2003. Shell Working at Nagwada
(North Gujarat) with Special Refernce to Shell Industries
of the Harappan Tradition in Gujarat. Man and Environ-
ment XVIII(2): 51-80.
Bhan, K.K., V.H. Sonawane, P. Ajithprasad, and S. Pratap-
chandran 2005. A Harappan trading and craft produc-
tion centre at Gola Dhoro (Bagasra). Antiquity 79(304),
http://antiquity.ac.uk/projgall/bhan/index.html.
Bisht, R.S. 1990. Dholavira: New Horizons of the Indus Civ-
ilization. Puratattva 20: 71-82.
Bisht, R.S. 2005. "The Water Structures and Engineering of
the Harappans at Dholavira (India)", in C. Jarrige and V.
Lefèvre eds. South Asian Archaeology 2001. CNRS, Paris.
pp. 11-26.
Bisht, R.S. 2015. Excavations at Dholavira (1989-90 to 2005-
05). Archaeological Survey of India, New Delhi.
Franke-Vogt, U. 1991. Die Glyptik aus Mohenjo-daro. Uni-
formität und Variabilität in der Induskultur: Untersuchun-
gen zur Typologie, Ikonogaphie, und räumlichen Verteilung,
III. Mainz.
Franke-Vogt, U. 1992. "Inscribed Objects from Mohenjo-Da-
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology
ro: Some Remarks on Stylistic Variability and Distribu-
tion Patterns", in C. Jarrige ed. South Asian Archaeology
1992. Monographs in World Archaeology No. 14. Prehis-
tory Press, Madison, WI. pp. 103-112.
Green, A.S. 2010. Reconstructing Operational Sequences:
A New Methodology for the Study of Seal Carving in the
Indus Civilization. Man and Environment 35(2): 15-34.
Green, A.S. 2016. Stamp Seals in the Political Economy of
South Asia's Earliest Cities. Unpublished PhD Thesis, New
York University.
Herman, C.F. 1997. Harappan Gujarat: The Archaeolo-
gy-Chronology Connection. Paléorient 22(2): 77-112.
Jamison, G.M. 2011. Regional Studies of Harappan Seal Pro-
duction: A Case Study From Sites In Sindh. Ancient Sindh
11: 17-44.
Jamison, G.M. 2012. Experimental Studies of Harappan Ste-
atite Carving and Firing Techniques. Pakistan Heritage 4:
1-18.
Jamison, G.M. 2013. Experimental and Ethnoarchaeological
Approaches to Indus Seal Production: Modeling Variation
in Manufacturing Techniques. Heritage 1: 222-243.
Jamison, G.M. 2016. "Seal Production in the Indus Civiliza-
tion: A Comparative Analysis of Regional Carving Tra-
ditions", in V. Widorn, U. Franke, and P. Latschenberger
eds. South Asian Archaeology and Art: Contextualizing
Material Culture in South and Central Asia in Pre-Modern
Times. Brepols, Turnhout. pp. 79-90.
Jamison, G.M. 2017. The Organization of Indus Unicorn Seal
Production: a Diachronic Comparative Study of Style, Skill,
and Sociopolitical Organization. Unpublished PhD Thesis,
University of Wisconsin–Madison.
Jamison, G.M. 2018a. "Understanding Indus Seal Carving
Traditions: a stylistic and metric approach", in M. Ameri, S.
K. Costello, G. Jamison, and S. J. Scott eds. Seals and Seal-
ings in the Ancient World: Case Studies from the Near East,
Egypt, the Aegean and South Asia. Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge. pp. 167-186.
Jamison, G.M. 2018b. "The Organization of Indus Unicorn
Seal Production. A Multi-faceted Investigation of Tech-
nology, Skill, and Style", in D. Frenez, G. Jamison, R. W.
Law, R. H. Meadow, M. Vidale eds. Walking with the Uni-
corn: Social Organization and Material Culture in Ancient
South Asia. Archaeopress, London. pp. 272-291.
- 192 -
Jamison, G.M., B.P. Sharma, P. Ajithprasad, K. Krishnan,
K.K. Bhan, and V.H. Sonawane 2017. Inscribed Unicorn
Seals from Bagasra, Gujarat: A Comparative Analysis of
Morphology, Carving Styles, and Distribution Patterns.
Heritage 5: 1-21.
Joshi, J.P., and A. Parpola 1987. Corpus of Indus Seals and
Inscriptions: Collections in India, Vol. I. Suomalainen
Tiedeakatemia, Helsinki.
Kenoyer, J.M. 1991. The Indus Valley Tradition of Pakistan
and Western India. Journal of World Prehistory 5(4): 331-
385.
Kenoyer, J.M. 1998. Ancient Cities of the Indus Valley Civili-
zation. Oxford University Press, Karachi.
Kenoyer, J.M. 2000. "Wealth and Socio-Economic Hierar-
chies of the Indus Valley Civilization", in J. Richards and
M. Van Buren eds. Order, Legitimacy and Wealth in Early
States. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. pp. 90-
112.
Kenoyer, J.M. 2003. Uncovering the Keys to the Lost Indus
Cities. Scientific American, July 2003: 68-75.
Kenoyer, J.M. 2005. Steatite and Faience Manufacturing
at Harappa: New Evidence from Mound E Excavations
2000-2001. Journal of the National Museum, Karachi.
Kenoyer, J.M. 2006. "The Origin, Context and Function of
the Indus Script: Recent Insights from Harappa". in T.
Osada ed. Proceedings of the Pre-symposium of RIHN and
7th ESCA Harvard-Kyoto Roundtable. Research Institute
for Humanity and Nature, Kyoto. pp. 9-27.
Kenoyer, J.M. and H.M.-L. Miller 2007. "Multiple Crafts and
Socio-Economic Associations in the Indus Civilization:
Perspectives on Continuity and Change from Harappa,
Pakistan", in I. Shimada ed. Rethinking Craft Production:
the Nature of Producers and Multi-Craft Organization.
University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City. pp. 152-183.
Kenoyer, J.M. and R.H. Meadow 2010. "Inscribed Objects
from Harappa Excavations 1986-2007", in A. Parpola, B.
M. Pande and P. Kioskikallio eds. Corpus of Indus Seals
and Inscriptions. Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia, Helsinki.
pp. xliv-lviii.
Konasukawa, A. 2013. Diversity of Harappan Civilization: A
Case Study of the Ghaggar Basin (with Special Reference to
Seals). Unpublished PhD Thesis, Department of Archae-
ology, Deccan College, Pune.
 Gregg Jamison Exploring stylistic variation in inscribed steatite seals of the Indus civilization
Mackay, E.J.H. 1931. "Chapter XXI: Seals, Seal Impressions,
and Copper Tablets, with Tabulation", in Sir J.R. Marshall
ed. Mohenjo-daro and the Indus Civilization. Probsthain,
London. pp. 370-405.
Mackay, E.J.H. 1938. Further Excavations at Mohenjodaro.
Government of India Press, New Delhi.
Marshall, Sir J.H. 1924. First light on a long-forgotten civili-
zation. Illustrated London News 20 September 1924: 528-
32, 548.
Marshall, Sir J.H. 1931. Mohenjo-daro and the Indus Civiliza-
tion. Probsthain, London.
Mughal, M.R. 1990. The Harappan settlement systems and
patterns in the Greater Indus Valley (circa 3500-1500
BC). Pakistan Archaeology 25: 1-62.
Parpola, A. 1994. Deciphering the Indus Script. Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge.
Parpola, A., B.M Pande and P. Koskikallio 2010. Corpus of
Indus Seals and Inscriptions: Supplement to Mohenjo-daro
and Harappa, Vol. III. Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia, Hel-
sinki.
Possehl, G.L. 2002. The Indus Civilization: A Contemporary
Perspective. Alta Mira Press, Walnut Creek, CA.
Possehl, G.L. 2003. "The Indus Civilization: An Introduction
to Environment, Subsistence, and Culture History", in S.
Weber and W.R. Belcher eds. Ethnobiology and the Indus
Civilization. Lexington Books, Lanham, MD. pp. 1-20.
Possehl, G.L. 2007. "The Harappan Settlement of Gujarat",
in E.C. Stone ed. Settlement and Society: Essays Dedicated
to Robert McCormick Adams. Costen Institute of Archae-
ology, University of California, Los Angeles/the Oriental
Institute of the University of Chicago. pp. 297-328.
Possehl, G.L. and C.F. Herman 1990. "The Sorath Harappan.
A new regional manifestation of the Indus urban phase",
in M. Taddei and P. Callieri eds. South Asian Archaeology
1987. Istituto Italiano per il Medio ed Estremo Oriente,
Roma. pp. 295-319.
Possehl, G.L. and M.H. Raval eds. 1989. Harappan Civiliza-
tion and Rojdi. Oxford & IBH and AIIS, New Delhi.
Rao, L.S., N.B. Sahu, P. Sahu, U.A. Shastry, and S. Diwan
2004. Unearthing Harappan Settlement at Bhirrana
(2003-2004). Purātattva 34: 20-24.
Rao, L.S., N.B. Sahu, P. Sahu, S. Diwan, and U.A. Shastry
2005. New Light on the Excavation of Harappan Settle-
- 193 -
ment at Bhirrana. Purāttatva 35: 60-68.
Rao, S.R. 1979/1985. Lothal: A Harappan Port Town (1955-
1962), 2 Vols. Memoirs of the Archaeological Survey of
India 78. Archaeological Survey of India, New Delhi.
Rissman, P.C. 1989. "The Organization of Seal Production
in the Harappan Civilization". in J.M. Kenoyer ed. Old
Problems and New Perspectives in the Archaeology of South
Asia. Wisconsin Archaeological Reports, vol. 2. Wiscon-
sin: Department of Anthropology, University of Wiscon-
sin-Madison, Madison. pp. 159-170.
Sant, U., T.J. Baidya, N.G. Nikoshey, N.K. Sinha, S. Nayan, J.K.
Tiwari, and A. Arif 2005. Baror: A New Harappan Site
in Ghaggar Valley – A Preliminary Report. Purātattva 35:
50-59
Shaffer, J.G. 1992. "The Indus Valley, Baluchistan and Hel-
mand Traditions: Neolithic Through Bronze Age", in R.
Ehrich ed. Chronologies in Old World Archaeology (3rd
Edition), Vol. 1. University of Chicago Press, Chicago. pp.
441-464.
Shah, S.G.M. and A. Parpola 1991. Corpus of Indus Seals and
Inscriptions: Collections in Pakistan, Vol. II. Suomalainen
Tiedeakatemia, Helsinki.
Shinde, V. 1998. Pre-Harappan Padri Culture in Saurashtra:
The Recent Discovery. South Asian Studies 14: 173-182.
Shinde, V.S., and S.B. Kar 1992. Padri Ware: A New Painted
Ceramic Found in the Harappan Levels at Padri in Guja-
rat. Man and Environment 17: 105-110.
Shinde, V.S., T. Osada, and M. Kumar eds. 2011. Excavations
at Farmana: District Rohtak, Harayana, India, 2006-2008.
Indus Project, Research Institute for Humanity and Na-
ture, Kyoto.
Sonawane, V.H. 1992. Fresh Light on the Specialized Crafts
of the Harappans in Gujarat. Eastern Anthropologist 45:
155-172.
Sonawane, V.H. 1999. Harappan Civilization in Gujarat: A
Recent Perspective. Prāgdharā 9: 1-13.
Sonawane, V.H. and P. Ajithprasad 1994. Harappa Culture
and Gujarat. Man and Environment 19(1-2): 129-139.
Uesugi, A. 2011. "Development of the Inter-Regional In-
teraction System in the Indus Valley and Beyond: A
Hypothetical View Towards the Formation of the Urban
Society", in T. Osada and M. Witzel eds. Cultural Rela-
tions between the Indus and the Iranian Plateau During
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology

the Third Millennium BCE. Department of Sanskrit and

Indian Studies, Harvard University, Cambridge. pp. 359-
380.
Uesugi, A. and G. Jamison in press. Diversity and Dynamics
in the Indus Urban Society: focusing on the iconography
and carving technology of Indus seals.
Uesugi, A., G. Jamison, V. Dangi and S. Nakayama 2016. A
Study on the Stylistic and Technological Aspects of Indus
Seals with A Focus on an Example from Bhirrana. Herit-
age 4: 1-17.
Vats, M.S. 1940. Excavations at Harappa. Archaeological Sur-
vey of India, New Delhi.
Wright, R.P. 2010. The Ancient Indus: Urbanism, Economy,
and Society. Cambridge University Press, New York.

- 194 -
 Takekazu Nagae Indus copper wares
Indus copper wares:
Study of manufacturing process by metallography
Takekazu Nagae
(Faculty of Art and Design, University of Toyama)
1 INTRODUCTION
Various kinds of artifacts excavated from the Indus
Valley tell us about the lives of ancient people. Copper
wares are one such kind of artifact, providing us with
significant information about advances in science
and technology during ancient times. Copper is one
of the oldest metals used by humans. Small pendants
and other items made by hammering "native copper"
found in the Middle East have been dated to about
8700 BC. The oldest smelted metal is considered to
be copper that was produced around 7000 BC in
Anatolia. The invention of bronze (copper-tin alloy)
brought about a remarkable increase in the use of cop-
per, heralding the beginning of the Bronze Age (Davis
ed. 2001: 3). At the ancient Indus Valley sites such as
Mohenjo-daro, Harappa, Lothal, and Rangpur, sev-
eral kinds of bronze wares were excavated along with
many copper wares. Alloying technology decreased
the melting temperature of a metal and made casting
easier. On top of that, the mechanical properties of
copper were enhanced by alloying. Generally, bronze
contains several percent of tin, and when this amount
goes over 10 %, the hardness rises steeply with tin
content. The alloys are then called "high-tin bronze".
In particular, we call high-tin bronze containing more
than 15 % tin "heat treatable high-tin bronze" (Mifune
- 195 -
et al. 2010). Microstructures of excavated bronze are
frequently observed mainly from artifacts belonging
to the first millennium BC (Srinivasan and Glover
1995) Therefore, the origin of heat treatment is as yet
unknown. Microstructural study is thus important
to reveal the origin of heat treatment technology of
high-tin bronze.
India has a great history of metal working begin-
ning from the Indus civilization. Here, I would like to
show typical microstructural data of copper artifacts
from the Bronze Age, and the Iron Age, and tradition-
al craftworks that persist to the present day.
2 BASICS FOR AN UNDERSTANDING OF
METALLURGICAL STUDY
2.1 Crystal structures of metal materials
Metal atoms bond with each other via free electrons.
These atoms are packed very densely and form metal
crystals. Figure 1(a) shows an example of lacunal pack-
ing. Most metal atoms do not arrange in this order. In
the case of copper, the atoms are arranged as shown in
Figure 1(b). They are piled up as schematically shown
in Figure 1(c). The atomic packing factor (APF) in
this case is 0.74, which is the highest value among all
kinds of metal crystals. Figure 1(d) shows a schematic
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology

Figure 1　Allay of atoms in a copper crystal

(a) Large interspatial array (No metals, except for Po, form this array), (b) Smallest interspatial array, (c) Stacking the smallest inter-
spatial array in layers, (d) Schematic illustration of copper crystal unit cell (Face-centered cubic: FCC)

Figure 2　Schematic illustration of impurity atoms

(a) Tin in copper FCC crystal (substitutional type), (b) Carbon in iron BCC crystal (interstitial type)

illustration of this crystal, which has a face-centered
cubic (FCC) structure. Silver and gold also take on
this FCC structure. Hexagonal closed packed (HCP)
and body-centered cubic (BCC) structures are other
typical crystal structures of metallic materials. Iron
shows a BCC structure at room temperature.
Engineering materials always contain impurities,
such as hydrogen, oxygen, and/or sulfur. It is impos-
sible to make a pure metal without any impurities.
These impurities often aggravate the characteristics
of the original metal. However, this also means that
we can improve the material properties or impart
new useful characteristics by the addition of adequate
elements (alloying elements). A copper alloy with
tin is called bronze, and an iron alloy with carbon is
called steel. We have used these alloys for a long time
now, from ancient times. Both of these alloys show
decreased melting temperature and increased strength
by alloying.
Figure 2 shows the positions of alloying elements

- 196 -
 Takekazu Nagae Indus copper wares
in crystals of copper (a) and iron (b). In bronze, tin
atoms are substituted with copper atoms which com-
pose the FCC crystal. In the case of steel, carbon takes
a position at the interspace of the BCC crystal of iron.
Tin and carbon are thus dissolved in the copper and
iron, respectively. Copper and iron are therefore called
solvents, tin and carbon are solute atoms, and the solid
material which dissolves solute atoms is called a solid
solution.
2.2 Phase transition of copper-tin alloy
The crystal structure of the copper-tin alloy changes
in accordance with temperature and composition. The
copper-tin alloy can exist as various phases denoted by
α, β, γ, δ, ε and η, each of which has a different crystal
structure. Figure 3 shows a schematic illustration of
the α, β and γ phases. Figure 4 shows the copper-tin
(Cu-Sn) binary alloy phase diagram (Saunders and
Miodownik 1990). This diagram indicates the phases
when a bronze alloy with a certain composition is
heated at a certain temperature for a certain time until
it attains equilibrium. When tin is added to copper,
some copper atoms are replaced by tin atoms (Figure
2). The copper atoms form a crystal with a FCC struc-
ture. The FCC structure has various slip systems and
shows high malleability due to its highly symmetric
structure. Even if copper is replaced by tin, the FCC
structure is maintained until a specific composition is
reached. This is called the α solid solution (Figure 3-a).
Tin is soluble in the α solid solution up to a maximum
of 16 %, and it keeps this state by rapid cooling, even
at room temperature. This state is called a supersatu-
rated solid solution. It naturally has high malleability
because the FCC structure is retained. However,
when a high-tin bronze, with tin content more than
about 10 %, is molten and is cooled, an extremely
fragile intermetallic compound phase called the δ
phase appears in addition to the α phase. The δ phase
has a complex structure and is fragile like glass. It is so
complex that it is difficult to show a simple schematic
- 197 -
illustration, as for the α, β and γ phases as shown in
Figure 3. When being shaped into objects, this fragile
phase could cause breakage of the object. Therefore,
the removal of the δ phase is important for high-tin
bronze working and for improving the durability of
products that contain it. Especially for heat-treatable
high-tin bronze, which contains more than 15 % tin,
the δ phase disappears and a part of it turns into the γ
phase by heating to above 520 °C, as shown in Figure
4. Furthermore, the γ phase turns into the β phase by
heating above 586 °C. The beta (β) phase is BCC and
is a supersaturated solid solution, which shows high
malleability. The gamma (γ) phase is an intermetallic
compound based on BCC. It is softer and more plas-
tic than the δ phase, although it is less suitable to work
than the α phase.
2.3 Fabrication method and microstructure
Usually, solid metallic materials are composed of
many small crystals (or grains). Such a material is
called a polycrystalline material. The morphological
characteristics of the grains vary according to the pro-
cessing history. In other words, we can estimate the
fabrication method used for metal wares by observing
the microstructure using optical microscopy and/or
electron microscopy.
Figure 5 shows optical micrographs of the Cu-Sn
alloy subjected to various processing methods, includ-
ing casting, forging, and heat treatment (quenching).
The microstructure of the cast alloy contains the
dendritic α phase. When hot worked, the dendritic α
phase changes to an equiaxed crystal with annealing
twins. When quenched, the α and β eutectoid phase
transforms into the β martensite phase. When cold
worked, slip lines are observed in the microstructure.
Figure 6 shows changes in form for the production
of a high-tin bronze bowl. P1 is a cast plate from
which the production starts. This form changed to
P2, P3, and P4 as it is hammered on a mortar with a
hollow depression. A photograph of its cross-section
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology

Figure 3　Position of copper and substitutional tin atoms in typical Cu-Sn alloy phases
(a) α phase: tin takes random position in FCC copper crystal, (b) β phase: tin takes random position in BCC copper crystal, (c) γ
phase: tin takes a body center position in BCC copper crystal orderly
* Bold outline circle shows body center of unit cell

Figure 4　Cu-Sn binary alloy phase diagrams

(N. Saunders and A.P. Miodownik in T.B. Massalski ed. 1990. Binary Alloy Phase Diagrams. ASM, Ohio. pp. 1481-1483)

demonstrates that the plate became thinner and thin-
ner. After quenching, P4 is changed to P5. The metal
structure in Figure 6 shows that P1 is composed of a
dendritic α phase and a α + δ eutectoid phase. In the
metal structure shown in P2, after forging of P1, the
shape of the α phase became isometric from dendrit-
ic, and annealing twin formation in the α phase was
observed. P5 is a sample after quenching. The metal
structure was composed of the α phase and the β mar-
tensite phase, while the δ phase disappeared (Mifune
et al. 2010).
3 MICROSTRUCTURE AND FORMING
METHOD OF INDUS COPPER WARES
Around 2600 ancient sites of the Indus civilization
have been found. Among them, 147 sites have been
excavated as of 2010 (Uesugi 2010). The sites of Far-
mana (29°02' N; 76°18' E) and Mitathal (28°53' N;

- 198 -
 Takekazu Nagae Indus copper wares

Figure 5　Changes in microstructures of Cu-22%Sn alloy.

Figure 6　Example of the changes in form and microstructure of bronze bowl with the fabrication process.
This sample is a Korean high tin bronze bowl made by hot forging of cast Cu-22%Sn alloy plate. P1 is the starting material made by
casting. As the forging process proceeds, the form and microstructure change from P2 to P5. The last sample (P5) was quenched
into water at the end the process.

- 199 -
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology
76°10' E) are two of these ancient Indus sites, and
excavated copper objects have been obtained from
them.
The author had a chance to analyze these copper
objects with the help of Indian and Japanese co-re-
searchers, from 2009 to 2012 (Nagae 2011; Manmo-
han Kumar et al. 2012). Here I show chemical analysis
data and microstructures of excavated artifacts from
those sites in order to reveal how they were produced.
The forming method (casting or forging) and the heat
treatment used were clarified for each.
3.1 Samples and experimental methods
Forty-two objects were subjected to analysis, in-
cluding rings, bangles, rods, arrow heads, and axes. All
were covered with a thick corrosion layer. All of these
analyzed samples have surviving metallic regions. A
small specimen was cut from the interiors of each of
these samples to observe the uncorroded metal region.
These specimens were mounted in resin and their sur-
faces were polished to remove all scratches. The result-
ing mirror-like surfaces were etched using a solution
of 60 ml of ethanol, 10 ml of hydrochloric acid, 30 ml
of distilled water, and 2 g of ferric chloride.
Samples for metallographic observations were
examined by optical microscopy (OM) and scanning
electron microscopy (SEM) or an electron probe
micro-analyzer (EPMA). Quantitative analysis of the
Farmana and Mitathal artifacts were carried out using
SEM-EDS and EPMA, respectively.
3.2 Chemical compositions
The major chemical compositions of the analyzed
samples are shown in Table 1. Most of them (except
for FRN-9 and FRN-29) are made of copper contain-
ing a small amount of impurities or alloying elements.
Tin was not observed in most of the samples except
for the bangle (FRN-9). Fifty percent of the Farmana
samples and 95 % of the Mitathal samples contained
arsenic. Arsenic is known to decrease the melting tem-
- 200 -
perature of copper alloys and improve their castability.
The hardness of copper alloys also increases upon the
addition of arsenic.
The bangles FRN-9 and FRN-29 have unique
compositions among the copper wares listed in Table
1, in that both contain a considerable amount of zinc.
Zinc changes the color of copper from red to a gold-
like yellow. It also decreases its melting point and
increases its hardness.
3.3 Microstructure and fabrication processes
Sixteen samples (eight each for Farmana and Mitath-
al) were selected for microstructural observations to
determine the fabrication process involved.
FRN-6: a ring (Figure 7-1)
The copper matrix was a polygonal α phase with an-
nealing twins. The long thin transversely elongated
phases correspond to Cu2S, due to the presence of
sulfur as an impurity. This ring was made by forging a
cast metal plate and subsequent annealing.
FRN-8: a fish hook (Figure 7-2)
The micrograph indicates a polygonal α phase with
annealing twins. The small dark spots are due to inter-
nal oxidation. A small amount of oxygen was detected
by EDS in this sample. This object was also made by
forging a cast metal plate and subsequent annealing.
FRN-9: a bangle (Figure 7-3)
This object was made of brass. As shown in Figure
7-3-b, the microstructure consists of a polygonal α
phase with annealing twins. This object was so severe-
ly corroded that even grain boundary corrosion can
be observed. This bangle was also made by forging of a
cast metal plate and subsequent annealing.
FRN-11: a rod (Figure 7-4)
This rod was made of copper containing sulfur and
iron as impurities. The microstructure consists of a
 Takekazu Nagae Indus copper wares

Figure 7-1 (a) Ring, FRN-6 and (b) microstructure

Figure 7-2 (a) Fish hook, FRN-8 and (b) microstructure

Figure 7-3 (a) Bangle, FRN-9 and (b) microstructure

Figure 7-4 (a) Rod, FRN-11 and (b) microstructure

- 201 -
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology

Figure 7-5 (a) Bangle, FRN-20 and (b) microstructure

Figure 7-6 (a) Axe, FRN-27 and (b) microstructure

Figure 7-7 (a) Axe, FRN-28 and (b) microstructure

Figure 7-8 (a) Bangle, FRN-29 and (b) microstructure

- 202 -
 Takekazu Nagae Indus copper wares

Figure 8-1 (a) Rod, MTL-3 and (b) microstructure

Figure 8-2 (a) Axe, MTL-14 and (b) microstructure

Figure 8-3 (a) Bangle, MTL-24 and (b) microstructure

Figure 8-4 (a) Bangle, MTL-26 and (b) microstructure

- 203 -
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology

Figure 8-5 (a) Bangle, MTL-29 and (b) microstructure

Figure 8-6 (a) Bangle, MTL-704 and (b) microstructure

Figure 8-7 (a) Bangle, MTL-705 and (b) microstructure

Figure 8-8 (a) Blade, MTL-950 and (b) microstructure

- 204 -
 Takekazu Nagae Indus copper wares

Table 1 Chemical compositions of the samples excavated from the Farmana and Mitathal sites.

Chemical composition (%) Analysis

No. Object
S Fe Ni Cu Zn As Sn Pb equipment
FRN- 1 ring － － － 98.0 － 2.0 － － SEM-EDS
FRN- 2 bangle － － － 100.0 － － － － SEM-EDS
FRN- 3 arrow head － － － 100.0 － － － － SEM-EDS
FRN- 5 ring － － － 98.0 － 1.0 － － SEM-EDS
FRN- 6* ring 0.9 － － 99.0 － － － － SEM-EDS
FRN- 7 ring － － － 100.0 － － － － SEM-EDS
FRN- 8* fish hook － － － 100.0 － － － － SEM-EDS
FRN- 9* bangle 0.4 1.0 － 81.0 14.0 － 3.0 － SEM-EDS
FRN- 11* rod 0.5 0.3 － 99.0 － － － － SEM-EDS
FRN- 12 rod － － － 98.0 － 2.0 － － SEM-EDS
FRN- 14 rod － － － 99.0 － 0.5 － － SEM-EDS
FRN- 18 bangle － － － 98.0 － 2.0 － － SEM-EDS
FRN- 20* bangle 0.3 0.4 － 97.0 － 2.0 － － SEM-EDS
FRN- 22 bangle － － 100.0 － － － SEM-EDS
FRN- 23 bangle 0.2 － － 97.0 － 3.0 － － SEM-EDS
FRN- 25 wire cave － － － 99.0 － 1.0 － － SEM-EDS
FRN- 26 hook? － － － 100.0 － － － SEM-EDS
FRN- 27* axe － － 1.0 97.0 － 2.0 － － SEM-EDS
FRN- 28* axe 0.5 0.6 － 95.0 － 4.0 － － SEM-EDS
FRN- 29* bangle － － － 84.0 16.0 － － － SEM-EDS
FRN- 30 nail? － － － 99.0 － 0.8 － － SEM-EDS
FRN- 31 rod － － － 100.0 － － － － SEM-EDS
MTL-3* rod 0.2 0.4 － 97.2 － 2.1 - 0.1 EPMA
MTL-14* axe 0.6 0.5 － 96.1 － 2.5 - 0.1 EPMA
MTL-16 bangle 0.1 0.5 － 96.9 － 2.3 - 0.1 EPMA
MTL-20 bangle 0.3 0.5 － 96.8 － 2.3 - 0.1 EPMA
MTL-21 bangle 0.7 1.4 － 96.0 － 1.9 - - EPMA
MTL-22 bangle 0.3 0.5 － 96.0 － 3.2 - - EPMA
MTL-24* bangle 0.1 0.7 － 94.2 － 3.9 - 1.1 EPMA
MTL-25 bangle 0.3 0.1 － 98.2 － 1.3 - 0.1 EPMA
MTL-26* bangle 0.2 0.2 － 96.1 － 3.6 - - EPMA
MTL-27 bangle 0.3 0.1 － 96.7 － 2.9 - 0.1 EPMA
MTL-29* bangle 0.1 0.3 － 99.1 － 0.4 - 0.1 EPMA
MTL-30 bangle - 0.1 － 94.7 － 3.1 - 2.1 EPMA
MTL-31 bangle 0.1 0.4 － 97.4 － 1.8 - 0.2 EPMA
MTL-35 bangle 0.6 1.1 － 96.0 － 2.2 - - EPMA
MTL-37 bangle 0.5 0.6 － 95.8 － 3.0 - - EPMA
MTL-45 indeterminate 0.2 0.5 － 99.2 － - - - EPMA
MTL-704* bangle 1.0 0.4 － 94.2 － 4.3 - 0.1 EPMA
MTL-705* bangle 1.0 0.1 － 94.6 － 4.2 - 0.1 EPMA
MTL-950* blade 0.1 0.3 － 96.8 － 2.6 0.2 0.0 EPMA
MTL-1214 bangle 0.5 4.1 － 93.6 － 1.8 - 0.1 EPMA

polygonal α phase with annealing twins. The small
dark gray spots correspond to Cu2S inclusions. This
rod was made by forging a cast metal plate and subse-
quent annealing.
FRN-20: a bangle (Figure 7-5)
This bangle was made of copper containing a fairly
large amount of arsenic and small amounts of sulfur
and iron. The matrix is a recrystallized α phase with
annealing twins. The dendritic etched region may be
caused by arsenic segregation. This bangle was made
by the forging of a cast metal plate and subsequent
annealing.

- 205 -
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology
FRN-27: an axe (Figure 7-6)
This object was made of copper containing arsenic
and nickel. The matrix is a recrystallized α phase with
annealing twins. This axe was also made by forging a
cast metal plate and subsequent annealing.
FRN-28: an axe (Figure 7-7)
This object was made of copper containing a large
amount of arsenic and with sulfur and iron impuri-
ties. The matrix is a polygonal α phase with annealing
twins. This axe was made by forging a cast metal plate
and subsequent annealing.
FRN-29: a bangle (Figure 7-8)
This object was made of brass. Figure 7-8-b shows that
the microstructure consists of a polygonal α phase
with annealing twins. This bangle was made by forg-
ing a cast metal plate and subsequent annealing.
MTL-3 through MTL-950
All of these objects from Mitathal are made of arsenic
copper which contains sulfur, iron, and lead as impu-
rities. The microstructure is a recrystallized polygonal
α phase with annealing twins. All the samples were
made by forging a cast metal plate and subsequent
annealing, the same fabrication method as for the Far-
mana objects.
3.4 Summary of metallographic analysis
of the Indus copper wares
A micrographic study was carried out on copper wares
excavated at Farmana and Mitathal in northern India.
Although the samples were severely corroded, 42 sam-
ples were obtained for chemical composition and 16
for microstructural observations. Most of the objects
were found to be made of copper containing sulfur,
iron, and arsenic. Two of the objects were made of
brass. All were produced by forging a cast metal plate
and subsequent annealing.
- 206 -
4 MICROSTRUCTURE AND
FABRICATION METHOD OF
COPPER WARES IN THE IRON AGE
Subsequent to the Bronze Age, the Iron Age occurred
during the second millennium BC in India. Bronze
artifact making technology should have been more
developed. The site of Mahurjhari, a megalithic bur-
ial-cum-habitational site (21°14' N; 79°30' E) in the
Maharashtra state was dated to about 800 BC. Many
bronze artifacts such as bowls, bangles, and horse or-
naments were excavated from this Iron Age site. Here,
I show the microstructural data for bowls that were
among the excavated samples.
4.1 Chemical composition
The chemical composition data of eight bowls are
listed in Table 2. Most of the analyzed samples were
made of tin bronze containing impurities such as sul-
fur or iron. Sample No. 2 contained more than 15 %
tin, which is within the range (15-25 %) of heat-treat-
able high-tin bronze.
4.2 Microstructure of two selected bowls
Microstructural observations to determine the fab-
rication process were carried out. Figure 9 shows the
appearance of two select bowls (MHR-2 and MHR-
8) and their microstructures.
MHR-2 is made of a heat-treatable high-tin
bronze. Polygonal α phase crystals with anneal-
ing twins and β phase were observed. The β phase
was formed by quenching. This bowl was made
by hot-forging a cast metal plate with subsequent
solution heat treatment and quenching. MHR-8 is
a bronze object which is nearly qualifies as a high-
tin bronze. The matrix was a polygonal α phase
with annealing twins. The long, thin, transversely
elongated phases correspond to Cu2S formed due to
the presence of sulfur as an impurity. Based on the
observation of elongation of this brittle sulfide phase,
 Takekazu Nagae Indus copper wares

Figure 9-1 (a) Bowl, MHR-2 and (b) microstructure

Figure 9-2 (a) Bowl, MHR-8 and (b) microstructure

Table 2 Chemical compositions of the samples excavated from the Mahurjhari site.

Chemical composition (%)

No. Object analysis equipment
S Fe Ni Cu Zn As Sn Pb
MHR-1 bowl 0.4 0.3 － 88.6 － 1.4 9.3 － SEM-EDS
MHR-2 bowl － 0.3 － 84.2 － － 15.5 － SEM-EDS
MHR-3 bowl 0.1 0.3 － 91.9 － － 7.7 － SEM-EDS
MHR-4 bowl 0.3 0.2 － 90.6 － 3 5.8 － SEM-EDS
MHR-5 bowl 0.1 0.3 － 91.9 － － 7.7 － SEM-EDS
MHR-6 dish 0.7 0.6 － 87.3 － － 11.3 － SEM-EDS
MHR-7 bowl 0.7 0.5 － 91.2 － － 7.7 － SEM-EDS
MHR-8 bowl 0.6 0.2 － 89.6 － － 9.7 － SEM-EDS

this bowl was likely made by forging a cast metal plate
while it was hot from the annealing heat treatment.
4.3 Summary of metallographic analysis of
copper-based metal wares in the Iron Age
Hot-forging and quenching heat treatment were
used for making bronze wares. The quenching is an
especially unique method which has been more com-
monly used for steel making. A few artifacts from
Mohenjodaro and Harappa contained more than 15
% tin (Singh 2008), but it is unknown whether these
high-tin bronzes were actually quenched because
there is very little microstructure information for
these high-tin bronzes, although they have been ana-
lyzed for their chemical components. Which is earlier
for applied quenching techniques, high-tin bronzes
or carbon steels? In order to reveal the origin of the
quenching technique, more artifacts from more an-

- 207 -
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology
cient sites need to be analyzed.
5 CONTEMPORARY
HIGH-TIN BRONZE MAKING
Heat-treatable high-tin bronze making still remains
in present day India. The author surveyed two work-
shops in Kerala in September 2009. These manufac-
ture bowls and gongs by hot-forging of heat-treatable
high-tin bronze in a traditional way. The survey
results of the temperature measurement during the
hot-working and the heat treatment for quenching are
described below.
1) E.T. Appuni (Kaladiparambil Cheruku-
dangadu, Palakkad Dist., Kerala, India)
Bowls, spoons, disk gongs, and cymbals are manufac-
tured in E.T. Appuni’s workshop. Figure 10-1 shows
high-tin bronze ware making at Appuni’s workshop.
The temperature of hot-working was measured during
the manufacture of bowls by the workshop owner and
his three relatives. First, molten Cu-22Sn is poured
into a hollow in a sand mold to make a disk, a starting
material which is then forged into a bowl. Cast disks
are forged in order to form gongs, cymbals, or bowls.
The temperature was measured 15 times during the
gong forging process. The highest temperature was
764 °C and the lowest was 600 °C with an average of
685 °C. The edge of the disk gong was fractured. Next,
11 data were obtained during the forging of a cymbal.
The temperature of hot-working of the cymbals was
753 °C maximum, 575 °C minimum, and 687 °C on
average. This process was carried out at a relatively
high temperature and, as in the case of the gong, frac-
ture occurred while forming a central dent.
Next, bowls were produced. The bowls were
formed by forging a pile comprising a few plates.
As this process progressed, more plates were added
to one pile. Figure 11-1 shows a thermal image and
- 208 -
the visible image of a pile of six plates being forged.
The upper images were taken at the beginning of the
forging process, which started when Appuni judged
that the bowls placed on a furnace had been heated
to the appropriate temperature. The temperature on
average was 740 °C. The lower thermo image in Figure
11-1 was taken when the forging was suspended once,
immediately before it was reheated. As seen in the
lower visible image, forging was briefly stopped when
a reddish color still remained. The temperature on
average was 630 °C at this point. In total, 40 data were
obtained during the process of bowl manufacture, and
they showed a 780 °C maximum, 556 °C minimum,
and 680 °C average temperature. It is known that the
Cu-22Sn alloy begins to transform to a liquid phase at
798 °C during heating as shown in Figure 4. So these
temperatures can be considered to be fairly high. The
average temperature in the hot-forging of the bowls
was almost the same as or only slightly lower than
that for the gongs and cymbals, for which fracture
occurred. Nevertheless, the bowls were not fractured.
Bowls shaped by hot-forging without post heat
treatment are brittle because their metal structure
contains an extremely fragile intermetallic compound
δ phase. To exclude the δ phase and to strengthen the
material, quenching was carried out. The temperature
of the bowl before quenching was 730 °C on average.
This temperature is within the range wherein the δ
phase completely transforms to the β phase.
2) K.R. Suku (ALA FORGE: Koparampathu Ka-
davaloor, Trissur District, Kerala, India)
Suku’s workshop (ALA FORGE) mainly manufac-
tures gongs and cymbals. He is a distant relative of
Appuni. Four brothers including him work there to-
gether.
Firstly, a disk was cast, as in the case of Appuni’s
workshop. The disk was then shaped by hot-forging.
The temperatures during hot-working to form a gong
were measured and the results are as follows. The
 Takekazu Nagae Indus copper wares

Appuni's workshop Molten metal is poured into a hollow to make a disk.

A pile of two disks is hot-forged by three persons As the making process proceeds, a pile of six bowls is hot-forged.
in the early stage of the fabrication process.

Heated bowls are quenched in water. Finished products which were scraped after quenching.
Figure 10-1 High tin bronze ware making at Appni's workshop

upper left image in Figure 11-2 is a thermal image
of a disk at the beginning of forging (and the upper
right photo is its visible image). The temperature of
the disk was 632 °C on average. The lower left thermal
image was taken when forging was suspended once,
immediately before it was re-heated. This temperature
was 546 °C on average. The reddish color of the disk
had already disappeared at this point, as seen in the
visible image (lower right photo). Fifteen measure-
ments were taken during hot-working of a gong at this
workshop. The results showed a 725 °C maximum,
546 °C minimum, and 646 °C average temperature.
This demonstrates that the gong was formed within a
considerably lower range of temperature compared to

- 209 -
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology

Suku's workshop Material is heated on a charcoal fire for forging

A disk gong is hot forged on a stone anvil by two persons After quenching, cold forging is carried out to fix its
deformation

Face of a disk is scraped using steel tools. By listening to the sound, the positions to pierce holes for
hanging rope are decided.
Figure 10-2 High tin bronze ware making at Suku's workshop (ALA FORGE)

Appuni’s workshop. It is known that the most suitable
temperature range for hot-working of the Cu-22Sn al-
loy is 530-650 °C. Although the results show that the
temperature in this case was slightly higher than this
range, no fracture was observed in the manufacture of
the gong.
The gong was also quenched to improve its brit-
tleness at room temperature. The temperature of the
gong before quenching was 725 °C on average, which
was almost equal to that in Appuni’s workshop.
In South Korea, the manufacture of a high-tin
bronze, called Korean bronze ware, or “Yugi”, is still

- 210 -
 Takekazu Nagae Indus copper wares

Immediately after the beginning of forging, Visual image

the average temperature is 740 °C

Immediately before suspending forging for re-heating, Visual image

the average temperature is 630 °C
Figure 11-1 Thermal images of bowls during hot working by Appuni in Palakkad, India

Immediately after the beginning of forging, Visual image

the average temperature is 632 °C

Immediately before suspending forging for re-heating, Visual image

the average temperature is 546 °C
Figure 11-2 Thermal images of bowls during hot working by Suku in Kadavaloor, India

- 211 -
 Current Research on Indus Archaeology

Table 3 Hot working temperatures and quenching temperatures applied for high tin bronze making.

Hot working temperature Quenching

Craftsman Forming process Temperature Object
Max. (°C) Min. (°C) Ave. (°C) (°C)
764 600 685 - GONG
E.T.Appuni
(Palakkad) Traditional hot forging 753 575 687 - SYMBAL
INDIA
780 556 680 730 BOWL
K.R.Suku Traditional hot forging 725 546 646 725 GONG
Go Tae Ju
Traditional casting - - - 672 BOWL
(Bonghwa)
Kim Sun Ick
Traditional casting - - - 645 BOWL
(Bonghwa)
Traditional hot forging 713 566 657 736 GONG
Kim Il Oung
KOREA (Gimcheon) Contemporary method
730 589 647 740 BOWL
(spinning)
Lee Sun Sul Contemporary method
(Geochang) (mechanical press) 672 626 653 653 BOWL

Han Sang-chun Traditional hot working 698 581 628 - BOWL

(Boseong) of ban-bangjja

carried out today. In total, the authors surveyed five
2)
Yugi workshops in February and August 2008 . Table
3 show the results of hot-forging and quenching tem-
peratures obtained in these Korean high-tin bronze
workshops for comparison.
In India, the temperatures were relatively high
in both the forging processes and heat treatment for
quenching because work was done in semi-outdoor
workshops during bright daytime. Possibly because
of this, fractures occasionally occurred in a workshop
which does not operate regularly. For the Korean
bronze ware, both central and local governments pro-
vide support, for example the designation of intangi-
ble cultural properties, in order to promote traditional
technologies. Thus the workshop room in Korea is
deliberately made dim in order to judge the tempera-
ture of the products more precisely by their color, and
the work was performed near the temperature most
suitable for the Cu-22Sn alloy.
6 SUMMARY
The chemical composition data of 185 metal artifacts
excavated from ancient sites in the Indus valley in
India, Mohenjo-daro, Harappa, Lothal, and Rangpur,
have been summarized by J.M. Kenoyer and H.M-L.
Miller (1999). Mostly, these artifacts are made of pure
copper containing small amounts of impurities or al-
loying elements. Sometimes, tin bronzes are detected,
containing less than 15 % tin. An article by R.N. Sin-
gh (2008) reports a few heat-treatable high-tin bronze
wares (base) from Mohenjo-daro, but it is unknown
whether these were actually heat treated or not be-
cause no microstructural data was given. Almost all of
the Indus crafts from Farmana and Mitathal presented
in this article are also copper wares, except for two
brass bangles.
In the Iron Age, more and more bronze wares were
popularly used and heat-treatable high-tin bronze
appears. The origin of the fabrication method of
heat-treatable high-tin bronze is still unclear; however,
the technique was transferred to east Asia and finally
reached the Japan archipelago with time. Although
heat-treatable high-tin bronze making is almost ex-
tinct in Japan, it remains alive in Korea, Myanmar,
Indonesia, and India today. The fabrication technique
of heat-treatable high-tin bronze is very unique, since

- 212 -
 Takekazu Nagae Indus copper wares

it employs hot-forging and quenching. Quenching is Nagae, T. 2011. "Compositional and Microstructural Analy-

well known as a typical heat treatment for steel. This sis of Copper Wares Excavated at Farmana", in V. Shinde, T.

heat treatment in the case of steel and high-tin bronze
elicits opposite results. The hardness of steel drasti-
cally increases after quenching, whereas the hardness
of heat-treatable high-tin bronze decreases. Thus, the
high-tin bronze loses its hardness, but it develops
toughness upon quenching. When and where the
quenching technique for steel and high-tin bronze
was first developed remains a question. Can the first
application of the quenching of high-tin bronze be
dated back to the Indus civilization? And to which
alloy was quenching applied to earlier, steel or high-
tin bronze?
Osada and Manmohan Kumar eds. Excavations at Farma-
na, District Rohtak,Haryana,India 2006-2008. Indus Pro-
ject, Research Institute for Humanity and Nature, Kyoto.
pp. 801-807.
Manmohan Kumar, A. Uesugi, V. Dangi, Vijay Kumar and T.
Nagae 2012. Excavations at Mitathal, 2011-12. Purātatt-
va 42: 148-181.
Singh, R.N. 2008. Occurrence of High-tin Bronzes in the
Middle Ganga Plain: Some Chemical Considerations.
Indo-Kōko Kenkyū 29: 19-31
Kenoyer, J.M. and H.M.-L. Miller 1999. “Metal Technologies
of the Indus Valley Tradition in Pakistan and Western
India”, in V.C. Piggott ed. The Archaeometallurgy of the

It is important to accumulate the appropriate met- Asian Old world. University University Museum Press,

allurgical analysis of ancient artifacts including Indus Philadelphia. pp. 107-151.

metal crafts in order to reveal the history of techno-

logical advances. Although metallographic analysis
results in some damage to ancient artifacts, we must
continue careful metallographic analysis to reveal the
history of science and technology.

References
Davis, J.R. ed. 2001. ASM Specialty Handbook Copper and
Copper Alloys. ASM International, Ohio.
Mifune, H., Y. Shimizu and T. Nagae eds. 2010. Asian High
Tin Bronzes: Production Technology and Regional Charac-
teristics. University of Toyama, Toyama.
Srinivasan, S. and I. Glover 1995. Wrought and quenched,
and cast higt-tin bronzes in Kerala State, India. The Jour-
nal of the Historical Metallurgy Society 29: 69-88.
Callister, W.D. Jr. 2007. Materials Science and Engineering:
an Introduction, seventh edition. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.,
New York.
Saunders, N. and A.P. Miodownik 1990. "Cu-Sn (Cop-
per-Tin)" in T.B. Massalski ed. Binary Alloy Phase Dia-
grams. ASM International, Ohio, pp. 1481-1483.
Uesugi, A. 2010. An Overview on Indus Archaeology. Indus
Project, Research Institute for Humanity and Nature,
Kyoto.

- 213 -