A Preliminary Study of the Beads from Harappan Site of Kotada Bhadli, Kachchh, Gujarat

Tejal N. Ruikar1, Prabodh Shirvalkar1, Y.S. Rawat2 and Satish Naik1

1. Deccan College Post Graduate and Research Institute, Pune 411006, Maharashtra, India (Email: [email protected]) 2. State Archaeology Department, Gandhinagar, Gujarat, India

Received: 20 September 2013; Accepted: 05 October 2013; Revised: 23 October 2013 Heritage: Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies in Archaeology 1 (2013): 486‐499

Abstract: Kotada Bhadli is a Late Mature Harappan site located in Kachchh, Gujarat. The site is approximately 3.11 acres in size. The site has been subjected to excavation for three seasons from 2010‐ 2013 by Prabodh Shirvalkar of Deccan College, Pune and Y.S. Rawat from Gujarat State Department of Archaeology. The site has yielded the evidence of fortification and a residential structure complex. A number of antiquities have been recovered during the course of excavation. Beads are one of the important antiquities found from the site. The beads unearthed during excavations are of various raw materials such as carnelian, agate, terracotta etc.This paper is intended to provide an insight into the economic condition of the people at the rural Harappan site of Kotada Bhadli based on the study of these beads.

Keywords: Kotada Bhadli, Kachchh, Beads, Mature Harappan, Fortification, Residential Area, Economy

Introduction Harappan Civilization is one of the oldest civilizations in the world. Its discovery in 1920’s filled the major chronological gap between the Stone Age and the Early Iron age of South Asia. The geographical extent of the Harappan civilization is vast covering the north‐western part of India and an area of about 1.5 million sq km. Possehl (1993) divides the distribution of sites of Harappan civilization into six domains i.e. Haryana, Punjab, Bahawalpur, Sindh, Gedrosia and Gujarat. Gujarat falls in the south‐eastern domain of the Harappan Civilization (Possehl 1999). Gujarat can be divided into four main ecological zones i.e. Saurashtra, Kachchh, North Gujarat and South Gujarat. The Harappans had chosen suitable ecological niches where adequate resources were available for the settlement (Pandya 1979). A large number of Harappan sites have been discovered in Kachchh, of which sites like Dholavira, Desalpur, Surkotada, Pabumath, Juni Kuran, Kanmer, Shikarpur, Khirsara, Kotada Bhadli, etc. have been excavated.

Beads Beads belong to one of the most popular category of antiquities from Harappan sites. Ruikar et al. 2013: 486‐499

However, a few detailed works have been carried out in this direction. While most of the excavation reports mention about beads, their shapes and raw material; meticulous analysis is seldom done.

Evidence of beads occurs in India and in the world since the prehistoric period. In India, beads of ostrich egg shell were found at Patne from Upper Palaeolithic levels (Sali 1985). Since then, through the proto‐historic period till today continuous use of beads is seen. Beads of various semi‐precious stones, terracotta, metals, bones and shells become very common in various phases of Harappan period. Almost all sites of Harappan civilization including Mehrgarh (Jarriage et al. 1995), Harappa (Wheeler 1947; Vats 1974, 1997), Mohenjo‐daro (Marshall 1930, 1973; Mackay 1938), Chanhu‐daro (Mackay 1943), Kalibangan (Lal et al. 2003), Rangpur (Rao 1962‐63), Lothal (Rao 1979, 1985), Surkotada (Joshi 1990), Padri (Shinde 1992a, 1992b, 1998; Shinde et al. 2008), Kuntasi (Dhavalikar et al. 1996), Kanmer (Kharakwal et al. 2012) etc. have yielded the evidence of beads.

The site of Kotada Bhadli Kotada Bhadli (Lat. 23º20ʹ N, Long. 69º25ʹ E) is located in Nakhatrana taluka of Kachchh district in Gujarat (Fig. 1). It was first discovered by J.P. Joshi (IAR 1965‐66). It is approximately 3.11 acres in size. The site is intact, flat and is marked by a fortification on all sides. Due to the growth of cactus on the fortification, the site is prominently visible from both a distance as well as in satellite images. The site is near the confluence of two rivers flowing on the eastern and western side (Kotadi and Tharavadi respectively). The rivers Kotadi and Tharavadi confluence in the northern side of the site and joins with river Bhurud (Fig. 2). The river Bhurud empties out in the Banni plains of the Greater Rann of Kachchh. This site was subjected to excavation for three seasons i.e. from 2010‐11 by joint venture of Prabodh Shirvalkar of Deccan College Post Graduate and Research Institute and Y. S. Rawat of Gujarat State Department of Archaeology, Gandhinagar. The site of Kotada Bhadli has yielded evidences of Late Mature Harappan culture. It has yielded structural evidences in the form of a residential complex and fortification wall. The residential complex (Fig. 3) consists of various small rooms with inter‐connecting doors. The fortification wall has four bastions at the corners (Fig. 4) and middle bastions (Fig. 5) which is exposed completely on southern side of the site. The stratigraphy of the site is different in residential complex and fortification area. The stratigraphy of residential complex comprises of four layers of which Layer 3 is habitational layer within the complex and Layer 3A is dump material layer outside the complex. These two layers mainly consist of antiquities, pot sherds and bones. There is natural slope or gradient from fortification to residential complex i.e. from south to north. Due to this, all the layers in the section are sloping or slanting. The stratigraphy of fortification comprises of 9 layers. Among them, Layers 1, 2, 3, 5 contain cultural material while Layers 4, 6, 7 are devoid of any cultural material. Layers 1 – 7 are related to the Harappan activity. Layers 8 and 9 are considered as virgin layers (Shirvalkar and Rawat 2012, 2012‐13).

487

ISSN 2347 – 5463 Heritage: Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies in Archaeology 1: 2013

Beads from Kotada Bhadli The main aim of this study is to provide insight about the economic condition of the people at the Harappan site of Kotada Bhadli through the analysis of beads. To fulfil this aim metrical analysis of beads was conducted. They are classified with the help of H. C. Beck’s (1928) classification and reports of the excavated sites. In total, 474 beads of various materials (Fig. 6) were found in the excavation. The varieties of materials used for making beads are shown in Table 1.

Figure 1: Map of Gujarat showing Kotada Bhadli

Figure 2: Google Earth image of Kotada Bhadli showing its location

488

Ruikar et al. 2013: 486‐499

Figure 3: Residential Complex, Kotada Bhadli

Figure 4: Corner Bastion, Kotada Bhadli

489

ISSN 2347 – 5463 Heritage: Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies in Archaeology 1: 2013

Figure 5: Middle Bastion, Kotada Bhadli

Table 1: Total number of Beads Unearthed from Kotada Bhadli

Raw Material Number of beads Agate 3 Amazonite 1 Bone 3 Carnelian 4 Crystal 1 Faience 2 Jasper 2 Quartz 1 Sandstone 3 Shell 4 Steatite 392 Terracotta 58 Total 474

Agate Beads Three agate beads were unearthed from the excavations. Table 2 shows the distribution of the beads in the areas those were excavated.

490

Ruikar et al. 2013: 486‐499

Figure 6: Excavated Beads from Kotada Bhadli

491

ISSN 2347 – 5463 Heritage: Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies in Archaeology 1: 2013

Table 2: Distribution of beads in the excavated area at Kotada Bhadli

Material Fortification Area Residential Area Agate 1 2 Amazonite 1 _ Bone 3 _ Carnelian 4 _ Crystal _ 1 Faience 1 1 Jasper 1 1 Quartz 1 _ Sandstone 2 1 Shell 2 2 Steatite 158 234 Terracotta 5 53

All three agate beads are of 3 different shapes. The shapes are globular shape, long barrel shape and short bicone. The perforations of all the beads are made by drilling from both ends of the bead. This can be said by observing the perforation of the bead under light and with the help of magnifying glass. It can be seen that the perforation is not plain or parallel, but conical or tapering. The average diameter of these beads is 7.19mm, length is 9.54mm and radius is 2.31mm. The average diameter of perforation is 2.25mm.

Amazonite Bead A single specimen of amazonite bead was unearthed from the excavations. This bead is cylindrical in shape. It has plain perforation i.e. approximately parallel.

Bone Beads Three specimens of bone beads were unearthed from the excavations. The bone beads were found in trenches excavated in the fortification area. No bead is found in the residential area. All the three bone beads are of 3 different shapes namely disc shape, short cylinder and standard barrel. One of the beads is made on fish vertebrae. The species of the fish could not be identified. The average diameter of these beads is 7.25mm. The average length is 6.18mm. The average radius is 2.78mm. The average diameter of perforation is 2.15mm.

Carnelian Beads Four carnelian beads were unearthed from the excavations. The carnelian beads were found in trenches excavated in the fortification area. No bead is found in the residential area. Among four beads, three are disc shaped and one is long bicone. The perforations of all the beads are made by using similar technique of drilling from both ends of the bead. The average diameter of these beads is 4.20mm. The average length is 3.02mm. The average radius is 1.67mm. The average diameter of perforation is 0.92mm.

492

Ruikar et al. 2013: 486‐499

Crystal Bead A single specimen of crystal bead was unearthed from the excavations. This bead is circular in shape. It has plain perforation i.e. approximately parallel, but it is not in the middle of the bead.

Faience Beads Two specimens of faience beads were unearthed from the excavations. Both the beads are of different shapes namely disc shape and standard barrel. The perforations of the beads are plain and approximately parallel. The average diameter of these beads is 3.20mm. The average length is 2.38mm. The average radius is 1.14mm. The average diameter of perforation is 1.15mm.

Jasper Beads Two specimens of jasper beads were unearthed from the excavations. These jasper beads are of two different shapes namely disc shape and standard barrel. The disc shaped bead has plain perforation and barrel shaped bead is perforated by using technique of drilling from both ends of the bead. The average diameter of these beads is 7.19mm. The average length is 8.41mm. The average radius is 1.43mm. The average diameter of perforation is 1.38mm.

Quartz Bead A single specimen of quartz bead was unearthed from the excavations. The shape of this single specimen is short bicone. It has plain perforation.

Sandstone Beads Three specimens of sandstone beads were unearthed from the excavations. Among the three sandstone beads, one bead has no proper shape to describe, other has completely abraded profile and the third one is circular shaped. This third bead has decoration on the profile. It consists of incised slanting lines. The average diameter of these beads is 29.03mm, length is 18.26mm, radius is 12.23mm and average perforation is 9.23mm.

Shell Beads Four specimens of shell beads were unearthed from the excavations. Among the four beads found in the excavations, three beads are of dentalium and fourth one is made out of marine bivalve shell. The place where this bead is perforated shows signs of abrasion. It seems to be a deliberate abrasion so that perforation can be done easily. The shapes of dentalium beads are long cylinder and short cylinder. While the other shell bead could be used as bead or pendant because its perforation is at the distal end of the shell. The average diameter of these beads is 7.19mm. The average length is 10.07mm. The average radius is 0.65mm. The average diameter of perforation is 2.47mm.

Steatite Beads The steatite beads predominate all the beads recovered during the course of

493

ISSN 2347 – 5463 Heritage: Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies in Archaeology 1: 2013

excavation. A total of three hundred and seventy‐three specimens of such beads were unearthed from the excavations. The steatite beads are classified into two shapes namely disc and cylindrical types. The quality of the steatite beads seems to be of poor as they are crumbling if it is carelessly handled. Each and every steatite bead was not measured, but one bead of disc and cylindrical shape from each lot was measured. The maximum and minimum diameter, length, radius and perforation of the steatite disc as well as cylindrical beads have been calculated and illustrated in Table 3.

Table 3: Maximum and minimum measurements of steatite beads

Type of Bead Measurement Maximum Minimum Steatite Disc Bead Diameter 4.20mm 1.83mm Length 2.46mm 0.96mm Radius 1.81mm 0.68mm Perforation 1.86mm 0.77mm Steatite Tubular Bead Diameter 3.99mm 1.49mm Length 15.47mm 1.88mm Radius 1.65mm 0.57mm Perforation 2.18mm 0.55mm

Terracotta Beads Fifty‐eight specimens of terracotta beads were unearthed from the excavations. Most of the terracotta beads are unearthed from the residential area. The shapes of these beads are standard truncated convex bicone, standard convex bicone, circular shape and oblate shape. A majority of terracotta beads have a diameter between 25‐30 mm (55% of the assemblage), length between 21‐24 mm (41% of the assemblage), radius between 10‐12 mm (62% of the assemblage) and diameter of perforation between 6‐8 mm (52% of the assemblage) (Fig. 7).

One of the terracotta beads from trench –XC4 of the residential area yielded a grain impression. The grain impression is of barley. The impression is deep and the grain seems to be deeply embedded in it. This grain seems to be intentionally pressed on the bead as it cannot be a part of binding material. Preliminary result of the analysis of grain impression provided by Satish S. Naik is given below.

Methodology The grain impression on terracotta bead was critically analyzed. It was found that no carbonized crust is retained except the impression of grain on bead. The dust was removed from the bead with the help of brush in dry state. The impression was critically examined under low power research binocular microscope (WILD PHOTOMAKROSKOP‐M 400 1,25x), identified on the basis of external morphological features and photographed satisfactorily. The measurements were noted with the help of eyepiece micrometer. The features were then compared with wild and cultivated materials to aid the identification.

494

Ruikar et al. 2013: 486‐499

Figure 7: Measurements of terracotta beads

Figure 8a: General View of the T.C. Bead and 8b: Ventral View of the Barley Grain impression

495

ISSN 2347 – 5463 Heritage: Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies in Archaeology 1: 2013

Systematic Description The identification of the grain impression on terracotta bead from Kotada Bhadli follows as under.

Family: Poaceae Hordeum vulgare L. emend. Bowden (Barley; Fig. 8a and 8b)

The grains impression retained features like size and shape indicate its close resemblance with the grains of typical barley (Hordeum vulgare) of the family Poaceae. The impression of ventral side a deep periclinal groove of elongated dehusked barley grain tapering towards the apex with a widening ventral furrow is noted. The central portion of the impression shows maximum breadth. The impression preserved size is 7.2 × 4.00 mm (L×B).

Discussion The occurrence of barley (Hordeum vulgare) impression on terracotta bead gives a profound evidence of Late Mature Harappan agriculture practices at Kotada Bhadli. Barley was a staple food of Harappan civilization. The oldest record of barley appeared in West Asia by 6000 B.C. (Helback 1966; Renfrew 1969, 1973 and Zohary 1971). Barley was under cultivation at Mehrgarh during 7th millennium B. C. (Meadow 1989). There are also ample of evidences of barley cultivation in Indian subcontinent (Saraswat 1986, 1988, 1992, Fuller and Madella 2001, Saraswat and Pokharia 2002, 2003). Pokharia et al. (2011) also reported the barley from Harappan Kanmer, supports the agricultural practices in Rann of Kachchh, Gujarat.

Observations Through the preliminary study of beads from the Harappan site of Kotada Bhadli some observations about the function and economy of the site can be given. Basically, beads of different raw materials are found in the excavation but their number is very limited. The typical Mature Harappan beads such as long barrel and etched carnelian beads have not yet been found. Apart from limited number of beads, there is no evidence of bead production or manufacturing at the site. Whatever beads are found were used by the population staying at the site or in all probability they have come due to trading contacts. Steatite beads are found commonly on the site. Generally from most of the sites, large numbers of steatite beads are found. For example, at the site of Kanmer out of 17,661 stone beads, 17,500 beads are made of steatite (Kharakwal et al. 2012: 543). The reason behind this could be the availability of raw material. The second reason could be low production cost or almost no cost. Making steatite beads requires little skill, labour or instrument (Mayer 2004, Deo 2000, Hegde 1983). The terracotta beads are second commonly found antiquity from the ancient sites. The manufacturing of these beads is also very cheap. Looking at the quantity of beads and profuse quantity of terracotta and steatite beads indicates perhaps a poor economy at the site. The structural and ceramic evidence coupled with antiquity records indicate that the site was rural Harappan settlement.

496

Ruikar et al. 2013: 486‐499

Acknowledgements The authors are thankful to all individuals who directly or indirectly helped during the completion of this paper. Special mention should be made of Prof. R. K. Mohanty, Dr. Arati Deshpande Mukherjee, Dr. Pankaj Goyal, Prof. Shanti Pappu and Prof. P. D. Sable. We are also thankful to Sikhasree Ray and Shantanu Vaidya for giving some thoughtful insight while writing this paper.

References Bar‐Yosef, D.E.M. 2004. Steatite beads at Peqi’in long distance trade and pyro‐ technology during the Chalcolithic of the Levant. Journal of Archaeological Science 31: 493‐502. Beck, H.C. 1928. Classification and Nomenclature of Beads and Pendants. Archaeologia 77: 1‐76. Deo, S.B. 2000. Indian Beads: A Cultural and Technological Study. Pune: Deccan College Post Graduate and Research Institute. Dhavalikar, M.K., M.R. Raval and Y.M. Chitalwala. 1996. Kuntasi – A Harappan Emporium on West Coast. Pune: Deccan College Post Graduate and Research Institute. Fuller, D. Q. and M. Madella. 2001. Issues in Harappan archaeobotany: retrospect and prospect, in S. Settar and R. Korisettar (eds.) Indian Archaeology in Retrospect, Vol. II: 317–390. New Delhi: Manohar. Hegde, K.T.M. 1983. The Art of Harappan Microbead. Archaeology 36 (3): 68‐72. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1965‐66. Helbaek, H. 1960. The Palaeoethnobotany of the Near‐East and Europe. in R. J. Braidwood and B. Howe (eds.) Prehistoric Investigations in Iraqi Kurdistan: 99–118. Chicago: Chicago University Press. Jarriage, C., J.F. Jarriage, R. H. Meadow and G. Quivron. 1995. Mehrgarh: Field Reports 1974‐1985, From Neolithic Times to the Indus Civilization. Pakistan: Department of Culture and Tourism, Government of Sindh and French Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Joshi, J.P. 1990. Excavation at Surkotada 1971‐72 and Exploration in Kutch. New Delhi: Archaeological Survey of India. Kharakwal, J.S., Y.S. Rawat and T. Osada. 2012. Excavation at Kanmer. Kyoto: Research Institute for Humanity and Nature. Lal, B.B., J.P. Joshi, B.K. Thapar and M. BALA. 2003. Excavations at Kalibangan: The Early Harappans. New Delhi: Archaeological Survey of India. Mackay, E.J.H. 1938. Further Excavations at Mohenjo‐Daro. Vol. I. Delhi: Manager of Publications. Mackay, E.J.H. 1943. Chanhu‐Daro Excavations 1935‐36. Connecticut: American Oriental Society. Marshall, J. 1930. Mohenjo‐Daro and the Indus Civilization. Vol. II. London: Arthur Probsthain.

497

ISSN 2347 – 5463 Heritage: Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies in Archaeology 1: 2013

Marshall, J. 1973. Mohenjodaro and the Indus Civilization. Vol. II. Varanasi: Indological Book House. Meadow, R. H. 1989. Continuity and change in the agriculture of the greater Indus Valley: The Palaeoethnobotanical and Zooarchaeological evidence. in J.M. Kenoyer (ed.) Old Problems and New Perspectives in the Archaeology of South Asia: 61–74. Madison: University of Wisconsin. Pandya, S. 1979. The Harappa Culture in Gujarat in D.P. Agrawal and D. K. Chakrabarti (ed.) Essays in Indian Protohistory : 49‐57. Delhi: B. R. Publishing Corporation. Possehl, G. L. 1999. Indus Age: The Beginnings. New Delhi: Oxford and IBH Publishing Co. Pvt. Ltd. Possehl, G.L. 1993. Harappan Civilization – A Recent Perspective in G.L Possehl (ed.) The Harappan Civilization: A Contemporary Perspective: 15‐28. New Delhi: Oxford and IBH Publishing Co. Pvt. Ltd. Rao, S.R. 1962‐63. Excavations at Rangpur and Other Explorations in Gujarat. Ancient India 18‐19: 5‐207. Rao, S.R. 1979. Lothal ‐ A Harappan Port Town (1955‐62). Volume I. New Delhi: Archaeological Survey of India. Rao, S.R. 1985. Lothal – A Harappan Port Town (1955‐62).Volume II. New Delhi: Archaeological Survey of India. Renfrew, J.M. 1969. The archaeological Evidence for the domestication of plants: Methods and Problems. In Domestication and Exploitation of Plants and Animals Ucko, P. J. and G. W. Dimbleby (Eds.), Duckworth, London. Pp.: 149–170. Renfrew, J.M. 1973. Palaeo‐ethnobotany: The Prehistoric Food Plants of the Near East and Europe. London: Methuen and Co. Ltd. Sali, S.A. 1985. The Upper Palaeolithic Cultures at Patne , District Jalgaon, Maharashtra in V. N. Misra and P. Bellwood (eds.) Recent Advances in Indo‐Pacific Prehistory: 137‐146. New Delhi: Oxford and IBH Publishing and Co. Pvt. Ltd. Saraswat, K.S. 1986. Ancient crop economy of Harappans from Rohira, Punjab (ca. 2000–1700 BC). Palaeobotanist 35: 32–38. Saraswat, K. S. 1988. Pre‐Harappan crop economy at ancient Rohira, Punjab (c. 2300– 2000 BC). in K. S. Ramachandran (ed.). Studies in Indian History and Culture: 221–240 New Delhi: Navchetna Press Saraswat, K.S. 1992. Archaeobotanical remains in ancient cultural and socio‐economical dynamics of the Indian subcontinent. Palaeobotanist 40: 514–545. Saraswat, K. S. and A. K. Pokharia. 2002. Harappan plant economy at ancient Balu, Haryana. Pragdhara 12: 153–171. Saraswat, K. S. and A. K. Pokharia. 2003. Palaeoethnobotanical investigations at Early Harappan Kunal. Pragdhara, 13: 105– 139.

498

Ruikar et al. 2013: 486‐499

Shinde, V., P. Shirvalkar and S. N. Rajguru. 2008. Padri: A Harappan Salt Manufacturing Centre on West Coast of India. Journal of Indian Ocean Archaeology 5: 57‐84. Shinde, V. 1992b. Padri and the Indus Civilization. South Asian Studies 8: 55‐66. Shinde, V. 1998. Pre‐Harappan Padri Culture in Saurashtra: The Recent Discovery. South Asian Studies 14: 173‐182. Shinde, V. 1992a. Excavations at Padri – 1990‐91: A Preliminary Report. Man and Environment XVII (1): 79‐86. Shirvalkar, P. and Y.S. Rawat. 2012. Excavations at Kotada Bhadli, District Kachchh, Gujarat: A Preliminary Report. Puratattva 42: 182‐201. Shirvalkar, P. and Y.S. Rawat. 2012‐13. Kotada Bhadli: A Fortified Harappan Settlement. Heritage India 5 (4): 70‐77. Vats, M. S. 1974. Excavations at Harappa. Volume I & II. Delhi: Bhartiya Publishing House. Vats, M. S. 1997. Excavations at Harappa. Volume I & II. New Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal Publishers Pvt. Ltd. Wheeler, R.E.M. 1947. Harappa 1946 – The Defences and Cemetery R37. Ancient India 3: 129. Zohary, D. 1971. Origin of south‐west Asiatic cereals: Wheat, Barley, Oats and Rye, in P. Davis et al (ed.) Plant Life of South‐West Asia: 235–263. Edinburgh: The Botanical Society of Edinburgh.

499