Subsistence-Based Economy and the Regional Interaction Processes of the Indus Civilization Borderland

in Kachchh, Gujarat: A Bio-Molecular Perspective

By

Kalyan Sekhar Chakraborty

A thesis submitted in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy

Graduate Department of Anthropology

University of Toronto

© Copyright by Kalyan Sekhar Chakraborty 2019

ii

Subsistence-Based Economy and the Regional Interaction Processes of the Indus Civilization Borderland in Kachchh,

Gujarat: A Bio-Molecular Perspective

Kalyan Sekhar Chakraborty

Degree of Doctor of Philosophy

Department of Anthropology

University of Toronto

2019

Abstract

This dissertation investigates the role of food producers in the Indus Civilization

borderland in Kachchh, Gujarat, particularly during the Urban/Mature phase (2600-1900 BCE).

During the Urban phase, this region was occupied by two distinct categories of settlements. The

settlements from the first category were strategically situated, contained Classical Harappan type

materials, and were specialized in craft production, craft-related trade and administration; these

are popularly known as Classical Harappan-type settlements. The settlements from the second

category, popularly known as Sorath-type settlements, were located inland, contained regional

pottery and practiced agro-pastoralism. The analysis of the subsistence economy of Kotada Bhadli,

a Sorath-type settlement, provides an evaluation of the nature of economic production at this

settlement and the possible day-to-day interactions between this settlement and neighboring non-

food craft-producing settlements. To date, our understanding of rural food production and regional

everyday interaction between different specialized groups in the Indus borderland is limited, and

therefore, through providing a detailed account of the subsistence-related economy at a rural

settlement, this thesis aims to evaluate the nature of specialized staple production, and provide

iii

more data for the understanding the nature of staple exchange between these settlements

specialized in diverse economic activities.

To incorporate this everyday regional interaction in our current understanding of regional

interactions during the Indus age, I summarized and arranged different arguments from various

scholars into distinct models. The analysis of molecular, isotopic and micro-botanical remains

suggest the involvement of Kotada Bhadli with specialized sedentary to semi-sedentary

pastoralism and some form of household-level cultivation of plants, along with some importing of

agricultural grains and Harappan-style craft goods from neighboring settlements. Based on these

results, I propose a likely cooperative regional interaction between diverse groups and specialists

such as craft producers, traders, raw material distributers and staple producers, in the presence or

absence of a centralized or regional authority during the Urban phase. Such reciprocal relationship

between diverse specialized groups not only supported the production of wealth but also helped to

maintain status and identity, as well as dealing with critical environmental, economic and probably

political conditions that may have ultimately helped sustain this civilization over many centuries.

iv

Dedicated

To my Grandparents

Late Sri Nanilal Chakraborty and Late Srimati Chaya Rani Chakraborty

v

Acknowledgments

I am overwhelmed to write this particular section of my thesis. Utilizing this opportunity

to look back into those years, I find so many people, organizations, and institutions, without their

enormous support and help, I would not have been here where I am today. Now when I have the

opportunity to formally acknowledge them, I feel anxious of missing names. I am greatly thankful

to all who have directly and indirectly helped me throughout my life, I am grateful to you and will

always be indebted.

First and foremost, I would like to thank my Ph.D. supervisor Prof. Heather M.-L Miller.

From the first day of my Ph.D. and even before I formally became her student, she was a great

support and a true inspiration. She is not just my Ph.D. advisor but a Guru who guided me for all

my endeavors whether it is related to my Ph.D. or not. Her academic integrity, quest for scientific

solutions to problems have always inspired me. She is a person of logic and perfection and these

qualities of her have always pushed me beyond my comfort zone and made me what I am today.

Along with her I would also like to thank my other committee members, Prof. Dave Smith, Prof.

Genevieve Dewar and Prof. Liye Xie, for their constant encouragement, analytical support, and

insightful and useful comments on my thesis.

The next person I would like to show my gratitude is Dr. Prabodh Shirvalkar from Deccan

College, and I often call him ‘Prabodh Bhaia’. Without his help and support, nothing would have

been possible. He has taken me to the site, gave access to all the materials that I used for my Ph.D.

and spent hours to explain me about the Sorath settlements. When I decided to do a Ph.D. on

Kotada Bhadli, he told me “take whatever you want”. Such trust on me made me responsible

towards the archaeological remains from Kotada Bhadli, and I made sure that as my analysis are

destructive, I use the samples with a great responsibility. He is the person who personally taught

me the nuances of field archaeology. Along with him Prof. Vijay Sathe from Deccan College was

my mentor and provided me continuous academic and personal supports. He is the person who

encouraged me to apply scientific methods in archaeology. He helped me to develop collaborations

and taught me the applications of chemistry in archaeological research. Without his continuous

support and teachings, I would have never imagined to carry-out scientific analysis on

archaeological materials.

Apart from the faculty members from University of Toronto, and Deccan College, there

are few people who are the pillars of this thesis. They have not only collaborated with me at

different stages of my Ph.D. but also taught me analytical procedures. I would personally like to

thank Prof. Supriyo Chakraborty, Prof. Syamalava Mazumdar, Prof. Greg Slater, Dr. Sheahan

Bestel and Prof. Petrus Le Roux. These eminent professors and scientist have not only allowed me

to use the facilities of their labs, but also spent their time, energy and resources to teach me the

analytical part of each methods that I used in this dissertation. They have also provided me with

constructive and insightful comments during every stages of writing, and they made it sure that I

get the science right.

Here I would also like to take the opportunity to thank all the funding agencies who has

provided generous funds to carry-out analysis as well as to present my results in different parts of

vi

the world that helped me to evolve into a better researcher. I would like to thank the University of

Toronto to provide me with graduate fellowship and many other grants to carryout pilot study,

analysis, as well as to present my research at various professional meetings. Junior research

fellowship from Indian Council of Historical Researches and the Small Study Grant from Nehru

Trust for the Indian Collection at Victoria and Albert Museum have supported me during the initial

stage of my research, and without their generous supports this thesis would not have been possible.

Prof. Heather Miller has also funded a part of my research from her personal funds.

I would like to extend my gratitude towards Natalia Krencil and Angelia Sidoriak. They

made sure that things run as smooth as possible for me while at the University of Toronto.

Dr. Michael W Gregg not only inspired me to carry out residue analysis, but he personally

helped me extensively to develop my synopsis and to start my Ph.D. at the University of Toronto,

and it’s because of him I ended up doing my Ph.D. under Prof. Heather Miller. He helped me

enormously to construct my thoughts in every single stages of my Ph.D. To me, he is the go-to

person whenever I encounter any problem or confusion. After him its Dr. Mathew Mosher (Matt)

and Dr. Greg Brown, they have helped me to construct my thoughts, read my works numerous

times. Matt not only helped me academically, he has also provided my brain with all the energies

possible through inviting me to his house numerous times. Here I would also like to thank Prof.

Julia Giblin for her constructed comments and for proof reading my drafts.

I am very much thankful to all the Lab Technicians I have worked with. Particularly Dr.

Carley Crann, Kansara Ji and Jennie have immensely helped me during my analysis and made my

transition to these highly specialized instruments extremely smooth. With them I discussed and

developed methods that I used for my Ph.D. research. They also equally helped me to interpret my

data. My lab mates, Nitesh Jadav, Amay Datye, Greg Brown, Swang Wo, Ramiz Saikh, Dipa

Jaishwal, Sharika Dubey, Manish Shandilya and Prof. Shibdas Bannerjee were tremendously

helpful during my lab visits. Every time I visited the labs, they made me feel home and were very

accommodating.

I would specifically like to thank Deccan College Administration, and the Archaeological

Survey of India, particularly Prof. Vasant Shinde (Chancellor, Deccan College), Sri Yadubirsing

Rawat and Sri Jitendra Nath, for letting me analyze the materials from Kotada Bhadli and for

allowing me to bring materials out of the country for the purpose of analysis. Particularly Shri

Jitendra Nath who has given me the permission on behalf of the Archaeological Survey of India.

This thesis would never have been possible without their timely help and support.

Deccan College in Pune is where it all started from the first day, I was admitted to the

Masters’ Program in 2008. Since then Deccan College has been my power house of archaeology.

There I met many people who I still admire. Prof. K. Padayya, Prof. Vasant Shinde, Prof. P.

Shirvalkar Prof. M.D. Kajale, Prof. Vijay Sathe, Prof. P. Joglekkar, Prof. R.K. Mohanty, Prof.

Veena Mushrif and Prof. P. B. Sable, they were great teachers and extremely knowledgeable

guides. I learned so much whenever I talked to them. They were always kind to me, they were

accommodating, and great human beings. Deccan College have also showered me with many

mentors and friends who taught me what life is and how to be happy in every adverse condition. I

vii

am truly thankful to Dighe sir, Phule sir, Sachin sir, Amol bhaia, Saleem bhaia, Yogesh bhaia,

Tilok bhaia, Pankaj bhaia, Shantanu bhaia, Tosha bhaia, Anwita di, Kanchana di, and Sharda di,

they have always provided me with constructive comments and suggestions throughout my career.

I would like to thank all my friends from Deccan College, Jose, Uday, Debanjan, Sourav, Avra,

Prateek, Vrushab, Ajmal, Narender, Gautam, Kim, Sutapa, Saumi di, Antara, Esha, Tejal, Jagriti,

Amrita, Elora and Mokshada. You guys were amazing, and I have spent the best days of my life

with you.

I would like to personally thank Prof. Brad Chase. He has not only inspired me to carry out

stable isotope analysis but also guided me at various stages of my thesis. Despite being extremely

busy with his teaching and research, he was always available to reply my emails and questions.

His suggestions, including his final comments as an external have potentially benefitted my thesis.

I am also thankful to Prof. Shanti Pappu, Prof. Anil K Pokharia, Dr. Akhilesh Kumar, Dr. Rajesh

S.V., Dr. Sneh Patel, and Dr. Katie Lindstrom for their support, direct and indirect guidance as

well as constructive discussions that were very helpful for my thesis.

Finally, I would like to thank my family and friends beyond my academic world. First, I

would like to thank my newborn son Krishyav Sekhar. Towards the end of my thesis, when I was

over-exhausted by the amount of work, his fresh look and warmth hug gave me all the power,

stamina and encouragement. At the final stage of my thesis, without the help of my mother-in-law

it was impossible for me to finish this thesis in a timely manner. She left her family back in India,

and stayed with us for many months, so that she can take care of all the domestic needs, provide

parental care to our son and to my wife, while I focus on my thesis. My parents have taken the

pain to be away in good and bad days from their child for so long so that I can live my dream.

Their faith, trust and unconditional love have not only molded me to a human being that I am today

but have always provided me with the strength to achieve my goals. I can’t thank enough to my

wife Moumita, I can never ask for a better wife than her. On one hand she is the greatest critique

of my work and on the other hand she is the best support. She has been always with me in ups and

downs and her sacrifices are beyond any word. My brothers and sisters, Saikat, Arpita, Snehasis,

Avijit, Surojit, Bishwajit are true gems. Throughout my life they made it sure that I always stay

happy and when I go home, I enjoy all the funs that I missed during these years in Canada. I have

also made many great friends in Toronto, who have made this newly immigrated place feel like

home. I cannot take all the names as there are too many of them, but I will certainly mention a few

names very close to my heart, such as Somnath da, Smita di, Sandeepan da, Snigdha di, Prodipto

da, Ranja di, Arup da, Madhumita di, Krishnakali di and Nanda Bhaia, Souvik da and Piu di,

Uddalok da, Arpita di, Indranil da and Suravita, and the list goes on. Finally, I would like to thank

my best friends Biru, Tukai and Bhargav, they have always provided me with strong shoulders

that I can lean onto whenever I feel low, and they made it sure that in every situation I stay in my

comfort zone.

viii

Table of Contents

Dedicated ................................................................................................................................... iv

Acknowledgments ....................................................................................................................... v

Table of Contents .................................................................................................................... viii

List of Tables .......................................................................................................................... xiii

List of Figures .......................................................................................................................... xiv

List of Appendices .................................................................................................................. xvii

Chapter 1 Introduction and Background ...................................................................................... 1

1.1. Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 1

The Indus Civilization and Gujarat ....................................................................... 4

1.2. The Adoption of Periodization in Gujarat ........................................................................ 9

The Pre and Early Harappan Phase in Gujarat (circa 3200-2600 BCE) ............... 12

Urban/Mature Phase in Gujarat (circa 2600-1900 BCE) ..................................... 14

Urban-Late Transition or the Late Mature Phase in Gujarat (circa. 2200-1900

BCE) .................................................................................................................. 21

The Post-Urban Phase in Gujarat (circa. 1900-1400 BCE).................................. 25

1.3. Harappan Expansion and Interaction Sphere in Gujarat: Overview of the Three

Common Models ........................................................................................................... 29

The Traditional Migration Model ....................................................................... 30

Indigenous Development Model ......................................................................... 32

Inter-Regional Integration: A Bottom-up Model ................................................. 36

1.4. Staple Surplus Production and Cooperative Exchange: A Regional Approach ................ 40

1.5. The Settlement of Kotada Bhadli and Major Findings .................................................... 46

ix

1.6. Overview of Thesis Chapters ......................................................................................... 50

Chapter 2 Site Formation Processes, Active Human Choices in Waste Management and

Economic Specialization ........................................................................................................... 54

2.1. Abstract ......................................................................................................................... 54

2.2. Introduction ................................................................................................................... 55

The settlement of Kotada Bhadli and the Nature of the Ash Deposits ................. 57

The Geology, Vegetation and Climate at Kotada Bhadli ..................................... 59

Cultural Sequence at Kotada Bhadli ................................................................... 63

2.3. Situating Kotada Bhadli Within the Indus Era of Gujarat ............................................... 64

2.4. Microscopic Analysis of the Sediment ........................................................................... 68

Phytoliths ........................................................................................................... 71

Spherulites ......................................................................................................... 72

2.5. Results and Interpretation .............................................................................................. 72

Low and High Phytolith Counts ......................................................................... 72

Monocots vs Dicots plants at the settlement of Kotada Bhadli ............................ 80

Types of Grasses ................................................................................................ 81

Phytolith Data and Economic Specialization at Kotada Bhadli ........................... 85

What was Burning and the Waste Management at the Site of Kotada Bhadli ...... 89

2.6. Discussion and Conclusion ............................................................................................ 91

Chapter 3 Enamel Isotope Data from the Domesticated Animals at Kotada Bhadli, Gujarat,

Reveals Specialized Animal Husbandry During the Indus Age .................................................. 94

3.1. Abstract ......................................................................................................................... 94

3.2. Introduction ................................................................................................................... 95

The Economic activities at the Settlement Under Study ...................................... 98

x

Pastoralism and Agriculture in Gujarat During the Mature Phase of the Indus

Civilization ...................................................................................................... 100

3.3. Materials and Methods ................................................................................................ 102

Morphological Separation of Sheep from Goats ............................................... 103

Sample Preparation and Cleaning ..................................................................... 104

Sample Preparation and Analysis for Carbon and Oxygen Isotopes .................. 105

Sample Preparation and Analysis for Strontium Isotopes .................................. 105

3.4. Results and Interpretation ............................................................................................ 106

Using Carbon Isotopes ratios to Determine Diet and Fodder Selection from

Tooth Enamel .................................................................................................. 107

Using Oxygen Isotopes to Determine the Hydrological Weather and the

Relation Between the Climate and Fodder Selection......................................... 109

Using Strontium Isotope rations to Determine Mobility.................................... 114

3.5. Discussion ................................................................................................................... 122

3.6. Conclusion .................................................................................................................. 125

Chapter 4 Selective Dairying and Culinary Practices at Kotada Bhadli During the Urban

Phase of the Indus Civilization ................................................................................................ 128

4.1. Abstract ....................................................................................................................... 128

4.2. Introduction ................................................................................................................. 129

Animal Consumption During the Indus Age and the Application of Lipid

Residue Analysis.............................................................................................. 131

Pottery Functionality and Lipid Residue ........................................................... 134

4.3. Archaeological Data from the Settlement Under Study ................................................ 137

4.4. Materials and Methods ................................................................................................ 141

Samples ........................................................................................................... 141

Lipid Extraction ............................................................................................... 144

xi

One-Step Acidified Methanolic Extraction ....................................................... 144

Conventional Chloroform-Methanol Extraction................................................ 145

First Stage of Pilot Analyses in India Using Gas Chromatography Mass

Spectrometry (GC-MS) .................................................................................... 145

Final Stage of Controlled Analyses in Canada Using Gas Chromatography

Mass Spectrometry (GC-MS) ........................................................................... 146

Gas Chromatography Isotope Ratio Mass Spectrometry (GC-IRMS) ............... 147

4.5. Results and Discussion ................................................................................................ 148

One-Step Acidified Methanolic Extraction vs. Conventional Chloroform-

Methanol Extraction ......................................................................................... 148

Modes of Animal Consumption at Kotada Bhadli Based on Fatty Acids and

Fatty Acid Ratios ............................................................................................. 150

Modes of Animal Consumption at Kotada Bhadli Based on Compound

Specific Isotope Analysis ................................................................................. 152

Association Between Ceramic Types and Lipid Residues ................................. 163

Pottery Type and Compound Specific Isotope Analysis.................................... 167

4.6. Archaeological Significance ........................................................................................ 172

4.7. Conclusion .................................................................................................................. 176

Chapter 5 Conclusions and Next Steps .................................................................................... 179

5.1. General Observations About the Settlement of Kotada Bhadli and the Settlement

Pattern of the Region of Gujarat .................................................................................. 179

5.2. Summary of the Microscopic Analysis of the Ash Deposits and AMS Dating .............. 181

5.3. Conclusions about the Biogenic Isotope Results of Domesticated Animals from

Kotada Bhadli .............................................................................................................. 184

5.4. Conclusions about the Absorbed Organic Residue Analysis of Pot-sherds from

Kotada Bhadli .............................................................................................................. 187

5.5. Final summary of the Thesis Focus .............................................................................. 190

xii

5.6. Summary: Models of interaction in Indus Age Gujarat, and the contribution of Kotada

Bhadli .......................................................................................................................... 192

References .............................................................................................................................. 201

Appendices ............................................................................................................................. 221

xiii

List of Tables

Table 1.1: Simplified chronology of the Indus Era Gujarat. ....................................................... 11

Table 2.1: Radiocarbon results. Calibration was performed using OxCal v4.2.4 (Bronk Ramsey,

2009) and the IntCal13 calibration curve (Reimer et al., 2013). Material codes are described in

Crann et al. (2016). ................................................................................................................... 66

Table 2.2: Details of sediment samples and the brief description of layers from which they were

collected, along with their phytolith and spherulite content. The layer description has been

modified after Shirvalkar and Rawat, (in press.). ....................................................................... 70

Table 2.3: Final counts for samples with high phytolith abundance ........................................... 73

Table 2.4: Final counts for samples with low phytolith abundance ............................................ 78

Table 4.1: GC-IRMS results of pottery samples from Kotada Bhadli, sorted based on the

probable source of lipids. ........................................................................................................ 155

xiv

List of Figures

Figure 1.1: Highlighted map of the Indus Civilization showing the location of major settlements

and settlements that are mentioned in this thesis. The black dashed lines indicate the region under

study and the red dot indicates the site under study. .....................................................................5

Figure 1.2: Map of Gujarat showing major sites with both Harappan and non-Harappan

affiliations. ..................................................................................................................................7

Figure 1.3: Geological map of Kachchh (developed after www.gsi.gov.in). .................................8

Figure 1.4: Excavated area of Kotada Bhadli, showing the southern settlement wall and the

central residential complex with ten interconnected rooms. ....................................................... 49

Figure 2.1: Satellite image showing the location of the site of Kotada Bhadli (source

https://www.bing.com/maps). The red highlighted area is the settlement wall, the yellow

highlighted areas indicate the extension of the three seasons of excavation. ............................... 61

Figure 2.2: (A) Schematic diagram of the residential area with interconnected rooms, and the

location of samples collected from the residential area. (B) Trench map of the settlement of

Kotada Bhadli, the maroon boxes indicate excavation blocks, the yellow boxes indicate the

sampling location for AMS dating and the blue boxes indicate the location of sediment samples

for phytoliths. (C) Photograph of the excavation block: -XL2 showing the layers along the inner

face of the southern wall. (D) Schematic diagram of the layers along the inner face of the

southern wall. (E) Schematic diagram of the layers from the residential area. ............................ 62

Figure 2.3: Calibration curve of charcoal samples from Kotada Bhadli. ..................................... 67

Figure 2.4: A comparative chronology of Kotada Bhadli and other Classical Harappan-type

(orange bar) and Sorath-type (blue bar) settlements from Gujarat, plotted against the general

chronology of Gujarat proposed by Possehl (1992) and later modified by Dhavalikar (1994).

Chronometric and relative dates of other settlements were collected from Bisht (2015, 1999);

Chase (2014); Deshpande and Shinde (2005); Dhavalikar (1995); Joshi (1990); Kharakwal et al.

(2012); Lindstrom (2013); Patel (2017); Pokharia et al. (2017); Possehl (2004); Uesugi. et al.

(2015) ....................................................................................................................................... 69

Figure 2.5: Distribution of monocot vs dicot phytoliths in samples of high phytolith counts (top)

and low phytolith counts (bottom). ............................................................................................ 84

Figure 2.6: Distribution of grass phytoliths in the sediment samples from Kotada Bhadli. ......... 85

Figure 2.7: Number of spherulites in the samples from Kotada Bhadli. Each slide was counted

for a maximum 20 spherulites. .................................................................................................. 90

Figure 3.1: (A) KTB-29 showing the sequential sampling along the enamel; (B) Age profile of

cattle/buffalo and goat/sheep from the site of Kotada Bhadli. .................................................. 103

xv

Figure 3.2: Comparison of δ13C values of tooth enamel from domesticated animals consumed at

both Kotada Bhadli and Bagasra; the data from Bagasra was acquired from Chase et al. (2014b).

............................................................................................................................................... 111

Figure 3.3: Carbon isotope values from Kotada Bhadli, indicating the nature of fodder selection.

Lines connect the sample from individual teeth as shown in fig 3.1A. ..................................... 111

Figure 3.4: Comparison of the δ18O isotope values of the domesticated animals consumed at both

Kotada Bhadli and Bagasra; the data from Bagasra was acquired from Chase et al. (2014b). ... 113

Figure 3.5: Oxygen isotope values from Kotada Bhadli. Lines connect the samples from

individual teeth as shown in fig 3.1A....................................................................................... 115

Figure 3.6: Intra-tooth variation of carbon (δ13C, triangles) and oxygen (δ18O, squares) isotope

ratios of the tooth enamel bioapatite of cattle/buffalo from the site of Kotada Bhadli. .............. 116

Figure 3.7: Intra-tooth variation of carbon (δ13C, triangles) and oxygen (δ18O, squares) isotope

ratios of the tooth enamel bioapatite of Sheep and Goats from the site of Kotada Bhadli. ........ 117

Figure 3.8: The geology of Kachchh and part of Saurashtra indicating the location of Kotada

Bhadli and other major settlements discussed in the chapter, modified after (Sen et al., 2009). 118

Figure 3.9: Average 87Sr/Sr86 isotope data of individual teeth from the cattle/buffalo and

goat/sheep from Kotada Bhadli, compared against the average 87Sr/Sr86 values of each individual

tooth of the faunal remains from Bagasra published in Chase et al. (2014b). The upper blue line

indicates the average value of 87Sr/Sr86 from the archaeological samples at the site of Kotada

Bhadli and the lower, red line indicate the average value of 87Sr/Sr86 from the archaeological

samples at the site of Bagasra mentioned in Chase et al. (2014b). ............................................ 121

Figure 4.1: Reconstructed vessels from the settlement of Kotada Bhadli used for organic residue

analysis. .................................................................................................................................. 143

Figure 4.2: The differences in the extraction yield between acid-based extraction and

conventional method. The left one is KB-106 extracted using the acid-based method (2nd

temperature program; the right one is KB-106 extracted using the conventional method (1st

temperature program). ............................................................................................................. 149

Figure 4.3: Partial gas chromatograms of TLEs from three Sorath Harappan potsherds from the

site of Kotada Bhadli. Peaks were identified by GC-MS. Numbers (X:Y) refer to chain lengths

(X) and number of saturation (Y) in the methanolic H2SO4 extracts of the fatty acids; br indicates

the presence of branched chain fatty acids and IS is the internal standard. The upper one is the

gas chromatogram of degraded ruminant adipose fat from bowl sherd KB-171, and the lower one

is the gas chromatogram of degraded vegetable oil from coarse red ware cooking vessel sherd

KB-6. ...................................................................................................................................... 153

xvi

Figure 4.4: The upper one is a gas chromatogram of aquatic fat residue from bowl sherd KB-106

indicating the presence of isoprenoid fatty acids (phytanic acid and 4,8,12 TMTD), as well as

long chain unsaturated fatty acids such as C20:1 and C22:1. The lower ones are the mass

chromatograms of selected ions (m/z 105, 290, 318, 346) of the same vessel. These ions are

indicative of ꞷ-(o-alkylphenyl)alkanoic acids 18, 20 and 22 carbons in length. ....................... 154

Figure 4.5: Plots of the δ13C values of C16:0 and C18:0 from Kotada Bhadli pottery vessels from

the settlement of Kotada Bhadli against the 95% confidence ellipse of reference fats obtained

from Craig et al., (2011). ......................................................................................................... 160

Figure 4.6: Plots of Δ13C values from Kotada Bhadli pot sherds placed against the δ13C16:0 values of the same potsherds. The ranges shown here represent the mean ±1 s.d. of the Δ13C values for a global database comprising modern reference animal fats from Africa, UK,

Kazakhstan, Switzerland, and the Near East, published in Dunne et al. (2017). ....................... 161

Figure 4.7: Channel-handled hemispherical bowls/ladles from the region of Kachchh, Gujarat,

during the Indus Age. Channel-handled hemispherical bowls/ladles (A) from Surkotada (Joshi,

1990), (B) from Dholavira (Bisht, 2015), (C) from Kanmer (Kharakwal et al., 2012), (D) from

Kotada Bhadli, and (E) samples analyzed from Kotada Bhadli. ............................................... 170

Figure 4.8: Present-day ladles from West Bengal, India. (A) and (B) ladles used to measure

mustard oil, (C) and (D) ladles used to measure milk, (D) and (E) ladles are being handled by the

local traders to exchange mustard oil. Picture credit to Arpita Biswas and Snehasis Biswas. ... 171

xvii

List of Appendices

Appendix 1: Details of the enamel samples from Kotada Bhadli analyzed for stable isotopes. R/L

indicates Right or Left and M1-3 indicates tooth position of the Molar tooth. * indicates the

samples that were grouped together to obtain the average strontium isotope values from each

tooth. ....................................................................................................................................... 221

Appendix 2: Details of the pottery samples from Kotada Bhadli analyzed for organic residue. 227

1

Chapter 1

Introduction and Background

1.1. Introduction

My thesis aims to understand the regional food producing economy within the Indus

Civilization and how this food producing economy was an integral part of the regional exchange

between a diverse group of economic specialists. A detailed analysis of food production,

consumption, and distribution within and beyond the settlement of Kotada Bhadli, a settlement

occupied during the Late period of the Mature phase (2200-1900 BCE) of the Indus Civilization

in Gujarat, was carried out to determine the role of this settlement in the regional economy. I have

assessed a number of arguments regarding the regional and interregional exchange in the region

of Gujarat and how this region functioned during the Indus era, and I argue for the existence of

cooperative relations between economic specialists. My research has provided evidence of how a

food-producing rural settlement was sustained in the region of Kachchh, Gujarat, and how it may

have participated in the regional economy and acquired some objects of Harappan material culture,

although this settlement did not engage in non-food craft production or raw material trade related

to Harappan-style craft objects.

Distinctive features of the Indus Valley Civilization are its vast expansion over 100,000

km2; large urban cities and towns; some degree of cultural uniformity; production by craft

specialists of ornaments and utilitarian objects using a diverse array of raw materials; and regional,

inter-regional and international trade. The Indus Valley Civilization flourished and was functional

for around 1000 years from circa. 2600 BCE to 1700 BCE. Although archaeologists have studied

its cities and towns, its international trade, and the level of sophistication it achieved during the

2

Urban/Mature phase between 2600 and 1900 BCE, our knowledge of its rural segment is limited.

The rural settlements of the Indus Civilization were certainly producing food, as most of the rural

settlements do even today. Emerging research, however, suggests that these settlements were not

only producing food but were also participating in raw material acquisition and non-agricultural

production, and were involved in regional exchange (eg. Dhavalikar et al., 1994; Law, 2013;

Possehl and Raval, 1989). There is also evidence that the rural settlements in Gujarat maintained

identities different from those observable in the urban settlements in Gujarat (S. P. Patel, 2017).

Understating the rural counterpart of the Indus Civilization is therefore important to uncover the

lesser-known aspect of this civilization, and to understand in detail the regional human-

environment interaction and internal functionality of this civilization. My increased emphasis on

the food producing segment of this civilization will also help us to understand the regional

variation that existed within its boundaries and the symbiotic interactions between the food-

producing and non-food craft-producing segments, which may have been essential to sustain this

civilization for so long.

My thesis is focused on a particular rural settlement in a specific region of the Indus

Civilization. My focus is on understanding how this particular settlement functioned, rather than

in comparing it to other settlements to determine the similarities and the differences between

settlements. The evaluation of similarities and differences is essential, but it is also crucial to focus

on these individual small rural settlements as a unit in order to determine their functionality, how

they were sustained, and how they interacted with their surroundings and perceived world. This

individualistic approach is necessary for the Indus Civilization. These individual settlements were

units of the sub-regions of the Indus Civilization acting within the Indus interaction sphere. These

units, and the interaction sphere itself, created and maintained ideological, material, economic and

3

technological diversity, which was essential to maintain this civilization that occupied varied

geological and ecological zones. My approach in this thesis is regional, I am interested in

understanding the interaction between the non-food craft producers and food producers

particularly in the region of Kachchh, Gujarat. This thesis cannot be seen as assessing the general

overall interaction between the rural and urban throughout the Indus Civilization. Considering the

diversity that existed within this civilization, the nature of such regional interaction might vary

extensively within the vast area of this civilization. Therefore, my conclusions and arguments are

strictly limited to the region of Kachchh, Gujarat, the southern borderland of the Indus Civilization,

and one of the least discussed area of this civilization.

The settlement of Kotada Bhadli emerged in the Kachchh region of Gujarat, a landscape

that was dominated by settlements specialized in craft production, trade, and administration during

the most prosperous period of the Indus Civilization in Gujarat, the Late period of the

Urban/Mature phase (ca. 2200 BCE to 1900 BCE). This settlement, although surrounded by a very

large wall, lacks evidence suggesting its involvement with non-perishable Harappan-style craft

production and related trade. I aim to study how this settlement performed in a landscape full of

settlements specializing in some form of non-perishable Harappan-style craft production. What

were the primary economic activities carried out at this settlement? How did it interact with its

neighboring settlement? What was the interaction between the residents of this settlement and its

surrounding environment in a rural setting? Given the lack of evidence to suggest any form of non-

food craft production at this settlement, I primarily focused on the analysis of the food production

strategy of this settlement. Therefore, the major questions that this thesis deals with are focused

on the food economy, specifically related to domesticated animals and their maintenance and

exploitation for primary (meat) and secondary (milk) product production.

4

The Indus Civilization and Gujarat

Since the 1920s, the last hundred years of archeological endeavor have identified over a

thousand sites spreading over an area of 100,000 km2, exhibiting a more or less uniform material

culture, known as the Harappan or Indus Civilization (Possehl, 1998) (fig 1.1). This is one of the

most geographically extensive state-level societies of the third millennium BCE, extending up to

the Himalayas in the North, the Arabian Sea in the south, Baluchistan in the west, and the Ganga

Valley in the east, covering the north-western and part of the western frontier of India and at least

half of the present-day political boundary of Pakistan. The extensive studies conducted in the Indus

Valley region demonstrate a gradual development of the Indus Civilization in the Indus Valley

region from preceding local cultures during the Early Harappan phase or the Regionalization Era,

around the late fourth to early third millennium BCE (eg. Kenoyer, 1991; Possehl, 2002; Wright,

2010). This civilization then gradually spread into the resource-rich borderlands, such as Gujarat

to the south-east and Baluchistan to the west, either through a population movement from the core,

or through the adoption of cultural traits, or both.

The so-called Harappans in the southeastern borderland of the Indus Civilization in Gujarat

have exhibited arguably different characteristics than the Harappans in the region of the Indus

Valley itself. During the Integration Era or the Urban/Mature Harappan phase, two distinctive

types of settlements can be observed in the region of Gujarat and are popularly called the

Classical/Sindhi Harappan and the Sorath Harappan (Possehl, 1992; Possehl and Herman, 1990).

5

Figure 1.1: Highlighted map of the Indus Civilization showing the location of major settlements

and settlements that are mentioned in this thesis. The black dashed lines indicate the region under

study and the red dot indicates the site under study.

6

The southeastern periphery of the Indus Civilization, the current political state of Gujarat,

was certainly not a single territory during the Indus period. The current political state of Gujarat

consists of three regions: Kachchh, Saurashtra, and mainland Gujarat (fig. 1.2). Based on the

archaeological data and distribution of Urban/Mature Harappan settlements, Kachchh and a

portion of coastal Saurashtra were included in the core region of the Indus Civilization, whereas

most of Saurashtra and the northern part Gujarat were categorized as the “agro-pastoral periphery”

(Herman, 1996).

These three regions, Kachchh, Saurashtra and mainland Gujarat are not only geologically

different but also fall under different climatic zones. Kachchh is a vast desert-like expanse of mixed

soils and low hills. Inland, Kachchh is bordered by desolate salt flats known as the Great Rann and

the Little Rann. The mainland of Kachchh is isolated by the Great Rann on the north and east, the

Little Rann on the south-east, the Gulf of Kachchh in the south and the rest by the Arabian Sea.

Kachchh is formed by a group of east-west trending uplifts, the highlands and the islands. This is

surrounded by a residual depression, the plains of the Great Rann and the Little Rann (fig 1.3)

(Merh, 1995). The rainfall is very erratic, varying from a few inches to approximately 35 inches;

exceptionally it rains as much as 45 inches (115cm.). The Rann of Kutch is a large marshy salt

plain rising slightly above sea level. It extends about 300 km east-west and in some places about

150 km north-south. During the monsoon season, most of the Rann remains under water, but from

November to May it remains dry (Gaur et al., 2013).

7

Figure 1.2: Map of Gujarat showing major sites with both Harappan and non-Harappan

affiliations.

The peninsula of Saurashtra forms a rocky tableland fringed by coastal plains; a major

portion of it was formed by the Deccan lava flows. Central Saurashtra is made up of an undulating

plain broken by hills and considerably dissected by various rivers flowing in all directions (Merh,

1995). Saurashtra has vast tracts of rich black cotton soil derived from weathered basalt, known

for its moisture retaining capacities. This black cotton soil is extremely good for agricultural

production, and therefore, Saurashtra would have been a prosperous region for agricultural

production during the Indus Age.

8

Figure 1.3: Geological map of Kachchh (developed after www.gsi.gov.in).

Mainland Gujarat can be further divided into North Gujarat, Central Gujarat and South

Gujarat (fig 1.2). North Gujarat is a semiarid, sandy plain dotted with fossil sand dunes and

attendant blowouts. The region expands in the north up to southern Rajputana and gradually

merges into the alluvial plains of Saurashtra towards the west and central Gujarat in the south. The

major rivers in North Gujarat include Banas, Saraswati, Rupen, Sabarmati and their tributaries; it

is divided from Central Gujarat by the Mahi river. The Narmada river divides Central and South

Gujarat; the latter is bordered by Maharashtra to the south and the Gulf of Cambay and the Arabian

Sea to the west. South and Central Gujarat contain a good proportion of fertile black cotton soils

developed by major rivers, such as the Tapi, Narmada and Mahi rivers (Sonawane, 2000).

9

The state of Gujarat as a whole falls in the sub-tropical climate zone, and the temperature

in this region varies between 45ºC and 8 ºC; in some regions within Gujarat, the temperature falls

as low as 4 ºC. Central Gujarat is moderately humid, while the coastal region of Saurashtra falls

within a humid to sultry climate zone, and the interior portion of Saurashtra falls within the range

for a dry climate. North Gujarat and Kachchh fall into a semi-arid to arid zone and receive annual

rainfall well under 400 mm (Merh, 1995). These three regions of Gujarat, Kachchh, Saurashtra

and mainland Gujarat, are not only geologically and environmentally different but also

demonstrate different level of affiliation with the Harappan and non-Harappan regional cultures.

1.2. The Adoption of Periodization in Gujarat

Considering the extensive expansion of the Indus Civilization and its occupation over many

centuries, as well as the similarities and differences observed within this civilization throughout

its occupation, different chronological approaches have been adopted. For example, Shaffer

(1992:442) conceptualized this civilization as a Tradition, following the notion that “this concept

facilitates a stylistic grouping of diverse archaeological assemblages into a single analytic unit,

while limiting the need for establishing precise cultural and chronological relationships that link

assemblages but imply that such relationships exists”. He divided his conceptualized Indus Valley

Tradition into three eras: The Regionalization Era (4000-2500 BCE), the Integration Era (2500-

2000 BCE) and the Localization Era (2100-1300 BCE). These Eras were further subdivided into

Phases, and only one Phase, the Harappan Phase, was included in the Integration Era. This

classification system was then adopted and slightly modified by Kenoyer (Kenoyer, 1998, 1995)

and many others working in the Indus Valley region. In contrast, Possehl adopted a slightly

different approach based on earlier excavators’ trifold division of Early, Mature and Late

10

Harappan. Possehl (1992) organized the archaeological record from the Indus Civilization into a

three-phase classification system: The Pre-Urban phase (3200-2600 BCE), followed by the Urban

or the Mature Harappan phase (2600-1900 BCE), then the Post-Urban phase (1900-1300 BCE).

This threefold division of the Indus Civilization was further modified (Possehl, 2002), and the

chronology of South Asia as a whole was divided into seven stages and each stage was then further

divided into phases, out of which four stages were assigned to the Indus Civilization: the Early

Harappan (3200-2600 BCE), the Early and Mature Harappan transition (2600-2500 BCE), the

Mature Harappan (2500-1900 BCE), and the Post-Urban Harappan (1900-1000 BCE). Dhavalikar

et al. (1994) further subdivided the Mature/Urban Harappan, particularly for the region of Gujarat,

into the Early Mature phase (2500-2200 BCE) and the Late Mature phase (2200-1900 BCE).

Dhavalikar et al. (1994) considered the Late Mature phase to be the most prosperous phase of

Gujarat prehistory, based on the evidence from the settlement of Kuntasi that he proposed

developed into an industrial center and a port during the Late Mature Phase.

This threefold division of the Indus Civilization has been widely accepted among the

scholars working in the region of Gujarat (Ajithprasad and Bhan, 2009; Dhavalikar et al., 1994;

Kharakwal et al., 2012; Shirvalkar and Rawat., (in press).; Sonawane, 2004; Sonawane et al.,

2003). To situate this thesis well in the regional research for Gujarat, I also adopted this division

of the Indus Civilization in Gujarat into Pre- and Early Harappan, Mature/Urban Harappan, and

Post-Urban Harappan (Table 1.1). A few researchers working in the region of Gujarat have adopted

the chronology by Shaffer (Chase et al., 2014a; Lindstrom, 2013); however, they were aiming to

situate their work within the Greater Indus Valley Region. In contrast, my research is a regional

approach and deals with a very specific location and a restricted time period between 2300-1900

BCE, which is the Late Mature phase of Gujarat and does not cover the entire Integration Era

11

(2600-1900 BCE). At the same time, my research also deals with activities that were very specific

to the region of Gujarat and may or may not have been similar to any other regions within the

Indus Civilization. Also, for my results to be most useful for other researchers from the region of

Gujarat, it was necessary for me to adopt the chronology that has been widely used among the

scholars working in this region. In the section below, I will discuss the major traits and

characteristics of these stages with reference to the region of Gujarat.

Table 1.1: Simplified chronology of the Indus Era Gujarat.

Date Range Occupation Phases in Gujarat

7000-3200 BCE Early Village farming communities

3200-2600 BCE Pre and Early Harappan phase

2600-1900 BCE

Mature/Urban Harappan phase

2600-2200 BCE

(Early Mature phase)

2200-1900 BCE

(Late Mature phase)

1900-1300 BCE Post-Urban phase

12

The Pre and Early Harappan Phase in Gujarat (circa 3200-

2600 BCE)

Gujarat has been continuously occupied since the Lower Paleolithic; a large number of

Mesolithic settlements, over 400, were identified from this region, primarily based on the presence

of microlithic tools (Rajesh and Krishnan, 2014; Sonawane, 2004). The Indian Mesolithic is used

to describe a technology, rather a time period, unlike the European Mesolithic, and it is better

referred to as the microlithic industry of India (Possehl and Rissman, 1992a). Although the earliest

dates of the microlithic industry in India can go back to as early as 25,000 to 20,000 BCE,

microliths continued to be used even during the Medieval period of India (Possehl and Rissman,

1992b). The earliest date of the “Mesolithic culture” from Gujarat can be dated to around 7500

BCE, based on microliths, but the production of microliths in Gujarat continued not only during

the Indus era, but are present in the early Historic period as well (Rajesh and Krishnan, 2014).

Throughout these periods, the “Mesolithic” population from Gujarat may have herded

domesticated animals such as sheep and/or goat and cattle, and probably collected wild seeds or

practiced some form of rudimentary agriculture (Sonawane, 2000).

Recent analysis and excavation of many settlements, such as Dholavira, Padri, Loteshwar,

Prabhas Patan, Lothal and Surkotada, suggest the presence of non-Harappan Chalcolithic cultures

in the region of Gujarat, which can be dated between the second half of the fourth millennium

BCE and the first half of the third millennium BCE (Sonawane, 2000, 2004). The non-Harappan

pottery traditions from this region includes Anarta ware, Padri ware, Pre-Prabhas ware, Micaceous

red ware, and Black & Red ware; however, our knowledge of these traditions is limited, apart from

their pottery assemblages and some other material remains (Sonawane, 2000, 2004; Sonawane and

13

Ajithprasad, 1994). Some of these non-Harappan Chalcolithic pottery traditions such as Anarta

and Pardri wares, however, continued to be used into the Mature phase of the Harappan Period

(Kharakwal et al., 2012; Lindstrom, 2013; Sonawane, 2000, 2004). The settlements associated

with the Anarta tradition appear to be as small as 0.1ha to as large as 35ha. Recent excavations at

the settlement of Loteshwar suggest the presence of a large number of pits and structures probably

made of wattle and daub (Rajesh et al., 2013b; Sonawane and Ajithprasad, 1994). The evidence of

similar structures of wattle and daub are also present at the pre-Prabhas period from Datrana IV

(Rajesh et al., 2013a). Microliths, blade tools, as well as bone tools were recovered from both of

these settlements. The settlements of Loteshwar, Datrana IV, Prabas Pathan and Somnath

contained remains of domesticated animals, including goat/sheep and cattle, as well as bones of

wild animals including fish vertebrae; however, there is no indication of indigenous regional

domestication of sheep and goat in Gujarat. We know very little of the plant remains from this

period. The macro-botanical remains from Loteshwar, particularly from the Anarta period, suggest

the dominance of various types of small millets, such as foxtail millet (Setaria sp.), little millet

(Panicum sumatrenese) and brown-top millet (Brachiaria ramose) (García-Granero et al., 2016a);

the plant remains from the Anarta period also includes Triticum sp., sesame, poppy seed, and

horse-gram (García-Granero et al., 2016a). The presence of grinding stones during the Anarta

period at Loteshwar suggests further processing of plants, and the starch grains and phytolith data

from these grinding stone indicate processing of both large and small millets as well as plants from

Triticeae and other families for both food and other purposes (García-Granero et al., 2016a).

Similar grinding stone were also present at Datrana IV (Rajesh et al., 2013a).

The evidence of early Harappan pottery types similar to those of Kot Dijian type and Amri

type are present in the region of Gujarat, but they are sparsely distributed. Except at Moti-Pipli,

14

they are primarily present in the burial contexts from Nagwada and Santhili, and at Nagwada,

stratigraphically underneath the Mature period (Sonawane, 2000). Early Harappan pottery types

are only present in a habitational context at the settlement of Moti-Pipli, but the type of gradual

development from Early Harappan to Mature Harappan forms that one can see in the region of

Sindh, western Punjab and Baluchistan are missing in Gujarat. These few instances may indicate

an early contact between the Chalcolithic cultures of Gujarat and the Early Harappan cultures of

the Indus Valley, as suggested by others (Rajesh and Krishnan, 2014; Sonawane, 2000).

Urban/Mature Phase in Gujarat (circa 2600-1900 BCE)

During the Urban/Mature phase, Gujarat presents a completely different picture than in the

preceding period, with numerous sites distributed throughout Gujarat. Over 500 settlements

belonging to the Urban phase (ca. 2600 to 1900 BCE), with or without Harappan affiliation, have

been identified from this region. Based on the material inventory, settlement pattern and

involvement with economic specializations, Possehl (1992) has identified two distinctive types of

settlements in this region. One type, identified as the ‘Sindhi/Classical Harappan’ settlements, is

similar to the settlements found in the region of Sindh, with material inventories similar to those

found in the lower Indus region; these sites included evidence for Harappan-style non-perishable

craft production and trade. The second type identified as the ‘Sorath Harappan’ settlements, shows

few similarities to the material inventory of the settlements from the Indus Valley region, having

primarily a different pottery assemblage along with a few pottery types similar to those found at

the site of Mohenjo Daro. These Sorath Harappan settlements lacked the architectural attributes of

a Sindhi Harappan settlement, and practiced an economy apparently based solely on agro-

pastoralism (Possehl, 1992).

15

As noted above, the gradual development from Early to Mature Harappan material culture

is missing in the region of Gujarat (Possehl, 1992; Sonawane, 2000; Sonawane and Ajithprasad,

1994). Some of the Urban/Classical Harappan settlements from this region contain an earlier layer

of regional non-Harappan remains, as well as a few pottery types similar to those found in the

Early Harappan levels in the Indus Valley region. There is, however, no evidence that one can

observe in the region of Gujarat to support the evolution of those early cultures into the Urban

Sindhi/Classical Harappan culture. The origins are also unclear of the Sorath traits in the region of

Gujarat, which Possehl and his team call “a regional Urban Phase manifestation” (Possehl and

Herman, 1990:314). Possehl and Herman (1990) argue, based on the dates of the Sorath settlement

of Rojdi, that an early interaction prior to the Urban Phase between the protohistoric people of

Gujarat, Rajasthan, Sindh and Punjab may have been responsible for this Sorath tradition. They

have observed considerable differences as well as a few similarities between the Sorath tradition

and the Classical/Sindhi tradition in Gujarat. The emergence of the Sindhi tradition in Saurashtra

can be dated to somewhere around 2500 BCE, whereas a slightly earlier date from the settlement

of Rojdi made Possehl and Herman (1990) speculate that prior to the migration of Sindhi

Harappans in the landscape of Gujarat, some Harappans may have been already present in Gujarat.

In the same article, they also suggested a gradual development of the Sorath tradition from the Pre-

Prabhas Somnath tradition, beginning about 3000 BCE. They do mention that this is not an

either/or situation but that both early contacts and regional traditions may have been responsible

for the development of this Sorath tradition.

Sonawane and Ajithprasad (1994), on the other hand, argue that there are no antecedent

stages in Gujarat prior to the technologically developed Sorath tradition; they state that neither the

Pre-Prabhas culture nor the Padri ware culture, which were early Chalcolithic cultures of

16

Saurashtra, have any resemblance to the Sorath tradition. Based on these observations, Sonawane

and Ajithprasad (1994) have also argued that prior to the emergence of the Harappan tradition in

Gujarat, it was occupied by a number of small, distinct village farming communities, which date

back to as early as the second half of the fourth millennium BCE. Based on these arguments,

Sonawane and Ajithprasad (1994:138) conclude that the “Harappan Chalcolithic society of Gujarat

must have been the outcome of the integration of all these non-Harappan and Harappan traditions”.

In contrast, Shirvalkar (2013) argues for an indigenous regional development of the Mature

Harappan phase in Gujarat in the form of the Sorath Tradition, which he views as a part of the

overall Mature Harappan zone. He also rejects the theory of Harappan migration from Sindh to

Gujarat as responsible for the development of the Sorath tradition. On the other hand, he argues

that similar to the way Early Harappan cultures from the Indus-Ghaggar-Hakra-Nara regions of

the Indus Civilization gave rise to the Mature Harappan traditions, regional Chalcolithic cultures

of Gujarat, such as the ‘Padri-Anarta Cultural Complex’ were responsible for the emergence of the

Sorath tradition in Gujarat (Shirvalkar, 2013:307). ‘Padri-Anarta Cultural Complex’ is a term

proposed by (Shirvalkar, 2013) to accommodate the regional pottery diversity of Gujarat into one

cultural complex because these pottery assemblages shares similar pottery types and properties.

He even argued that although these regional pottery traditions have some differences, there are

large amounts of similarities as well, and calling them separate traditions will in turn hamper the

classification of the regional Pre-Harappan cultures of Gujarat that likely gave rise to the Sorath

Tradition of Gujarat.

The basis of Shirvalkar's (2013) argument was subsequently criticized by Rajesh and

Krishnan (2017). Shirvalkar (2008) illustrated the sequential development of typical Sorath-type

17

pots from Padri wares, such as the bowls and basins at the settlement of Padri. The reanalysis of

the pottery from the site of Padri by Rajesh and Krishnan (2017), demonstrated that there are no

similarities in term of surface treatment, painted motives or ceramic types between Padri ware and

Sorath ware, and therefore it is not possible to establish a gradual development of Sorath-type

pottery from Padri ware. Rather, Rajesh and Krishnan (2017) argued that at many settlements in

the region of Gujarat, including at Padri, both Padri wares and Sorath wares were present during

both the Urban and Post-Urban phases.

To conclude, archaeologists working in this region have argued that the Sorath tradition is

an indigenously-developed regional expression of the Mature Harappan tradition, or that it is a

regional manifestation of the Urban/Mature Phase that developed through the integration of

regional and non-regional Harappan and non-Harappan traditions either contemporaneous or

slightly earlier than the Urban Phase of Gujarat. Verma and Menon (1999), in contrast, argue for

a completely separate identity for the Sorath tradition. Their preference is not to link the Sindhi

Harappan tradition and the Sorath tradition, but to study them as two distinctive cultures who

occupied Gujarat during the same period. The approach of Verma and Menon (1999) is completely

opposite from the previous claims; they are more inclined to emphasize the differences between

the Urban Harappan traits and the regional traits that can be seen at settlements like Rojdi and

Rangpur.

All of these arguments have some flaws, so that no one particular argument fully explains

the development of the Sorath tradition in the region of Gujarat. One of the major flaws of all of

these arguments is that they are mostly dependent on ceramic typology, and none have tried to

understand the Sorath tradition beyond the ceramic types. Our overall knowledge of any other

18

aspects of this tradition beyond their ceramic typology is limited, and until we have a more

complete picture of this regional tradition, it is problematic to compare this tradition with the

Classical Harappan tradition either for similarities or for differences. My thesis is one such

approach, looking beyond the ceramic tradition of this Sorath tradition to understand the nature of

the economy at these regional, rural food producing settlements, and how it shaped the regional

economy and perhaps socio-political interaction in the region of Gujarat. My intention is not to

understand the development of the Sorath tradition, but to understand how these people functioned.

How did they exploit the regional resources and cope with their environment? How did they

interact with their neighbors? During the Urban/Mature Phase, how did they flourish and expand

to a point where these Sorath settlements were not restricted to the region of their origin in

Saurashtra but even expanded to the region of Kachchh, which was mostly dominated by the

Sindhi/Classical Harappan settlements? I will not be able to answer all of these questions in this

thesis, but I present one of the first efforts to address them from the perspective of a rural food-

producing settlement from Kachchh that displays a considerable amount of Sorath type traits.

Leaving aside the issue of whether the Sorath and Classical Harappan traditions were

linked to one another or totally separated, they are clearly situated differently in Gujarat. The

Sindhi/Classical Harappan settlements in Gujarat are fewer than the Sorath settlements. To date,

around 25 of these Classical settlements have been found, out of which around 15 are located in

the region of Kachchh, and the remaining are sparingly distributed throughout the other regions of

Gujarat (Sonawane, 2004). Interestingly, these Classical Harappan settlements are only located

along the coast line, the margin of both the Great and Little Rann, and along trade routes and close

to the sources of raw materials, possibly in order to facilitate Harappan-style non-perishable craft

manufacturing and both regional and inter-regional trade. In contrast, settlements with

19

predominantly Sorath-type materials are hinterland settlements primarily located in central

Saurashtra, apparently to take advantage of the large amount of fertile land. The exact number of

these settlements is not known, but Sonawane (2004) argues that these settlements easily

outnumber the Classical/Sindhi settlements.

In comparison to the Sorath-type settlements, Sindhi/Classical settlements are larger. The

largest Classical/Sindhi settlement from Gujarat, the settlement of Dholavira, can be measured at

over 70 ha. (Bisht, 2015), and is counted as one of the five Indus Civilization cities (albeit the

smallest). In contrast, the largest Sorath settlement of Rojdi is only around 7 ha. (Possehl, 1992).

City planning and civic architecture are prominent in these Classical/Sindhi settlements. The

majority of these settlements have at least one huge stone-built surrounding wall and are generally

divided into upper and lower towns; the site of Dholavira, the largest among all, is divided into

upper, middle and lower towns (Bisht, 2015). In these types of settlements, Harappan-style mud

bricks along with the locally available stones are the most popular building material. This

combination of building materials is one of the distinctive features of the Classical/Sindhi

Harappan settlements in Gujarat, as the extensive use of stone as building material is lacking in

other Mature Harappan settlements from the Indus Valley region. Some of these settlements

indicate the presence of a non-Harappan layer underneath the Urban layer, but the majority of the

settlements from this category were only occupied during the Urban Phase and were primarily

engaged with Harappan-style non-perishable craft production, trade and administration.

Settlements like Bagasra (Chase et al., 2014a; Sonawane et al., 2003), Shikarpur (Ajithprasad and

Bhan, 2009; Chase et al., 2014a) and Kanmer (Kharakwal et al., 2012) were engaged in the

production of shell and stone objects, whereas sites like Lothal (Rao, 1979), Dholavira (Bisht,

2015) and Surkotada (Joshi, 1990) were likely engaged in facilitating trade and administrative

20

works. The material inventory in these Sindhi/Classical settlements includes diagnostic elements

of Urban Harappan settlements from the Indus Valley region, such as typical Classical Harappan-

type pottery, copper tools, cubical stone weights, seals and sealings with Indus script, long blades

from Rohri chert, and ornaments including steatite and etched carnelian beads.

Unlike the Sindhi/Classical settlements, the Sorath settlements primarily occupied the

central Saurashtra region of Gujarat during the Urban Harappan Phase. These settlements were

smaller when compared to the Classical settlements, and only a few of them were walled. Harappan

building materials such as mud-bricks are rare in these settlements; rather, roughly shaped stone

and rubble were used primarily as building materials (Sonawane, 2004). Harappan-style craft

manufacturing, which is predominant in the majority of the Sindhi/Classical settlements, is mostly

absent in these Sorath settlements. Rather, these Sorath settlements were primarily engaged with

agriculture and pastoralism. A few of them may have participated in the acquisition and

distribution of raw materials necessary for Harappan-style craft production (Law, 2013), and the

Sorath settlement of Kuntasi may have participated in Harappan-style craft production and been

involved in interregional trade (Dhavalikar et al., 1994). The pottery assemblages in these Sorath

settlements are also considerably different from the Classical Harappan settlements. The site of

Rojdi contains only 28 vessel types out of 98 Mohenjo Daro vessel types, based on their shapes;

other attributes, such as paste type, manufacturing techniques, surface treatments and surface

paintings are also considerably different between these two traditions (Possehl, 2004). Based on

the enamel isotope data from Bagasra, however, (Chase et al., 2014b) argue that although the

Sorath settlements were not primarily engaged with the production and trade of non-perishable

Harappan-style craft objects, they may have supplied animal and plant products to the settlements

21

predominantly containing Classical/Sindhi Harappan type materials during the Urban/Mature

Phase. My thesis directly addresses this suggestion.

Urban-Late Transition or the Late Mature Phase in Gujarat

(circa. 2200-1900 BCE)

This transitional period between the Urban and the Post-Urban phase is rarely discussed in

detail; however, with recent excavations from the region of Gujarat, this period has become more

and more prominent. During this period, particularly in Kachchh, several changes can be observed,

which include changes in settlement layout as well as the emergence of new settlements. The

occupation at Dholavira shrank into the citadel area, mud-brick structures were abandoned, and

new stone structures were built; although traditional artefact types from the previous stages

continued to be used, typical Harappan-type steatite seals underwent a structural change from

square to rectangular (Bisht, 2015).

At the Sindhi/Classical Harappan site of Kanmer, particularly from Periods IIB and III,

there are indications of a slight reorientation of the settlement pattern. Although the

Classical/Sindhi Harappan materials continued from the earlier phase, new ceramic styles

including Sorath-type pottery appear during period IIB and by period III, this Sorath-type pottery

becomes predominant (Kharakwal et al., 2012). The other interesting feature of this period at

Kanmer is the presence of layers of ash mixed with Sorath-type pottery and other cultural debris,

particularly along the eastern slope of the mound, which appears to be thrown from the fort wall

as well as in situ burning (Kharakwal et al., 2012: 89-91). Similar ash layers are also present in

many settlements during this phase, which includes the settlement of Dholavira, Surkotada,

Pabumath, Shikarpur, and even at the settlement of Kotada Bhadli, which is the settlement of

22

interest for this thesis. I will return to these ash layers in Chapter 2. It is evident from the remains

at Kanmer that stone beads and tools were manufactured at this settlement, and the residents of

Kanmer may have participated in regional exchange and administration; however, whether there

was any change in this economy particularly during period IIB is unclear. By period III, human

occupation extended beyond the surrounding settlement wall, which is interpreted by the

excavators as evidence that this wall was no longer important (Kharakwal et al., 2012). Similarly,

at Shikarpur during period II there is an increased use of Sorath-type materials, although it is not

clear whether the primary economy of this settlement changed during this period. While no new

architectural projects were undertaken at Shikarpur during this time, there are indications that

major restoration of the Shikarpur settlement wall was carried out during this transition period

(Ajithprasad and Bhan, 2009), in contrast to Kanmer.

Dhavalikar et al. (1994) suggested that this second half of the Urban/Mature phase in

Gujarat, which he calls the Late Mature phase with a suggested date of 2200-1900 BCE, was the

most prosperous period of Gujarat prehistory. He suggested that during this phase, international

trade received a boost and many new settlements emerged on the landscape, including Kuntasi,

Desalpur, Pabumath, Jaidak and Kotada Bhadli. The settlement of Kuntasi emerged on the south

side of the little Rann of Kachchh, near the Arabian Sea, around the end of the first half of the

Urban phase and was fully functional during the second half of the Urban phase, which is the Late

Mature phase (Dhavalikar et al. 1994). This settlement primarily contained Sorath-type ceramics,

similar to the ceramics from Shikarpur Period II, Kanmer Period IIB, Bagasra Phase III, Rojdi A

and Rangpur IIA and IIB (IAR 2007-08). This settlement is well surrounded by a large wall, and

the architectural constructions were primarily made of stone rubble and slabs. The extensive

excavations revealed that during the Early Mature phase, for a brief period of time, this settlement

23

was collecting and distributing raw materials for non-perishable Harappan-style craft production.

By the Late Mature phase, Kuntasi participated in the production of Harappan-style non-perishable

crafts such as shell and stone objects as well as copper objects, and its location near the Arabian

Sea suggests that this settlement may have participated in long distance trade using the sea route

(Dhavalikar et al., 1994). The settlement of Desalpur, located near the Great Rann of Kachchh was

also occupied during this phase. The ceramic assemblages at Desalpur primarily consist of Sorath-

type pottery (Uesugi. et al., 2015). Unfortunately, due to limited excavation, we are uncertain of

the economic activities carried out in this settlement. Likewise, the site of Pabumath was primarily

occupied during this phase and located at the margin of the Great Rann. Regrettably, we do not

know much about the kinds of economic activities carried out at Pabumath. Sonawane (2004),

however, suggests that “this settlement along with Surkotada may have acted as garrison defense

outposts in order to control the resource areas further South and East” (Sonawane, 2004:67). The

Harappan occupation at Jaidak also emerged during this phase, and primarily contained Sorath-

type pottery comparable to Rjodi B and Kuntasi I, as well as some Classical Harappan-type shapes

along with other regional pottery (Ajithprasad, 2008; S. P. Patel, 2017). Although this is a

settlement with a large surrounding wall and with structures made of stone rubble and slabs, there

are no indications of any form of non-perishable craft specialization (S. P. Patel, 2017). Similarly,

the site of Kotada Bhadli, located inland, contains primarily Sorath-type pottery, is surrounded by

a well-built large wall, and contains residential structures made of stone blocks and slabs

(Shirvalkar and Rawat, 2012). Similar to Jaidak, at this settlement there are no indications of any

form of craft production beyond household level production of some shell objects and stone tools.

Three seasons of excavation did not recover any Harappan-style seals or sealings. Only one

24

possible Harappan-style weight was found at this settlement; however, Ruikar et al. (2015) has

identified a few weights suggested to be following a regional style of measuring system.

In contrast, Lindstrom (2013) has observed considerable changes in the primary economy

of non-perishable craft production during Phase III (2200-1900 BCE) at the settlement of Bagasra,

a Sindhi/Classical Harappan settlement from the Saurashtra region of Gujarat. No active

workshops have been identified during this phase, and the refuse from craft activities are now more

dispersed; by the end of this phase, it appears that Bagasra was no longer a craft manufacturing

center for non-perishable Harappan-style goods (Lindstrom, 2013). At the same time, utilization

of Sorath-type pottery also increased considerably during this phase (Lindstrom, 2013; Sonawane

et al., 2003).

Overall, the major traits of this Late Mature phase in Kachchh are the increased utilization

of Sorath-type pottery by the Sindhi/Classical settlements, where the majority of the pottery in the

preceding phase was Classical Harappan types. An increased utilization of stone rubble and slabs

for construction in comparison to Harappan-style mud-bricks can also be observed during this

phase. No major new architectural projects were carried out during this time, but the structures

from the previous phase were usually maintained and restored. Harappan-style seals also continued

during this period, although some structural changes can be observed, and the Harappan script is

still found on seals, sealings and in the form of graffiti on pottery. Regarding the primary economic

activities, there are no indications of major shifts, but numerous new settlements emerged during

this period across the landscape of Gujarat, most likely performing specific functions in the greater

economy and interaction sphere of Gujarat. When considering the Sorath settlements from this

25

phase, we have very little information available, but at the settlement of Rojdi, the occupation

reached to its peak, and new architectural projects were carried out (Possehl, 2004).

The Post-Urban Phase in Gujarat (circa. 1900-1400 BCE)

The cultural change observed in the Post-Urban phase is multi-directional and the degree

and nature of this change also varies between the regions of the Indus Civilization. The decline in

Harappan traits as well as the economic decline that can be observed in this phase varies

extensively between places, and not every region within the Indus Civilization has experienced

this change at the same time or at the same magnitude. Even within Gujarat, different regions

experienced it differently. To characterize the Post-Urban phase of Gujarat, Sonawane (2002:166)

suggested that the most distinctive feature of the Post-Urban Harappan settlements in Gujarat is

the general economic decline of the material cultures which caused a gradual process of

deurbanization. According to him, the prosperity of the Classical Harappan settlements in the

region of Gujarat was dependent on foreign and long-distance trade, and as soon as this inter-

regional interaction began to be disconnected during the beginning of the second millennium BCE,

many of these Classical Harappan settlements from Gujarat did not survive. It is quite evident that

the majority of the settlements that were earlier engaged in non-perishable craft production and

trade were no longer functional, and the settlements that continued to be occupied during this

period were reduced to a very restricted portion of the settlement and failed to maintain the civic

form of the earlier period (Ajithprasad and Bhan, 2009; Bisht, 2015; Dhavalikar et al., 1994;

Kharakwal et al., 2012; Lindstrom, 2013; Rao, 1979). These generalized statements of this phase

may be true for a particular group of settlements; however, it is not entirely true for the entire

region. There are certainly a few changes that are universal throughout the region of Gujarat; for

26

example, the changes in the ceramic style, an overall decline in the number of settlements, and a

likely shift to increasing reliance on pastoral nomadism and the appearance of mobile pastoral

camp sites. Otherwise, this phase affected different regions of Gujarat somewhat differently.

The majority of the Sindhi/Classical Harappan settlements, primarily located in the region

of Kachchh and along the coast of Saurashtra, were abandoned during this period, except for

Dholavira. Deposits from the Post-Urban phase at the majority of these Sindhi/Classical Harappans

settlements are scattered in nature and indicate that the sites were only occupied for a brief period

of time; for example, at Kanmer, there is no well-defined Post-Urban phase (Kharakwal et al.,

2012). At Bagasra, a small area of settlement outside the surrounding wall can be dated to the Post-

Urban Phase (Bagasra Phase IV). Although there is no clear stratigraphic break between Bagasra

Phase III and Bagasra Phase IV, based on the presence of predominantly Sorath-type pottery

similar to that found in Rangpur-IIC and Rojdi-C, as well as based on the absence of Classical

Harappan-type pottery, phase IV at Bagasra was dated to around 1900-1700 BCE; that is, the early

period of the Post-Urban phase (Lindstrom, 2013). At the settlement of Shikarpur, the Post-Urban

Phase is marked by a thin and patchy layer and was identified as Shikarpur Phase III by the

excavators. There is no indication of any form of non-perishable craft activities during this period,

and circular structures appeared during this period, completely different from all previous

architecture. The ceramic assemblage appears to be similar to Rojdi C ty