The Cultures of Northeast and Adjoining Regions: A Comparative Study

— K.N. Dikshit* and Manjil Hazarika**

The neolithic culture of forms a distinct identity in the Neolithic cultural tradition of India. E.C. Worman, V.D. Krishnaswami and B.K. Thapar classified the Neolithic cultures of India, whereas A.H. Dani, T.C. Sharma and O.K. Singh discussed the issue of Northeast in a broad spectrum and added more dimensions in solving the neolithic problem of Eastern India. The agricultural origin – the transition to food production and domestication of animals is attracting increasing attention as a topic of enquiry in different parts of the world. Northeast India has not yet provided the basic subsistence economic pattern which includes not only polished stone tools but also other cultural traits like pottery, animal husbandry and process of beginning of agriculture. In this paper, an attempt has been made to highlight the vast repertoire of stone tools and pottery from different states of Northeast and their position in the neolithic status of Eastern India.

ince the first discovery of a Neolithic research, many excavations were conducted artifact of blue jadeite stone in in India which no doubt provided valuable S Eastern Indian context by Sir John information and proved to be of far-reaching Lubbock in 1867 from Assam (Lubbock 1867), importance and added more dimensions in a number of publications have reported the solving the neolithic problem. Subsequent finding of neolithic celts by amateur as broad-spectrum studies by E.C. Worman well as by professionals (Steel 1870, Barron (1949), A.H. Dani (1960), V.D. Krishnaswami 1872, Hutton 1924, Cockburn 1879, Godwin (1962), B.K. Thapar (1965, 1974, 1978 and Austen 1875, Anderson 1871, Banerjee 1924, 1985) have placed these neolithic materials Dasgupta 1913, Coggin Brown 1914, Walker in the framework of Indian Neolithic as 1931 etc.). However, these findings could not the earliest farming communities of the be placed in its proper perspective in neolithic Indian sub-continent as happened in rest cultural context in pre-independence era. of the World. The agricultural origins – the With the initiation of problem-oriented transition to food production is attracting

*Former Joint Director General, Archaeological Survey of India and General Secretary, Indian Archaeological Society, New Delhi ** Research Associate, Indian Archaeological Society, New Delhi and Ph. D Researcher, Himalayan Languages Project, Bern University, Switzerland

98 | Journal of Indian Ocean Archaeology No. 7 & 8, 2011-12 Fig. 1: Neolithic – World view of early farming cultures (after Diamond and Bellwood 2003: 597) increasing attention as a topic of enquiry in of those early farming communities, one different parts of the World (Fig. 1). can safely place the horizon as “neolithic”. The post-glacial period has witnessed a Sir John Lubbock termed all the remains marked change in human history with the of prehistoric man which included the beginning of agriculture which has changed polished stone tools and appeared in the the entire scenario of human adaptation archaeological context before the emergence from hunter-gathers to farmers. This shift of metal as Neolithic. The Neolithic has been in the economical basis of the prehistoric defined in the Encyclopaedia Britannica (1969: societies has been termed as the “Neolithic 214) as those archaeological assemblages Revolution” by V. Gordon Childe (1936, having (i) polished stone tools, (ii) pottery, 1942). This revolutionary change has led (iiii) horticulture and/or domestication the mobile foregers and hunters to settle of animals. In recent years, each of these down in a place where they could conduct traits has been individually examined and certain farming activities and resulted empirically tested for understanding region- in surplus food and necessity of storage specific origin and growth of the culture. facilities. Permanently settling down at a In this line of enquiry, the beginning of place has led to the formation of villages farming and domestication of animals has and gradually more complex societies. gained much attention for reconstructing To understand the neolithic culture as a the change in basic subsistence economy of whole, one must understand the basic traits prehistoric societies. observable in archaeological context. Upon In the context of Northeast India (Fig. recognising the basics traits as signatures 2), one may painfully admit that the region

Journal of Indian Ocean Archaeology No. 7 & 8, 2011-12 | 99 Fig. 2: Map showing the location of Northeast India has not yet provided the basic subsistence the discovery of stone tools and pottery but economic pattern which includes not only the application of modern studies such as stone tools but also other cultural traits like analysis of phytoliths, residual, carbonised pottery, animal husbandry and the process grains were not taken into account. These of beginning of agriculture. In fact, in the studies will help in understanding the beginning main emphasis was given on transition from wild species to domesticated

100 | Journal of Indian Ocean Archaeology No. 7 & 8, 2011-12 ones, not only confined to animals but also scholar, prepared a comprehensive regional to food items such as rice etc. (Hazarika synthesis of the celts found in old Darrang 2006a, 2006b) and Cachar districts and compared with the J.H. Hutton (1928) was the first scholar adzes found in Burma and Chotanagpur who attempted to give a systematic synthesis region of India. Other scholars like P.C. of the prehistoric artifacts found in Northeast Choudhury (1944) and E.C. Worman (1949) India. K.L. Baruah (1939), an Assamese made systematic attempts at understanding

Fig. 3: Map of the Neolithic Pattern of India (after Krishnaswami 1962)

Journal of Indian Ocean Archaeology No. 7 & 8, 2011-12 | 101 the neolithic scenario of this region by provinces (Fig. 3), viz. A – central and considering the stone tools. western India, B – southern India and D E.C. Worman (1949) plotted the neolithic – Kashmir and grouped the East Indian sites found in Indian context which were Neolithic complex as Province C – eastern exclusively in Assam and and also India including two regions, i.e. (i) Assam in central and southern India – south of the (Fig. 4) and (ii) Bengal--Orissa on Ganga plain and north of Puddukkottai. the basis of the study made by Dani. He His conclusion was that there is no positive has called the classification of Worman evidence of the existence of neolithic people (1949) as ‘purely academic and theoretical’ before the use of metal and most of the and presented his classification dictated neolithic celts of Indian origin have their by geographical factors as ‘each group of cultural affiliation from at tools of a particular region shows a distant different dates. One can draw the conclusion kinship in material and form’ although by his remarks that Indian neolithic celts, manufacturing technique is common. may belong to the Chalcolithic phase and It may also be mentioned that “as the India has no neolithic phase as such. material was obtained generally in the A.H. Dani (1960) who has made a form of flat slabs from stream-beds, very detailed study of eastern Neolithic culture little chipping or flaking was necessary, divided Assam and north-eastern states battering or hammering and grinding or into six zones such as Cachar hills, Sadiya smoothing being sufficient to produce tools” Frontier zone, Naga hills, Khasi hills, Garo (Krishnaswami 1962: 51). hills and Brahmaputra valley zone, whereas B.K. Thapar (1978: 11-22, 1985: 37- he made the classification of tool types 43) who has also studied the problem under seven categories such as facetted tools, of neolithic, divided the culture into six shouldered tools, splayed axe, rounded but geographical zones, (i) Northern covering the axe with broad cutting edge, wedges and Kashmir valley, whereas eastern India has grooved hammer stones. On the basis of his been identified as (ii) Belan valley covering analytical study of tool types, he was also of the Vindhyan Plateau in districts Allahabad, the opinion that Southeast Asian elements Mirzapur, Rewa and Sidhi, (iii) Northern came in different waves at different times Bihar or Mid-eastern covering district through (former Burma) and a Saran, (iv) North-eastern covering Assam definite chronology could be ascribed “on the and the adjacent sub-Himalayan region, basis of a black polished ware associated with (v) Central-eastern covering Chotanagpur the specialised tools of the later complexes plateau with its Peniplains extending in of Burma”. West Bengal and Orissa and (vi) Southern, V.D. Krishnaswami (1962: 25-64) divided covering the Peninsular India. Out of the six the Indian Neolithic complex in four regions, he has taken up the northern region

102 | Journal of Indian Ocean Archaeology No. 7 & 8, 2011-12 Fig. 4: Surface collection of neolithic stone tools from Assam (Northeast India) (after Krishnaswami 1962: 52-53)

1. shouldered hoe, irregular and broad, 2. shouldered hoe, irregular and long, 3. axe with broad cutting edge, 4. faceted hoe with long parallel sides, 5. faceted hoe curvilinear, 6. shouldered hoe, regular and broad, 7. shouldered hoe, regular and long, 8. shouldered hoe with regular and crescent shaped body, 9. faceted hoe with unifacially ground edge, 10. gouge-adze, 11. rounded butt axe, curvilinear, 12. rounded butt axe with bifacially-ground median edge, 13. splayed axe, 14. tanged axe, 15. faceted hoe with bifacially-ground median edge, 16. rounded-butt axe, unifacially ground edge-bevelled, 17. wedge-blade, 18. faceted tool with side notches

Journal of Indian Ocean Archaeology No. 7 & 8, 2011-12 | 103 – Kashmir valley and Belan valley where new of Southeast Asia, both of mainland and excavations were carried out in 1960s and island. The term is used to refer to the lithic 1970s. While talking about the Belan valley assemblages from the Terminal Pleistocene he has emphasized that in these regions and Early Holocene of Southeast Asia in neolithic levels, blades, pottery, querns, characterised by unifacial, centripetal mullers, sling balls, celts, bone arrowheads, and circumferential cobble reduction and terracotta beads and bones of animals were resulting flakes and debitage (Marwick noticed. The paleo-botanical analysis has 2008). However, the term Hoabinhian has revealed rice husks of domesticated variety been under debate (Shoocongdej 2000). as a degraissant in pottery. G.R. Sharma The Hoabinhian techno-complex (Bellwood put this date to 7th – 5th millennium BCE on 1978) is defined purely on the basis of tool the basis of the C14 dates from the neolithic categories comprising pebble tools, utilised levels at which has so far provided flakes, and a small proportion of edge- the earliest evidence of rice cultivation in the ground tools and bone tools, and in the later sub-continent (Thapar 1965: 87-112, 1974: period pottery and fully ground axes and 61-65). adzes also occur. The Hoabinhian sites are T.C. Sharma (1966) systematically spread over a broad region from Southern studied the neolithic material from Northeast China, North Vietnam, Malaya, Thailand, India kept at various museums in India Laos, Cambodia, Sumatra, and Taiwan. and abroad and compared with excavated While excavating at Spirit cave, Gorman material from Daojali Hading. He strongly reported Hoabinhian tools of later period believes that the neolithic personality of this overlapping with the Neolithic pottery. region has emerged under a strong influence Data from Excavated Sites of Chinese and Southeast Asian Neolithic which has an earlier tradition known as Northeast India includes the present day Hoabinhian. Gorman (1970, 1971) while states of Arunachal Pradesh, Assam, working at Spirit Cave found Hoabinhian Manipur, Meghalaya, Mizoram, Nagaland, tools overlapping with the neolithic pottery Sikkim and Tripura. The entire area covers and ground stone adzes. Similar situation several geographical divisions proposed by also existed at Vietnam and in other Singh (1999) such as: Assam valley covering northern areas where Hoabinhian evolved the Brahmaputra plain, Eastern Himalaya, into a fairly coherent agricultural array of Purvanchal and Meghalaya-Mikir region neolithic culture (Bellwood 1985). covering the hilly surroundings of the valley. The region is criss-crossed by several Characteristic cultural traits tributaries and streams of the Brahmaputra of Hoabinhian culture and Barak rivers. However, most of the Hoabinhian is a cultural techno-complex Neolithic sites are located on the hilly tracks

104 | Journal of Indian Ocean Archaeology No. 7 & 8, 2011-12 or upland areas suggesting a unique trait of excavations were conducted subsequently. this cultural phase in the region. Parsi-Parlo The post-independence era has witnessed excavations at a handful of sites carried out The Neolithic site of Parsi-Parlo, excavated by the universities located at Guwahati, by A.A. Ashraf (1990), is situated on the Dibrugarh, Shillong etc. and several State northern slope of the Terrace I at a height departments of archaeology in Eastern India of 12 m from the river bed of Kamla on its besides Archaeological Survey of India. To right bank. Excavation at Parsi-Parlo during discuss the issue of the genesis and growth 1982-83, revealed about 50 to 100 cm thick of the early farming communities in the cultural deposit. Scrapers and large cutting region, it will be pertinent to address the tools with the rudiments of pecked and data gathered from each of the excavated ground techniques characterize phase I at the site separately and compare within the site. Raw material used for manufacturing framework, which may be termed as tools of this phase was consisted of sandstone “Northeast Indian Neolithic Complex”. and quartzite. Phase II represents the layer (2) and is characterized by the occurrence Arunachal Pradesh of pecked and ground stone implements, Arunachal Pradesh, erstwhile N.E.F.A. wasted blade/axe and faceted tools with (North East Frontier Agency) falls in the handmade pottery. It is the continuation division of Eastern Himalaya (Prasad of the preceding phase with conspicuous 1999). There are reports on the sporadic absence of scraper and other large cutting finds of neolithic stone artifacts from time tools and also the emergence of pottery. The to time both in surface context as well as tool kit, in general, provides hafting facilities in possession of local inhabitants. Besides and is mostly agriculture based. At the site the discoveries made by M.C. Goswami and of Parsi-Parlo, a small number of potsherds his colleagues (Goswami et al. 1972) from represents square-grid and honey-comb the Kameng district and the joint scientific (web) beater-impressed pottery. Lavigation is expedition in the Daphabum area led by poor and it contains high percentage of gritty the Geological Survey in collaboration particles. The pottery represents bowl with with the Anthropological, Archaeological, featureless rim and constricted neck, lipped Botanical and Zoological surveys (IAR 1969- pot with globular body made for culinary 70, Bopardikar 1972), the most noteworthy purposes. Again, potsherds discovered at this and extensive surveys were carried out site of Taba are coarse in texture and these by A.A. Ashraf (1990) in different parts of were handmade and comprise plain (thick Kamla and Kurung valleys since 1982. The and coarse) ware, stamped (grid pattern) exploration resulted in the discovery of the ware and irregular corded ware. stratified Neolithic site at Parsi-Parlo where

Journal of Indian Ocean Archaeology No. 7 & 8, 2011-12 | 105 Daporijo mentioned below: Layer I. Dark loose earth, approx. 20 to 30 Directorate of Research, Arunachal Pradesh cm thick, archaeologically sterile (IAR 1995-96) explored in and around Layer II. Dark grey and loose upper half, Daporijo around 20 sq km, in 1994-95 and and light grey lower half, about 75 cm thick, conducted excavations to ascertain the archaeologically rich, bearing stone tools of existence of the Neolithic culture of that various types and potsherds area, after having found few artifacts on Layer III. Yellowish brown compact earth the surface. Fifteen trial trenches of 2 × 2 of about 45 cm m were dug to ascertain the chronological T.C. Sharma (1966) studied the collection setup of the Neolithic culture. The depth of of stone artifacts recovered from excavations, the trial trenches were between 35 to 40 cm, road cutting and surface at Daojali Hading and the artifacts were found in layer (2). All (Fig. 5). The artifacts from excavation the 11 Neolithic tools are highly weathered comprised of 32 edged tool, 22 grinding and made of soft clay stone, typologically stones, 4 querns, 6 mullers, 11 quartzite belonging to the Neolithic axe group (IAR pebbles and fossil wood. The raw materials 1994-95: 3, IAR 1996-97: 2-3). used are locally available shale, sandstone, Assam quartzite and fossil wood. Shale was used for making edged tools and so also fossil wood; Perhaps the most well-known sites of entire sandstone for grinding stones, whetstones, Northeast India is Daojali Hading located querns, etc. Artifacts from the road cutting in a low hillock having an altitude of 1,000 and the surface also show similar nature of feet AMSL in the North Cachar Hills was composition. The edged tools are made by discovered by M.C. Goswami (Goswami and flaking and grinding. The ground tools falls Sharma 1963). into two main groups: Daojali Hading 1. Edge ground: four specimens 2. Fully ground: They are further Excavations carried out at the site by M.C. sub-grouped as: Goswami with the assistance of T.C. Sharma i. Tanged or shouldered celts with revealed the stratigraphical position of the three sub-types: Neolithic culture of Northeast India for the a. Curvilinear. first time. During the year 1961, a 3.6 × 0.75 b. North Cachar Hill variety m trench was laid out whereas in 1963, 4 c. Rectilinear variety regular trenches were dug in the undisturbed ii. Small celts with three sub-types: parts of the mound at Daojali Hading. The a. Oval archaeological finds consisted of potsherds b. Triangular and stone implements. The site which has c. Quadrangular a deposit of 1.5 m revealed three layers as

106 | Journal of Indian Ocean Archaeology No. 7 & 8, 2011-12 Fig. 5: Stone artifacts from excavation at Daojali Hading (after Sankalia 1974)

d. Quadrangular adzes indirect-evidence regarding the use of food e. Chisels plants in the neolithic society. The pottery from Daojali Hading was As no substantial work has been done in classified by T.C. Sharma (1967) into three this direction, it is difficult to state whether varieties, i.e. 595 pieces of cord-impressed these plants were wild or domesticated. variety (Fig. 6 & 7), 19 pieces of stamped Future work will shed light on these issues. dull red variety, and 11 pieces of brick red Sarutaru variety. Majority of the potsherds are heavily weathered and broken into small fragments S.N. Rao (1977) carried out an excavation which prevent in identifying the shapes and at the neolithic site of Sarutaru in Kamrup forms of the vessels. The cord-impressed district, Assam, during 1967-73, under the coarse grey ware is made of coarse and auspices of the Department of Anthropology, unevenly mixed clay, heavily tempered with Dibrugarh University. Sarutaru is a hamlet large quartz particles. These vessels were situated at 25 km southeast of Guwahati, and prepared by the coil-building method. the Neolithic site lies on the top of a small The presence of querns and mullers hillock about 125 m high from the foothill. clearly suggests that the available grains On the basis of an accidental encounter of a were grinded in the querns which provides few ground stone celts during the construction

Journal of Indian Ocean Archaeology No. 7 & 8, 2011-12 | 107 stages: chipping and grinding. Celts made on slate are generally flat and require less of chipping. In such cases the stone celts are ground at the working edge only. In the case of sandstone material chipping clearly preceded grinding. The tools that were obtained by chipping and grinding retain the flake scars on the surface in spite of subsequent grinding all over the body. The stone tools are classified by S.N. Rao (1977) into two types: 7 shouldered celts and 2 round-butted axes. The shouldered celts are made of flat and thin nodules of slate; as a result, both the faces are smooth and the sections thin. The straight and broad cutting edge is sharp due to bifacial grinding, about a cm from the

Fig. 6: Cord-impressed, basket pattern and beater -impressed pottery of Daojali Hading (after Sharma 1989: 226)

of a farmhouse on the hillock at Sarutaru, the site was selected for excavation for understanding the stratigraphical position of the artifacts. Three trenches, measuring 3 m square each, were laid and dug to a depth of 65 cm. Excavations revealed the cultural horizon at a depth of 20 cm from the surface continuing up to a depth of 56 cm till the sterile layer. Artifacts include ground stone celts and potsherds. The stone industry of Sarutaru includes 9 ground stone celts made of slate of grey to black colour and sandstone of cream to buff colour. These are manufactured in two Fig. 7: Cord-marked pottery from Daojali Hading (after Sengupta and Sharma 2011)

108 | Journal of Indian Ocean Archaeology No. 7 & 8, 2011-12 Fig. 8: Surface collection - Corded ware from Phunan hills, Manipur (after Singh 1993) edge. Two curved shoulders on either side recovered from the excavations at Sarutaru form the tenon at the butt. The shoulders in association with stone axes. Pottery is were obtained by making two grooves on handmade and made of clay mixed with either side, first by chipping and then by quartz particles that show up on the surface. grinding, possibly with a harder rounded Three ceramic types, on the basis of colour, pebble that was no more than a cm long. have been recognized: brown, buff and grey. In one specimen one of the shoulders is The ceramic is sometimes decorated with finished, almost to the right angle. The cord-impressions or basket-impressions on edge on one shouldered celt is blunt due to the exterior in the form of either parallel or utilization that leaves indentation marks. criss-cross lines. The round-but axe is ground all over and Marakdola yet retains a few flake scars due to chipping. It has a medium cutting edge that is S.N. Rao (1977) carried out another sharp and broad. The sides gently taper to excavation at the site of Marakdola which make the butt-end rounded and the cross- was a low mound situated at distance of 1 section biconvex. Numerous potsherds were km from the Neolithic site of Sarutaru to

Journal of Indian Ocean Archaeology No. 7 & 8, 2011-12 | 109 Fig. 9 & 10: Surface collection from Phunan hills, Manipur (after Singh 1993) derive a relative date for the site of Sarutaru. and polished stone tools and pottery (Fig. The excavations revealed a single cultural 8) have also been collected as stray finds in stratum of 1 m thickness with wheel turned exploration. pottery of fine kaolin clay. Exterior decoration Nongpok Keithelmanbi include among others, cord-impressions on some of the vessels from shoulder to the base. The site of Nongpok Keithelmanbi (Singh Due to the occurrence of a shouldered celt 1993) is located on the top of a flattened among the pottery, Rao assigned the site to hill range which projects from the main the Neolithic period. While going through mountain range towards the end up to the with the details of the excavated material, Thoubal river valley. A trial trench dug in it is difficult to accept the site as that of 1983 could unearth three cultural sequences neolithic period because it has been observed in a 74 cm thick slope deposit of fissured at many sites that neolithic celts survived as clayey loam. A charcoal sample (BS-523) late as 7th century CE and afterwards. from the corded ware stratum has been dated to 4,460 + 120 year B.P. No stone Manipur artifacts were recovered from the excavation. Manipur is another adjoining state which However two celts, one unfinished made on has been explored and a few sites have been fine sandstone pebble by flaking at one end put to excavations. The excavated sites are on both surfaces with traces of grinding to Nongpok Keithelmanbi, Napachik while produce the edge and one pointed butt type the sites of Laimanai and Phunan have of ground celt, were collected from other been explored. A good number of ground localities of Nongpok Keithelmanbi area.

110 | Journal of Indian Ocean Archaeology No. 7 & 8, 2011-12 Fig. 11: Pottery from excavation at Nongpok Keithelmanbi, Manipur (after Singh 1993)

The pottery at the site of Nongpok 4 to 5 mm. From the rim fragments, the Keithelmanbi (Fig. 11) is mostly the corded vessel appears to be shallow bowls with ware overlying the Hoabinhian stratum flatly carved base and globular pot with in the cultural sequence. This ill-fired and constricted neck. handmade pottery is heavily weathered Napachik and in many cases the corded surface is also eroded. The cord-marks are found in the The Napachik (Singh 1993) site, discovered form of linear and criss-cross patterns. The in 1981 is a small hillock located on the right pottery is made of fine clay and tempered bank of the Manipur river at Wangu village, with sand and a few quartz particles. Fine Bishnupur district. A trench measuring sands were used as tempering material for 4×2 sq m was dug at the southwestern the plain pottery. The colour of the potsherds slope and another trench measuring 5×2 includes various potsherds of red and brown, sq m was dug in 1985 at the eastern of which light red and reddish brown are the foothill (Fig. 12). The dominant cultural dominant colours. In thickness, the potsherds material collected from the excavations are ranges from 2 to 8 mm, the common being the potsherds decorated with cord-marks

Journal of Indian Ocean Archaeology No. 7 & 8, 2011-12 | 111 Fig. 12: Stratigraphy of Napachik excavation 1985 (after Singh 1997: 68)

Fig. 13: Pottery from excavation at Napachik, Manipur (after Singh 1993)

112 | Journal of Indian Ocean Archaeology No. 7 & 8, 2011-12 Fig. 14: Tripod ware legs from Napachik (after Singh 1997: 75)

(Fig. 13) and tripod legs (Fig. 14) in association with pebble and flake tools as well as ground celts. The cord-marks are similar to the ones found at the site of Phunan. Some of the flake tools are very small and resemble non-geometric microliths. Besides, a large number of crystallized quartz with tiny scars at the tip and side, probably for certain uses, and waste flakes are also found in the excavation. The lithic artifacts of the Napachik site include: 3 pebble tools, 51 flake tools, 21 flakes, 27 cores, 7 ground celts and 7 grinding stones. Neolithic celts of triangular variety have almost circular or oval median cross-section. In manufacturing these neoliths, grinding, pecking and grinding techniques were employed. Fig. 15: Corded Tripod wares from Laimanai (after Singh 1997: 77) The lithic artifacts from Laimanai site of Manipur are made of sandstone by applying found at the site of Laimanai (Fig. 15). chipping and grounding techniques. These The tripod wares characterize the ceramic include triangular hoe blade, small chisels industry of the Napachik site of Manipur. The with gouged edge and small trapezoidal pottery varieties are 748 pieces of plain ware, celt. In cross-sections the tools have oval 893 pieces of cord-marked ware, 4 pieces of and rectangular forms. Tripod legs are also ring footed ware, 64 pieces of tripod legs ware,

Journal of Indian Ocean Archaeology No. 7 & 8, 2011-12 | 113 etc. The pottery is handmade, fragmentary and fired under low temperature. Decoration is done by beating with cord-wrapped paddle. Most of the potsherds are of fine texture and tempered with sand, vegetables or powdered charcoal. The tripod legs also are mostly reddish brown in colour, a few are grey and dark grey. The legs are solid and made separately. The tripod legs are either long or short. The long legs have conical shape, while the short legs have flat, circular or tapering body with either a nob or flat slandering top to facilitate in lutting. This three legged pottery has also been found in a burial at Ban Kao, a small inland Fig. 16: Three legged pottery from Ban Kao, Thailand settlement in Thailand, datable to 2000 (2000 BCE) (after Bahn 2002:112) BCE (Fig. 16). These pots where extensively used as reported from many sites in western Thailand and also as far as Malaysia (Bahn 2002: 112). This type of pottery has been also reported from the late levels of Lungshanoid culture in South China which is different from the classical Lung-shan cultures dominated by several basic forms namely ting tripod with solid legs and tou with cut-out ring feet and kui type jars etc (Fig. 17). In the beginning, it is handmade but evidence of potter’s wheel has been also noticed towards the end (Chang 1977: 174-180). Among the tripod legs of Napachik, there is a solid flat leg that resembles the ring tripod type of the late Neolithic of South China (Singh 1993). It could be also interpreted that the region of Manipur possibly worked as the meeting place of the Fig. 17: Tripod ware from Lung-Shan Neolithic Culture of new neolithic impulses from the adjoining China (circa 2000 BCE) (after Chang 1977:176) region of Southeast Asia.

114 | Journal of Indian Ocean Archaeology No. 7 & 8, 2011-12 Meghalaya

Garo Hills of Meghalaya could draw the foremost importance due to the discovery of the largest number of prehistoric sites and artifacts (Fig. 18 & 19). Even though the area was known for the presence of Stone Age artifacts in the pre-independence era (Walker 1931), systematic explorations were initiated by researchers (IAR 1963-64) from Gauhati University only during 1963- 64. Continuous explorations in Garo Hills have brought to light several sites bearing Neolithic stone implements and pottery. D.K. Medhi (1980, 1990) studied the geological Fig. 18: Stone tools from Garo Hills (IAR 1966-67) and the geo-morphological aspect of the sites of Garo Hills which reveals that the tools are not found in a stratified context, and the ground and chipped tools are found together. The site of Selbalgiri 2 was brought under excavation.

Selbalgiri 2

M.C. Goswami and T.C. Sharma (IAR 1967-68) collected a good number of artifacts from Selbalgiri 2 and a small trench, measuring 7.7 × 3.7 m was laid to ascertain the stratigraphical sequence of the implementiferous strata. The tentative Fig. 19: Grinding stone from Garo hills (IAR 1966-67) stratigraphy of the excavation is as follows: Layer I: 22 cm thick, composed of reddish and several small flakes, besides pottery earth mixed with a small quantity of quartz Layer III: 35 cm thick yellowish in colour gravel; yielded 6 stone axes, both ground bearing less gravel and found numerous and chipped, 1 scraper and a large number microliths, both geometric and non- of potsherds geometric, with pottery Layer II: 20 cm thick, reddish brown in The pottery from the sites of central colour containing large number of quartz and the northern parts of the Garo Hills are gravel; and obtained a core, four hammers handmade and are predominantly grey in

Journal of Indian Ocean Archaeology No. 7 & 8, 2011-12 | 115 Fig. 20: Section of the excavation at Pynthorlangtein (IAR 1992-93) colour. Impure clay, tempered with quartz deposit during 1992-93. The trial trench grits, was used in manufacturing the pottery taken up at the highest point of the mound (IAR 1966-67). The pottery collected from the yielded a cultural deposit of 1 m comprising excavation at Selbalgiri 2 (IAR 1967-68) was Neolithic cultural milieu (Fig. 20). The handmade, coarse and gritty in fabric and tools comprised adzes, axes, chisels, points, grey, grey-brown and dull brown in colour, blades, scrapers, polishers, penknife, flake- with very rough texture due to the presence blanks, cores and flakes. Majority of the celts of quartz grits in the clay. No decoration are chipped and a few are partly ground could be detected on the potsherds. The (Fig. 21 & 22). Besides the lithic artifacts, pottery found on the surface was relatively a few potsherds of handmade, coarse red thicker and less gritty. ware pottery with cord-impression (Fig. 23) were collected at a depth of 60-80 Pynthorlangtein cm. Some Neolithic stray tools were also L.S. Rao (IAR 1992-93), with his colleagues of collected from Riat Turein of Jaintia Hills the Prehistory Branch of the Archaeological and Rongchugiri of West Garo Hills by them. Survey of India took a trial trench measuring The Neolithic factory site of Pynthorlangtein 2 × 1 m at Pynthorlangtein (25O 22’ 26’’; (Taher and Rao 2005) did not yield any 92O 06’ 07’’) in Jowai Tehsil, with a view shouldered celt, a common type of artifacts to ascertain the nature of the habitational invariably associated with the Neolithic sites

116 | Journal of Indian Ocean Archaeology No. 7 & 8, 2011-12 Fig. 23: Pottery from excavation at Pynthorlangtein (IAR 1992-93)

of Northeast India. Recent explorations carried out by M. Mitri (2005) have yielded neolithic stone artifacts and pottery from Sohpet Bneng Hill of Ri-Bhoi district in Meghalaya. On the basis of the artifacts and the raw material used, he argues that “the people who arrived in the Khasi and Jaintia Hills had already equipped themselves with Fig. 21 & 22: Stone artifacts from excavation at Pynthorlangtein, Neolithic technology which they brought Meghalaya (IAR 1992-93)

Journal of Indian Ocean Archaeology No. 7 & 8, 2011-12 | 117 from outside” (Mitri 2009: 75). Pottery found on the surface (IAR 1991-92: 83). The site at the sites is mostly handmade, fired in low of Chungliyimati was put to excavation temperature, and has cord-impressions, a recently. common characteristic feature of Neolithic A.K. Sharma (1996) collected some stone pottery of Northeast India. He suggests that artifacts from the areas like Rokimi, Karami, the northern part of the Ri-Bhoi region Siromi, Lazimi, Itumi, Lokhimi, Sachema along the border of Karbi Anglong district of and Kigwema which are presently inhabited Assam was the entry point to the Khasi and by the Sema and Lotha Nagas. The raw Jaintia Hills for the Neolithic dwellers and materials used are greenstone, a variety of the “Neolithic elements of this region are the diorite, shale, slate, sandstone and jadeite. direct offshoot of the outliner Neolithic from As greenstone is a fine grained tough rock, Cachar Hills and Karbi Anglong region” not landing to flaking, the tools are shaped (Mitri 2009: 84). by pecking and the edges are prepared by grinding. As jadeite is not available locally, Nagaland probability remains that these were obtained Nagaland is another area where neolithic from Upper Burma and South China. The artifacts are recorded since long. V. Nienu common tool type is the rounded shouldered (1974) has reported the site of Chungliyimati to quasi-tanged axes, similar to the pointed located at a distance of 8 km from the butt axe of South India. Chare Administrative Outpost from which Chungliyimati stone bowls, pestles, grinding stones, balls, hammers, querns, mullers, whorls, knives, Archaeological excavations at Chungliyimati handaxes, scrapers, cores, flakes, terracotta carried out by a team of the Anthropological and stone smoking pipes were recovered. Society of Nagaland under the aegis of The Department of Culture, Government Department of Art and Culture of the of Nagaland also collected a few Neolithic Government of Nagaland, headed by Tiatoshi stone celts and terracotta objects from Jamir of the Nagaland University, have Chungliyimati and Changsang (IAR 1980- revealed finished and unfinished celts of 81: 84). Later explorations at this site sandstone and spillite and numerous earth under the direction of T.C. Sharma led to cut storage pits. Besides, buff coloured wheel- the discovery of polished neolithic celts of made pottery, Ambari ware, beads of glass, shouldered variety, pottery, grinding stones, tile, jade, agate, amethyst, carnelian and stone rubbers, pestles, stone earrings, whorls iron were also recovered indicating inter- made of stone, etc. The coarse variety, ill- regional trade network. Archaeo-botanical fired handmade pottery from the site, were remains include Oryza nivara, Oryza rufipogon, made by beater and paddle method due Oryza sativa, Siteria sp., Triticum aestivum, to which grooved beater marks are visible and Hordeum vulgare. The structures at the

118 | Journal of Indian Ocean Archaeology No. 7 & 8, 2011-12 site indicate that the houses faced the east human burial. There appears no evidence with three distinct plans such as roughly of animal domestication and agriculture. rectangular with a frontal semi circular apse, Considering the archaeological data, the pentagonal plan and an oblong shaped excavator has the assigned the site to early plan having a tapering front. Radiometric pre-Neolithic context (Jamir 2012). This new samples analyzed by Institute of Physics, path-breaking study led by Tiatoshi Jamir Bhubaneshwar, and Birbal Sahni Institute can be considered as first of its kind in entire of Paleobotany, Lucknow, assigned a time Northeast India as far as multidisciplinary bracket ranging from 980 CE to 1647 CE for approach is concerned. the site. Considering the time bracket, the West Bengal excavators have assigned the site to post- Neolithic period. Investigations of other The neolithic celts and ring-stones were Naga ancestral sites have reported remains reported from the western upland in of cultivated rice and millet, Bos indicus, Bos association with microlithic assemblage frontalis, Bubalus bubalis, Sus scrofa, cervus, on the surface, especially in the valleys of jungle fowl, barking deer and wild boar. Tarafeni and Bhairabbanki. Mention may The radiometric samples analysed by Beta also be made about the discovery of neolithic Analytic Inc., Miami, Florida, have provided artifacts from the foothill regions of Susunia a time bracket of 50 BCE to 1600 CE for these along the banks of Gandheswari and its sites (Jamir 2011: 41-44). tributaries (Fig. 24 & 25). From the banks Mention be made about another of Subarnarekha in the district of Midnapur excavation carried out at a cave Ranyak on the border of Mayurbhanj in Orissa khen (RYK) at Mimi which has yielded edge- several Neolithic tools such as adzes, splayed grinding tools of serpentinite and limestone axes, shouldered celts, bar celts, chisels and made from river pebbles, a few hammer stones, disc shaped scraper tools and bone tools and cord-marked pottery besides a

Fig. 24: Surface collection from Susunia (after Fig. 25: Surface collection from Subarnarekha (after Chattopadhyaya et al. 2005) Chattopadhyaya et al. 2005)

Journal of Indian Ocean Archaeology No. 7 & 8, 2011-12 | 119 Fig. 26: Surface collection from Kalimpong (after Chattopadhyaya et al. 2005)

Fig. 27: Polished stone axes from Pandu Rajar Dhibi (IAR 1964-65) mace-heads were found. From Darjeeling- 2nd millennium BCE (IAR 1964-65). Kalimpong area (Fig. 26), neolithic celts Tamluk were also reported as early as 1904 from hill-slopes on the west bank of Tista river The neolithic artifacts along with an ill-fired (Chattopadhyaya et al. 2005: 72-73). pottery were also reported in the lower most level at Tamluk in the coastal region of West Pandu Rajar Dhibi Bengal. In the excavations at Pandu Rajar Dhibi in In West Bengal, neolithic celts have the lowest level (Period I), a few neolithic been reported from different areas; however, ground stone tools (Fig. 27), bone tools and defining the neolithic in the state is still a microliths along with a handmade grey problem (Chattopadhyaya et al. 2005: 72-73, ware with rice husk impressions, wheel-made Ghosh 1989: 41). Celts and ring stones are painted red pottery and limited quantity of widely recorded without much details of the black-and-red ware were encountered. Their chronological position. In northern Bengal, date has been assigned to the middle of the ground and polished stone artifacts have

120 | Journal of Indian Ocean Archaeology No. 7 & 8, 2011-12 Fig. 28: Celts from Kuchai and Nayapur (after Singh 2009:122) been reported from Susunia hill, Midnapore out at Kuchai, Baidipur and Shankarjang and Purulia area. Excavations at several sites (Dhenkanal district) confirmed neolithic celts have yielded Neolithic celts in Chacolithic in association with a coarse grit-tempered context; i.e. Bharatpur, Haraipur (IAR 1964- red ware. Behera (2000) has extensively 5: 46), Pandu Rajar Dhibi (IAR 1960-1: 67, explored the Bonaigarh area and located IAR 1962-3: 43, 1963-4: 61, 1964-5: 48, Das several celt-manufacturing localities and a Gupta 1964), Tamluk (IAR 1954-5: 19) in few sites associated with celts and ceramics. association with ceramic industry. Hence, The site of Sulabhdihi must have served as mere association of neolithic polished a large scale celt manufacturing centre in artifacts can not be considered as traits to the area. Trial trench at the site of Bargaon designate these sites as pure “neolithic”, as on the left bank of river Brahmani has these kinds of artifacts are not uncommon revealed a habitational deposit of about even in early Historical/Medieval sites. Datta 140 cm divisible in to three layers based on (1992) has discussed in details the neolithic cultural material of which the lowest level artifacts of West Bengal found in different provides indication of neolithic occupation. context. Explorations conducted by Basa et al. (2000) in Pallahara area of central Orissa have Orissa brought to light neolithic stone artefacts in Explorations conducted in different parts of association with coarse red ware and black- Orissa have yielded several neolithic sites and-red ware. and a few of them have been excavated, Kuchai which placed the neolithic culture of these areas in a chrono-stratigraphical Surface exploration at the site of Kuchai position (Fig. 28). The excavations carried during the 1950s has yielded typical ground

Journal of Indian Ocean Archaeology No. 7 & 8, 2011-12 | 121 Golbai Sasan

Explorations conducted at the site of Golbai Sasan revealed neolithic celts and bone pieces along with Chalcolithic pottery. However, in the excavation, a sequence of three periods was worked out. Period I revealed a clayey deposit of more than a meter and found separated from the Chalcolithic deposit of the succeeding period IIA. In excavation, no stone or bone tools were found in this trench except two pieces of bone with working marks and a handmade pottery showing cord and reed impressions which appears to be made on a slow wheel Fig. 29: Stone tools from Golbai Sasan (after Sinha 2000: or turned table techniques. The pots were 328) mostly vases in dull red and grey wares. The neolithic artifacts were found in exploration stone implements like axes including a and one of them, a shouldered celt was shouldered adze. Thapar during 1961-2 started reported from mid level of the Chalcolithic excavation revealing a 40 to 45 cm of clayey deposit identified as period IIA (Fig. 29). The deposit of neolithic culture in association with last period IIB has been bracketed with Iron a coarse grit-tempered red ware, some­times age (Sinha 2000). also slipped and showing in addition incised or finger-tip decoration. The stone industry Mid-Ganga Plain and Vindhyan includes ground stone axes of butt or pointed- Hills end vari­ety, chisels, mace-heads, pounders Stray neolithic finds have been recorded at and grinding stones. From this deposit were different region of Bihar and a few of the also recorded microliths of non-geometric sites have been excavated. Sites like Taradih variety represented by blades, points, lunates and Maner are located in the alluvial tract and various types of scrapers without any and Senuwar lies in the vicinity of Kaimur evidence of pottery. The time gap between foothills. The discovery of stone bead, these two levels i.e. microliths and neolithic neolithic celt, bone arrowhead and point remains to be ascertained. and microliths etc. suggest similar cultural This level appears to have resonantly development at the sites of , Taradih connected with the similar levels noticed at and Senuwar (Narayan 1996). neolithic sites in Bihar (IAR 1961-2: 35).

122 | Journal of Indian Ocean Archaeology No. 7 & 8, 2011-12 Chirand 2000 BCE or earlier beginning at this site may

The site of Chirand in Bihar (IAR 1962-3, be assigned to the neolithic level as the next 1963-4, 1964-5, 1968-9, 7969-70, 1970-1, preceding level Chalcolithic has been dated to 1971-2, Verma 1970-1) was excavated 1950 BCE by radiocarbon method. by the Directorate of Archaeology and Senuwar Museums, Bihar and revealed five broad cultural period beginning with neolithic till Excavations at the site of Senuwar by the the late historical period. Period I represents Banaras Hindu University have recorded four a full-fledged neolithic culture characterized cultural periods from neolithic onwards till mainly by bone tools and decorated pots, the Kushana period. Period I has yielded besides other neolithic artifacts. Bone and polished stone axes, hammers, rubber antler implements are the characteristics of stones, pestles, sling balls, sharpeners, Chirand. Bone ornaments are represented discs, beads of agate, chalcedony, faience by pendants, ear rings, bangle­ s of ivory and and steatite besides pottery (Fig. 30). tortoise bone, discs and combs. The neoliths The other lithic assemblage consisted of include celts, hammers, pestles, querns, marginally retouched bladelets, partly balls, etc., usually made of quartzite, basalt backed bladelets, flakes, blades and cores and granite. According to the excavators, of chalcedony and chert. The bone tools the microliths characterized by parallel- are comprised of borer, point, chisel and sided blades, scrapers, arrowheads, serrated arrow-head, both socketed and tanged. points, notched blades, points, lunates, borers Archao-botanical investigations have and a few geometric microliths generally provided evidence of rice (Oryza sativa), made of chalcedony, chert, agate, jasper, barley (Hordeum vulgare), dwarf wheat etc. were also a part of neolithic complex. (Triticum sphaero coccum), bread wheat (T. There is predominance of red ware and lesser aestivum), sorghum millet or jowar (Sorghum frequency of grey, black and black-and-red bicolor), chickpea (Cicer arietinum), green wares in this period. gram or mung (Vigna radiata), field pea The structural remains of the late (Pisum arvense), lentil (Lens culinaris), horse Neolithic level include a circular floor of gram (Dollhos biflorus), grass pea (Lathyrus about 4 m in diameter, a series of open sativus), oil seeds belonging to sesame or hearths, a few post-holes near the floor til (Sesamum indicum) and linseed (Linum and a few burnt chunks of clay with reed usitatissimum) (Singh 1988-89). or bamboo impres­sion. There are remains of rice, wheat, barley, mung and masur in a Taradih charred condition and a few burnt clay pieces Excavations at the site of Taradih near with paddy-husk impression besides bones of Bodh-Gaya in the flood plains of the river animals, birds, fish etc. A relative date of cirea Phalgu by Ajit Kumar Prasad have revealed

Journal of Indian Ocean Archaeology No. 7 & 8, 2011-12 | 123 Fig. 30: Cord-impressed pottery, period IA, Senuwar (after Fig. 31: Cord-impressed and Rusticated ware, Mahagara Singh 1995-96) (after Sharma and Mandal 1980)

Fig. 32: Neoliths from Mahagara (after Sharma and Mandal 1980)

124 | Journal of Indian Ocean Archaeology No. 7 & 8, 2011-12 Fig. 33: Microliths from Mahagara (after Sharma and Mandal 1980) Fig. 35: Microliths from Koldihwa (after Sharma and Mandal 1980)

Fig. 34: Cord-impressed pottery, Koldihwa (after Sharma and Mandal 1980)

Journal of Indian Ocean Archaeology No. 7 & 8, 2011-12 | 125 neolithic cultural material at the lowest and Orissa need more detailed discussion level which has been subvivided in the while addressing the neolithic situation Phase A and B on the basis of ceramics. of Northeast India as these regions are Phase A is characterised by handmade geographically situated adjoining to our pottery of red ware, burnished red ware, study area. The sites from mid-Ganga plain cord-impressed ware and rusticated ware. namely Lahuradewa, Jhusi, Hetappati, The burnt clay pieces with reed impression Sahgaura, Imlidih Khurd, Dhuriapar, indicate construction of house of wattle- Bhanudih etc. and from Vindhyan hills, and-daub nature. Other features include the sites like Tokwa, Mahagara (Fig. 31, neolithic tools, microliths and bone tool. 32 & 33), Koldihwa (Fig. 34 & 35), Pachoh, Besides continuation of the pottery of this have been also excavated but we found it phase, burnished grey ware appears in Phase difficult to connect the neolithic culture of B along with neolithic tools, microliths, Northeast India except the cord-impressed bone tools, terracotta objects, stone beads, pottery (Hazarika 2012a). Further field carbonised grains, bones of domestic as well work is required to address this issue by as wild animals such as cattle, goat, pigs, identifying the food plants, domestications buffalo, sheep, deer and stag. Carbonised of animals and the economy of neolithic grains suggest growing of crops like rice, people. However, the issue of connection of wheat, barley, lentil etc. (Prasad 1989). microlithic using people and neolithic ones Among the division of the Neolithic in Bihar, Vindhyan hills, West Bengal and cultures of India recognised by Thapar Orissa appears to be a common finding in (1985), the division of Northern Bihar or the lowest level, whereas in Northeast except Mid-eastern district Saran and Central- at Garo hills and Napachik, in no other areas eastern covering Chotanagpur Plateau with have microliths been found (Table 1 & 2). its peni-plains extending in west Bengal

126 | Journal of Indian Ocean Archaeology No. 7 & 8, 2011-12 Table 1: Comparative data of neolithic sites from Eastern India with details of the material remains

Tool types & other Region Site Pottery Structures Plants Animals antiquities

Square-grid, honey- Arunachal Pecked and ground Parsi-Parlo comb (web) and beater- Pradesh stone tool impressed pottery

Daporijo Neolithic axe

Cord-impressed variety, Daojali Edged tool, grinding stamped dull red Assam Hading stones, querns, mullers variety, and brick red variety

Cord-impressions or basket-impressions Sarutaru Ground stone celts on the exterior of the pottery of brown, buff and grey colour

Wheel turned pottery of Marakdola Shouldered celt fine kaolin clay

No stone tools from Ill-fired and handmade Nongpok excavation, but ground pottery with corded Manipur Keithelmanbi celt from adjoining surface in linear and areas criss-cross patterns

Pebble and flake tools, ground celts, some of Plain ware, cord- the flake tools are very marked ware, ring Napachik small and resemble footed ware, tripod legs non-geometric ware microliths, grinding stones

Ground and chipped stone axe, scraper, Handmade grey colour Meghalaya Selbalgiri 2 microliths, both pottery geometric and non- geometric

Adzes, axes, chisels, points, blades, scrapers, Pynthorlang- Coarse red ware pottery polishers, penknife, tein with cord-impression flake-blanks, cores and flakes

Handmade grey ware with rice husk Ground stone tools, impressions, wheel- West Pandu Rajar bone tools and made painted red Bengal Dhibi microliths pottery and limited quantity of black-and- red ware were

Journal of Indian Ocean Archaeology No. 7 & 8, 2011-12 | 127 Tool types & other Region Site Pottery Structures Plants Animals antiquities

Ground stone implements like axes including a shouldered adze from exploration and ground stone axes of butt or pointed- Coarse grit-tempered end vari­ety, chisels, red ware, some­times mace-heads, pounders also slipped and Orissa Kuchai and grinding stones, showing in addition microliths of non- incised or finger-tip geometric variety decoration represented by blades, points, lunates and various types of scrapers from lower level of excavation

Handmade pottery Neolithic celts and of dull red and grey Golbai Sasan bone pieces in wares, showing cord exploration and reed impressions

Circular floor of about 4 m Neoliths include in diameter, celts, hammers, a series pestles, querns, bone of open tools, microliths Red ware and lesser hearths, a Rice, wheat, Bones of Bihar Chirand characterized by frequency of grey, black few post- barley, mung animals, parallel-sided blades, and black-and-red holes near and masur birds, fish scrapers, arrowheads, wares the floor and serrated points, a few burnt notched blades, points, chunks of lunates, borers clay with reed or bamboo impres­sion

Rice, barley, Polished stone axes, dwarf wheat hammers, rubber bread wheat, stones, pestles, sling sorghum balls, sharpeners, millet or discs, beads of agate, jowar, chalcedony, faience chickpea, and steatite, retouched green gram Senuwar bladelets, partly backed or mung, bladelets, flakes, field pea, blades and cores of lentil, horse chalcedony and chert, gram, grass bone tools comprised pea, oil seeds of borer, point, chisel belonging to and arrow-head, both sesame or til socketed and tanged and linseed

128 | Journal of Indian Ocean Archaeology No. 7 & 8, 2011-12 Tool types & other Region Site Pottery Structures Plants Animals antiquities

Bones of domestic Burnt clay as well pieces as wild Handmade pottery of with reed Carbonised animals Neolithic tools, red ware, burnished red impression grains of rice, such as Taradih microliths and bone ware, cord-impressed indicate wheat, barley, cattle, tool ware and rusticated construction lentil goat, pigs, ware of house of buffalo, wattle-and- sheep, daub nature deer and stag

Corded and incised Burnt clay Rounded celts with flat ware of thick fabric, pieces with sides and rectangular Uttar plain red ware and wattle cross-section and Pradesh ill-fired crude black- and daub Koldihawa microliths, parallel- (Vindhyan and-red ware, rice impressions sided blades, blunted Region) husk is embed­ded in indicates blades and scrapers, the clay in some of the construction the microlithic artifacts potsherds of huts

Microliths, consisting Hutments, retouched blades, the floors backed blades, lunates, are circular scrapers, borers, or oval on triangles, trapeze etc; plan, burnt Rice husk and cattle rounded celts and Cord-impressed, clay lumps rice grain in (sheep/ bone arrowheads, rusticated, burnished with wattle- pottery as goat, deer Mahagara querns, mullers, red, and burnished and-daub degraissant, horse hammers, sling-balls, black ware impression domestic rice tortoise sharpeners, ring-stones, indicates the in charred wild boar perforated shell objects use of mud condition and fish (ornaments), clay, plaster on dabber, terracotta the screen beads and perforated walls of pottery discs these huts

Ring-stones, rounded celts and microliths consisting of fluted Light burnt Pachoh cores, retouched blades, clay lumps backed blades, scrapers and points

Journal of Indian Ocean Archaeology No. 7 & 8, 2011-12 | 129 Tool types & other Region Site Pottery Structures Plants Animals antiquities

Domestic animals Bone arrowheads, such as beads fashioned on cattle and semi-precious stones goat, wild and terracotta, Hand-made cord mammal Rice, barley, fragments of querns, impressed pottery, such as til, moong, Tokwa mullers, hammer rusticated ware and gaur, some fruits stones, etc., microliths burnished red and nilgai and and beans include flakes, flake burnished black sherds black- fragments, blades, buck, blade fragments, birds, scrapers, triangles fish and molluscan species

Barley, jowar, Microlithics include bread wheat, various types of blades, rice, lentil, scrapers, triangles, pea, grass trapeze, points, drills pea, horse Cattle, Cord-impressed ware, Uttar and lunates made of Circular gram and sheep, rusticated bone, Pradesh chart, chalcedony, huts having black gram goat, boar, burnished red ware, (Middle Jhusi carnelian and quartz, walls of together barasinga, burnished black ware Ganga micro disc beads and bamboo and with fruit etc. fish, and crude black-and- Plain) cylindrical beads made reeds remains of turtle and red ware of paste material like awala, grapes birds steatite, bone tools and ber and comprised of simple oil-seeds arrowheads comprising til or seasame

Hut floors with burnt Hand­made cord- clay lumps impressed ware, with reed rusticated ware, Hetapatti marks ordinary red ware with suggest jar, shallow and deep wattle- bowls and basins and-daub structures

Cord-impressed ware made of gritty clay Sohgaura mixed with rice husk, straw, rusticated ware, plain red ware

130 | Journal of Indian Ocean Archaeology No. 7 & 8, 2011-12 Period IA- coarse variety of hand-made Bones and red ware and black- a tortoise and-red ware industry shell often displaying cord- Wattle- impressions on exterior and-daub surface dwelling Wild and indicated domestic Period IB - Appearance Lahuradewa by post-hole variety of rice of some new shapes in and burnt and foxtail pottery such as beaker, mud clots grass Charred perforated vessel, with reed- and un- spouted vessel and marks charred dish or bowl-on-stand, bones continuation of Black- showed and-red ware terracotta cut marks and stone beads, and a few micro steatite beads

Domestic cattle, Rice, barley, sheep/goat wheat, jowar, and pre- Wattle-and- millet and sumably daub huts bajra (pearl pig and Micro beads of represented millet), lentil, wild ani- steatite, other beads of Hand­made cord- Imlidih by reed field pea, mals such terracotta, agate and impressed pottery, Khurd marks, floors grass pea and as horned faience, bone points plain red ware made of green gram deer, ca- and pottery discs mud, ovens or mung, nid, fresh- and hearths sesame, til, water jujube, anwla turtle, and grapes fish, and freshwater mollusc

Wattle-and- daub houses Cord-impressed red A few micro beads of represented ware, plain red ware Bhunadih steatite, terracotta and by burnt with spouted vessels, pottery discs clay lumps beakers, and vases bearing reed marks

Journal of Indian Ocean Archaeology No. 7 & 8, 2011-12 | 131 Table 2: Comparative Data of neolithic sites from Eastern India including earliest evidence of agriculture

Pestles, Polished Bone Region Site Microliths querns, Pottery Structures Plants Animals Axe tool ponders Arunachal Parsi-Parlo √ √ Pradesh Daporijo √

Assam Daojali Hading √ √ √

Sarutaru √ √

Marakdola √ √

Nongpok Manipur √ √ Keithelmanbi

Napachik √ √ √ √

Meghalaya Selbalgiri 2 √ √ √

Pynthorlangtein √ √

West Pandu Rajar √ √ √ √ Bengal Dhibi

Orissa Kuchai √ √ √ √

Golbai Sasan √ √ √

Middle Ganga Plain Chirand √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ (Bihar and Uttar Pradesh)

Senuwar √ √ √ √ √ √

Taradih √ √ √ √ √ √ √

Sohgaura √ √

Lahuradewa √ √ √ √

Jhusi √ √ √ √ √ √

Hetapatti √ √

Imlidih Khurd √ √ √ √ √

Bhunadih √ √

Vindhyan Koldihawa √ √ √ √ √ Hills

Mahagara √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √

Pachoh √ √ √

Tokwa √ √ √ √ √ √

132 | Journal of Indian Ocean Archaeology No. 7 & 8, 2011-12 Table 3: Some Important Radio-Carbon dates of Neolithic culture from Eastern India

SL. State Site Lab. N. C14 Dates Cal. Dates in BCE Reference N.

1 Assam Dibru valley 2210 + 140 BCE Saikia 1988

Kanai Gaon 2 Assam PRL 1234 1440 + 80 BP IAR 1992-93: 118 Reserve

Nongpok 4,460 + 120 years 3 Manipur Singh 1993 Keithelmanbi BP

4 Manipur Napachik 1450 BCE Singh 1993

Haora and Ramesh and 5 Tripura Khowai river 1500 BCE Rajagopalan valley 1999: 13-30

TF - 1035 1270 + 105 BCE TF - 1127 1375 + 100 BCE TF - 1125 1515 + 155 BCE 6 Chirand TF - 1033 1540 + 110 BCE Agrawal 1982: Bihar TF - 1034 1570 + 115 BCE 271-72 TF - 1030 1580 + 100 BCE TF - 1031 1675 + 140 BCE TF - 1032 1755 + 155 BCE

BS - 1967 5464, 5298, 5059 BCE Mid BS - 1951 6290 + 140 BP 4220, 4196, 4161 BCE Tewari et. al. 7 Ganga Lahuradeva BS - 1966 5320 + 90 BP 5258 BCE 2001-02: 55-56 Plan ERL - 6442 6290 + 160 BP 6442 – 6376 BCE (AMS)

Mid BS - 2526 7477 BCE 8 Ganga Jhusi BS - 2524 5837 BCE Pal 2007-08: 277 Plan BS - 2525 6196 BCE

PRL - 224 6570 + 210 BCE Vindhyan Sharma et. al. 9 Koldihwa PRL - 100 5440 + 240 BCE region 1980: 199-200 PRL – 101 4530 + 185 BCE

BS - 2417 6591 BCE Vindhyan 10 Tokwa BS - 2464 4797 BCE Pal 2007-08: 277 region BS - 2369 5976 BCE

The above radio-metric dates from variance with Northeast. In fact, more data is Northeast India provide a time range bracket required to understand the source of neolithic from circa 2500 – 1500 BCE whereas the inspiration because till date there appears to dates from Vindhyas and mid Ganga plains be no direct connection either from Yangtze pushed the antiquity to the middle of the valley or an indigenous transformation from 7th – 6th millennium BCE which are at quite local hunter-gatherer stage.

Journal of Indian Ocean Archaeology No. 7 & 8, 2011-12 | 133 Discussion tools from Garo Hills and artifacts used in

From the above survey, it appears that in shifting cultivation reveals homogeneity in the adjoining region of Northeast India, the function of both these modern and ancient areas of North Bengal, North Bihar and mid artifacts. The use-wear patterns of the present Ganga plain and Vindhyan region, there day as well as prehistoric artifacts suggest we find flourishing early farming cultures similar kinds of use. Similarly, Pratap (2000) of Neolithic/Chalcolithic stature and the has correlated the shifting cultivation system recent archaeo-botanical investigations from of the Paharias of Santal Paraganas with the Lahuradeva pushed back the antiquity of archaeological record. Kingwell-Banham rice on the basis of two conventional radio- and Fuller (2012) suggests that shifting carbon dates of wood charcoal to 6th – 5th cultivation may have been a widespread millennium BCE (Tewari et al. 2008, Singh economic system during the neolithic 2010) (Table 3). But there too is a problem to period, in both the Ganga valley and the connect the archaeological material of such Deccan plateau of South India. Against this an early age; whether it is the continuation background, a discussion on the shifting of Mesolithic avertedly evolved in the later cultivation prevalent in Northeast India will period with food production or they adapted be pertinent. themselves the neolithic tradition from the regions which are still not satisfactorily Shifting Cultivation explored or interpreted. The excavators have Slash and burn or shifting or Swidden connected them with Period IA yielding red practice of clearing forest for cultivation, and black-and-red ware pottery bearing locally known as jhum is the most common cord-pattern which is assigned with the agricultural practice in Northeastern neolithic in this region. tropical hilly regions (Fig. 36). It is the The survey of excavated sites of Northeast reflection of ecological adaptation and is India suggests that most of the uplands ideal for understanding man-environment yielding sites are located on the southern relationship in high altitudes. This type bank of the Brahmaputra river (Hazarika of agriculture requires limited tools and 2008a, 2008b and 2011). The cord or basket equipment and entirely depends on climatic impressions on the exterior of the pot clearly or environmental situation for which it can suggest the neolithic folk were making be considered as a very primitive agricultural basketry utensils. Shifting cultivation practice. Sharma (1990) is of the opinion that practiced by the present day tribal population some agricultural pattern similar to that of residing in the hilly areas has been regarded the shifting cultivation was prevalent during as a continuation of Neolithic tradition the Neolithic period in Northeast India. For (Sharma 1981: 50). A comparative study most of the tribal people, this cultivation has made by S.K. Roy (1981) on the Neolithic been in vogue for centuries and still remains

134 | Journal of Indian Ocean Archaeology No. 7 & 8, 2011-12 Fig. 36: Areas of shifting cultivation in India (after Dikshit and Dikshit 2004) a major land use practice, which provides a and Changkija 2003: 367). On the basis of basis for subsistence farming, maintenance the technology and indirect archaeological of cultural values and social stability for the data, shifting cultivation can be regarded as people living in low population density (Aier a distinct stage in the evolution of agriculture

Journal of Indian Ocean Archaeology No. 7 & 8, 2011-12 | 135 and modern land husbandry practice, a transitional stage between nomadic hunting- gathering and sedentary agriculture. The practice of shifting cultivation has evolved through the struggle of small human societies to supplement their hunting and food gathering in the forests by the then newly discovered technique of raising food crops by planting (Satapathy and Sarma 2002: 122-123). This unique human ecological relationship in high altitude landscapes, first involves clearing of forest cover and vegetation on chosen hill slopes by cutting, slashing and subsequently burning the dried Fig. 37: Preparation of the jhum field by cutting, slashing and biomass, before the onset of the monsoon burning the dried biomass (Fig. 37). The ash from the burnt vegetation acts as fertilizer for the crops to be sown (Fig. 38). Digging sticks made of bamboo or simple iron hoes are used to prepare the soil for sowing. A variety of crops are sown at appropriate periods (Fig. 39). Inevitable loss of soil fertility after successive crops and topsoil denudation then compels shifting of cultivation to a new hill slope after two-three years; hence the epithet ‘shifting’ cultivation. Shifting of the jhum fields frequently necessitates shifting of the human settlements as well. This kind of agriculture does not require any machinery input and involvement of animals. Mixed cropping is one of the important aspects of Fig. 38: With digging sticks and simple hoe made of Iron and this cultivation which provides alternatives, bamboo, seeds are sown in these jhum land if a crop fails due to climatic, environment or any other factors. The whole process is done on a community basis. A variety of crops are presently grown in jhum land such as

136 | Journal of Indian Ocean Archaeology No. 7 & 8, 2011-12 paddy (Oryza sativa), maize (Zea mays), foxtail millet (Setaria italica), finger millet (Eleusine coracana), black gram (Phaseolus mungo), sesamum (Sesamum indicum), cucumber (Cucumus saliva), pumpkin (Cucurbita spp.), taro (Colocasia esculenta), chilies (Capsicum frutescence), potato (Solatium tuberosum), ginger (Zingiber officinale), banana (Musa sapientum), peas (Pisum sativum), mustard (Brassica nigra), cotton (Gossypium spp.), jute (Corchorus spp.) etc. (Dikshit and Dikshit 2004: 69). The practice of jhum has overwhelmingly influenced population mobility, material culture and settlement history among the many hill tribes of India’s Northeast and represents a unique human-environment Fig. 39: Jhum cultivation field relationship in high altitude landscapes which continues to adept, evolve and define this “Dark Age” of the history of Northeast traditions among its practitioners. It has a India. It may not be out of context to record special significance in the ethos of tribal that in Sri Lanka, the Mesolithic continued societies and has great value in their social for a pretty long time till it was not taken over relationships, culture and mythical beliefs. by the Iron Age. While discussing the early The shifting cultivation of Northeast farmers, one must understand the difference India is a continuous process and survives of the population living in the hilly area/ till date in the hilly landscape along with and plains because the cultural development the changed terrace cultivation especially were open to plains but not to the hilly areas in Arunachal Pradesh and Nagaland. The who were possibly living in isolation and this antiquity of lowland cultivation in the area is fact, one can substantiate with the present yet to be established; however, the emergence day analogy. of urban societies has been recorded only Adjoining Areas of Northeast from the fourth/fifth centuries CE in which India with China and other lowland rice cultivation must have played Southeast Asian Countries a vital role. In this conjecture, it is suffice to state that from the end of neolithic to To understand the neolithic material complex the beginning of historical period there is of Northeast India which is believed to be a a cultural gap in the region which requires larger part of South Chinese and Southeast more sustained work in order to understand Asian complex, one must understand the

Journal of Indian Ocean Archaeology No. 7 & 8, 2011-12 | 137 neolithic chronology of both the above southern China is comparable to these dates. mentioned areas. It has been observed that Radio-metric dates suggest an emergence of the Chinese river civilisation like Yellow and pottery making technology in the southern Yangtze continued for a longer time and the China, the Japanese Isles, and Russian Far role of copper and bronze made a very late East during around 14,000 BP and 13,000 intrusion in the life of common man and if BP (Kuzmin and Keally 2001) (Fig. 40). The one may see that in this part of Asia, cities southern part of China, particularly the developed very late whereas from Euphrates Yangtze valley has been considered as one of to Indus there were many fortified urban the ‘primary’ centre for origin of a number of centres between 4th – 3rd millennium BCE. plants including rice, whereas the northern Several cave sites of East Asia have part of yellow river is favoured for millets yielded very early evidence of pottery since such as Setaria indica and Panicum miliaceum. late Pleistocene period and the Jomon Rice domestication must have been during culture of Japan has provided a radiometric 4500-4000 BCE with pre-domestication time bracket of 13,000-12,000 BCE for the beginning by 5500-5000 BCE (Fuller et al. beginning of pottery (Yasuda 2002: 119- 2008: 41). 142) and interestingly earliest pottery of Recent studies on the neolithic culture

Fig. 40: Some important sites yielding early evidence of pottery in East Asia (The base map of East Asia is downloaded from www.wikipidia.com)

138 | Journal of Indian Ocean Archaeology No. 7 & 8, 2011-12 suggest a distant past of early farming Abu Hureyra site, archaeo-botanical cultures in two different zones of Asia, West investigations have provided evidence of Asia and Monsoon Asia characterised by exploitation of wild plants such as wild different domesticates such as wheat and barley, wild einkorn wheat and wild rye barley in the West and rice and millet in (Hillman 2000). In subsequent phase, the East, settlement and economy. For during Pre-Pottery Neolithic A (PPNA) and situating the neolithic context of Northeast Pre-Pottery Neolithic B (PPNB) the sites India, a larger view of the emergence of became more larger and the architecture early farming communities in two of the got elaborated. The transition from round best studied regions is essential for a holistic structures of PPNA to rectilinear structure understanding of the multi-directional of PPNB is best attested at Jericho and cultural diffusion from these two regions and Jerf el Ahmar (Kuijt and Goring-Morris because of the process of domestication and 2002). There is sizable amount of data agriculture also as they gave birth to some clearly suggesting domestication of wheat of the world’s oldest urban civilisation. and barley in the Near East during these cultural periods (Colledge 2001). Flannery, West Asia Binford and Braidwood provided a sort of As already mentioned, the study of composite cultural picture, a foundation of Neolithic culture in India started by the the beginning of food production in the Near reporting of Neolithic celts, whereas other East. This story is to be seen in other parts of considerations like domestication of animals, Near East especially in Turkey and Iraq. This agriculture and introduction of pottery are happening in the whole of the region around later phenomenon. In fact, towards the Caspian and adjoining region may have end of the Ice age and the beginning of started somewhere from 10th millennium Holocene especially in the region of Near BCE (Fig. 41). East including northern part of Africa, The important excavations in the especially Egypt, the Natufians which was Neolithic context although the aims were a more widespread Mesolithic industry gave different conducted at Jericho, Catal Huyuk, rise to incipient Neolithic way of life in the Cayonu Tepesi, Can Hasan, Hacilar, Jarmo, form of settlements by the people who had Hassuna, Karim Shahir, the Kermanshah begun farming but not yet started to make group provided a continuous sequence pottery. The Natufians of southern Levant starting from pre-pottery Neolithic to the occupied the caves and the terraces in front emergence of Chalcolithic culture and of the caves whereas excavations have further cultural development in the area. yielded clusters of round building made on To assess these earlier excavations the other stone foundations (Bar-Yosef 1998). works carried out at Abu Hureyra in north In the arly Natufian levels at the Syria and Ain Ghazal on the outskirts of

Journal of Indian Ocean Archaeology No. 7 & 8, 2011-12 | 139 Fig. 41: Farming began at these sites of West Asia between 11,000 to 7,000 BCE (after Bahn 2002: 57)

Oman, Gilgal in the Jordan valley, Grittile rested on cereals and pulses. They used a in southeastern Turkey, Umm Dabaghiyah new variety of wheat called emmer (Moore in Iraq and Ganj Dareh in the Kangavar 1983, Singh 1974). region of the central Zagros Highlands Monsoon Asia further provides the developmental stages and for example, the excavation at Ain While talking about West Asia, we should not Ghazal confirm a close cultural link with forget Monsoon Asia, which is characterised contemporary Jericho. Mentioned be also by its temperature and wet climate which made about Abu Hureyra which starts with was ideal for the growth of forest and other a Mesolithic settlement which was deserted representative features of monsoon Asia. as reoccupied by Aceramic Neolithic. It was Monsoon Asia covers a large area of the perhaps the largest amongst all the archaic Asian continent such as India, southern settlements in the Levant. The residents foot of the Himalaya, Southeast Asia, south practised agriculture and their economy China east of Sichuan and Yunnan provinces

140 | Journal of Indian Ocean Archaeology No. 7 & 8, 2011-12 in the eastern margin of the Tibetan Northeast India (Fig. 42). Plateau, north China east of the Shianxi As seen that the commingling of and Liaoning provinces located east of the agriculturist and pastoralist resulted in Dahinganling mountains and the Pacific the population concentration in the great coastal regions south of Sakhalin where rice river valleys up to Indus whereas in north is grown as a dominant representative crop China the Yellow river civilisation and in besides others like foxtail millet, broomcorn south China, Yangtze river civilisation were millet, sorghum etc. The areas of , also thriving and this process continued in Yangtze and Mekong flowing in Monsoon Monsoon Asia whereas west Asia gave rise Asia have yielded evidence of ancient to great civilisations like Mesopotamian, civilisations characterised by rice cultivation, Egyptian and Indus. The cultural traits of hunting and fishing (Yasuda 2004: 12-19). these civilisations have been freely noticed From about 5000 BCE, settled agricultural in the Persian Gulf and also on the eastern communities based on cultivation of rice shore of the South Arabia and other Gulf spread slowly through Yangtze river system countries like Oman and Bahrain. to different parts of Southeast Asia including In Monsoon Asia, in the eastern part

Fig. 42: From about 5000 BCE, settled agricultural communities based on cultivation of rice spread slowly through Yangtze river system (after Bahn 2002: 113)

Journal of Indian Ocean Archaeology No. 7 & 8, 2011-12 | 141 of India including mid Ganga plain, it is tradition entered the Kashmir valley in the noticed that cities came up not before the 2nd half of the 4th millennium BCE when the beginning of the first millennium BCE. What neolithic people resided in the western part were the factors responsible for it? Was it of the valley around Kanishkapura and then entirely environmental or climatic is difficult moved towards central Kashmir somewhere to explain in the present academic scenario. between 2881 BCE and 2347 BCE and moved It is suffice to suggest that more work is towards Gufkral in the south-eastern part of required in this direction to understand the the valley. origin of Neolithic in regarding Earlier excavations at the sites the existence of skeletal remains of wild of Burzahom (IAR 1960-61 to 1970-71, and domesticated animals and carbonised Khazanchi 1977, Khazanchi and Dikshit grains which are indicative of the process of 1980) have indicated strong connections transition from the food gathering to food with the East Asian Neolithic complex. producing economy as earlier excavations Dikshit (1982) has opined the movement of are silent on these vital issues. For this the integrated neolithic culture from the area of field work in the adjoining areas/countries North China to Kashmir. There are several be taken up in a cultural programme either typological affinities of the Yang Shao phase at the university level or at the national/ with the Kashmir Neolithic in terms of international level. structures, bone and stone tools. The stone While discussing the influence of East knives-harvesters with perforation recorded Asian Neolithic complex on the northeast in north and central China with Yang Shao Indian Neolithic through the eastern corridor and Lung Shan complex and Jomon phase of the Himalaya, it will be pertinent to address of Japan and Korea along with other traits the Neolithic data from Kashmir in the anticipates strong cultural connection foothills of western Himalaya which forms between Kashmir, China and further east in a distinct entity in the early agro-pastoral the Monsoonal Asian context. scenario of the Indian subcontinent. The Interestingly, explorations in the Djangu recent excavations at the site of Kanishkapura area of north Sikkim in the Himalayan (Kanispur) have provided invaluable cultural foothills have recorded typical harvesters in material as well as pushed back the antiquity association with other Neolithic artifacts like of Kashmir Neolithic to the last quarter of the celts with single or double perforation and 4th millennium BCE. The discovery of emmer adzes etc. (Fig. 43) suggesting affinities with wheat (Triticum dicoccum) of west Asian south Chinese Neolithic complex (Sharma origin at the site has sheded light on the long 1981, 1985). The Kashmir Neolithic has distance connections of Neolithic farmers. its own characteristics along with several The excavator of the site (Mani 2008: 235) borrowed Neolithic traits from adjoining believes that the Central Asian Neolithic regions (Thapar 1985: 41).

142 | Journal of Indian Ocean Archaeology No. 7 & 8, 2011-12 ox-bow lakes, carbonised grains have been found and also dated to an earlier period. In the monsoon Asian context, the eastern part of India including mid Ganga plain has yielded a good number of sites with indication of early beginning of agriculture, especially based on rice. However, there is no concrete evidence of early agriculture in the Northeast India. As suggested earlier by many scholars that the neolithic of Northeast India has its genesis in South China which has evidence of early agriculture. Attention should be given to more detailed comparative studies of the typo-technology of the stone artefacts found in the region with wouth China and other Southeast Asian counties which show certain morphological similarities (Hazarika 2012b) (Fig. 44).

Fig. 43: Surface collection of neolithic perforated tools from North Sikkim (after Sharma 1996)

Conclusion

From the discussion, one can draw parallels in the tool typology but as far as the carbonised grains are concerned the Northeast Indian sites could not provide any substantial evidence. It may also be mentioned that the Northeast Indian sites are located mostly in the hilly areas whereas in the plains, archaeological chronology is considerably very late; 5th-6th century CE. But in the context of mid-Ganga plain, where most Fig. 44: Shouldered and bar celt from Southeast Asia of the sites are in the plains especially near (Displayed at the Museum of Indian Archaeological Society)

Journal of Indian Ocean Archaeology No. 7 & 8, 2011-12 | 143 The presence of microliths, non-geometric could be considered keeping in view the and geometric especially in Vindhyan hills geographical, temporal and cultural isolates. and also in mid-Ganga plain including West According to one group, it has been argued Bengal and Orissa appears to be forerunners that in the area where food production is of the emergence of neolithic culture in some not based on the domestication of local or parts of Eastern India whereas Northeast indigenous plants and animals, the farming Indian neolithic culture was definitely in tradition might have been imported from close connection with the northern Southeast neighbouring areas where indigenous Asian neolithic which was also a derivative agriculture has been substantially recorded of the south Chinese neolithic culture present (Smith 2001: 204). The expansion of neolithic in the Yangtze valley. traits in the northeast part of India from While dealing with the early farming the Yangtze corridor may not be direct but cultures of Northeast India, it appears that through other Southeast Asian neighbouring the region can stand alone as a separate countries as the Northeast Indian Neolithic and distinct developmental case in the complex appears to be quite late as per the context of East Indian Neolithic tradition. available radio-metric dates. The development of agriculture in this region

References

Agrawal, D.P. 1982. The Archaeology of India. Bahn, P.G. (ed.). 2002. The Atlas of World Archaeology. London: Curzon Press. Oxfordshire: Andromeda Oxford Limited. Aier, A. and S. Changkija. 2003. Indigenous Banerjee, R.D. 1924. Neolithic Implements from Knowledge and Management of Natural Resources, Abor Country. Annual Report of the Archaeological In Anthropology of Northeast India, eds. T.B. Subba Survey of India 102. and G.C. Ghosh. New Delhi: Orient Longman. Barron, Lt. 1872. Note on Stone Implements from Anderson, J. 1871. The Stone Implements of Yunan the Naga Hills. Journal of the Royal Anthropological etc. Report on Expenditure to Western Yunan Via Institute 1: 62-63. Bhama. Calcutta. Barua, K.L. 1939. Prehistoric Culture of Assam. Ashraf, A.A. 1990. Prehistoric Arunachal: A Study Journal of the Assam Research Society 7(2): 35-41. on Prehistory and Ethnoarchaeology of Kamla Bar-Yosef, O. 1998. The Natufian Culture in the Valley. Itanagar: Directorate of Research, Govt. of Levant. Evolutionary Anthropology 6: 159-177. Arunachal Pradesh.

144 | Journal of Indian Ocean Archaeology No. 7 & 8, 2011-12 Basa, K.K., T.K. Das and B.K. Mohanta. 2000. Dasgupta, H.C. 1913. On Two-shouldered Stone Neolithic Culture of Pallahara, Central Orissa, In Implements from Assam. Journal of the Asiatic Society Archaeology of Orissa, vol. I, eds. K.K. Basa and P. of Bengal 9: 291-93. Mohanty, 264-284. Delhi: Pratibha Prakashan. Datta, A.K. 1992. Neolithic culture in West Bengal: with Behera, P.K. 2000. Neolithic Culture Complex of special reference to South and South-East Asia. Delhi: Bonaigarh, Orissa, In Archaeology of Orissa, vol. I, Agam Kala Prakashan. eds. K.K. Basa and P. Mohanty, 222-263. Delhi: Diamond, J. and P. Bellwood. 2003. Farmers and Pratibha Prakashan. Their Languages: The First Expansions. Science 300: Bellwood, P. 1978. Man’s Conquest in the Pacific: The 593-603. Prehistory of Southeast Asia and Oceania. William Dikshit, K.N. 1982. The Neolithic Cultural Frontiers Collins Publishers Ltd, Auckland. of Kashmir. Man and Environment VI: 30-36. Bellwood, P. 1985. Prehistory of the Indo-Malaysian Dikshit, K.R. and J.K. Dikshit. 2004. Shifting Archipelago. London: Academic Press. Cultivation Studies in India: A Review. Man and Bopardikar, B.P. 1972. Prehistoric Investigations – Environment 29 (2): 37-69. Daphabum, Scientific Surveys Expedition (N.E.F.A.). Fuller, Dorian Q, Ling Qin and Emma Harvey. In Archaeological Congress Seminar Papers, 1-8. 2008. A Critical Assessment of Early Agriculture Nagpur: Nagpur University. in East Asia, with emphasis on Lower Yangtze Rice Chang, K.C. 1977. The Archaeology of Ancient China. Domestication. Pragdhara 18: 17-52. New Haven and London: Yale University Press. Ghosh, A. 1989. Encyclopaedia of Indian Archaeology. Chattopadhyaya, B.D., G. Sengupta and S. vol. II. Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal Publishers Chakrabarty. (eds.) 2005. An Annotated Archaeological Pvt. Ltd. Atlas of West Bengal (Prehistory and Protohistory), Godwin-Austin, H.H. 1875. A Celt Found in the Khasi Vol. 1, Kolkata: The Centre for Archaeological Hills at Shillong, Proceedings of the Asiatic Society of Studies & Training, Eastern India and New Delhi: Bengal 158-59. Manohar Publisher. Gorman C. 1970. Excavations at Spirit Cave, North Childe, V.G. 1936. Man makes himself. London: Watts Thailand: Some interim interpretations. Asian and Co. Perspectives 13: 79-107. Childe, V.G. 1942. What Happened in History. New Gorman C. 1971. The Hoabinhian and After: York: Penguin Books. Subsistence Patterns in Southeast Asia during the Choudhury, P.C. 1944. Neolithic Culture in Late Pleistocene and Early Recent Periods. World Kamrupa. Journal of the Assam Research Society 11(1- Archaeology 2: 300-20. 2): 41-47. Goswami, M.C. and T.C. Sharma. 1963. A Brief Cockburn, J. 1879. Notes on Stone Implements from Report on the Investigation into Prehistoric Khasi Hills, etc. Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal Archaeology in the N.C. Hills. Journal of the Gauhati 48: 133-37. University 13(2): 63-66. Coggin Brown, J. 1914. Grooved Stone Hammers Goswami, M.C. et al. 1972. A Typological Study of from Assam, etc. Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal Some Prehistoric Tools from the Kameng District of 10(4): 107-109. N.E.F.A. Journal of Assam Research society 15(1): 29-35. Colledge, S. 2001. Plant Explotation on Epipalaeolithic Hazarika, Manjil. 2006a. Understanding the Process and early Neolithic Sites in the Levant. Oxford: BAR of Plants and Animal Domestication in Northeast International Series. India: A Hypothetical Approach. Asian Agri-History 10: 203-212. Dani, A.H. 1960. Prehistory and Protohistory of Eastern India. Calcutta: Firma L. Mukhopadhyay. Hazarika, Manjil. 2006b. Neolithic Culture of Northeast India: A Recent Perspective on the Origins Das Gupta, P.C. 1964. Excavations at Pandu Rajar of Pottery and Agriculture. Ancient Asia 1: 25-43. Dhihi. Calcutta.

Journal of Indian Ocean Archaeology No. 7 & 8, 2011-12 | 145 Hazarika, Manjil. 2008a. Archaeological Research Khazanchi, T.N. 1977. North-Western Neolithic in Northeast India: A Critical Review. Journal of Culture of India. Newsletter 7 & 8 of the Indian Historical Research 16: 1-14. Institute of Advanced Study, Shimla. Hazarika, Manjil. 2008b. Prehistoric Importance of Khazanchi, T.N. and K.N. Dikshit. 1980. The Grey Northeast India: Some Theoretical Considerations. Ware Culture of Northern Pakistan, Jammu and Proceedings of North East India History Association Kashmit and Panjab. Puratattva 9. 28: 22-36. Kingwell-Banham, E. and D.Q. Fuller. 2012. Hazarika, Manjil. 2011. A Recent Perspective on Shifting cultivators in : Expansion, the Prehistoric Cultures of Northeast India, In marginalisation and specialisation over the long Understanding North East India: Cultural Diversities, term. Quaternary International 249: 84-95. Insurgency and Identities, ed. Madhu Rajput, 30-55. Krishnaswami, V.D. 1962. The Neolithic Patterns of New Delhi: Manak Publications Pvt. Ltd. India. Ancient India 16: 25-64. Hazarika, Manjil. 2012a. Cord-impressed Pottery in Kuijt, I. and A. Goring-Morris. 2002. Foraging, Neolithic-Chalcolithic Context of Eastern India, In Farming and Social Complexity in the Pre-Pottery Neolithic-Chalcolithic Cultures of Eastern India, ed. K.N. Neolithic of the Southern Levant: a Review and Dikshit. New Delhi: Indian Archaeological Society. Synthesis. Journal of World Prehistory 16: 361-440. Hazarika, Manjil. 2012b. Prehistoric cultural Kuzmin, Y.V. and C.T. Keally. 2001. Radiocarbon affinities between Southeast Asia, East Asia and Chronology of the Earliest Neolithic Sites in East Northeast India: an Exploration. In Unearthing Asia. Radiocarbon 43 (2B): 1121–1128. Southeast Asia’s Past: Selected Papers from the 12th International Conference of the European Association of Lubbock, J. 1867. The Stone Age Stone Tools in Upper Southeast Asian Archaeologists, vol. 1, eds. Veronique Assam. Athenaeum June 22: 822. Degroot and Marijke J. Klokke, 16-26. Singapore: National University of Singapore Press. Mani, B.R. 2008. Kashmir Neolithic and Early Harappan: A Linkage. Pragdhara 18: 229-247. Hillman, G.C. 2000. Abu Hureyra 1: The Epipalaeolithic, In Village on the Euphrates- From Marwick, B. 2008. What attributes are important for Foraging to Farming at Abu Hureyra, eds. A.T.M. the measurement of assemblage reduction intensity? Moore, G. Hillman and A.J. Legge, 327-398. New Results from an experimental stone artefact York: Oxford University Press. assemblage with relevance to the Hoabinhian of mainland Southeast Asia. Journal of Archaeological Hutton, J.H. 1924. Two Celts from the Naga Hills. Science 35: 1189-1200. Man 24(15): 20-22. Medhi, D.K. 1980. Quaternary History of the Garo Hutton, J.H. 1928. Prehistory of Assam. Man in India Hills, Meghalaya. Unpublished Ph. D. Dissertation, 8(4): 228-232. University of Pune, Pune. IAR- Indian Archaeology: A Review: Volumes mentioned Medhi, D.K. 1990. Prehistory of Assam. Asian in the text. Perspective 29(1): 37-44. Jamir, T. 2011. Integrating Traditional Knowledge, Mitri, M. 2005. A Report on the Neolithic Tools from Archaeology and Heritage Management in Sohpet Bneng Hill of Ri-Bhoi District in Meghalaya, Nagaland, In The North East Umbrella: Cultural- (An Ethnoarchaeological study). Proceedings of the Historical Interaction and Isolation of the Tribes in North East India History Association 26: 87-95. the Region (Pre-History to 21st Century), eds. Marco Mitri and Desmond Kharmawphlang, 37-56. Mitri, M. 2009. An Outline of the Neolithic Culture Shillong: Don Bosco Centre for Indigenous Cultures of the Khasi-Jaintia Hills of Meghalaya, India: An Publication. Archaeological Investigation. BAR International Series 2013, Oxford. Jamir, T. 2012. Piecing together from Fragments: Re-evaluating the ‘Neolithic’ Situation in Northeast Moore, Andrew, M.T. 1983. The First Farmers at the India. In Neolithic-Chalcolithic Cultures of Eastern India, Levant. In The Hilly Flanks and Beyond, eds. P.E.L. ed. K.N. Dikshit. New Delhi: Indian Archaeological Smith and P. Mortensen, 91-105. Chicago: The Society. Oriental Institute. Narayan, V. 1996. Prehistoric Archaeology of Bihar. : Kashi Prasad Jayaswal Research Institute.

146 | Journal of Indian Ocean Archaeology No. 7 & 8, 2011-12 Nienu, V. 1974. Recent Prehistoric Discoveries in Sharma, T.C. 1966. Prehistoric Archaeology of Assam Nagaland - A Survey. Highlander II (1). - A Study of the Neolithic Culture. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, University of London, London. Pal, J.N. 2007-08. The Early Farming Culture of the Middle Ganga Plain with Special Reference to the Sharma, T.C. 1967. A Note of the Neolithic Pottery Excavations at Jhusi and Hetapatti. Pragdhara 18: of Assam. Man 2(1): 126-128. 263-281. Sharma, T.C. 1981. Neolithic Pattern in Eastern Prasad, A.K. 1989. Taradih. In Encyclopaedia of Indian India. In Recent Researches in Indian Archaeology and Archaeology. vol. II, ed. A. Ghosh. Delhi: Munshiram Art History, ed. M.S. Nagaraja Rao, 41-52. New Delhi: Manoharlal Publishers Pvt. Ltd. Sundeep Prakashan. Prasad, J. 1999. Eastern Himalaya, In India – A Sharma, T.C. 1989. Neolithic – Eastern Region, In Regional Geography, ed. R.L. Singh, 480-492. An Encyclopedia of Indian Archaeology, vol. 1, ed. A. Varanasi: National Geographical Society of India. Ghosh, 225-227. Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal Publishers Pvt. Ltd. Pratap, A. 2000. The Hoe and the Axe: An Ethnohistory of Shifting Cultivation in Eastern India. Delhi: Oxford Sharma, T.C. 1990. The Prehistoric Background University Press. of Shifting Cultivation, In Shifting Cultivation in Northeast India, ed. D.N. Majumdar. Guwahati: Ramesh, N.R. and G. Rajagopalan. 1999. Late Osmos Publications. Quaternary Sediments of North-Eastern India: A Review. Gondwana Geological Magazine 14 (1): 13-35. Shoocongdej, R. 2000. Forager mobility organization in seasonal tropical environments of Western Rao, S.N. 1977. Excavation at Sarutaru: A Neolithic Thailand. World Archaeology 32 (1): 14-40. Site in Assam. Man and Environment 1: 39-42. Singh, B.P. 1988-89. Early Farming Communities of Roy, S.K. 1981. Aspect of Neolithic Agriculture and Kaimur Foot Hills. Puratattva 19: 6-18. Shifting Cultivation, Garo Hills, Meghalaya. Asian Perspective 14(2): 193-219. Singh, O.K. 1993. Stone Age Culture of Manipur, Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, University of Manipur, Saikia, P.C. 1988. Stone Tools of Dibru Valley. Imphal. Dibrugarh: North East Museum Society. Singh, O.K. 1997. Stone Age Archaeology of Manipur. Sankalia, H.D. 1974. Prehistory and Protohistory of Imphal: Amusana Institute of Antiquarian Studies, India and Pakistan. Pune: Deccan College. Manipur. Satapathy, K.K. and B.K. Sarma. 2002. Shifting Singh, P. 1974. Neolithic Cultures of Western Asia. Cultivation in India: An Overview. Asian Agri-History London: Seminar Press. 6 (2):121-139. Singh, P. 2010. Archaeology of the Ganga Plain - Sengupta, G. and S. Sharma. 2011. Archaeology in Cultural Historical Dimensions. New Delhi: Aryan North-East India: The Post-Independence Scenario. Books International. Ancient India (New Series) 1: 353-368. Singh, R.L. (ed). 1999. India: A Regional Geography, Sharma, A.K. 1981. Prehistoric Explorations in Varanasi: National Geographical Society of India. Sikkim. Puratattva 10: 82-83. Singh, U. 2009. A History of Ancient and Early Medieval Sharma, A.K. 1985. Comments on Sundara’s India. New Delhi: Pearson and Longman. ‘Cultural Ecology of the Neolithic in India’. In Recent Advances in Indian Archaeology, eds. S.B. Deo and K. Sinha, B.K. 2000. Golabai: A Protohistoric Site on Paddayya, 51-52. Pune: Deccan College. the Coast of Orissa, In Archaeology of Orissa, vol. I, eds. K.K. Basa and P. Mohanty, 322-355. Delhi: Sharma, A.K. 1996. Early Man in Eastern Himalayas. Pratibha Prakashan. New Delhi: Aryan Books International. Smith, B.D. 2001. The Transition to Food Production. Sharma, G.R. and D. Mandal. 1980. Excavations at In Archaeology at the Millennium – A Sourcebook, eds. Mahagara 1977-78 (A Neolithic settlement in the Belan G.M. Feinman and T.D. Price, 199-229. New York: Valley. Allahabad: University of Allahabad. Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers. Sharma, G.R., V.D. Misra, D. Mandal, B.B. Misra and J.N. Pal. 1980. Beginnings of Agriculture. Allahabad: Abhinav Prakashan.

Journal of Indian Ocean Archaeology No. 7 & 8, 2011-12 | 147 Steel, E.H. 1870. Celts Found Among the Namsang Thapar, B.K. 1985. Fresh Light on the Neolithic Nagas. Proceedings of the Asiatic Society of Bengal, Cultures of India. In Archaeological Perspective of 267-268. India since Independence, ed. K.N. Dikshit, 37-43. New Delhi: Books and Books. Taher, N. and L.S. Rao, 2005. A Neolithic Factory Site at Pynthorlangtein, In Proceedings of the Sixteenth Verma, B. S. 1970-71. Excavation at Chirand: New International Conferences of the European Association Light on the Indian Neolithic Culture Complex. of South Asian Archaeologists, Paris, 2-6 July 2001, vol. Puratattva 4: 19-23. I. Prehistory., eds. C. Jarrige and V. Lefevre. Paris: Walker, G.D. 1931. Garo Manufacturing of Bark Editions Recherche sur les Civilisations. Cloth. Man 27(5): 15-16. Tewari, R., R.K. Srivastava and K.K. Singh. 2001-02. Worman, E.C. 1949. The Neolithic Problem in the Excavations at Lahuradewa, District Sant Nagar, Prehistory of India. Journal of Washington 39(6): Uttar Pradesh. Puratattva 32: 54-62. 181-201. Tewari, R., R.K. Srivastava, K.S. Saraswat, I.B. Singh Yasuda, Y. 2002. Origins of Pottery and Agriculture and K.K. Singh. 2008. Early Farming at Lahuradewa. in East Asia, In The Origins of Pottery and Agriculture, Pragdhara 18: 347-373. ed. Y. Yasuda. Japan: International Research Center Thapar, B.K. 1965. Neolithic Problems in India, In for Japanese Studies. Indian Prehistory: 1964, eds. V.N. Misra and M.S. Yasuda, Y. 2004. Introduction – Discovery of Riverine Mate, 87-142. Pune: Deccan College. Civilisation in Monsoon Asia, In Monsoon and Thapar, B.K. 1974. Problems of the Neolithic Civilisation, eds. Y. Yasuda and V. Shinde, 12-19. Cultures in India: A Retrospect. Puratattva 7: 61-65. New Delhi: Lustre Press/Roli Books. Thapar, B.K. 1978. Early Farming Communities in India. Journal of Human Evolution 7: 11-22.

148 | Journal of Indian Ocean Archaeology No. 7 & 8, 2011-12