The Molluscan Shell Assemblage from Khirsara: Evidence for ... · remains were recovered from the...

The Molluscan Shell Assemblage from Khirsara: Evidence for Another Harappan Shell Working Settlement in Gujarat

Arati Deshpande‐Mukherjee1, Soumi Sengupta1 and Jitendra Nath2 1. Department of Archaeology, Deccan College Post‐Graduate and Research Institute,

Yerawada, Pune 411006, Maharashtra, India (Email: [email protected], [email protected])

2. Archaeologoical survey of India Mumbai Circle, Sion Fort (E), Mumbai 400022, Maharashtra, India (Email: [email protected])

Received: 29 August 2014; Accepted: 22 September 2014; Revised: 13 October 2014 Heritage: Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies in Archaeology 2 (2014): 23‐40

Abstract: In Gujarat molluscan shell remains commonly feature at many of the Harappan sites where in most cases they have resulted from shell working activities involving the manufacture of shell objects. While at some of the coastal settlement these also represent past food refuse. In recent times similar remains were recovered from the excavations at Khirsara a mature Harappan site in District Kachchh, Gujarat. The three season’s excavations have unearthed structural remains of a fortified settlement showing a systematic town planning having a citadel, warehouse, factory site and habitation annexes. In this paper are discussed the results of the shell analysis carried out on the molluscan shell remains. Interestingly the site although located far from the coast has yielded these remains which are of marine origin. It is observed that the two large marine gastropods Turbinella pyrum and Chicoreus ramosus had been specifically brought to the site for the manufacture of a variety of shell objects. Major production was of bangles followed by those of ladles while the resulting waste was further used to make secondary objects like inlays, beads, etc. From the overall shell evidence it is inferred that at Khirsara not only was shell working one of the main craft activities to be carried out but had also served as an important centre for this craft during the mature Harappan period in Gujarat.

Keywords: Marine Molluscs, Gastropods, Bivalves, Gujarat, Mature Harappan, Shell Working, Bangles

Introduction In Gujarat at most excavated Harappan sites, shell remains of molluscs,an invertebrate group of animals, frequently feature along with objects made from them. These have been recorded at Rangpur (Rao 1963), Lothal (Chari 1985), Surkotada (Sharma 1990), Dholavira (Bhist 1991), Nageshwar (Bhan 1992), Malvan (Shah 1995), Kuntasi (Deshpande 1996), Shikarpur (Deshpande 1996), Bagasra (Deshpande‐Mukherjee 1999), Beyt Dwarka (Gaur et al. 2005), Nagwada (Bhan and Gowda 2003), Kanmer (Kharakwal

ISSN 2347 – 5463 Heritage: Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies in Archaeology 2: 2014

24

et al. 2012) and Padri (Deshpande‐Mukherjee and Shinde 2014). At all these sites, shell identification has revealed the presence of a variety of molluscs belonging to terrestrial, freshwater and marine habitats (Deshpande‐Mukherjee 1998).These findings are important as they are aiding in the reconstruction of various aspects of past shell working, ancient coastal landscapes and dietary use of molluscs in Gujarat during the Harappan period. Of significance in these shell assemblages are the commonly occurring sawn fragmented parts of marine gastropods Turbinella pyrum and Chicoreus ramosus. Studies by Hornell (1913), Kenoyer (1983), Bhan (1992) and Deshpande (1996, 2006) have shown that these represent the shell waste or debitage which has resulted from shell working activities. Today it is a well established fact that shell working involving the manufacture of shell objects was an important craft activity during the Harappan period. In Gujarat this was mainly possible due to proximity to the Gulf of Kachchh which is the nearest major source area for T. pyrum shells (Pota and Patel 1991). Hence it is not surprising that many shell working sites are located in its vicinity such as Nageshwar (Hegde et al. 1992), Beyt Dwarka (Gaur et al. 2005), Kuntasi (Deshpande 1996), Bagasra (Sonawane et al. 2003), etc.

Figure 1: Map showing Khirsara and other excavated Harappan sites in Gujarat

Recently molluscan shell remains were recovered from the excavations at Khirsara in District Kachchh. Khirsara also referred to locally as ‘Gadhwali Wadi’ lies about 85km. northwest of Bhuj and is situated in the South‐eastern outskirts of the present village overlooking the river Khari (Fig.1). The site, excavated for three seasons (2009‐2013) by the Vadodara excavation branch of the ASI, has unearthed structural remains of a

Deshpande‐Mukherjee et al. 2014: 23‐40

25

fortified mature Harappan settlement showing a systematic town planning having a citadel, warehouse, factory site and habitation annexes (Nath et al. 2012).

In this paper are discussed the results of the shell analysis which was carried out mainly on the shell samples from the first two seasons excavation (2009‐2011).The study was aimed at identifying the various molluscan species found, factors responsible for their presence, their function and to determine the nature and extent of shell working activity at the site.

The recovered shell assemblage consisted of shell objects and complete to fragmented molluscan shells. The shell objects comprised bangles, beads, inlays, and ladles. Of these bangles are most common being both broad and narrow and some having the distinct ‘V’shaped chevron motif which is characteristic of typical Harappan bangles (Fig. 2). They closely resemble those found at other Harappan sites. Inlays are mostly of the droplet type. The site has also yielded a few complete shell ladles (Fig. 3). A more detailed quantitative study of all the shell objects is yet to be carried out.

Figure 2: Shell bangles Figure 3: Shell ladle

Besides these finished objects also recovered were complete to fragmented molluscan shells showed good preservation however some have a chalky appearance due to weathering.The shell remains were analysed in the archaeozoology laboratory of the Deccan College PGRI, Pune. Their analysis involved taxonomic identification, NISP and MNI determination, shell measurements and taphonomic observations such as breakage, discoloration, abrasion, modifications, etc.

The shell identification revealed 13 molluscan taxa belonging to both marine and freshwater habitats comprising four marine bivalves, eight marine gastropods, one scaphopod and one freshwater gastropod (Table. 1).Certain small gastropod shells which could not be identified due to discolouration were recorded as unidentified (Un). In the entire assemblage majority of the molluscan shells identified are of marine origin.


26

Table 1: List of molluscs identified at Khirsara No Species Abbreviation Family Class Type NISP 1 Turbinella pyrum

Tp. Turbinellidae Gastropod M 790

2 Chicoreus ramosus

Cr. Muricidae Gastropod M 52

3 Meretrix meretrix

Mm. Veneriidae Bivalvia M 21

4 Anadara sp. An. Arcidae Bivalvia M 75 Thais sp. Th. Muricidae Gastropod M 26 Crassostrea sp. Cr. Ostreidae Bivalvia M 3 7 Telescopium telescopium

Tt. Potamididae Gastropod M 1

8 Dentaliumsp. Dt. Dentalidae Scaphopoda M *9 Melania striatella tuberculata

Ms. Melanidae Gastropoda Fw 27

10 Cypraea sp. Cp. Cypraeidae Gastropoda M 111 Architectonica

sp. Ah. Architectonicidae Gastropoda M 1

12 Natica sp. Nc. Naticidae Gastropoda M 213 Nassarius sp. Ns. Nassariidae Gastropoda M 114 Mytilus sp. Mu. Mytilidae Bivalvia M 115 Unidentified Un. Bivalvia/

Gastropoda M 27

M ‐ marine, Fw‐freshwater, * Present but yet to be quantified

Marine Molluscs Four marine bivalve species were identified Meretrix meretrix, Anadara sp. Crassostrea sp. and Mytilus sp. (Fig. 4). These shells do not bear any signs of human modifications. Interestingly 16 complete shells of the venerid clam Meretrix meretrix were found along with 21 complete Turbinella pyrum shells in trench U39/3 in the factory area. A few fairly large sized complete shells of the blood cockle Anadara sp. are present. There is a scarce representation of oysters in the assemblage except for three shell fragments of Crassostrea sp. All the above mentioned species have been reported from other Harappan sites such as Kuntasi and Bagasra, where they had served as a food source (Deshpande‐Mukherjee 1998; Deshpande‐Mukherjee 2015). Presence of a shell fragment of the mussel shell Mytilus is significant as it is nearly absent at most Harappan sites in Gujarat. Complete to fragmented shells of eight marine gastropods occur which are mainly dominated by the two large shells of Turbinella pyrum and Chicoreus ramosus. A few shells of small gastropods like Thais sp., Natica sp., Cypraea sp., Nassarius sp., Telescopium telescopium, etc. are also present along with schaphopod shells belonging to Dentalium sp. (Table 2.).


27


28

Figure 4: Marine bivalves: first row from top Anadara sp., middle row Meretrix meretrix

Figure 5: Complete Turbinella pyrum shell

In the entire assemblage, maximum occurrence is of Turbinella pyrum (n=790) (Figs. 5&6), (Table 3). Its large white shell having a smooth surface, an inflated body whorl and a internal thick columella covered with ridges was the most commonly preferred raw material in shell working. The variety of T. pyrum having an acute spire was used. Mostly sawn fragments from the apex, spire, main shell whorl, columella, and small chips were found (Table 3 & 4). Of which columella are maximum in number (n=308) (Fig. 7). Many of the fragments display evidence of sawing by a sharp metal blade indicating shell cutting. Besides shell fragments, 25 complete shells were recovered of which 23 were found in the factory area. The largest complete shell measuring in length‐ 172.00mm and breadth‐ 122.00mm was found in trench R‐37/2. It is perforated in the apical region, has worm holes on its surface and a part of the outer shell is broken.

Another well represented shell is that of Chicoreus ramosus, a large marine muricid gastropod having spines on its outer shell (Fig.8). The internal part of its shell is thin, smooth, glossy and the columella is devoid of any grooves. It is also found to inhabit similar ecological habitats like T. pyrum in the Gulf of Kachchh. As compared to T. pyrum, fewer fragments of this shell occur n=52. (Table 5). These comprised partially broken shells, intact spire with columella, columella, spine fragments from the aperture and basal portions which also display cut marks caused by sawing.


29

Table 3: Location wise distribution of Turbinella pyrum debitage (n= 790)

(Does not include bangles and objects) Location Complete

Shells Apex Spire Columella Chips Main Shell

whorl Total

Warehouse ‐ 11 ‐ 14 12 5 42Factory 23 74 13 58 4 46 218Citadel ‐ 57 3 41 8 34 143Residential 1 72 36 146 18 10 283Other Areas (outside fortification, Factory, etc)

1 35 3 49 9

7 104

25 249 55 308 51 102 790

Table 4: Distribution of T.pyrum in index trench Z38/1 from citadel area Layer Depth in m Apex Columella Frg. from main

whorl Spire Frgs. Total

1 0.0 to 0.50 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐2 0.50 to 0.90 2 1 ‐ ‐ 3 63 0.90 to 4.00 8 7 5 1 3 244 4.00 to 4.50 3 ‐ 5 ‐ ‐ 85 4.50 to 5.10 1 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 1

14 8 10 1 6 39

Table: 5 Location wise distribution of C.ramosus debitage (n=52) at Khirsara (Does not include finished objects)

Location Complete Apex Spire Columella Chips Outer Whorl Total Outer fortification north

‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 2 1 3

Residential ‐ ‐ 1 ‐ 7 1 9warehouse 2 ‐ ‐ ‐ 5 7Factory 1 5 ‐ ‐ 6 17 29Citadel ‐ 1 ‐ ‐ ‐ 3 4Total 3 6 1 ‐ 20 22 52

Freshwater Molluscs Alongside marine molluscs, small complete shells of the freshwater gastropod Melania striatella tuberculata were identified. Commonly found in rivers, streams and lakes it was introduced accidentally into the site either due to natural factors like inundation or human activities. Their presence suggests that during the Harappan period these had probably inhabited the nearby river Khari which had sufficient water to support these

ISSN 2

30

mollusidentif

By carshells and th

347 – 5463 He

scs. A few tfication is di

rrying out tawhich were

hose that we

eritage: Journa

tiny bivalveifficult due t

Figure 6:

Figu

aphonmic obe intentionalre accidenta

T. Pyrum85%

al of Multidisci

e shell fragmto the small

Distributio

ure 7: Parts o

bservations lly collectedally introduc

iplinary Studie

ments were asize of the fr

n of mollus

of Turbinell

and quantifd by the site ced.

es in Archaeolo

also found bragments.

scs at Khirsa

la pyrum

fication it winhabitants

C. r

Others10%

ogy 2: 2014

but their ex

ara

was possible for a specif

ramosus5%

s

act species

to identify fic purpose


31

Figure 8: Chicoreus ramosus shell with a saw cut

In the shell assemblage shell remains of T. pyrum and Chicoreus ramosus like most Harappan sites in Gujarat had been brought to Khirsara as raw material for the shell industry. These shells had been regularly procured from the shallow intertidal coral reef areas in the Gulf of Kachchh where they were collected at low tide.


32

Whereas shells of smaller gastropod species such as Natica sp., Archaeotectonica sp., Thais sp., Telescopium telescopium, Melaniastriatella were accidentally introduced. Due to their limited numbers, isolated occurrences and lacking signs of human activity no specific role can be attributed to these shells. Since Khirsara is not located on the immediate coast it is quite likely they were collected along with the larger shells as these inhabit mudflats and mangroves which are also present in the Gulf of Kachchh. Similar might have been the case with marine bivalves like Meretrix meretrix and Anadara sp. Dietary use of these two shells is difficult to infer at Khirsara due to their limited occurrence.

Dentalium shells even though show no traces of working were probably used as beads as is observed at other sites such as Kuntasi (Deshpande1996), Padri (Deshpande‐Mukherjee and Shinde 2014) and Dholavira (per. observation). Of interest is a small Natica shell from trench AE35/4 layer 3 having an oblong perforation which could have been used as bead.

The Shell Industry at Khirsara By taking into consideration the appreciable quantities of sawn shell fragments of the two large marine gastropods T.pyrum and C.ramosus, it is very clear that at Khirsara shell working was being carried out on a fairly large scale. Three major types of shell working have been identified: shell bangle manufacture, ladle manufacture, manufacture of miscellaneous objects such as inlays, beads, etc.

Shell Bangle Manufacture Shell bangle manufacture at Khirsara is distinctly identified from the presence of sawn T. pyrum fragments from the apex, aperture, spire and diagonally sawn columella with a part of the main whorl attached (Figs.9 & 10, Table 3). These result during the different stages of the manufacturing process involving the extraction of shell circlets by sawing from a complete T. pyrum shell. A similar shell debitage has been observed during the manufacture of shell bangles in the modern day shell industry in West Bengal (Deshpande‐Mukherjee 2006). By closely studying the shell waste at Khirsara and comparison with other shell working sites it has been possible to reconstruct the stages of manufacture. The process of bangle manufacture appears to be closely similar to that reported for Harappa Kenoyer (1983), Nageshwar (Bhan1992) and Kuntasi (Deshpande 1996, 2006).

In the present‐day shell industry in West Bengal, for obtaining bangle circlets, smooth good quality shells in a particular size range of 90‐200mm are preferred by the craftsmen. Similar was the case at Khirsara, from the measurements of the columellas, it is observed that fairly large sized shells in a similar size range were used. Good quality shells were preferred which might help explain the presence of 21 complete T.pyrum shells in trench U39/3. These, were probably considered unsuitable for shell working as some of them have worm holes on their shells and hence were kept aside (Fig. 11). The holes are caused by cliona sponge which attack the T. pyrum shells in


33

Figure 9: Sawn apex of Turbinella pyrum

Figure 10: Sawn columellae of T. pyrum


34

Figure 11: Complete T. pyrum shell with boring holes of Cliona sponge

Figure 12: T. pyrum apex with a saw cut

shallow coral reef for extracting calcium carbonate and eventually destroy the shell. Such shells are not suitable for working. This is generally not the case with shells collected from deeper waters.

Prior to shell cutting after the selection and sorting of shells, the T.pyrum shells were prepared by hollowing out the interior and detaching the columella. For this the tip of the apex of the shell was struck with a sharp object such as a metal hammer resulting in a circular perforation. Or the apex was sawn as seen in Fig. 12. Through this with the aid of a pointed hammer the internal septa connecting the columella and the walls of the shell were detached. Following this the shell was sawn diagonal to the main shell axis. Sawing was probably done with a saw having a sharp metal blade. One saw cut was made diagonally from the beginning of the main shell whorl to the apex in the spire portion. It is in this stage that the perforated diagonally sawn apex portions of the shell were obtained. Another diagonal saw cut was made from the base of the main whorl to the area above the aperture. By doing so a part of the main shell whorl and basal portion of the shell with the central columella was detached. From the resulting hollow main shell whorl, rough circlets of required widths were sawn. The rough circlets were further ground down on their interior with an abrasive tool while their exterior surface was rubbed over flat sandstone. Similar is the practice in Bengal where sandstone querns are used for this operation. Harappan bangles are generally plain but


35

often a ‘V’ shaped groove is incised on their external surface. At Khirsara both narrow and broad bangles have this particular groove which was done using a saw as seen from the deep cut marks.

Since shell debitage resulting from the various stages of bangle manufacture has been recovered, it is quite likely that the entire process of bangle production was carried out at the site. Besides the use of T. pyrum there is a possibility that bangles were also manufactured from C.ramosus shells however this aspect needs to be further investigated.

Ladle Manufacture Ladle manufacture is revealed from the presence of sawn shell fragments of Chicoreus ramosus, comprising apex, columella with spire attached and spine fragments. (Figs. 13, 14 & 15). Their presence strongly suggests the production of these particular objects besides shell bangles by the Khirsara inhabitants. Recovery of finished shell ladles from the site further highlights this aspect. A reconstruction of the ladle manufacture process involving C.ramous had been earlier attempted for Mohenjodaro (Kenoyer 1983, 1984), Nageshwar (Bhan 1992) and Kuntasi (Deshpande 1996). A similar

Figure 13: Sawn spire of Chicoreus ramosus

Figure 14: Sawn columella of C. ramosus

manufacturing process has been identified at Khirsara. This had involved the initial removal of the spines covering the main shell whorl which were removed both by sawing as well as chipping. Some of the spines due to their large size and thickness required sawing .Following the removal of the external spines, a diagonal saw cut was


36

made from the top of the main whorl extending around both sides of the shell and reaching the narrow anterior end of the shell. A handle was formed by making two parallel longitudinal cuts from the anterior tip towards the main body whorl. From this a ladle was detached and by repeating the process on the other half of the shell a second but smaller ladle could be obtained (Kenoyer 1983). It is observed as compared to bangles, production of shell ladles was limited.

Figure15: Sawn spines of C. ramosus

Manufacture of Miscellaneous Objects such as Inlays, Beads, etc. Besides bangles and ladles, manufacture of miscellaneous objects such as inlays, beads, etc. is evident. A closer examination of the T. pyrum shell fragments from the apex and main whorl showed deep cut marks which are perpendicular to the shell whorls (Fig.16). Also rectangular shell fragments with rough edges have been found. These were obtained from the main whorl and were later made into inlays. It appears that fragments from the apex, spire, columella, were intentionaly retained by the shell workers at Khirsara for the manufacture of small miscellaneous items such as beads and inlays. Such finished objects have also been found at the site. In case of the columella they were further shaped into cones, short cylinders by removing the grooves and smoothening them (Figs. 17& 18).

Identification of Shell Working Area Sawn shell fragments of both T. pyrum and C. ramosus have been found from all over the site. At this juncture it is difficult to find out their exact manufacturing areas since a detailed spatial study of all the shell debitage and objects is yet to be carried out.


37

However in case of T. pyrum major concentration of its debitage has been observed in the residential area and the ‘factory site’ located to the north of the citadel. (Table 3). While C. ramosus debitage was found mainly in the factory site (Table 5) .

Figure 16: Spire part of T.pyrum bearing saw marks

Figure 17: Columella of T.pyrum with grooves removed

Figure 18: Trimmed T.pyrum columella


38

Discussion The overall shell evidence strongly suggests that shell working was an important craft activity at Khirsara involving the production of a variety of objects such as bangles, ladles, beads and inlays. For this the two large marine gastropods T. pyrum and C. ramosus had been specifically procured along with which the other molluscs were also accidentally brought. Even though the site compared to others like Shikarpur and Bagasra was not located very close to the Gulf of Kachchh yet had carried out shell working on a fairly large scale. It is quite likely that it was carried out on a more or less similar scale to that of other major centres such as Lothal, Bagasra and to a certain extent even Dholavira. By far Dholavira appears to be the largest shell working site in Gujarat as recent ongoing studies by the first author are revealing. Interestingly recent excavations at Kotada Bhadli a Late Mature Harappan site located quite close to Khirsara has not yielded shell evidence of the same magnitude (Shirwalkar and Rawat 2012).

Bangles being the most commonly produced objects were the main focus of the shell industry. A comparison with other sites like Nageshwar and Kuntasi indicate the similarity in the manufacturing process and technology involved. It is observed that the Khirsara shell workers had made maximum use of T.pyrum shells without wasting any of it probably since they had to be procured over a greater distance. Hence the additional production of miscellaneous objects both to supplement the shell industry as well due to a demand for them. Taking into account the nature of the settlement, presence of appreciable quantities of shell debitage and finished objects, the shell industry was geared for both the local and regional markets.

Today although rich shell evidence is available from many of the sites in Gujarat a limited quantified data makes it difficult to estimate the intensity of this activity at most sites. Due to which a lot still remains to be understood about the role of these sites in the production and exchange of finished shell objects within the Harappan interaction spheres. To conclude this shell study has indicated the rich archaeological potential of the Khirsara shell assemblage for a further understanding of Harappan shell working in Gujarat.

Acknowledgement Sincere acknowledgements are owed to the Archaeological Survey of India for providing the opportunity to study the shell material and Dr. Kumaran is sincerely thanked for his help during the research. The reviewer’s comments are duly acknowledged which have helped in improving this paper.

References Bhan, K. K. 1992. Shell industry. In Excavations at Nageshwar: a Harappan shell working

site on the Gulf of Kutch.(K. T. M. Hegde, K. K. Bhan, V. H. Sonawane, K. Krishnan and D.R. Shah, eds.), Pp. 125‐136. Vadodara: M.S. University Archaeological Series 18.


39

Bhan, K. K. and D. Gowda. 2003. Shell working at Nagwada (North Gujarat) with

special reference to shell industries of the Harappan tradition in Gujarat.Man and Environment Vol. XXVIII (2): 51‐80.

Bisht, R. S. 1991. Dholavira: a New Horizon of the Indus Civilisation. Puratattva 20, 71‐82.

Chari, V. K. 1985. Shell remains. In Lothal: a Harappan port town 1955‐62 Vol II. (S. R. Rao, ed.) Pp. 614‐624. New Delhi: Memoirs of the Archaeological Survey of India No:78.

Deshpande, A. 1996. Shell Remains. In Kuntasi, a Harappan emporium on West Coast. (M. K. Dhavalikar, M. R. Raval and Y. M. Chitalwala, eds.), Pp. 331‐347. Pune: Deccan College.

Deshpande, A. 1996‐97. Application of Molluscan Studies in Archaeology with Special Reference to Western India (Ph.D. synopsis). Bulletin of the Deccan College Post‐graduate and Research Institute 56‐57: 355‐361.

Deshpande‐Mukherjee, A. 1998. Shell fishing and shell craft activities during the Harappan period in Gujarat. Man and EnvironmentVol XXXIII (1): 63‐81.

Deshpande‐Mukherjee, A. 1999. A preliminary study of Marine molluscan shell remains from Bagasra: A Harappan site in Gujarat. Puratattva 29: 110‐113.

Deshpande‐Mukherjee, A. 2006. Reconstructing the past: Ethnographic Observations on Shellworking at Bishnupur in Past and Present Ethnoarchaeology in India.(GautamSengupta, Suchira Roychoudhary and Sujit Som eds.), pp.383‐409, Pragati Publications, N.Delhi and Centre for Advanced Studies and Training in Eastern India, Kolkata.

Deshpande‐Mukherjee, A. 2015. Packaged food from the sea: Dietary use of Marine Molluscs at coastal Harappan settlements in Gujarat, India. In Recent Researches on the Indus Civilisation and Maritine archaeology in India (A.S.Gaur and Sundaresh eds.),pp.75‐86. New Delhi: Agam Kala Prakshan.

Deshpande‐Mukherjee, A. and V. Shinde. 2014. Evaluating the role of Molluscan Shell assemblage recovered from Padri, a Coastal Harappan settlement in Gujarat, India. In Archaeomalacology: Shells in the Archaeological Record. (Katherine Szabo, Catherine dupont, Vesna Dimitrijevic, Luis Gomez Gastelum and Nathalie Serrand eds.)pp.19‐.31 ‐, BAR International Series 2666. Archaeopress, Oxford, ISBN 978 1 4073 1308 5.

Deshpande‐Mukherjee, A. S. Sengupta and J. Nath. 2012. Making sense from waste? Molluscan shell Remains from the Harappan site of Khirsara, District Kachchh, Gujarat. International Conference on Harappan Archaeology (27‐30 October 2012). Chandigarh: Archaeological Survey of India.

Gaur, A. S., Sundaresh and K. H. Vora. 2005. Archaeology of Bet Dwarka Island. New Delhi: Aryan Books International and National Institute of Oceanography, Dona Paula.

Hegde, K.T. M, K. K. Bhan, V. H. Sonawane, K. Krishnan and D. R. Shah 1992. Excavations at Nageshwar: a Harappan shell working site on the Gulf of Kutch. Vadodara: M.S. University Archaeological Series 18.


40

Hornell, J. 1913. The Chank Bangle Industry.Memoirs of the Asiatic Society of Bengal 3 (7), 407‐ 448.

Kenoyer, J. M. 1983. Shell working Industries of the Indus Civilisation : an Archaeological and Ethnographic Perspective. Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, Berkeley, University of California.

Kenoyer, J. M. 1984. Shell working Industries of the Indus Civilisation: a summary. Palaeorient 10 (1): 49‐63.

Kharakwal, J. S., Y.S. Rawat and T. Osada. 2012. Excavations at Kanmer 2005‐06‐2008‐09 Indus Research Project Institute for Humanity and Nature, Kyoto, Japan.

Nath, J, R. N. Kumaran and A. Kulkarni. 2012. Excavations at Khirsara: A Harappan Outpost in Kachchh. Puratattva 42: 122‐132.

Pota, K. A. and M. I. Patel. 1991. Exploitation of Chanks from the Gulf of Kutch, Bulletin of the Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute 42, 445‐450.

Rao, S. R. 1963. Excavations at Rangpur and other explorations in Gujarat. Ancient India 18‐19: 5‐207.

Shah, D. R. 1995. Shell Remains, in Excavations at Malvan (F.R. Allchin and J.P.Joshi eds.), pp. 107‐112. New Delhi: Archaeological Survey of India.

Sharma, A. K. 1990. Shell Remains. In J. P. Joshi (ed.) Excavation at Surkotada 1971‐72 and exploration in Kutch, 383‐388. New Delhi: Archaeological Survey of India.

Shirvalkar, P. and Y.S. Rawat. 2012. Excavations at Kotada Bhadli, district Kachchh, Gujarat, A preliminary report. Puratattva 42:182‐201.

Sonawane, V. H., P. Ajithprasad, K. K. Bhan, K. Krishnan, S. Pratapchandran, A. Majumdar, A. K. Patel and J. Menon. 2003. Excavations at Bagasra ‐1996‐2003: A Preliminary Report. Man and Environment Vol. XXVIII (2): 21‐50.

Date post:	22-Mar-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	0 times
Download:	0 times

The Molluscan Shell Assemblage from Khirsara: Evidence for ... · remains were recovered from the...

Documents