BOOK REVIEWS

Indian Beads: A Cultural aud Technological Study. Shantaram Bha1chandra Deo. Pune: Deccan College Postgraduate and Research Institute, 2000. 205 pp., 7 color, 37 b/w plates, 3 maps, 24 figures, bibliography, no index. Paper 600 rupees. No ISBN.

Distinctive Beads in Ancient India. Maurya Jyotsna. BAR International Series 864. Oxford: Archaeopress, 2000. 122 pp., 1 map, 10 figures, 7 tables, bibliography, index. Paper cover. ISBN 1-84171-067-9.

Amulets and Pendants in Ancient Maharashtra. Maurya Jyotsna. New Delhi: D. K. Printworld, 2000. 102 pp., 4 maps, 12 figures, 3 tables, bibliography, index. Cloth 220 rupees. ISBN 81-246-0158-5. Reviewed by PETER FRANCIS JR. (1945-2003), former Director of the Centerfor Bead Research, Lake Placid, New York

India is one of the world's largest countries rate with him on a book. That project with one of its most ancient civilizations. never happened, as Dikshit passed away in Blessed with immense natural and human 19(}9, just before his own History (?f Indian resources. It is no surprise that it is a lead­ Class was published. ing source of beads in both ancient and Deo received a fellowship from the In­ modern times. Only China is larger and as dian Council of Historical Research to ancient, but the Chinese have never been study and prepare a manuscript on Indian as interested in beads as have the Indians. beads during the years 1985 to 1988. He The Indian subcontinent has been unparal­ worked on the project for many years, long leled in terms of bead making, bead trad­ after the period of the fellowship. Deo ing, and the use of beads since early in the passed away in 1999, and as a tribute to his third millennium B.C. many years devoted to the subject, a team Thus, it is something of an event that of Deccan College atIiliates, led by V. N. in the same year three books were pub­ Misra, edited and published the volume. lished on Indian beads. The first was M. )yotsna, the author of the other two released posthumously. S. 13. Deo, profes­ books reviewed here, was privileged that sor and director of Deccan College, Pune, Deo C11l1e out of retirement to act as her had written many "bead chapters" in the guide for her M. Phil. at Deccan College. excavation reports of the Deccan College Deo might be said to represent the "old archaeologicll teams. He was introduced to school" of Indian bead research. )yotsna the subject by M. G. Dikshit (19--1.t), 1952<1, is in the generation producing a "new 19521>, 19()9), then regarded as India's school," involving several young archae­ leading bead authority, and W;lS to collabo- ologists and doctOLll clndicbtes, notably BOOK REVIEWS

Sunil Gupta (1995-1996, 1999, 2000), Chapter 1 deals with the "Cultural Sig­ Kishor Basa (1992a, 19921J; Basa et al. nificance of the Study of Indian Beads" and 1991), and Alok Kumar Kunungo (1996­ Chapter 2 with "Indian Beads: Antiquity, 1997). Techniques of Making and Materials In the interest of full disclosure, the Used." Both leave much to be desired for reader should know that I have been anyone who is trying to learn about the involved in the study of Indian beads for a social significance of beads (or even the quarter of a century (e.g., Francis 1981, study of beads) or their technical aspects. 1982a, 198211, 1984, 1985, 1987, 1990, For example, the second sentence ill 1991, 2001). A significant amount of my Chapter 1 reads, "Since the Old Stone Age, work was done at Deccan College, the in­ man has been in the habit of decorating stitute with which both Deo and Jyotsna himself either by the use of simple orna­ were associated. I know both of the authors ments or by cosmetics" (p. 1). This is a personally, and despite a few disagreements bold assertion. Is there any truth to it? with each of them, I think kindly of both There are no references given, nor are of them. Unfortunately, I cannot say the there any details. All we are told in the fol­ same for these three books under review. lowing sentences is, "It is well known that This conflict makes this the most difficult in ancient times a kind of red pigment was book review I have ever been asked to used for decorative patterns on the body. write. Along with the use of crude cosmetics var­ Deo's book, Indian Beads: A Cnltnral and ious types of ornamentation such as beads Tecl/llological Stndy, purports to be a cultural and bangles, formed part of decorations and technological study of beads. On the [sic]" (p. 1). Pieces of ocher, presumably whole, it is neither. Some useful features used as body paint, are known from the illuminate the use of beads from perspec­ Lower Paleolithic (Edwards 1978: 135), but tives that had not hitherto been adequately this is not true of beads or bangles. studied. One is an appendix to the first Deo returns to the theme at the begin­ chapter on Vedic amulets (pp. 39-42). It ning of the second chapter. "So far as ar­ discusses amulets prescribed in the Artll/!a chaeological data is concerned, it is well Veda and a gloss to that ancient book of known that no evidence of beads has so f:lr magic, the Kan§ilw St7ra. The list is instruc­ been reported fi'om any prehistoric sites in tive, although only about half of the 55 India save from the Mesolithic sites of magical objects listed were amulets (the Langhnaj in North Gujarat and the site others were made into ointments or used of Mahadaha in Uttar Pradesh " (p. 5). internally). The final paragraph informs us This is not "well known." In 1981, I that, "quite a good number of instances are published "Early Human Adornment in recorded in other branches of Vedic litera­ India: Part One, The Upper Paleolithic," ture which indicate the use of amulets...." and the next year "Early Human Adorn­ (p. 42). Unfortunately, none of these are ment in India: Part Two, The Mesolithic" elaborated upon. (Francis 1981, 1982r). The first discussed The most important contribution IS several beads (along with some grooved Chapter 5 "Be;lds in Indian Sculpture." human teeth) ti'om the sites of Patne, While other writers have commented on Maharashtra, ill central India and the Kur­ this theme, no one has covered it so thor­ nool Cave complex in the southern Indian oughly. This is done so historically and state of Andhra Pradesh. The second re­ presents important data on the subject. ported on beads li'om northern sites: Regrettably, as with most of the book, the Langhnaj, ornaments (they ;,re not beads) section can only be easily read by someone fi'om Mahadaha, beads fi'olll Bogor, Rajas­ who already knows quite a bit ;lbout th;lIl, and the evidence of contemporary ancient Indian history and ;lrchitecture. rock paintings. R;lrely are details, such ;lS datt's of v;lrious This inli.wllLltion would have greatly periods or loca tiolls of scul ptures, gi ven. expanded Deo's statement. Both papers 37° ASIAN PERSPECTIVES 42(2) . FALL 2003

were published in the BI/llelil/ of Ihe De{((l11 The rest of the description of stone College Rcsc(/rch II/slill/lc at the time Deo beadmaking is f.1irly accurate, but clearly was the director of Deccan College. I am based on reading other people's accounts. not so much miffed that he did not cite my Referring again to the antiquity of this work as appalled by the lack of scholarship industty, Deo tells us, "That Cambay was this shows. Deo's book is concerned mostly a great centre for this industry is further with stone beads, and by far the most im­ evidenced by the Peripll/s, which states that portant stone bead industlY in India (and carnelian also came to Cambay from P(/e­ perhaps even in the world) for millennia is Ih(///(/ (Paithan) and T(/g(/m (Ter) in the now concentrated at Cambay, Gujarat. The Deccan (Maharasthra)" (p. 33, insertions section on this industry begins: his). There is no citation for this informa­ tion. The industty flourished there [at What the anonymous Greek sailor wrote Cambay] from remote times and in the first-century Pcripills was, "There is continues now in a dwindling form. in this region [sc. of Barygaza] towards the The antiquity and the various mate­ east a city called Ozene, the former seat rials used in the industry will be dealt of the royal court, fi:om which everything with at a later stage. The raw material is mainly ex­ that contributes to the region's prosperity, ported to Cambay from the neigh­ including what contributes to trade with boring Baba Ghori mines at Ratan­ us, is brought down to Barygaza: onyx, pur 111 the erstwhile Rajpipla State. agate ..." (Casson 1989: 81, insertions his); The mines are dug deep into the and, "there is brought to Balygaza, by con­ natural soil to a depth of about 30­ veyance in wagons over very great roadless 35 feet till [sic] the carnelian or stretches, from Paithana large quantities agate seam is reached. The blocks of of onyx, and from Tagara large quantities stone weighing over 1 to 2 pounds of cloth of ordinary quality" (Casson are brought to the surface and are 1989: 83). chipped on the spot to select the promising stones. The Bhils in the There is no mention of Cambay in the neighboring area also collect agate for Peripills, as the city did not then exist. being taken to the lapidaries at Cam­ Ozene (Ujjain) was the beadmaking center. bay. (pp. 11-12; insertions mine). Barygaza (modern Broach) was the port. Paithana (Paithan) was probably not a ma­ Most of this is quite erroneous. Cambay jor supplier of onyx, despite what the Pcri­ only began making stone beads in the pillS said. Tagara (Ter) supplied cloth, not sixteenth centUlY (Francis 1982(/: 28, 2001 : carnelians (Casson 1989: 81,83). 108). There is no evidence that the in­ The technical information in Chapter 2 dustry has "diminished." Baba Ghor Hill is also full of errors. His discussions on is referred to in the literature; it is not a "tinting" stone beads (pp. 17, 31) does not "neighbor" of Cambay, nor are the mines take into account the making of onyx fi·om called "Baba Ghori." Rajpipla was absorbed banded agate. Despite years of working into Gujarat State in 1949. Why is it being on the "Megalithic problem," Deo never cited in the 1980s as the center of mining? makes the connection between a certain It is not clear what "natural soil" means; class (Dikshit's 1949 "southern group") of it is alluvium from the Narmada l<..iver. etched carnelians and these people, who There are no agate or carnelian "seams," made, used, and traded them (pp. 18-19). only layers of alluvia where stones were The first material listed under "Non-Stone washed down to the mouth of the river. Materials" is steatite, a stone (p. 20). Car­ Stones of 1 or 2 pounds are very rare, as the nelian (p. 33) and turquoise (p. 37) were Narmada could not transport them. The first worked at Mergarth, Pakistan. Tur­ tribal Bhils actually do (/11 the digging and qUOIse was worked as early as 6000 B.C., finding of the stones. It diminishes their more than three millennia and carneli:lIl role to say that they, "also collect agate ..." more than a millennium before the date BOOK REVIEWS 37 1

he first ascribes them to during the Harap­ Shapes" are grouped "coral" and "shell" pan civilization (Jarrige and Meadow 1980: (p. 115), neither of which are "shapes." 124, 131). Garnet is not adequately de­ The entire extent of foreign parallels for scribed as, "the purple-tinted stone" (p. 35), shell is explained in this way: "The use of nor is onyx, "virtually an agate which is shells is quite universal, in primitive com­ layered" (p. 36). Lapis lazuli does not come munities as well as amongst the elite." The fi'om Persia (p. 36), which has been called discussion on charm cases (p. 116) includes Iran since 1935. only Indian ones. No mention is made that His discussion of glass beads (pp. 2()-30) these were used in dynastic Egypt and are is even weaker than that of stone beads. He common throughout the Islamic world. It does not inform us how they were made, would be a valuable exercise to work out except to erroneously explain that canes for the evolution of this important bead type. cutting into smaller beads (seed beads, Because they are small and highly vari­ Indo-Pacific beads) were made by bundling able, it is important to illustrate beads well. cold canes together and fusing them at a The plates here are not nearly as useful as "light temperature" (p. 29). Most glass they might be. The first four color plates beads discussed (stratified eye beads, gold­ are from a mineralogy book with several glass beads, mosaic beads, segmented beads) minerals that have little to do with Indian were imports and have nothing to do with beads. The other color plates are of mixed an Indian bead industl)'. Arikamedu did quality shot in various museums, mostly not have beads of, "deep cobalt blue and the Allahabad Museum, which owns no occasionally of pale purple shades" (p. 29). archaeologically recovered beads. The 32 Three of the other chapters (3: Typo­ black-and-white plates are reproduced logical Classification, 4: Amulets and Pen­ from other publications. Many were of low dants, and 6: Foreign Parallels) are little quality in the original and are just as bad more than catalogues ofwhere various beads here. Figures 1 through 24 are line draw­ have been excavated. The "typological clas­ ings made by Deo after (or traced from) sification" is not what the title suggests, but various publications. simply a listing of geometric bead shapes. It One would think that if a scholar had is even unclear what some of these are handled 500,000 (p. vii) or 1,000,000 (there are no corresponding illustrations). (p. 121) beads, he might have made origi­ For example, how does Deo separate a nal drawings or photographs that could be "globular" bead from a "spherical" one? used to supplement the text he was writing. The amulet and pendant section offers a This would eliminate beads not discussed little information on particular items, but in the text and emphasize those that are. more often leaves the reader wondering Map A (Mineral Resources for Bead what is being discussed, as in, "The Vnjm is Industry [sicj) ignores the principal bead a well-known symbol, sacred to the Bud­ materials (agate and carnelian) and their dhists" (p. 93). Nor is it clear why amulets locations (the lower reaches of the Nar­ and pendants are grouped together; one has mad5, the God5varl, and the Krisl)5), as cultural meanings, while the other is a sub­ well as the principal historical source of class of beads defined by the placement of garnet (the God5varl-Krisll~i doab). On the perforation. the other hand, it shows sources for cal­ The foreign parallels chapter (Chapter 6) cite, baryte, and magnesite, minerals hardly is not informative. There is no attempt to ever used for beads in India. Map C (Bead discover //lily there are parallels. Are they Making Sites) covers only sfollc beadmaking mere coincidence, the result of the trade of sites, eliminating several important ones beads, technology transfers, or the borrow­ (Inamgaon and Limudra, for example) and ing of styles? The second paragraph dis­ crediting others that probably do not de­ cussing gold-foil (gold-glass) beads (p. 113) serve to be there (e.g., Tel', Paithan). No concerns stone beads, which don't belong sites that made beads in other media are in this category at all. Under "Other considered. 372 ASIAN PERSPECTIVES . 42(2) . FALL 2003

]yotsna's DistilletilJe Beads suffers from flat barrel, oblong and diamond cut form many of the same problems as Deo's book. [sic]" (p. 23). To its credit, it is more updated than Deo's. Chapter lOon the gemology of ancient It is divided into twelve chapters. The first, India is perhaps the most interesting one "Distinctive Beads in Ancient India," is in the book. However, it discusses precious an introduction. This is followed by chap­ gems, such as rubies, diamonds, topazes, ters on the obsolescence of beads, beads in and sapphires, which were rarely worn as literature, beads in sculptures, sites men­ beads. tioned in the text, chapters covering bead The chapter on the prophylactic and types (amulets, pendants, eye beads, etched therapeutic uses of stones holds out some beads), a chapter on gemology in ancient promise. Yet, virtually all uses ascribed in India, one on the prophylactic and thera­ this chapter are without references. Occa­ peutic qualities of stones, and a conclusion. sionally, the name of a writer or a book On page 1 we are told, "This book might be mentioned, but it is often doubt­ attempts to observe them [beads] primarily ful that the source was even consulted. For from cultural [rather] than the decorative example, ]yotsna (p. 105) writes, "Pliny angle" (insertions mine). We are never told says amethyst protects man [sic] against sor­ why the book discusses only "distinctive cery." Well, not quite. What Pliny the beads" rather than all beads or even what Elder (a Roman, not an Indian) said was: constitutes a "distinctive bead." The book "The Magi falscly claim that the amethyst gives us very little cultural information. prevents drunkenness, and that it is this While there is some attempt to reveal what property that has given it its name. More­ certain amulets were used for, and the be­ over, they say that, if amethysts are in­ ginning of the eye bead chapter discusses scribed with the names of the sun and the concept of the "Evil Eye," discussions moon and are worn hanging from the neck of decorations or shapes dominate the along with baboons' hairs and swallows' cholpters on amulets, pendants, eye beads, feathers, they are a protection against spells" and etched beads. These chapters are just (Eichholz 1962: 265, emphasis mine). cltalogues. The illustrations at least have the advan­ Chapter 2 is entitled "Obsolescence of tage of being placed in the text where they Beads," but does not discuss that topic, are relevant. However, they all appear to being an abbreviated history of the bead have been copied or traced £i'om other trade. The chapters on beads in literature publications, to which no credit is given. and sculpture are merely adequate. The fancifu I and incorrect methods for Awkwardly placed in the middle of the making glass beads (A and B, Fig. 7, p. 85) book is a chapter that lists the sites men­ are thinly disguised versions of van der tioned in the text and a map to locate Sleen (1973: 20, 24). Most bead illustra­ them. This could be useful to the non­ tions are copied (or traced) from other specialist. Unfortunately, many entries have publications, many from Beck (1941) or no dates, and the reader is expected to from Deo's version of the same drawings. know when the Satavahana, Maratha, or Compare ]yotsna's Fig. 1: 2, 3, 4, 10, and microlithic periods were, as well as what 11 with Deo Fig. 16: 126, 125, 127,123, OCP, PGW, and NPBW cultures refer to and 122 and Beck P1. VII: 14, 15, 16, 12, (they are ceramic types). Equally distressing and 11. is the old habit in India to include un­ The index is useless. Unless an entry is informative summaries such as: "A good repeated twice, which happens only a few number of beads of various materials and times, there is only one page listed for each shaped [sic] from ]yotsna to Pala period entry. Thus, agate and carnelian, major [sic] were uncovered. The materials used bead materials throughout the book, have are terra cotta, carnelian, chalcedony, only single page references. Moreover, quartz, nLlrble, agone, and jade. The com­ who would go to an index to look up mon shapes are globular barrel, flat round, "Spherical Beads With Elongated Eyes In BOOK REVIEWS 373

Quadrants" or "Etched Eye Beads With erally without any special importance. On figure '8,' Circle And Guilloche, Treble the contrary, amulets have been found to Eye Patterns" (all capitals as in the origi­ posses definite shapes, so designed for some nal)' The latter entry appears twice with magico-religious or superstitious reasons" page 99 above page 82. (p. 1). The same dichotomy is reflected in The reference section could have used the first page of Chapter 5 (Amulets and some editing. While a bibliography can be Pendants: A Typological Study) in which constructed in different ways, it should at she quotes definitions of the two items least be consistent. Sometimes a publisher is ti'OIn EI/cyclopedia A IIIericaI/a and The COl/cise listed with no place, most often a place is Oxford Dictiol/ary. listed without a publisher, sometimes nei­ Quoting definitions frol11 encyclopedias ther is included, and at least one case, a and dictionaries is at least a step better than country is listed as a place of publication. is done in most of the volume, where Multiple authors are sometimes denoted references are casually ignored. On page 2 by an ampersand (&), sometimes by a slash she declares, "The use of amulets and pen­ (f), sometimes by a comma, sometimes by dants was not confined to anyone place "and," and at other times with no punctu­ or period. They are traced in ornaments, ation at all. Most page numbers are absent almost all over the world, from a very early for papers in a journal or volume with age. The great mass of the evidence about multiple authors. First names are also these now available justifies the statement omitted at times. that the use of amulets was, and still is, ]yotsna's other book, AI/llliets al/d PC/l­ universal." What evidence is that? Is the dal/ts, is much smaller than Distil/ctill(' Beads, statement justified? Can "I/I/iversal" be being 14.5 by 22 cm vs. 21.5 by 28 cm. reconciled with "allllost all over the world"? It only contains 75 pages of text and is set Chapter 2 is entitled "The Technological in larger type. Of course, the subject is Importance of Amulets and Pendants," but much more restricted. We are again left is nothing of the sort. Half of the three with the odd combination of pendants and pages of text merely describe perforations. amulets. Type 5 (p. 9) is called" 'Y and V' shape This book appears to have been a rush perforation or Miscellaneous." On the next job. For example, there are four fold-out page, it is described as a 'V' perforation; maps at the beginning of the volume. One on the plate on the f.1Cing plate, it is a 'Y' wonders why Map 3, "Maharashtra Geol­ perforation. The last page covers "Polish," ogy" was even included. The only refer­ "Mould," and "Drills" most perfunctorily. ence to it is on page 29, referring to the No technological importance is advanced. Deccan Trap. No one remotely f.1miliar Chapter 3 (Excavations in Maharashtra: with the state needs a map to show them A Summary) is intended to parallel the that this enormous geological formation chapter with the same theme in Distil/ail!C covers almost all of Malur:lshtra. The only Bcads and has all the same weaknesses, as mineral marked on the map is quartz, and well as others. When considering l3ah;il by no means are all occurrences noted. (p. 15) we are told that, "Details about Map 2 is even more puzzling. It is simply a materi;l1 typology of beads are lacking, as a duplicate of Map 4. It is supposed to show full report has not been published" (p. 15). us trade routes, passes, and ports in addition So, unless the author visited the depository to the places shown on Map 4, but none of and studied the assemblage (which she these features are included. clearly did not do), why is it even men­ In the second paragraph of the first tioned? As we saw in Distil/cti"c Bcads, chapter (Cultural and Historical Impor­ references, particularly to Classical Western tance of Amulets and Pendants) we ;lre left literature, are being parroted from some wondering again why these two classes ;lre secondary source. We ;ne told that Paithan joined. AsJyotsna says (p.I), "Pendants are was mentioned in both the PcrijJ/l/s (we saw of simple and conventional shapes gen- above that it was) and in Ptolemy (appar- 374 ASIAN PERSPECTIVES . 42(2) FALL 2003

ently Cr

keya, Krishl)a, Balar;lma etc., amongst Kausambi and Paithan. The speci­ Brahmanical images and those of mens from several of these sites, Manjusri and others in the Buddhist throw light on the artistic patterns of pantheon. beads and of the materials out of which they were made (see pI. XXIV 1I12S ee Coomaraswamy. op. ril., pI tf and figs. 8 ff). XLVI, 175. (Karttikeya) Jyotsna, Distil/rti/Jc Beads, p. 7, column 2, Jyotsna, A 11/11 leIs al/d PCI/dallls, p. 68, first first full paragraph: paragraph: Towards the beginning of the 1st Even a late work like Ulacarita dated millennium BCE and in subsequent to the thirteenth century CE men­ centuries a full-fledged maturity is tions tiger claws as an ornament. seen in the urban revolution. It cul­ Through [sir] the literary tradition is minated in an exuberance of con­ at present limited to seventh century temporary material assemblage in­ CE onwards, the ornament seems to cluding the beads, which are no have gained popularity during the exception to the general richness of Gupta period. The ornament is dis­ the cultural pattern of the times. This tinctly carved on many a Gupta is evident from the beads found at sculptures [sir] as well as in bronze Hastinapura, Ujjain, Pataliputra, Raj­ images (Coomaraswamy 1980, PI. ghat, Ranagira, Vashali, Kausambi, XLVI, 175).-Gal)a from Khoh in Kaundinyapura, and Paithan. The the Prince of Wales Museum, Bom­ specimens from several of these sites bay bears a tiger's tooth pendant throw light on the artistic patterns around his neck Cfig. 10.2). This or­ of beads and of the materials out of nament is a peculiar feature on ima­ which they were made. ges of Kartikeya, Kl)SI)a, Balarama, etc., amongst Brahmanical images This review has not only been long; it and those of Mal'ijusri and others in has also been harsh. That is unfortunate, the Buddhist pantheon. but I believe it is necessary. Beads hold tremendous potential for enlightening us The new information added here is about a about many aspects of past human behav­ statue of Gal)a. Figure 10.2 shows a tiger­ ior. They have long been ignored, and this claw pendant, not a tiger-tooth pendant. has allowed far too many writers on the Additionally, Jyotsna commits an error in subject to avoid scrutiny and publish sub­ copying Deo. Deo's reference to Coo­ standard works on this once arcane topic. marswamy (1965) was his Hislory 4 II/dial/ This can no longer be tolerated, neither in alld Jlldol/csiall Art. Jyotsna's reference is the Indian context, nor in any other. to Commarswamy (1980), his book Yak~as, yet she cites the precise page and plate number as Deo, even though two different R.EFERENCES CITED works were involved. 13ASA, K. K. J'J'J2a Early historic glass beads in Thailand Deo, p. 5, colul11n 2, last paragraph: and Peninsular Malaysia, in SOlllh Asial/ A !'rhaelon 1990: 83-102, ed. I. Towards the beginning of the 1sI Clover. Center for Southeast Asian millennium B.C. and in subsequent Studies, University of Hull. U.K. centuries a full-fledged maturity is I'J'J2iJ E'lrly glass beads in India. SOl/fh Asial/ seen in the urban revolution (pIs. SII/dies 8: 91-1 04. XXX.If). It culminated in an exu­ 13ASA, K. K., I. CLOVEn, AND J. HENDEnsoN berance of contemporary material as­ 199 I The relatiol1Ship between early semblage including the beads which Southeast Asian and Indian glass. BI/I­ are no exception to the general rich­ leli" or ,he t"d,,-f',lri!ir p,.ehisll>rir Ass,,­ ness of the cultural pattern of the riali",;IO: 3('('-385~ times. This is evident ti·om the beads 13ECK, H. C. found at Hastinapura, Ujjain, Patali­ I'J-+ 1 The Bcads (1·0/11 Taxila. Memoirs of puo·a, Rajghat, Ranagira, Vasali, the Archae·ological Survey of India ASIAN PERSPECTIVES . 42(2) . FALL 2003

No. 65. Delhi: Manager of Pub­ Beads Monograph Series 7. Lake lications. Placid, NY: Lapis Rome. 1982( Early human adornment in India, Pt CASSON, L. 2, The Mesolithic. BIII/etill 0( 'he Dcc­ 19H9 The Peripills "[aris Eryrllnlei. Prince­ mil CJI/ege Resellrrh IlIStitll'~ .+ 1 :59­ ton: University Press. 67. C()()MAnSWAMY, A. K. 19H.+ Plants as human adornment in India. 1965 Hisrory 0( [lldiall alld [lldollesiall A rr. E«>lIolllir BMall)' 38(2): 19'+-209. New York: Dover (reprint; original 19H5 llaba Ghor and the Ratanpur Rak­ 1927). shisha. JOllrJIal 0( the Erollo/1/ir alld So· 19HO Yaksas. New Delhi (2 pam; reprint, rial Hi.""r)' <'( the Oriellt 29: 198-204. original 1927-1928). 1987 Bead E/1/porill/1/: A Cllide '0 the Beads FOIiI Arika/1/edll ill the POlldirh,.,..r)' lVIII­ DIKSHIT, M. G. Sellili. Museum Publications 2, Pon­ 1949 Errhed Beads ill [lidia. Deccan College dicherry Museum, Pondicherry. Monograph Series 4. Poona: Deccan 1990 Glass beads in Asia, Pt 2, Indo-Pacific College Postgraduate and Research beads. Asiall PerspcctiIJes 29(1): 1-23. Institute. 1991 lleadmaking in Arikamedu and be­ 1952a SO/1/e Bcads{l'olll KOlidilpJ7r. Hyderabad yond. World Archaeolog)' 23(1): 2H­ Archaeological Series 16. Archaeo­ 43. logical Department of the Govern­ 2001 Asia's Mari'ilile Bead Trade (I'O/1/ c. 300 mellt of Hydrabad, Hydrabad. B.C. to the PresCllt. Honolulu: Univer­ 1952b lleads from Ahichchhatra, U. P. AII­ sity of Hawai'i Press. rimt Ilidia 8: 33-63 + 5 pis. 1969 His'ory 0( Illdiall Class. l3ombay: Uni­ GUPTA, S. versity ofBombay. 1995- Beyond Arikamedu: Micro stratig­ 1996 raphy of the Iron Age-Early Historic EDwAnDs, S. W. transition and Roman contact in 1978 Nonutilitarian activities in the Lower South India. Pllriltattlla 26: 50-61. Paleolithic: A look at the two kinds 1999 Indo-Pacific beads in Japan. Bead of evidence. Cllrrmt Allthropolog)' Stlld)' Trust NCIlJslettcr 34 : 11-14. 19(1):135-137. 2000 New analyses of Indo-Pacific beads EICHHOLZ, D. E. and glass waste from Arikamedu, 1962 PlillY: Natllral Histor), IIJith all EII,~/ish India. Bcad Stlld)' Trust NellJsletter Trallslatioll, vol. 10. Loeb Classical 35: 8-9. Library. Cambridge, MA, London: JAnnlGE, J.-F., AND R. H. MEADOW Harvard University Press, William 19HO The antecedents of civilization 111 Heinemann. the Indus Valley. Sriclltilir AllleriraIl FnANCIS, P., In. 244(8) : 122-133 19H1 Early human adornment in India, Pt KANU GO, A. K. 1, The Upper Paleolithic. BIII/<'Iill 0( 1996- Beads among the Juang of India. the Dercall Col/c.~e Researrll Ilistitllte 1997 Beads: Tile JOlmral orthe Soriet)' 0( Bead 40: 137-140. Researrhers 8-9: 3-1 O. 19H2a Ilidiall A,~ate Beads. World of Beads Monograph Series 6. Lake Placid, STEVENSON, E. L. NY: Lapis Route. 1991 Clalldills PtO/CIlI)': The C('(~~raph)'. 19H2b The Class Beads of [lldia. World of New York: Dover Publications.

A PC(l(~firl RC(l/III: Thc Risc (lllrl F(l/l (~r thc IlIrllIS CilJiliz(ltioll. Jane R. McIntosh. Boulder, co: Westview Press, 2002. 224 pp., many illustrations (some color), bibliography, index. Cloth $45.00. ISBN 0-8133-3532-9.

RCIJiCl/Icrl by JONATHAN MARK KENOYER, UlIilJcrsity 4 WiSrollSill, M(lrlisoll

The f.lnciful title of this book should be a "story" rather than a serious scholarly text clue to the reader that this is actually a about the Indus Valley civilization. If read

.-1S;.1I1 1'l'f.\J'(·oil'(·.~. Vol. -I~. No.2" ~llllJ hy Ulli\'l'r"ity ofH;\\\";li'j Press. BOOK REVIEWS 377

as a story it is quite well written and en­ ment of farming communities is actually gaging, with lots of excellent illustra­ around 7000 B.C. and not 4300 B.C. The tions taken primarily from the website beginning of the Harappan phase of the www.harappa.com. However, if used as a Indus Valley civilization is around 2600 source for accurate information on the B.C. (Kenoyer 1991, 1998) and not 3000 Indus civilization, the reader should be B.C. Finally, the decline of the Indus cities forewarned that the presentation is ser­ begins around 1900 B.C. and not 2100 B.C. iously flawed. The author does not appear Similar inaccuracies are found in her dating to have had any first-hand experIence of writing in Egypt and China, as well as working on the Indus Valley civilization the beginnings of agriculture and copper and her information has been taken pri­ metallurgy in Mesopotamia. It is not clear marily from articles and recently published if the errors are due to bad editing or mis­ books by leading authorities in the field. takes by the author herself, since the dates The bibliography indicates that she has for some events are restated incorrectly in done a considerable amount of background the body of the text, while others are ac­ research, but since there are almost no curately stated. Anyone who is not familiar references cited throughout this text it is with the correct dates would be very con­ often difficult to differentiate her ideas fused in comparing the text with the time from those derived from other scholars. line, and they would be seriously mistaken The text is organized in thirteen chapters if they used her timeline for teaching or that cover a wide range of topics, focusing comparative study. on specific aspects of the Indus Valley civi­ [n the first chapter "Lost Civilizations," lization and comparisons with contempora­ she continues with more outdated inter­ neous civilizations in West Asia and China. pretations that no serious scholars would In the first introductory chapter the author support. For example, she says that, "The sets the tone of the book with statements historical Ganges Civilization was built on that serve to reinforce stereotypes of the foundations laid by the Indo-Aryans, a no­ Indus that scholars have been trying to madic people who had invaded the sub­ erase for the past fifty years. She states that, continent at some time before 1000 BC ..." "... within less than a thousand years the The idea of "invading Indo-Aryans" has Indus Civilization-like a candle-had been beaten to death by numerous scholars flared up, burned brightly, and gone out" (Lal 1998; Shaffer 1984) and at present, no (p. 8). She also argues that, "... the clues one supports this idea. She makes some from the Indus Civilization seem to be general comparisons between the Indus and showing us a state without violence or early urban societies in Mesopotamia and conflict. Who were these peace-loving Egypt that are generally accurate, but do people?" (p. 12). While these statements not add anything new to the discussion. are clearly problematic, she does emphasize The second chapter looks at the evi­ the point made by many Indus scholars, dellCe for pre-Indus communities, begin­ that the legacy of the Indus cities can be ning with early Palaeolithic communities seen in "many aspects of modern South and continuing through Neolithic and Asian life" (p. 12). early Chalcolithic settlements. Overall, the In her introduction she also provides a discussions presented in this section are very detailed timeline that compares major very close to the original reports by the events in the history of the Indus, Egypt, primary scholars. However, one serious Mesopotamia, and China. Here again we error is seen in her discussion of an early see a pattern of inaccurate information that stone tool fi'om a gravel bed in Kashmir. comes up again and again throughout the Contrary to her statement on pages 32-33, text. While the entries are generally sig­ the early stone tool found at the site of nificant, the dating of the events is very Riwat, dating to before 2 million years ago, inaccurate, especially for the Indus. In the was actually found in situ (Rendell et a!. Indus Valley region, the earliest develop- 191\9) and therefore in a primary context, 378 ASIAN PERSPECTIVES . 42(2) . FALL 2003

even if this position was secondary to its methodological approaches and this results original use. Other early stone tools found in contradictory statements. For the dis­ in the Himalayas are dated to around 2.8 cerning scholar who is £lmiliar with the million years ago (Korisettar 2002; Sharma original sources, this free association of dif­ 1995), so the dating of the Riwat stone terent viewpoints is quite obvious and at tool to before 2 million years ago is not the same time disturbing, because the sup­ really that surprising. porting arguments for the interpretations Each of the subsequent chapters deals are missing. For the uninitiated reader, with one or more aspects of Indus sub­ who is using this book to learn more about sistence, crafts politics, trade, or religion. the Indus civilization, the presentation of Most of the themes and the eXKot Diji, Sothi, and The absence of images depicting hu­ Rehmandheri, all of which are located on man conflict, however, cannot be the Indus-Saraswati Plain or adjacent val­ taken to indicate a utopian society in leys, and except for the site of Kot Diji, which everyone worked together none has evidence of extensive burning. without warfare. We have to assume She later qualifies her statement by saying that there were periodic struggles for that, "Not all of the sites were destroyed control and conflicts within a city as ..." and that, "the timescale of change now well as between cities. These battles seems longer than previously supposed. As and political confrontations may have a result, one may no longer argue for a been illustrated in other ways that are sudden transformation" (p. 50). She then not preserved in the archaeological record. (Kenoyer 1998: 82) says that the crucial period of change was between 2700 and 2600 B.C. "instead of It is also important to note that large cities a few years." No serious scholars have such as Mohenjo-daro and Harappa may ever considered that the Indus urbanism have been too large to attack directly and emerged in a few years and most of those that any conflict may have happened in who argue for a short period of change the hinterland, a pattern that is well docu­ point to the period 2600-2500 B.C. (Pos­ mented throughout history. McIntosh does sehl 1993). Work at Harappa has shown not present a convincing argument for a that the main period of change was be­ "peaceful" society and her attempt to ex­ tween 2800 and 2600 B.C. and that this in plain how the Indus society was governed itself was only the culmination of a much through religious hegemony based on later longer process that began as early as 3500 historical comparisons with the Hindu ide­ B.C. (Kenoyer 1998; Meadow and Kenoyer ology and the caste system do not make 1994, 1997). any historical sense. The war£ue and con­ Without citations it is impossible for flict of the Vedic and Classical period of the reader to go to the original work and Indian history is well known not only from discover what the specialist scholars really the literature, but also from the archaeo­ intended. As illustrated above, Mcintosh logical record of burned cities and weap­ often juxtaposes interpretations by authors onry. When the caste system arose in the who have very difterent theoretical and warring early historic cities of the Ganga- BOOK REVIEWS 379

Jamuna Doab, it was reinforced by a highly cussion weaves back and forth between the stratified ritual and political hierarchy peaceful Indus people, nonviolence, and backed by military force. respect for life in Indian religions and oc­ Overall, the photographic illustrations casional references to "Indo-Aryan l11va­ are excellent, but there has been some ,11'­ del'S" (p. 2(2). She concludes, tistic license in the captions and in some places the identification of specific objects One key aspect of Indus society, as I have reconstructed it, is its absence of is inaccurate. In Figure 47, seal G is identi­ violence or military activity. It may fied as coming from Mohenjo-daro when be carrying the thesis too f.lr to credit in £lct it comes from a single house at Har­ the Indus Civiliz;ltion with Indian appa along with a broken seal D, and tablet pacifism and nonviolence and place F. Tablet C is also from Harappa, but not all the blame for violence and warfare from the same house as stated in the cap­ upon the waves of later invaders, but tion. This example should be taken as a there is surely a grain of truth in this caution to readers that they should look to suggestion. (p. 2(3) the original publications to find out ac­ Fortunately, archaeologists who are actively curate information about specific artifacts. studying the Indus civilization have been One additional caution for Indus script able to get more than a grain of truth out lovers is the fact that the gray Indus script of their research and the reader is advised found at the beginning of each chapter and to look to the bibliography for more reli­ the insert boxes are printed in reverse. This able sources of information. orientation is how it appears on the actual In summary, this book has nice pictures intaglio seal (Shah and Parpola 1991 : 159) and is a good read if you are not interested and not the way it would have appeared in an accurate discussion of the archaeology when impressed into clay. In contrast to of the Indus Valley civilization or of later the good photographs, the maps are very South Asian culture, religion, ;md history. I poorly drawn with many in,lccuracies in would not recollllll.end this book to high river placement, the placement of the sites, school or college students, or teachers who and the spelling of site names. For example, are trying to improve their understanding maps on pages 46, 143, and IR4 have the of the earliest urban civilizations in South important site of R.akhigarhi located in dif­ Asia. ferent positions on each m'lp. The map on page '143 has so many spelling errors that R.EFER.ENCES CITED there is not space to list them all here and the map on page 90 has the site of Dwarka KENOYER,j. M. located in the open se,l rather than on the IlJ'YI Urban process in the Indlls tradition: A preliminary model li'om Har;lppa, coast where it is actually situated. in !-!lIm!'l'tl E.wal'aliolls !986-!990: In the fln,1I chapters Mcintosh ,1ddresses 2')-(,11, ed. R. H. Meadow. M'ldison, the complex issues of decline ,md legacy WI: Prehistory Press. of the Indus cities. Here 'lgain, the types IlJ'Ji'{ 1'1 IIrim1 Cities t>( Ille !lInlls Valle)' Cil'i­ /i~·lIlioll. Karachi: Oxford Univl'l'sity of problems noted above continue. At one Press. point she retLlcts her statement about KORISETTilR, R. inv'lding Indo-Aryans, and says, "They may 211112 The archaeology of the SOllth Asian not h;1\Ie caused the end of the Imius Civi­ Lower Pabeolithic History and Cllr­ lization, but they sounded its death knell" rent status, in !ldi'"1 ~rrllaeolo,~)' ill (p. '1(3). In the following chapter she adds RelrIlS!"'(/, vol. I, [>n'lollis/I".)': Arrl",e· that the, "... Indo-ArY;lns ... were the olo.~)' t>( SOli 111 ~sia: I-(,(), ed. S. Settar and R. Korisettar. Nt'w Delhi: Indian torch-bearers of the Indus cultural heri­ Council of Historicli Research. t'lge" (p. 1(5), but then goes on to ;lrgue Li\I, 13. 13. how much of what we know of later In­ IlJlJH Rigvedic AryallS: The dehate mllst dian (Hindu) culture is not at all like what go OIl. Casl .-Illd WeSI -IH(3--I) :-I3lJ­ is attributed to Indo-Aryan tribes. Her dis- -I-IH. 380 ASIAN PERSPECTIVES . 42(2) . FALL 2003

MEIIDOW, R. H., liND J. M. KENOYEll sl,11I. Oxford: British Archaeological 199.+ Excavations at Harappa 1993: The Reports. city walls and inscribed materials, in SHIIFFEIl,j. G. SOlllh Asiall Arrlwcology, 1993: '+51­ 198.+ The Indo-Aryan invasions: Cultural .+70, ed. A. Parpola and P. Koski­ myth and archaeological reality, in kallio. Helsinki: Suomabinen Tie­ The People SOlllh Asi,,: The Biologiral deakatemia. of Alllhropology of Illdia, Pakislall, Illld 1997 Excavations at Harappa '199'+'-1995: Neplll: 77-90, ed. R. Lukacs. New New perspectives on the Indus script, J. York: Plenum Press. craft activities and city organization, in SOll,h Asiall Arrlwco"~~y '/995: 139­ SHIII'I, S.G.M., liND A. PIIIlPOLIl 172, ed. B. Allchin and R. Allchin. 1991 Cl/PIIS 0( IlIdlls Se"/s alld IlIsrrip,iolls, New Delhi: Oxford and ll3H. 2, Collerli'l//s ill Pc1kisl,lIl. Helsinki: Suomabinen Tiedeakatemia. POSSEHL, G. L. 1993 The date of Indus urbanization: A SHAllMII, K. K. proposed chronology for the pre­ 1995 Quaternary stratigraphy and pre­ urban and urban Harappan phases, in history of the upper Indus Valley, SOll,h Asiall Arrhaeology, 1991: 213­ Ladakh, in QllalerJ/c1ry EIIIJirolllllellls 249, ed. A. J. Gail and G.J.R. Mevis­ alld Ceoarrlweology or Illdia: 9R-l0R, sen. Stuttgart: F. S. Verlag. ed. S. Wadia, R. Korisettar, and V. S. Kale. 13angalore: Geological Society I~ENDELL, H. M., R. W. DEN ELL, liND M. A. of India. HilUM 19R9 Pleislorelle ami Palaeolilhir !JIIJesliga­ liolls ill Ihe Soall Valley, Nor,herJ/ Paki-

Illdia, All Archacolo,(!ical History: Palacolithic Bcginnings to Early Historic FOllndatiolls. Dilip K. Chakrabarti. New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2001. xvi, 374 pp., 56 b/w figs., 8 maps, bibliography, index. Paper. ISBN 09156-5880-9.

RC1Jicwcd by HElDI J. MILLER, Dcpartfllcnt (![ Anthropoloc"Z)'J Harvard UnilJcrsity

Dilip K. Chakrabarti's ambitious goal for landscape seldom changes, and the ways his book Illclia, All ArciTaco!o,fZira! Hislory is that cultures exploit their environments to create a continuous archaeological his­ tend to be limited by persistent [lCtarS such tory from the Palaeolithic period up to and as geography, climate, soil type, and water including Early Historic India. The study resources. Thus, focusing on how environ­ region is described as including the modern ments were used will give coherence to states of India, Pakistan, Nepal, Bhutan, a long chronological sequence and to a and Bangladesh, although the book focuses widely varied geographic region. Interest­ on the archaeological remains uncovered in ingly, Chakrabarti's goal has a political mo­ India and Pakistan. In order to connect the tivation, many time periods and ancient cultures in this vast geographic expanse, Chakrabarti What we want to emphasize in the context of the ancient history of such proposes to examine the relationships be­ a vast landmass as the subcontinent of tween human societies and the land. This India is that it is only through the re­ is a fascinating idea, to use the history of construction of the historical devel­ how human societies lived in the diverse opment of mail-land interaction in environments of South Asia to create an different parts of the subcontinent encompassing view of the past. The in situ that the fi'amework of a past accept- BOOK REVIEWS 381

able to all segments of its population had great influence in the third millennium can emerge. (p. 3) B.C. Sites and topics that are well pub­ lished in the specialist literature, such as the However, political discussion does not play Mehrgarh excavations and evidence at this a major role in the book and Chakrabarti site for animal and plant domestication, are hones in on the archaeological remains. described in detail. In order to meet his goal of creating a The Harappan or Indus civilization continuous history, he reviews the accu­ (Chakrabarti uses both terms) is the topic of mulated archaeological data per period and Chapter 5 and the sites, chronology, mate­ per region. Beginning with the Palaeo­ rials, and trade of this cultural phenomenon lithic through the Mesolithic periods and are discussed, however some or lhe details early village communities, to the Early in this chapter are confusing and mislead­ Historic period of India, Chakrabarti fills ing. For example, Chakrabarti describes his the chapters with archaeological data. Un­ view of the political and soci'll £i'amework fortunately, there is little overarching nar­ of the Harappan civilization as, "multiple rative to help the reader contextualize the kingdoms centred around the major settle­ details, and the short introductions and ments of a region" (p. 199) without offer­ conclusions to each chapter are over­ ing any convincing evidence. In contrast to whelmed by the amount of detailed infor­ his stated view, he notes the, "prevalence mation in between. Another major draw­ of a common ideology over a wide region, back of the book is the inadequate use of which one may deduce from the many citations and references. Other scholars' re­ common symbols, the standardization of search is generally noted at the beginning difterent Harappan artifacts and the general of sections, but when it is described in the distinction between 'citadel' and ordinary text there are no citations. Also, there are residential area need not necessarily mean some uncited quotations and some studies political unity under one empire" (pp. are noted in the text without references. 199-2(0). This issue is not completely dis­ Following an introductory chapter cussed and, thus, such ambiguity, without wherein the goals of the book are dis­ any data-based reasoning, leaves the reader cussed and the region is introduced, Chap­ lost. ter 2 reviews the evidence of early humans An additional example of misleading in­ in the subcontinent beginning with the formation in this chapter is the data that history of Palaeolithic research. Sites are Chakrabarti cites in his description of the brieRy described, chronology is discussed, role of a priesthood in the cities and towns and some controversies are noted, such as of the Harappan civilization. He writes that whether the cranial fragment found in the the data he cites, "unmistakably imply the N'lrIllada River valley belongs to HOII/o services of priests-priests of a type that a ('/"ectl/s or archaic HOl1lo s(/piel/s. In Chapter practicing Hindu would engage for per­ 3, Chakrabarti discusses only the Mesolithic forming his household rituals even today delta that f.1lls into chronologiell position ." (Chakrabarti 1':>':>5,2(0). This evi­ between the Palaeolithic remains and the dence includes a limestone head as well as early f:lrIlling communities in the region. a few other pieces of stone sculpture £i'om

Huntinb t'l t'l t"l t"> cultures of the the site of Mohenjo-daro and supposed subcontinent have existed £i-om the Palaeo- tire altars Ii-om the site of Kalibangan, lithic period until modern times, and which Chakrabarti states were found on Chakrabarti's chronological focus does not top of platforms. These data and his inter­ fully appreciate the adaptability of this hu­ pretation are problematic for a number of nun environmental strategy. reasons. The focus of Chapter -1- is on the early First, only the site of Mohenjo-daro has villages of Baluchistan, the Indus Valley, yielded sculptured stone figures, and a ,wd northwest Indi'l, the areas where the stlldy of this corpus (II pieces in tot;ll) by H'lrappan civilization emerged or at least Ardeleanu-Jansen (I':>H-1-), along with a re- ASIAN PERSPECTIVES 42(2) . FALL 2003 lated study by Dales (1987), strongly sug­ tance of examining Harappan artifacts gests parallels with other civilizations to within their own cultural context. the northwest (e.g., the Helmand region). The evidence cited in support of a prac­ Ardeleanu-Jansen describes the sculptures ticing priesthood are a few small fragments in a squatting or submissive pose while of the Harappan cultural record and from Kenoyer has recently noted that the partly only two sites. In all, Chakrabarti's point kneeling position of many of these figures, that these remains have ritual significance "can be interpreted as supplication or sub­ is understood. However, it does not seem servience, but this is also a standard position plausible to interpret them as evidence of for sitting in readiness for action" (Kenoyer a priesthood, functioning similar to one in 1998: 102). In contrast, Chakrabarti sees Hinduism today. these figures in meditation. Ardeleanu­ Chapter 6 describes the archaeological Jansen and Kenoyer agree that these stone remains found beyond the limits of the sculptures were ritualistic, yet how they Harappan civilization. Similar in structure might point to a practicing priesthood, to the early chapters of the book, a com­ functioning simibr to such a practice in pendium of sites is presented from a variety Hinduism today, is not discussed by Chak­ of regions in the subcontinent, from the rabarti. Northwest Frontier Province to southern The supposed fire altars found at the site India. The v,lried subsistence practices and of Kalibangan (Rajasthan), were found in habitations across this vast area are de­ rooms in both the citadel and lower town, scribed by region, however, there is very and they were sunken into floors. One of little narrative linking all this data together. the excavators of that site, 13. 13. Lal, In Chapter 7, Chakrabarti addresses the notes that, while such structures were also Early Historic period of India: how it is found at Banawali (Haryana), they were defined, what it includes, and how it is not uncovered at Mohenjo-daro, Harappa dated. In addition to the archaeological re­ or any other Indus Valley site. Hence, he mains, he includes the textual evidence for suggests that these teatures may be evi­ the political structure of India during this dence of a regional cult (Lal 1997). period. Second, when considered in their con­ What is striking about the archaeologi­ text, the importance of these few stone cal record apparent in this book's detailed figures and pit features is diminished by descriptions, is the regionalism of the cul­ the thousands of other motiE, architectural tural remains. Although Chakr;lbarti would details, ;H1d artif,1cts found at dozens of like us to see an "essential character" of the sites, data that Chakrabarti chooses to Early Historic period, rooted in an archae­ overlook. Some of this material does sug­ ological continuum fi'om the Palaeolithic, gest ritual practices, however (and the third it seems very clear that there is a distinct problem), it remains to be demonstr:lted amount of regional expression in the mate­ whether the religious beliefs prevalellt in rial remaillS from these time periods and the Indus Valley five thousand ye;lrs ago across the varied bndscape. Even Chakra­ are Hindu or are reminiscent of Hindu barti notes this, ;l1though he prefers to em­ practice. In a detailed iconographic study phasize "broad uniformity" (p. 318). of the often-cited proto-Shiva se;11 fi'om Instead of trying to shoehorn the data Mohenjo-daro, Srinivasan clearly demon­ into a sequelltial continuum, perhaps it is strates that when the imagery of the seal better looked at in ,111 its variatiollS and is compared to its contemporary materials. permutatiollS. Its varied nature could be the fi'om its own cultural context, there is sig­ link connecting the Pabeolithic to early nificant support for reading the image as a f:lrming communities and further to various divine bull-man (Srinivasan 1975-1976). third millennium adaptatiollS across the There is little supporting evidence for landscape. Chakr,lbarti's origin;ll goal of illterpreting the figure as an early form of examining the hum,ln-land relations could Shiva. This study demonstrates the impor- be used to create a continuum of human- BOOK REVIEWS

environmental adaptations through time. Reports 01/ Fieldl/lork Carried Ol/t at Unfortunately, the book loses this focus af­ Mohel/io-daro Pakistal/ 1982-83: 139­ ~d. ter the introduction. 158, M. Jansen and G. Urban. Aachen: IsMEO-Aachen University This book raises another thought­ Mission. provoking topic: why do we envision the CHAKRABAHTl, D. K. archaeological history of South Asia in the 1995 The Archaeology or AI/cie/lf II/dial/ Old World sequence ofPalaeolithic, Meso­ Cities. Delhi: Oxford University lithic, Neolithic, to Iron Age? With the evi­ Press.

del1Ce of the so-called Mesolithic (hunting­ DALES, G. F. gathering-foraging) societies existing for an 1987 Stone Sculptures from the Proto­ expansive period of time, not limited to a historic Hclmand civilization, Af­ particular cultural phase, it is clear that such glunistan, in Oriel/talia [osephi TI/rci ili[ell/orial: 219-224, ed. G. Gnoli and a neat, evolutionary classification of human L. Lanciotti. Serie Orientale Roma cultural development does not correctly LVI. Rome: Istituto Italiano per appreciate the archaeological record of Medro Ed Esterno Orienta.

South Asia. How can we envision a con­ KENOYEH, J. M. tinuum of archaeological history, one that 1998 AI/cieut Cities 0( the II/dl/s Valley CiIJi­ utilizes the regionalism we see in the cul­ lizatiol/. Karachi: Oxford University tural remains with the long-lasting human Press and the American Institute of Pakistan Studies. adaptations? Chakrabarti's original thesis may be the answer: societies' relationships LAL, B. B. 1997 The Earliest CiIJilizatiol/ 0( SOl/th Asia. with the environment as the key to creat­ New Delhi: Aryan Books Intertu­ ing an interconnected, long-term archaeo­ tiona!. logical history of such a vast region. SHiNIVASAN, D. 1975- The so-called proto-Siva seal from REFERENCES CITED 1976 Mohenjo-daro: An iconographic as­ sessment. Arrhi!les of Asial/ Art 29: AHDELEANU-JANSEN, A. 1984 Stone sculptures fi:om Mohenjo­ 47-58. daro, in II/terill/ Reports, vo!. 1,

Development 4 a Field Petrographic Analysis System and its Application to the Study oj Socioeconomic Interaction Networks (~f the Early Harappa/1 Northwestern Indus Valley oj Pakistan. Graham Mansfield Chandler. Oxford: BAR International Series 995, 2001. 425 pp., 75 b/w maps, photos, illustrations, appendices with 164 pp. of data, bibliography. ISBN 1-84171-196-9.

Reviewed by HEIDI J. MILLER, Department 4AnthropoloY'YI Har/lard Uni/lCrsity

Graham Chandler's book presents a sys­ in Pakistan is a welcome addition to the tematic and significant research project corpus of analytic studies of South Asian wherein the methods are clearly discussed pottery. Moreover, Chandler has made a and the data are published unambiguously. noteworthy contribution by devising a His analysis of the mineralogical compo­ portable petrography kit for producing and sition and technology of Early Harappan analyzing ceramic thin sections in the field. (3500-2650 B.C.) ceramics from four sites He shares the process by which he assessed

.-Is;,/11 }la.'fl('(II/'r.,,- Vol. -Q. No. .? (. .?(H13 by Ulliwrsiry of !-!:lw;\j'j Press. ASIAN PERSPECTIVES . 42(2) . FALL 2003 the equipment choices and their sources, spreadsheet format, per sample, in the ap­ and thus ensures the reproducibility of such pendixes. The vast majority of the samples a kit. This research was Chandler's Ph.D. were from the Early Harappan levels of the dissertation and thus the methodology and sites, along with some wasters collected results are well discussed, however, the from the surfaces of three of the sites and study is limited in sample size and extent. some Harappan period material from Reh­ The book is divided into two sectiollS: the man Dheri (included for comparative pur­ first describes the creation of the portable poses). Geographically the sites form an in­ petrography kit while the second discusses teresting group. Rehman Dheri is a large the analysis of 165 sherds from Early Har­ settlement in the Gomal Plain with char­ appan contexts. acteristic Harappan cultural features of a The creation of thin sections of sherds complex society, while Tarakai Qila and for petrographic analysis has relied on Lewan are much smaller sites to the north, cumbersome equipment and export per­ in the Bannu Basin. It has been suggested mits, and one of Chandler's goals was to by the excavator (Durrani 1986) that Reh­ devise a system that would produce and man Dheri may have been a ceramic distri­ analyze thin sections under difficult work­ bution center for the region, a hypothesis ing conditions on an archaeological site. Chandler tests. The site of Harappa, one of The kit had to be physically small and the type-sites of the Harappan civilization, lightweight (and thus easy to travel with) is geographically and geologically distinct and yet powerful enough to cut and polish from the other three sites, and thus proves a significant number of sections with the to be an interesting counterpoint. least amount of supporting materials (e.g., In the background chapters, Chandler blades and abrasives). He condenses a com­ covers all the bases, albeit briefly in some plicated sequence of production steps into instances. The site descriptions are uneven four stages, each with distinct equipment and the discussions regarding theoretical requirements: consolidating, cutting and issues (e.g., reasons for the Widespread oc­ grinding, polishing, and an;llysis. The currence of a particular style) are very short equipment possibilities for each stage are and not always critical; however, the re­ discussed and the price ranges, availability, view of methods is thoughtful. weight, and performance of the various In contrast, the descriptions of the sam­ possibilities are explored. Chandler makes ples are detailed and well presented. The his decisions and field-tests the kit in Pak­ analysis of each sample involved identify­ istan and Turkey where it performs well ing the mineralogical composition, asses­ with some fine-tuning. The second and sing the size, shape, and number of inclu­ longer portion of the book reports the sions, and a close examination of the quartz results of his analysis of seven common ce­ minerals. Chandler used the results to ex­ ramic forms found at four sites with E;lrly plore whether the vessels were manu­ Harappan occupations in Pakistan. f:lctured ;It the sites (did their composition Chandler explored one aspect of possi­ reflect the site's geological environment)) ble socioeconomic interaction during the in addition to a number of technological Early H;lrappan period: was pottery Illoved issues such ;lS firing temperatures and between sites or was technical inf()l"lllation observations of surf;lce treatments. The shared) Three of the sites sampled (R.eh­ results show that the sherds from all the man Dheri, Tarakai Qila, and Lewan) are sites reflect their respective geological located in close proximity to each other environments, and thus there is no petro­ in northwestern Pakistan, while the fourth graphic evidence that vessels were traded or (the site of Harappa) is a discrete distance exchanged. Chandler also suggests that away in the Pnnjab. A total of 165 thin technology Illay have migrated fi'om Reh­ sections were nude and analyzed, and the man Dheri to the smaller neighboring sites, results are presented graphicl1ly and in but this is not convincing. BOOK REVIEWS

Rehman Dheri is the primary sample graphic analysis, as well as the documenta­ source for the study (67 out of 165 samples) tion regarding the creation of a portable and thus this site receives the most thor­ petrographic kit for use on-site. Taken in ough analysis. The compositions of these conjunction with additional evidence from samples were used to create baseline defi­ recent analytic work in Gujarat, India (for nitions tor SIX fabric types. Chandler overview see Krishnan 1997, 20(2), this emphasizes that his definition and use of research has serioLls implications for how these fabrics is an exploratory research tool archaeological ceramics in South Asia are and the types do not necessarily represent classified, by throwing doubt on the reli­ distinct f:1brics intended by the potters. ance of ware or fabric as a classifying prin­ The distribution of his fabric types varies ciple. Chandler's systematic and well­ through time but not by vessel form solely presented study demonstrates that fabric or at Rehman Dheri. Chandler documents ware is closely associated with the location coarser f:1brics dominating in the later Har­ of production (at least for the Early Har­ appan culture levels and suggests that there appan period in the Northwest Frontier may have been fewer potters producing Province, Pakistan). It is hoped that the vessels and thus less variation in the raw portable petrography kit will be repro­ material. In comparison, Tarakai Qila and duced and used by other scholars, and that Lewan, as well as the site of Harappa, this analytic work will continue to explore showed fewer £1bric types but the samples the composition and technology of South fi'om these latter sites were limited to the Asian ceramics. Early Harappan period and there were fewer sherds sampled per site. Chandler's analyses are thorough and convincing. However, the primary weak­ REFERENCES CITED ness to the book is the theoretical fi'ame­ work in which he tries to fit the analyses. DUHRANI, F. A. There is a debate regarding whether the 19H(, Rehman Dheri and the Origins of Indus Civilization. Ph.D. diss., De­ emergence of the urban culture (the Ma­ partment of Anthropology, Temple ture Harappan) from the Early Harappan University, Philadelphia, PA. period involved abrupt or gradual changes KIUSI-INAN, K. (M ughal 1990; Possehl 1990). The debate 19lJ7 Scientific analysis of pottery and focuses on ;1 number of characteristics that their cUltULll implienions, in Allcim/ are seen in the Mature Harappan period C("l"<1/llics. His/oriral Ellqlliries Il1/(l Sci­ ell/itic Al'l'l"Ol1r!les: 177-196, ed. P. C. throughout the Indus River valley and Pant and V. Jayaswal. Delhi: Agam adjacent areas, and whether the precursors K;lla !'Llkashan. to these characteristics are present in the 2()()2 A survey of ceramic analysis with E;lrly Harappan period. These include set­ special retl'l"enCe to pottery, in III dill II tlement p;ltterns, ditferent aspects of tech­ Arr!l,woloX)' ill Re/rosl"'(/, vol. I: 377­ 3HH, ed. S. Settar and Il.-. Korisettar. nologies and crafts in ;1 variety of materials, New Delhi: Indian Council of His­ and sociopolitical issues. Ch;lI1dler's study toried Research and Manohar !'ub­ of;1 single aspect of E;lrly Harappan mate­ IishLTs. rial culture is not ;lliequate to address the MU(;IIAI., M. R. myriad issues in this debate: the study's 19911 Furthn evidence of the early Har­ sample size is too slllall and geographically appan culture in the greatLT Indus V;dley: 1971 -I ()9(). SOllt!l Asi,11I limited, and it e"amines very little Mature Stlldies 6: 175-199. Harappan pottery (only a few sherds fi'om a single e"clVation trench at Rehman !'''SSt'.III., G. L. I()()() Il.-evolution in the urban revolution: Dheri). The l'lllergence of Indus urb'l11iz;\­ However, this book is signiticallt because tion. A 111111111 Relliell' 0( AII{/1I'<'!"'/"X)' it reports the results of a well done petro- 1(): 2(, 1-21'2. 386 ASIAN PERSPECTIVES . 42(2) . FALL 2003

Maritimc Archacology: Historical Dcscriptions oj thc Kalingas. Sila Tripati. National Institute of Oceanography, Goa. New Delhi: Kaveri Books, 2000. xxii + 166 pp., 20 maps, 14 b/w plates, bibliography, index. ISBN 81-7479-038-1.

RC1!icl/lcd by BERENICE BELLINA, School (?( Archacology, Oxford Unillcrsity

Tripati aims to present a maritime history the main argument of this book: the of the Kalingas from the earliest historical "greatness of Kalinga" and its contribution times, that is to say from the very last cen­ to civilization through large-scale coloni­ turies B.C. (Mauryan period), until the thir­ zation. This chapter presents the general teenth century A.D. The Kalingas, whose historical background and the literary, epi­ frontiers fluctuated according to historical graphic, numismatic, archaeological, and events, mainly corresponds to contempo­ artistic sources available. His a priori views rary Orissa, which formerly included the lead him to interpret the sources in such northern part of Andhra Pradesh. This a way that he concludes that by the time book is the first attempt to present a his­ Asoka conquered Kalinga, the region was torical account of the maritime activities already wealthy and powerful because of, of the Kalinga. Indeed, though deeply "maritime trade and colonial expansion" involved in trade, until now this region has (p. 2). As evidence of Kalinga's leading role mainly inspired studies on its general or in this civilizing adventure, Tripati uses economic history and on art history, which the fifth-century A.D. Javanese inscriptions, provides limited references to its maritime which, "use scripts similar to those from and trade activities. Given my interest in Orissa, indicating that Kalinga was the car­ early exchange between South and South­ rier of civilisation to Indonesia" (p. 5). Al­ east Asia, I was pleased that Tripati had though some of the earliest Indian scripts of drawn sparse data together, contributing to Southeast Asia appear to be derived from a clearer picture of the involvement of one southern India, and more precisely from eastern region of India in maritime trade. the Pallava script (De Casparis 1975: 13), as Nonetheless, this book £liled in several far as I know, none of them has specifically ways in its attempt because of the author's been identified as scripts from Kalinga. In eagerness to make Kalinga the pioneer of the matter of the earliest inscriptions of the Indianization in Southeast Asia, which he Indonesian archipelago, De Casparis wrote considers a civilizing process and, as a re­ that since 1918, Vogel had concluded: sult, distorts the data for this purpose. In­ that the origin of this early Southeast deed, it appeared to me that the real in­ Asian script was the Pallava script terest of the author (I believe a native used in numerous inscriptions of the of Orissa) is to promote his nationalist­ Kings of the dynasty of this name. regionalist ideas. While presenting the main These inscriptions are dated tl'om the content of this book, I will point out some middle of the fourth century A.D. and of his more characteristic positions and the have been found in different parts of severe deficiencies or distortions his ideas southern India fi'om the GUl1tur Dis­ led him to produce. trict of Andhra Pradesh in the north The pref:1Ce anticipates the position of to the l3ellary District of Mysore in the author when he defines Kalinga as the the west, and south of Kanci (Con­ jevaran) in the south. Although this area between the rivers Ganges and God­ script was also used in some inscrip­ avari, extending it to include large parts of tions of Ceylon and in inscriptions of l3engal, where there existed important the Kadambas of Kuntala (northern ports of trade. Mysore), there can be no doubt that In the first chapter, Tripati introduces it was most closely associated with

.-Isid" hTSjl('oi,'"s, Vol. -L2. No. ~ ,j' 10()3 by UlliVt'rsity of H:l\vaj'i Press. BOOK REVIEWS

the Palbvas, so that its use outside nisation in eastern Borneo" (p. 47). Just the Pallava kingdom should be at­ as surprisingly, one can discover that, "the tributed to strong Pallava influence in maritime contacts between Kalinga and such areas. (De Casparis 1975: 13) Burma and the steady flow of immigrants" account for the "Brahmanical features in Tripati ends the historical backgronnd sec­ Burma" (p. 47). Proposing new readings of tion concluding that Kalinga people, "were the Chinese sources, Tripati writes that the pioneers of Indian colonisation in fllr­ "Bali was one of the important Indian set­ thering India and the Indian Archipelago" tlcmcnts in ancicnt times. The Chinese (p.7). accounts mention that Bali was a rich and The second chapter is divided in two civilised kingdom ruled by Indians who sections. The first one presents the ancient professed Buddhism" (p. 46). The entire ports of Kalinga, both those known section is full of distorted sources and data, archaeologically as well as those known arguments lacking bibliographic references, from texts where locality is not securely or out-of-date studies from the early twen­ identified. It is a useful section; available tieth century. Here, one of the oldest con­ evidence and sources are presented for each cepts of cultural exch;lI1ge between India port. The archaeological evidence comprise and Southeast Asia, dating back to the Chinese coins and porcelains, Middle East­ hyperdifIllsionist Greater India movement, ern ceramics, Roman coins, Western am­ whose most f.lnlOus figure was R. C. phorae, and Western-influenced ceramics, Majumdar, is found. Indians, or more spe­ such as Rouletted Ware. The textu,ll cifically for Tripati, "the pioneer sailors sources are passages found in early Western from Kalinga and South India penetrated texts such as Ptolemy's CcoXmphy, in the into Southeast Asia and started the process Indian ja!a/.w, in Pali texts, ,llld in the Sin­ of Indianisation" (p. 45), by establishing ghalese chronicles, as well as in Chinese colonies, brought civilization to the under­ accounts. The second section, entitled "ex­ developed popubtions of Southeast Asia, pansion of culture," is probably the most the latter being considered as passive agents reactionary because it consists of a massive in the process. attempt to convince the reader of the su­ Another typical ditfusionist view, ftlllnd premacy of the Kalingan culture, which in early studies, namely that Southeast spread into Southeast Asia due to its nu­ Asian cultures are some kind of pale copies merous colonies. Those K,lIingan settle­ of the Indian cultures, is ;lIso presented. ments in Southeast Asia generated such ef­ Tripati writes that, "Buddhist images of fective cultural contacts there th,lt, "the Java .'illlli/alc those fi·om Ratnagiri" (p. 51). local population assimilated a superior cul­ The third chapter contains descriptiollS ture to their best adv'lntage with some var­ of ancient trade routes known ii·om literary i:ltiollS" (p. 44). As Ell· as I know, there is sources :md 'lrchaeological evidence m no evidence for such Indian colonies in South Asi,l ;lnd between South ,lnd South­ Southeast Asia ;md even less ior K'llingan e,lst Asi,l. Here 'lgain, to promote the colonies. Trip'lti takes it as axiom;ltic :llld prominent position of Kalinga ;md its ports nlakes it his main argument to account itlr in overseas maritime exchange, the ,luthor Indian-illSpired f,,'atures in Southe;Ist Asi;l. has gone too En beyond the evidence, itlr In the following p,lges, the author lists the instance, when he states th,lt, "Voy,lges to regions that might have had close or indi­ Southe,lst Asian countries were regular" rect exchange with South Asia and what he beclllse, "Kalinga had her colonies in cOllSiders evidence of those colonies. For 13urIna, Sumatra, ThaiLmd, Champa, Malay illStance, in the Borneo section, more than peninsula and beyond" (p. 72). This chap­ one reader would be astonished to read o( ter also discusses items of trade as well as "the Sanskrit inscriptions found ,It Muara the currency used m South Asi:l. Unitlr­ Kamann ..." tll

Allllradl/(/jJlfra: The British-Sri Lalfkall Excavatiolls at AlflfradhajJlfra Sa!gal/(/ Walta 2, 1101. L The Site. Robin Coningham. Oxford: Archaeopress, 2001. xxx + 209 pp., bibliography. £45.00. ISBN 1841710369.

RevielfJcd by SHINU A. ABRAHAM, DejJarllllellt of AlflhrojJology, Ulliversity of PClllfsylvalfia

Despite the many years of research on the adel or inner city, which is surrounded by a early historic archaeology of South Asia, zone of monastic establishments. A village/ few reports of systematic excavations exist, tank zone in turn surrounds the monastic and this deficiency has affected theoretical zone, and the outermost zone is that of and material interpretations of South Asian forest and hermitages. The chapter begins urbanislll. It is therefore with great antici­ with a history of archaeological research of pation that South Asian archaeologists and the site and then describes each zone in historians receive this first of two volumes detail. Chapter 4, co-written by Coning­ of the long-awaited report of six seasons of ham and Paul Cheetham, presents further excavations at the site of Anuradhapura in background information on the excavations Sri Lanka, a joint Sri Lankan-British proj­ in the form of a detailed description of the ect carried out between 1989 and 1994. As fortifications of the citadel. Again, a brief one of the most significant sites in South history of previous archaeological work on Asia, systematic fieldwork at Anuradhapura the citadel's defenses is presented, followed represents an opportunity to address sev­ by a description of the British-Sri Lankan eral key concerns: a refinement of the team's two field seasons of survey on the chronological and arti£1Ctual sequences for fortifications. the southern portion of South Asia; a re­ Chapters 5 and 6 present and evaluate evaluation of early historic urbanization the core data from the excavations. Chap­ processes in South Asia; and a better un­ ter 5 describes Trench ASW2, its location, derstanding of Anuradhapura's position as a excavation techniques, and the subsequent pivotal player in Indian Ocean trade. This structural sequence that was developed. first volume focuses on the excavation The trench covered an area of 100 sq m, results of a single trench-Anuradhapura designed to be large enough to recover Salgaha Watta 2 (ASW2); the second vol­ both a structural sequence for the site and ume will examine the artif:1cts from the a large enough corpus of artif:1cts for the excavations. development of a periodized catalogue. Its Chapter 1 briefly introduces the reader location was determined by previous son­ to the site of Anuradhapura in Sri Lanka's dage work by Deraniyagala at the highest north-central province and presents the point of the site, which suggested a possible project's aim to investigate the ancient ur­ 1()-l11 sequence going back to the initial ban core of the complex. Chapter 2, co­ Iron Age occupation of the site. In all, the written by Coninghalll and Paul Haggerty, excavations resulted in the development of describes the physical environment of the a sequence of 30 structural phases, occur­ site, including a presentation of the geol­ ring within 11 structural periods. Chapter ogy, climate, drainage and relief, flora, 6, co-written by Coningham and Kathy [luna, and soils of the greater Anur­ Batt, focuses on the chronological eval­ adhapura region. Chapter 3 presents a uation of the results of Trench ASW2. detailed description of the entire city of Through the use of a combination of rela­ Anuradhapura. Coningham adopts Sene­ tive and absolute dating techniques, the virarna's fourfold division of the complex, researchers attelllpt to construct a period­ which depicts the site as a series of concen­ ized sequence of the excavated structural tric circles: at the center is the fortified cit- units. Structllral phases were evaluated 39° ASIAN PERSPECTIVES FALL 2003 based on the presence or absence of chro­ tlement size to an overall extent of 60 ha, nological diagnostic artifacts, and on 29 ra­ as well as the construction of a rampart and diocarbon measurements that were carried ditch around the settlement. Particularly out on charcoal samples from 11 structural noteworthy is the presence of possibly phases. imported fine gray ware, the £1bric and Both chapters begin with Structural Pe­ shapes of which appear ancestral to Rou­ riod K, the earliest context within the letted Ware. Rouletted Ware was also trench, and end with Structural Period A, found in this period, as were a possible the most recent context. Detailed diagrams sherd of Northern Black Polished Ware of key structural phases and other rele­ and more sherds with Brahm! inscriptions. vant elements accompany the descriptions. The faunal record indicates an increase in Structural Period K was characterized by shell finds and the earliest evidence for co­ several phases of possible temporary round comlt fiber. [n addition, several punch­ or circular shelters, and yielded radiocarbon marked coins were recovered. This period dates suggesting an occupation between has been correlated with Deraniyagala's c. 840 and 460 cal. B.C. Arti£1cts associated Period V, the lower Early Historic. with this period-including black and red Structural Period G and H take the ex­ ware pottery, graffiti-bearing sherds, iron cavation to a date from 200 B.C. and A.D. objects, and remains of cattle, hare, and 130, straddling the period of the rule of deer-seem to identify this period with the Emperor Asoka when his son, Mahinda, is Deraniyagala's Period HI, the protohistoric traditionally thought to have converted Iron Age. Sri Lanka to Buddhism. Structurally, the Structural Period J also included several fourth occupational Period H is described phases of round shelter construction, but as a comparative anomaly. Its main fea­ the evidence pointed to a more permanent tures are shallow linear troughs cut into old occupation in this subsequent period. This land sur£1ces and filled with wood, which period has been dated to c. 510-340 cal. had been burned. The troughs were then B.C., and the artifact corpus is essentially refilled. These pits may represent a crema­ the same as the earlier period, with the ad­ tion ground, although no human skeletal dition of a small number of medium-fine remains were recovered from within. An­ gray ware sherds. Also present were paste other proffered explanation is that they beads, iron slag, iron, copper, shell, ame­ represent a craft-working locality. A high thyst and quartz objects, and debitage, as concentration of finds was recovered from well as the first examples of horse bones the troughs, including Rouletted Ware, in the excavation's £llll1al record. With the Gray Ware, one sherd of Hellenistic pot­ recovery of four sherds bearing portions of tery, a clay sealing, and five sherds with Brahmi inscriptions, Coningham identifies Brahm! inscriptions. The inscription on Structural Period K with Deraniyagala's the clay sealing is of particular interest, be­ Period IV, the basal Early Historic. cause it mentions the name and title of A major shift occurs with Structural Pe­ a person who also donated a cave to the riod I, which is dated between c. 360 and Buddhist Sangha at a nearby monastic 100 cal B.C. In this period, the round or complex. Structural Period G indicates a circular structures of Periods K and J are resumption of occupation at the site with replaced by cardinally oriented square or five phases of construction that include the oblong structures. Walls were constructed first evidence within the trench of the use of posts covered in wattle and daub and of limestone slabs and brick. Notable struc­ probably roofed originally with grass and tures include buildings with clay platforms, palm and later with kiln-fired tiles. This is pavements of limestone slabs and brick, but the first evidence fi'om the excavation of ,lJ] important aspect of Period G construc­ the use of tile, and it predates the use of tion is evidence concerning the use of brick in the ASW2 sequence. The evidence pillars (gneiss or granite pillars being a also suggested a 60 percent increase in set- key feature of later Anuradhapura period BOOK REVIEWS 391 architecture), which, rather than being an glazed ceramics and a wide range of coins; imported technology, as generally claimed, this period has been dated between the may instead have developed out of wood seventh and twelfth centuries A.D. Finally, prototypes from the late centuries B.C. and Period A is represented by the disturbed early centuries A.D. This period also pro­ upper levels of the citadel, with Rouletted vides clear evidence of Indian Ocean trade Ware occurring in mixed deposits with in the form of sherds of Arikamedu pottery western Asian and eastern Asian pottery. type 10, first identified at Arikamedu and In the concluding Chapter 7, Coning­ already found at three Sri Lankan sites, as ham contextualizes the results of the exca­ well as in Southeast Asia. Other evidence vation of Trench ASW2 with a discussion of trade include a selection of Hellenistic­ of the development of urban formations in type pottery, an ivory mirror-stand, sherds Sri Lanka. He considers the existing evi­ of Eastern Mediterranean glass, and west­ dence for hunter-gatherer groups, Iron Age ern Asian sherds with turquoise glazes that settlement sites, megalithic cemeteries, and possibly represent Parthian wares. literary-documentary traditions, as well as A pillared hall, one of the most typical the ongoing debate concerning the extent forms of the classic Anuradhapura period and inAuence of external elements on Early architecture, represents Structural Period F. Historic Sri Lanka. The hall consists of gneiss or granite pillars Given the severe lack of systematically that presumably supported Aoors, walls, organized and published excavations in the and roofs built of wood, tile, brick, and region, this volume and the forthcoming mud. Artifactual evidence in the form of Volume 2, represent a welcome contribu­ Lakshmi plaques, punch-marked coins, late tion to the study of Early Historic South Roman brasses, and pottery suggest a date Asian archaeology. The clear and careful for this period of A.D. 300 to 600, which descriptions-in conjunction with a pleth­ was corroborated by radiocarbon samples ora of detailed maps, diagrams, illustrations, calibrated between A.D. cal 340 and 540. photographs, and tables-make it an in­ Because of their disturbed nature, Struc­ valuable addition to the literature. And, tural Periods E, D, C, and 13 were amalga­ unlike many South Asian site and excava­ mated into a single macroperiod. Period D tion reports, Coningham is careful to dis­ and E were represented mainly by a series tinguish between his presentation of data of intrusive robber pits rather than actual and the corresponding evaluation of the building construction. The principal rem­ evidence, allowing the reader to consider, nants of Period C are a lime-l11ortared wall independently and critically, the proffered made of an alignment of six ashlar blocks. evidence. There can be little doubt that the Period 13 represents reoccupation of the South Asian archaeological community area as a residential quarter. Artif:1cts in­ looks forward to the publication of the clude western Asian and eastern Asian second volume of this report.

ll1r/irlll Arrlwc%gy ill RCfrospcct, I/O/III11C l: Prchistory-Arr/wc%,'.!y of SOllth Asirl. Edited by S. Settar and Ravi Korisettar. 2002. New Delhi: Manohar Publishers. xviii + 489 pp., tables, illustrations, bibliography, index, appendices. ISBN H1­ 7304-319-1.

RCl!icIIJcr/ by DILlP K. CHAKRABARTl, Ox.f

The total number of articles in this volume what is known as prorohistory in the Indian is fifteen, out of which ten are devoted to context-roughly the period between the

.-b"i,1II I'as/w..,j"cs. Vol. -I~. No. .2 C" 200.) hy UlIi\'t'r"ity ofH,I\\";\j'j Press. 392 ASIAN PERSPECTIVES . 42(2) . FALL 2003

beginning of food production in the sub­ Valentine Ball (cf. 1865) to East Indian continent around 7000 B.C. and the begin­ prehistory and Carlleyle's discovery of a ning of its historical period in c. 700-600 Mesolithic horizon in the Ganga Plain B.C. In Indian archaeology the term pre­ (Carlleyle 1885: 97-105) are forgotten. history is used generally for the Paleolithic Korisettar's notion of current status is and the Mesolithic. This working defini­ equally Deccan College-centered and in tion has been in use at least since 1962 many cases uncritical. Nowhere is it men­ when H. D. Sankalia published his Pre­ tioned that the reports of paleoliths in history nlld Protohistory ill Illdin nlld Pnkistnll areas such as the Alakananda Valley in (Sankalia 1962). Some authors in this vol­ Garhwal, Arunachal Pradesh, Meghalaya, ume even deal with historical material and Manipur may be unrealistic claims. (cf. R. K. Mohanty, K. K. Basa). Under the The Paisra work by P. C. Pant and Vidula circumstances, an explanation of why the Jayaswal is mentioned but its significance volume is entitled "South Asian Prehistory" as one of the velY few subcontinent sites was necessary. A similar explanation was to have possessed traces of lean-tos and also necessary for the use of the term South deliberate arrangements of rock pieces is Asia. With the exception of a few desultory ignored. A monograph on the archaeology references to the lithic situation in Pakistan of the Chhotanagpur plateau, which dis­ and Nepal, the volume deals only with the cussed the Paleolithic stratigraphy of the modern nation state of India. The editorial entire region (Chakrabarti 1993), and a introduction to the volume is written by an report on the prehistory of Bangladesh in art historian and textual scholar of ancient a monograph on the archaeology of this Karnataka (S. Settar) and a Stone Age spe­ countlY (Chakrabarti 1992), are equally cialist with focus on the same region (R. ignored. Basudev Narayan's monographs Korisettar). One may not see eye-to-eye on prehistoric Bihar (now Jharkhand) with them over a large number of issues (Narayan 1996, 1999) have met with the discussed in their introduction. To give same fate along with a report on the Stone only one example, the work at Mehrgarh Age of the Union TerritOlY of Delhi and indicates, according to them, the transition Haryana (Chakrabarti and Lahiri 1987). It is from food-gathering to food-production in also not realized that the flake industry the subcontinent, "under the impact of an from Jammu reported by H. M. Saroj fwm external stimulus." To most of us Mehr­ Jammu, which he cites and was subse­ garh shows that Baluchistan (and thus, the quently reported from Kangra, is identical subcontinent) was within the nuclear area to the stone industry from the Hissar Neo­ of certainly barley cultivation and possibly lithic context of central Asia (Ranov 1982). wheat cultivation as well. It is not Lower Paleolithic at all. Korisettar's opening article on the his­ On a more serious level, this article does tory of Paleolithic research in India and its not highlight the emergent issue of early current status (1ils to mention that the basic Pleistocene antiquity of stone tools in the distribution of Indian Stone Age material subcontinent or assess the possible role of was understood by the end of the nine­ India in human evolution in that con­ teenth century and the discoveries made in text. Although all the right notions have post-independence years were simply a been expressed-environment, adaptive stratigraphic and typological elaboration of strategies, radiometric datings, new per­ what was discovered in the second half of spectives, and so on-it is not mentioned that century. Panchanan Mitra's book Prc­ that Paleolithic research in India is still historic Illdin (Mitra 1922), the first book of mostly limited to the establishment of stra­ its kind, ought to have been cited. Kor­ tigraphy and typology, because Paleolithic isettar's history is basically a checklist of archaeologists of the country, by virtue of Deccan College dissertations. Even the sur­ their educational background in history and vey of nineteellth-century research is des­ training only in field techniques, can safely ultory. For instance, the contribution of deal only with these aspects. The only area BOOK REVIEWS 393

where innovativeness has been shown is other things, that Aravallis was a center in the settlement-subsistence approach (for of both early agriculture and metallurgy detailed comments, see Chakrabarti 2003). (for detailed discussion, see Chakrabarti The work led by D. P. Agrawal on the en­ 1999: 219-220). vironmental history of Kashmir from c. 4 The most significant omission in P. mya onwards (for a summary, see Agrawal Singh's analysis of the Neolithic cultures of 1992) was not even mentioned in passing, northern and eastern India is the result of although this remains the most important excavations at Golbai Sasan in the Puri piece of environmental research in post­ District of Orissa (Sinha 2000), substan­ 1947 India. tively carrying forward the result of a slllall J. N. Pal's summary of Middle Paleo­ excavation trench at Kuchai in the same lithic contexts in the subcontinent refers to region. The next article, "Brahmagiri and parts of Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pra­ beyond: The archaeology of the southern desh, the areas he knows thoroughly. The Neolithic" by Ravi Korisettar, P. C. Ven­ radiocarbon dates for the Sanghao Cave katasubbaiah, and D. Fuller is a detailed of Pakistan ought to have been cited (cf. summary of Fuller's Ph.D. dissertation from Chakrabarti 1999:74). The Upper Paleo­ Cambridge. The basic importance of this lithic data, as reviewed by D. R. Raju and paper lies in the fact that it envisages the P. C. Venkatasubbaiah, are biased in (wor early South Indian Neolithic situation as of Andhra, the area they know best, but an amalgam of both indigenously domes­ they f.lil to mention that the Upper Paleo­ ticated and externally introduced crop lithic assemblages in India are not always items. Perhaps the most crucial horizon re­ straight-jacketed aftJirs of blades and bur­ garding our understanding of the emer­ ins; the earlier tool types also occur along gence of the South Indian Neolithic lies in with blades and burins in various areas. The the Rake industry immediately underlying dated Upper Paleolithic industry of Kash­ the Neolithic level at a number of sites. mir has been ignored. V. N. Misra's treat­ The most important aid to our under­ ment of the Mesolithic ignores the prob­ standing of the post-urban Harappan, or lem of the late Pleistocene occurrence of plainly speaking, the Late Harappan situa­ microliths in the context of the South tion in Panjab, Haryana, and Uttar Pradesh, Indian teri industry and the probability is the set of distribution maps published by of sites like Bagor in the Aravallis being Joshi, Bala, and Ram (1984), but discussion food-producing. The occurrence of copper along that line or even a reference to this objects in nagor II need not necessarily publication is missing from Sonawane and imply that its Mesolithic inhabitants got Majumdar's article. Dhavalikar's under­ them as the result of contacts; they may standing of the central Indian Chalcolithic also reRect a situation 1ll which the culture remains unchanged fi'om what he microlith-using, food-producing commu­ wrote on the topic in 1979 (Dhavalikar nities of the Aravallis began to use the 1979). The later excavated site of Dang­ plentiful copper sources of the region. The wada, on which a report is available most important evidence in this regard (Chakravarty et al. 1989), is neglected by comes fi'om Ganeswar in northeast Araval­ him. Sheena Panja offers a critical review lis: phase 1 is exclusively microlithic, but of research on the Deccan Chalcolithic. finished copper tools appear in a limited The most important corpus of Indian quantity in phase 2 and increase rapidly in copper hoard finds was published by Paul number throughout the successive phases, Yule (1985), and in the context of sub­ indicating a local or regional development continental metallurgy as a whole, copper of metallurgy. One may strongly suspect hoards were analyzed by Chakrabarti and that phase 1 is food-producing. Further, Lahiri (1996). V. D. Misra does not refer the f.lct that the first period at Balathal, to these publications in his analysis of the also in the Aravallis, dates from the late Gangetic Valley copper hoards. The copper fourth millennium B.C. and implies, among hoards of Jharkhand, Orissa, and Bengal 394 ASIAN PERSPECTIVES 42(2) . FALL 2003

are not at all protohistoric and cannot be the Government of India) is that the lumped together, as he does with the upper authors have already published their mate­ Ganga Valley specimens, which are asso­ rial and opinions elsewhere. Old foot ciated with Ochre Coloured Pottery and soldiers of the subject usually do not find related to an extensive copper-rich region anything new, refreshing, or exciting in such of Rajasthan and the Narnaul section of volumes. Regrettably, the present volume Haryana. Further, the hoards that we find is not an exception. outside this region as far west as Mehsana in Gujarat and as far south as Kerala and the southern tip of Tamil Nadu were traded items, falling neatly along some well­ REFERENCES CITED known arterial routes of Indian history. ACHAWAL, D. P. Much of Vibha Tripathi's reappraisal of 1992 Mall alld EIII/irolllliellt ill Illdia throllgh early Indian iron has been overtaken by a Ages. Delhi: Books and Books.

spate ofrecent discoveries, the last ofwhich BALL, V. takes the beginnings of full-fledged iron 1865 Stone implements found in Bengal. use at Dadupur near Lucknow in central Procccdillgs or the Asiatic Society or Bell­ .~al: 127-128. Ganga Valley to c. 1700 B.C. All these dis­ coveries make sense in light of an earlier CAHLLEYLE, A.C.L. indisputable find of iron implements in the 1885 Rcport or TOllrs ill Gorakhpllr, SaraH, alld GI/(/zipl/r ill /877-78-79 al/d 80. Black-and-Red Ware context at Jakhera Calcutta: Government of India. (Aligarh District, upper Ganga-Yamuna CHAKHABAHTl, D. K. Plain), a site published by M.D.N. Sahi 1992 Allciellt Ballgladcsh: A Stl/dy or the (1994) but ignored by Tripati. The data Archaeolo.~ical SOl/rccs. Delhi: Oxford on the iron-bearing megaliths have been University Press. provided by R. K. Mohanty and V. Selva­ 1993 Archacology or £astcl"II Illdia: Chh"'a­ kumar, although the possibility of a pre­ lIagpl/r Plateal/ alld l;fIcst B('IJ.~al. Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal. iron stratum of Indian megaliths cannot be 1999 Illdia: All Arrl/(/eological History. Palco­ denied. A clear historiographical look at lithic B(:~illllillgs to Early Historic FO/ll/­ rock art studies has been taken by R. G. datiolls. Delhi: Oxford University Bednarik, fully taking into consideration Press. 2003 Archacolo.~y ill the Third World: A His­ the contribution made by V. S. Wakankar tory of Illdiall Archacology sil/cc /947. to this field. K. S. Krishnan provides an Delhi: D. K. Printworld. overview of what has been achieved in CHAKHABAHTI, D. K., AND N. LAHIRI the field of ceramic thin-section studies. 1987 A preliminary report on the Stone Kishore Basa discusses the importance of Age of the Union Territory of Delhi beads as an artifactual category, with pri­ and Hargan;1. 1\IIall alld EIIIJir'l/lIl/cllt mary emphasis on the analysis of glass 1]: 109-116. 1996 Coppcr alld Its Alloys ill Allcicllt Illdia. beads, in which he has played a major role. Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal. Finally, the volume has a few appen­ CHAKHAVAHTY, K. K., V. S. WAKANKAH, AND dixes: late Pleistocene [lUna fi'om caves in M. D. KHAHE Kurnool District, Andhra; a statewide list 1989 Dallgll'ada E.wa/!aTiol/s. 13hopal: Gov­ of Upper Paleolithic sites in India; a gazet­ ernment of Madhya Pradesh. teer of southern Neolithic sites and list of DHAVALIKAH, M.K. excavated megalithic sites. In the list of 1979 Early £ml1ing cultures of central Upper Paleolithic sites, the sense of geog­ India, in Essays ill Illdial/ Pr"'ohistory: raphy is very confusing because many sites 229-245, ed. D. P. Agrawal, and D. K. Chakrabarti. Delhi: 13. R. in Bihar, now in Jharkhand, have been Publishing Corporation. treated as falling in West Bengal. A prob­ JOSHI, J. P., M. 13ALA, AND RAM lem with government-financed publica­ J. 1984 The Indus civilization: A recon­ tions of this kind in India (the Indian sideration on the basis of distribution Council of Historical Research is a wing of maps, in FrollTicrs of thc Illdl/s Cil'ili::a- BOOK REVIEWS 395

li"lI: 5J 1-530, ed. B. 13. La!, and SAHI, M.D.N. S. P. Gupta. Delhi: 1300ks and 13ooks. 199-+ Aspl'((s of Illdiall Arrhae"I"gy. Jaipur: Publication Scheme. MrrnA, P. 1922 Prehist"ri,. [lIdi,l. University of Cal­ SANKALlA, H. D. CLltta. J962 Prehisl"r)' "lid Pr",,,hisl<1I")' ill Illdia ""d Pa/.:islall. Poona: Deccan College. NARAYAN, 13. 1996 Prehisl<1I"ir A rdwc"I",!!y 0( Bihar. Patna: SINHA, 13. K. K. P. Jayaswal Research Institute. 2000 Golbai: a protohistoric site on the 1999 EIIICtgillg [SSlIl'S "r Prehisl<1I")' ill Bih'lI". coast of Orissa, in Arrhae"I".!!)' 0{ Calcutta: Centre for Archaeological Orissa: 322-355, ed. K. Basra and P. Research and Training. Mohanty. Delhi: Pratibha Prakashau.

RANOV, V. A. YULE, P. 19R2 The Hissar Neolithic culture of So­ 19R5 !vIetal",,,r/.: "r the Br"lIze Age ill Illdia. viet Central Asia. !v[all alld E/lIJir"lI­ Munich: Prahistorische Bronzefunde. lI/clII 6: 63-71.

Indian Archaeoloc'

Reviewed by WILLIAM R. BELCHER, U. S. Army Central Identification Laboratory} Hawai'i

This volume of the series presents a timely ever reason, that any contributions by Pa­ synthesis of current topics and research kistani scholars could not be included. strategies related to the Harappan or Indus Possehl sets the stage with an overview Valley civilization. Indian and Western of "Harappan archaeology" since Indian scholars present a variety of topics related independence with a chronology of work to the development, rise, and senescence done by Indian as well as foreign scholars of this civilization. During the last thirty (also see Possehl's appendix). He includes a years, "Harappan" research has moved brief examination of the changing para­ away from speculation to well-formulated digms of research, which allows the reader research strategies. S0111e of the most to put the subsequent chapters in a theo­ important contributions have been the retical and historical context. Two papers inAuence of geoarchaeologicaljlandscape, (Schuldenrein, Jansen) discuss "landscape hum;lI1 biological, and f.lunal/paleoethno­ archaeology" in a geological/paleoclimato­ botanical studies. Of course, the basis of logical sense as well as in terms of settle­ any research is solid archaeological field­ ment systems. Schuldenrein's research is work and a reanalysis of past data and par;l­ ground-breaking and represents one of the digms. Although the title of the book refers first detailed regional, geoarchaeological to Illdiall Arc//(/c%gy ill Rctrospcct, readers studies intimately tied to an ongoing ar­ must understand that the Harappan civili­ chaeological project. l3y using a variety of zation overlaps the borders between Paki­ landscape records, Schuldenrein ties the stan and India. More than half of the con­ paleoclimatic and geomorphological set­ tributions deal specifically with research or tings of the "Indus Heartland" together and sites in Pakistan; however, these papers are examines the morphology and site forma­ presellted by German, American, and Brit­ tion processes of site occupation. Jansen ish researchers. It is unfortunate, for what- examines settlement networks of the Indus

."-I.,j,m fla.-.pea;"!· .... Vol. '+2. No. ~ " 10113 by Unin.T"ily ofH:IW.li'j Prl'ss. 396 ASIAN PERSPECTIVES 42(2) . FALL 2003

civilization. Considering that the Indus are interconnected and cannot be readily civilization occupies over 1 million sq km, disarticulated. one of the key questions is how the settle­ Three papers (Ajithprasad, Sonawane, meIlts were distributed and interconnected and Choksi) present an excellent overview over the landscape. This article focuses on and current state of att~1irs for the pre- and Mohenjo-daro, but examines the impor­ post-Harappan archaeology of the Gujarat tance of the city's placement in order to region. This region has been the central utilize water transport. From this specific focus for Harappan research 111 India. model, Jansen expands to a discussion of Ajithprasad exam1l1es the pre-Harappan transportation and trade corridors that de­ cultures of Gujarat and places them in veloped between Indus and non-Indus civ­ an archaeological context similar to other ilizations and examines core and periphery regIons 111 South Asia. The article IS relationships between urban and rural areas. detailed and deserves more than a cursory One of the most enigmatic aspects of read by the reader. The examination of the Harappan studies is the origin and deci­ antecedent cultures enables one to under­ pherment of the Indus script. It seems that stand the role of these early societies in the more ink, paper, and frLlStration has been emergence and development of the urban produced dealing with this particular topic economy of the Harappan civlization in than any other in reference to this civiliza­ Gujarat. One of the important threads in tion. Coningham's cogent article presents a Harappan studies has been the examination useful overview on this difficult and vola­ and persistence of earlier cultures as they tile topic. His call to use multiple ap­ were incorporated into the "Harappan proaches and place writing and inscriptions sphere of influence" and urban expansion. in an archaeological and cultural context is Sonawane discusses the post-urban cultures necessary to begin to understand the role of that developed in the wake of the Har­ writing in the Harappan civilization. appan civilization; however, emphasis is Harappan social organization and reli­ placed on the fact that this end of the civi­ gion are examined by Dhavalikar and Atre, lization is a process of localization and does respectively. These aspects of society are not mark the end of a cultural tradition. often inextricably combined, particularly Although the focus is on post-Harappan in urban settings. In examining Harappan cultures, a review of the Gujarati expres­ social organization, Dhavalikar tackles an sion of the Harappan civilization is inclu­ exceptionally difficult topic and otters a ded, which makes this paper, along with unique overview that provides insights into Ajithprasad's, an excellent overview of modern as well as ancient social and politi­ Harappan civilization in the Gujarat region. cal systems. By using a more anthropologi­ Underlying any archaeological study of cal approach and reviewing previous re­ the Harappan civilization is an understand­ search and ideas, Dhavalikar has provided a ing of the chronology and various cultural very thorough review of this subject. Like­ relationships. This is particularly important wise, Atre reviews the extremely contro­ in ceramic analysis, which provides a tem­ versial topic of Harappan religion. Through poral and cultural link between sites in the examination of the dichotonlies that an analytical sense. As Choksi states, "An have been presented in terms of Vedic/ understanding of the relationship be­ non-Vedic, Aryan/Dravidian, etc., Atre tween material culture and society pro­ moves beyond these and presents Harappan vides a framework through which the an­ religion as a more organic entity. Atre cient record can be interpreted" (p. 273). otters a model that is tied into artif.1ct and Through the study of Cujarati ceramics, spatial analyses, architectural studies, and Choksi attempts to move beyond chron­ ethnographic comparison. As with Dhava­ ologies and intersite relationships and ex­ likar's contribution, Atre's discussion of re­ amine the social significance of ceramics. ligion suggests that religion, social and po­ Essential in this ti'amework is the use of litical org'lnization, as well as architecture, ethnoarchaeology as an 'lIlalyticll tool. BOOK REVIEWS 397

Craft technologies and specialization variety of issues. The detail includes pre­ (Ardeleanu-jansen and Bhan et al.) are two sentation and summary of data from various of the defining characteristics of complex sources. This allows the reader to evaluate societies. jansen presents an overview of the claims and conclusions of the authors archaeological research, while Bhan et al. as well as those of earlier scholars. The examined the studies of Harappan tech­ authors have conducted a huge service to nologies through detailed ethnoarchaeo­ the archeological community by placing logical studies, an important strategy for archeobotany into a larger sociocultural understanding traditional technologies and realm that addresses such issues as season­ applying models to past behavior. Bhan ality, cropping, irrigation, the use of non­ et al. present an extensive overview of food plants, and the effect of a changing craft production and its relationship to past environment on the society. This article political-social systems in the Indus Valley will serve as an important resource and civilization. This paper should be read by summary for years to come. any scholar interested in the social and Meadow and Patel have discussed pas­ religious aspects of this ancient culture. toralism in several other venues (see bibli­ Ardeleanu-jansen examines a common, yet ography in volume), but this article pro­ enigmatic, arti(lct form found in many vides a useful overview within a South Harappan sites: the terracotta figurine. Al­ Asian context. The focus of this paper is though Ardeleanu-jansen focuses on those on the zooarchaeological and iconographic fi'om Mohenjo-daro, she provides an over­ evidence for pastoralism in northwestern view of these materials that place them in a South Asia. Additionally, an historical temporal and spatial context. However, overview of zooarchaeology in South Asia little understanding of the figurine's mean­ is offered. Pastoralism is a difficult strategy ings are offered, perhaps as "... we still to document, except when regional evi­ have to penetrate deeper into their icono­ dence is available. Through the use of graphical and distributional patterns ..." new research as well as published reports, (p.218). Meadow and Patel examine this difficult Examining humans and their use of the subject, which they readily admit is only landscape encompasses almost a third of this just beginning. volume, which speaks to the importance of Thomas presents an overview of (lunal bioanthropology (Kennedy), paleoethno­ remains from Harappan sites in western botany (Fuller and Madella), (lunal studies India and touches upon nonfood uses of (Meadow and Patel, Thomas), and land­ animals, such as pets. Additionally, his scape archaeology (Schuldenrein, jansen; overview discusses the use of wild animal discussed above). Kennedy's paper provides resources, including non-mammalian spe­ a history and overVIew of univariate, cies, in the Harappan economy. Unlike bivariate, and multivariate analyses of pre­ some of the other papers, the data is only historic human skeletal nuterials in South presented as presence/absence of particular Asia, focusing on those recovered fi'om species (although percentages are men­ the mid- to late-1980s excavations at tioned within the text). Cemetery R-37 at Harappa. Interestingly, 130th Thomas and Meadow and Patel multivariate analyses suggest that heteroge­ discuss the controversial issue of domes­ neity characterizes the Harappan popula­ ticated horses and camels in a Harappan tions, suggesting a great variety of ethnic context. Meadow and Patel have stated groups. This situation is similar to what categoricllly that these animals are not we would expect fi'om the archaeologi­ present in the faunal collectioIlS prior to cal record of diverse burial customs and the middle of the second millennium. unique features of widely scattered urban Confusion has arisen primarily due to "... centers. the absence of proper osteological, con­ Fuller and Madella's review of Harappan textual, and temporal documentation" archeobotany is extensive and touches on a (p.401). ASIAN PERSPECTIVES 42(2) . FAll 2003

In most cases the presentation of the Harappan civilization, Harappan culture, material is impeccable; nevertheless, the Indus civilization, Indus culture, and In­ quality of some photographs, including dus Valley civilization (and others) are two maps (Figs. 12 and 13), are dark and used throughout the text and refer to the cloudy, making them difficult to read. same urban phenomenon that appeared in However, this is inconsequential when northwestern South Asia between approxi­ compared to the importance and usefulness mately 2500 and 1800 B.C. Although the of these syntheses. The standards of re­ situation will continue to improve, the search, new approaches and models pre­ Harappan or Indus Valley civilization still sented should be of interest to those scho­ ranks as one of the least known civilizations lars interested in South Asian and Southeast in archaeological circles today. This volume Asian archaeology as well as those inter­ will lead to a greater understanding of this ested in the rise of complex societies on a civilization on a global scale and will serve global scale. One arti£Kt of research history well a dedicated scholar as well as a begin­ that should not cloud the reader's under­ ning student. The bibliographies will serve standing in this volume is the plethora of any scholar who wishes to examine these terms that describe this early civilization. topics in more detail.

Indian Archaeology in Retrospect, Volume III: Archaeology and Interactive Disciplines. Edited by S. Settar and Ravi Korisettar. 2002. New Delhi: Manohar Publishers. xviii + 505 pp., bibliography, index. ISBN 81-7304-321-3.

Reviewed by SEETHA N. REDDY, ASM Affiliates, Inc., Encinitas, California

III dian Archae%gy in Retrospect is a four­ authored by 18 scholars including 15 In­ volume publication of 60 papers authored dian and 3 Western archaeologists. The by 76 scholars. The primary objective of volume has a helpful introduction, which this impressive undertaking was to review presents a short synopsis of each chapter. the progress made in South Asian archaeol­ The 50S-page volume is arranged topi­ ogy during the later half of the twentieth cally, covering such subjects as soils (Chap­ century, and to summarize and evaluate ter 1), climate and paleoenvironment (Chap­ changes in research trends. This book re­ ters 2 and 3), bioanthropology (Chapters view is focused on the third volume: Ar­ 4, 5, and 6), ethnography (Chapters 7 and c1l1lc%gy I1l1d IlitcractilJc Disrip/illes. Volume 8), ethnoarchaeology (Chapter 9), paleon­ 1 (Prc/listory: Arr/lIlc%gy of SOllth Asi(1) is a tology (Chapter 10), subsistence studies compilation of 15 articles, four appendixes (Chapters 11 and 12), and technical studies (lists of sites from various cultural periods) (Chapters 13, 14, and 15). and an index. Volume 2 (Protohistory: Ar­ The first three chapters, on soils, climate, rhl1c%.

would have been more comprehensive if tion, and the Chalcolithic. Several theoret­ some of the work done and being done on ical issues are discussed including cattle do­ fishing industries by William Belcher, mestication, Mesolithic origins of animal hearths by Jonathan Meyer, crop produc­ husbandry, social dimension of animal hus­ tion by Seetln Reddy, and brass casters by bandry, and the continuity of faunal ex­ Lee Horne would have been included. ploitation traditions in the Indian subconti­ Chapter 1() by G. L. Badam is a synthesis nent. of Quaternary vertebrate paleontological The last three chapters of the volume research. In addition to reviewing research (Chapters 13, 14, and 15) are technical trends in the field, the author makes note studies of metallurgy, chemistry, and dating of the importance of vertebrate paleontol­ methods. Chapter 13, a review of archae­ ogy to Paleolithic archaeology, and bridges olometallurgical studies, is authored by the gap between geological and archaeo­ D. P. Agarwal, one of the leading Indian logical time sequences. experts in this field. In addition to a com­ Recent research issues and studies in prehensive review, the article illustrates archeobotany and archeozoology related to the research potential of approaches that subsistence studies are presented in Chap­ explore technological aspects of craft spe­ ters 11 and 12. D. Fuller should be com­ cialization that are not easily decipherable mended for providing a detailed synthesis through traditional methods. Chapter 14, of archeobotanical research in India in by A. Kshirsagar and B. C. Deotare on ar­ Chapter 11. Her synthetic review is by far chaeological chemistry, is primarily focused the most comprehensive and detailed in the on conservation of archaeological objects volume. The chapter has a background to of varying materials, sediment, and organic terms and the history of the discipline in materials. Use of soil chemistry to decipher India (divided into pre-Aotation, Aotation, habitation residue, and bone chemistry for and a subsequent self-critical phase). The dietary reconstruction are also brieAy dis­ latter section is on important but rarely cussed. The last chapter in the volume, addressed (and only recently acknowl­ Chapter 15 by D. P. Agarwal, is a review of edged) issues, particularly with respect to the dating methods used for Quaternary the variation in recovery methods and the­ deposits and Paleolithic sites. Ol'etical frameworks 111 Indian archae­ An important theme emphasized by the obotanical studies. One issue that the editors in the Introduction was the need author tackles is that of consistency in for holistic and interdisciplinary approaches identification (particularly of pulses, castor, to Indian archaeology. All of the chapters wheats, and millets such as £lcl/(;l/c, Selar;a, in this volume are essentially in-depth SOI;gll/l/lI), which is slowly, but steadily, be­ reviews of particular specialties, and none coming an issue of considerable concern are truly interdisciplinary. However, this among paleoethnobotanists throughout the volume does lay the foundation for new world. Plant domestication and crop dif­ interdisciplinary research in the future. It fusion is examined by region of origin should be noted that, although reference is including Southwest Asia, Africa, South made throughout the volume to "South Asia, and China. The lengthy but well­ Asia," the data and research being discussed written chapter also has sections on the is from India only, with the exception of potential of phytoliths, pollen, and futllre Chapters 4, 5, and 11. In hindsight, since directions for research in the discipline. the second volume of the set was focused Archeozoological research issues, trends, on Harappan research (most of which falls and the status of the field is presented by in Pakistan), this volume might have been U. C. Chattopadhyaya in Chapter 12. Sec­ more explicitly stated as focused on re­ tions of the chapter include the history of search in India. At the same time, all the discipline in the Indian subcontinent, and articles would have been much stronger Holocene f

geopolitically limited. Such regional seg­ struction, archeobotany, archeozoology, menting of archaeological research along conservation, and dating. Furthermore, the national borders, although to be expected volume would be ideal for classroom semi­ and a widespread phenomenon in modern nars, and in general is a worthy addition to archaeology globally, does not benefit the the growing body of literature on archae­ discipline. Instead, it often creates an artifi­ ology of the subcontinent. The editors cial boundary within the scholarly commu­ should be applauded for all their hard work nity that over time has the potential of be­ in compiling these volumes. coming impermeable. It would also have been useful to provide a short summary of REFERENCES CITED the contents of the other three volumes in the series. Finally, one visual distraction of P,NGlE, U. the volume is the numerous typographical 1983 Morphological and Genetic Compo­ sition of the Gonds of Central India: and spelling errors, which could have very A Statistical Study. Ph.D. diss., In­ easily been eliminated through careful dian Statistical Institllte, Calcutta. copyediti ng. P,NGlE, U., AND C. VON FURER-HAIMENDORI' Overall, Arc!laco!oy), ill Re/rospa/, volume 1987 G"lIds I1l1d Their N('/:~hb"lIrs: A Stlld)' 3, Arc!laco!o,(!), alia III/cmc/ille Discip!illes, is a ill Gellcric Dillcrsir)'. Lucknow, India: fine collection of articles that will prove Ethnographic and Folk Culture Soci­ highly valuable to scholars of Indian and ety. 1998 Tribal Cohcsioll ill rhe Godl1lJl1ri Valle)'. South Asian archaeology, and also to a Institute of R.esource Development wider audience interested in issues related and Social Management, Hyderabad: to ethnography, paleoenvironmental recon- Uooklinks Corporation.

Indian Archaeology in Retrospect, Volutne IV: Archaeology and Historiography-History, Theory and Method. Edited by S. Settar and Ravi Korisettar. 2002. New Delhi: Manohar Publishers. xix + 515 pp., bibliography, index, appendices. ISBN 81­ 7304-322-1.

Reviewed by JONATHAN MARK KENOYER, Department (~f Anthropology, Ulliversity oj Wisconsin, Madison

This edited volume is undoubtedly the of India in recent years and recommend it most important of four volumes compiled as essential reading for anyone interested in by Settar and Korisettar, as it addresses crit­ current and future developments in archae­ ical methodological and theoretical issues ological method and theory. that form the heart of archaeology, not The first article by R. S. Pappu is an ex­ only in India, but also in the whole world. cellent summary of the recent projects in There are fifteen substantive articles that India that have been investigating the Plio­ provide critical summaries of the state of Pleistocene to early Holocene record of difterent research methods and the quality climate fluctuations, geological events, and of theoretical fi'ameworks used by scholars evidence for early human presence in this working in South Asia. An appendix pro­ changing landscape. His main conclusion is vides a useful list of sites reported by the that we have a f.lirly comprehensive under­ Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) in its standing of secondary sites that demonstrate annual reports between 1953 and 1993. the presence of human populations in the Overall, I feel that this is one of the most subcontinent, beginning as e;lrly as 2 mil­ important new edited volumes to come out lion years ago, but that future investigations

.-I ..;i<111 fln.'/J/'O;"l'.', Vol. -11, No. 2: " 21111J by University of H;l\\'.li·j Pre.;s. 4°2 ASIAN PERSPECTIVES 42(2) . FALL 2003 need to focus on the discovery and excava­ In the article by Lahiri et aI., we are tion of primary occupation and activity provided with a scathing critique of the sites. The article by M. D. Petraglia, ap­ Archaeological Survey of India. In their pearing later in the volume, directly com­ analysis of the annual reports of the ASI, plements Pappu's article, since it focuses on they find serious gaps in terms of survey specific methods of analysis and the various coverage by the ASI and argue that an theoretical frameworks used in Paleolithic overall map of archaeological settlements in studies. While both articles are excellent India is needed to understand changing summaries, they do not emphasize the ma­ settlement patterns. The main thrust of jor contributions to the field that have the article is that the ASI does not em­ resulted from work in India and South Asia ploy people who have a strong theoretical in general. Perhaps this is out of a sense of or methodological foundation in modern modesty by the two authors, but I can say archaeological approaches, that there is a without hesitation that the Paleolithic lack of planning and carrying out of high­ settlement analysis done by Petraglia with quality scientific research, and that it has K. K. Paddayya in Karnataka is one of the not fulfilled its responsibility to publish ex­ most thorough and well documented for cavation reports. any region of the world, even though they A series of three articles are devoted to did not find evidence for any primary the discussion of the history of theoretical undisturbed sites. Furthermore, the com­ developments in "Indian" archaeology and prehensive geoarchaeological reconstruc­ South Asian archaeology in general. K. K. tions and site catchment analysis done by Paddayya's review of theoretical perspec­ Pappu and his colleagues is also an excel­ tives is an expanded version of an earlier lent example of well-organized multi­ work and begins with a discussion of "in­ disciplinary research. Although they do digenous epistemological traditions" and mention it in passing, I feel that they concludes that there is no evidence for the should have given more time to a discus­ existence of an Indian tradition of archaeo­ sion of the extremely significant work done logical research. He seems to be unaware of by Pakistani geologists and the British Ar­ the fact that pre-colonial Europe also had chaeological Mission in the Potwar region no archaeological tradition and that even of Pakistan (though this work is discussed during the early colonial period "archaeol­ in other articles). The modern political ogy" was merely an elite pastime or a form borders and current political tensions be­ of treasure hunting. Both approaches have tween India and Pakistan should not com­ been going on in South Asia since the promise the credit due to outstanding abandonment of the Indus cities left large scholarship. mounds that could be looted of bricks or The article by B. B. Lal is only slightly scoured for eroding beads and gold. I revised fi'om his 1081 article on his research would argue that the emergence of archae­ methodology for testing the historicity of ology was not the result of an enlighten­ the Mahabharata and Ramayana. Lal's ment among European scholars, but that it work has provided considerable impetus to was a result of a colonial period, global Hindu fundamentalists who have tried to reorientation of human perceptions of the appropriate the incomplete archaeological past. South Asia and for that matter all record to legitimize their own views of regions of the world contributed to the de­ the past. He does add an up-to-date dis­ velopment of archaeological theory in ways cussIon of the continuing controversy that none of the articles in this volume ac­ about the contested site of the now knowledge. destroyed Babri Masjid and the previously Historical geography would not have destroyed R;lma temple, but does not sug­ developed as a formal field of study with­ gest an improved methodology that would out the work of Brahmin ;lIld Jain, pundits avoid future misappropriation of the ar­ who taught European scholars how to read chaeological record. and write their languages and who them- BOOK REVIEWS 4°3

selves set the stage for indigenous inter­ mendable since it is not just national origin pretations of the past through the estab­ that defines one's archaeology, but rather lishment of the Brah1110 Sa111aj and Arya the academic training one has received and Sa111aj. Local villagers had long been aware the academic environment in which one of ruined mounds and it was their local oral works. Archaeologists who have been traditions that had passed down the names exposed to critical thinking and allowed to of important places such as Ayodhya, Kau­ develop their research along these lines sambi, and Takshasila. Brahml would not have emerged from many different in­ have been deciphered and the development stitutions in India, Pakistan, Europe, and of comparative linguistics would not have America. However, the authors do £111 into been possible without the considerable in­ the trap of assuming that there is a distinc­ put from native Indian and British-Indian tive "Indian" as opposed to "Western" ar­ linguists and grammarians. To suggest that chaeology. Many of the critical statements archeologists working in India were taking about the way archaeology is done in handouts of theory and methodology from South Asia can just as easily be leveled at Western scholars is to discount generations some European and American archae­ of archaeologists who used the archaeolog­ ologists who even today do not excavate ical record of the subcontinent as a testing stratigraphically, do not have a research ground for survey techniques, stratigraphic strategy, perpetuate an uncritical use of excavation methods, chronological studies, the "cultural-historical" approach and who and for contesting diffusion models for the continue to uncritically use diffusion mod­ origins of everything from domestic plants els to explain culture change. and animals to civilization itself. Although Most of the remaining articles in the I agree with Paddayya that "Indian Ar­ volume are summaries of the current state chaeology" did contribute to global ar­ of research in their various fields of study chaeological method and theory through with a heavy emphasis on South India. Wheeler's emphasis on strategic planning, Korisettar and Rajaguru tackle the over­ stratigraphic excavation, and detailed re­ arching issue of "man-land relationships" in cording, but it is important to emphasize the Deccan using what they term the "eco­ that Wheeler never taught his students system concept." The major emphasis is on how to think critically, to question his in­ the geographic setting and the total eco­ terpretations or propose new theoretical logical system in which human commu­ models to address complex issues arising nities have developed their adaptive strate­ fi'om their research. There never was and gies. The authors do an excellent job of never will be a monolithic entity called summarizing the current state of research "Indian Archaeology" that can, in and of on human cultural adaptations in Karnataka itself, produce or maintain theoretical from the Paleolithic through the Early His­ contributions. Innovations in method and torical period. The detailed study of geol­ theory are the result of individuals who are ogy, fauna, Aora, and settlement systems ~lS willing to tackle the enigmatic archaeolog­ well as technological advances is quite im­ ical record and tease out new ways to study pressIve. In their section on ethnography and interpret the past. and in their conclusion they begin to ad­ The two articles by Fuller and Bovin, dress the complex issue of difterent adap­ and Bovin and Fuller provide ample evi­ tive strategies that coexisted side by side. dence for the considerable contributions in However, they have not taken into ac­ both method and theory by scholars work­ count one of the main shortcomings of the ing in South Asia. In their comprehensive ecosystem approach, which is the human survey of how archaeology has been prac­ ingredient itself. Hopefully, future studies ticed in the subcontinent, they include will begin to sort out the ilnp~lct of differ­ both indigenous Indian and some Pakistani ent communities on each other during the scholars as well ~lS foreign scholars working long history of Karnataka. in South Asia. This approach is com- Murty's article takes a very interesting ASIAN PERSPECTIVES . 42(2) . FALL 2003

approach to the study of the origins of an south from both linkages since they were exclusive sheep/goat pastoralism 111 the definitely part of the overall cultural pro­ southern Deccan. Since there is little con­ cess. crete evidence for sheep/goat pastoralism as Tripati et al. provide a discussion of the distinct from the emergence of Neolithic­ history of marine archaeology in India that Chalcolithic village culture, he feels that it is quite comprehensive. However, they ne­ is possible to trace the origins of this adap­ glect to credit the considerable input of tive strategy through the epistemological Italian and other foreign scholars who analysis of the oral traditions of modern helped with the initial training of the In­ pastoralists. His analysis concludes that dian underwater archaeologists. S. R. Rao sheep/goat pastoralism emerges from an­ is without doubt the individual who pro­ cestral cattle pastoral-cum-agricultural tra­ vided the legitimation of this field of re­ ditions with periodic conflict relating to search, but he is by no means a pioneer of social domination. Unfortunately, he does underwater archaeology and based on the not provide any suggestions on how this poor quality of the current array of excava­ narrative model could be tested archae­ tion reports, there is considerable scope for ologically. methodological and theoretical improve­ Numismatic studies in India have long ment in the field. held a special place in the research on the Marathe's discussion of low-altitude ae­ past, and the article by Mangalam of re­ rial reconnaissance methods is a welcome search since Indian independence reveals addition for site documentation in the ar­ that important advances have been made in chaeology of South Asia and his many pos­ the field. Although there continues to be a itive results will certainly aid in better maps larger proportion of "coin-collector" types, and surveys in the future. While the author some scholars are using modern scientific may have been the moving force behind methods to go beyond the basic identifica­ the implementation of this technique in tion of the coin in its historical context, India, it is odd that he does not mention to address more diverse issues relating the widespread use of this technique in to sociocultural, religious, economic, and the U.S. and Europe and he does not ref­ technological aspects of history. erence the published manuals that provide The article by Gurukkal on socioeco­ the same basic information that he has pre­ nomic research in South India provides sented. a historiographic perspective of empirical The article by]oglekar, on quantification studies of state formation and caste struc­ in South Asian prehistoric studies, provides ture. Although somewhat narrow in its an analysis of the degree to which scholars focus, the overall conclusions on the need have used quantification and sampling in to develop more refined theoretical models their research and analysis. While the bibli­ are applicable to other regions of the sub­ ography does have some lacunae, the au­ continent. thor has made a relatively thorough survey Ray presents a brief summary of recent of the published material and concludes excavations and issues in the archaeology of that there appears to be very little evidence Early Historic maritime traditions in India for the use of sampling strategies and quan­ and concludes that there has been an over­ titative research in South Asian archaeol­ emphasis on the importance of Mediterra­ ogy. On a cautionary note however, it nean trade and connection between India would be useful to compare these results 'lnd the l"toman world. She also feels that with a similar survey of the same range of there is an overemphasis on the role of published materials fj'om other regions. North India and that cultural developments Overall, I have found the publication to in the south are more than just extellSions be extremely thought provoking and rec­ of north Indian processes. I feel that her ommend it highly. I also want to thank the critique is well founded, but would warn editors for their e!torts to bring together that it is not possible to disconnect the such a comprehensive set of articles. BOOK REVIEWS

Tire Arr!weo!ogy 41111 Ellrly Historir TO/lIII ill Celltril! Illdill. Monica Smith. BAR In­ ternational Series 1002. Oxford: John and Erica Hedges Ltd. and Archaeopress, 2001. vi + 163 pp. 48 b/w maps, drawings, and photos. Paper. U.S. $60.00. ISBN 1841711977.

Rellie/fled by HIMANSHU PRABHA RAY, CClltre.{tl/· Historirll! St/ldies, jll/lliJ!wr!ll! Nelrnt Ulli/J('f"sity

In South Asian archaeology, as elsewhere, and special purpose areas of site use. Based the objective of surtlCe survey and col­ on an analysis of artif.lcts from her survey, lection programs has moved beyond just Smith identifies types of goods that came discovering sites to addressing questions of into the area and lists them as iron, salt, wider social and cultural significance. Start­ sandstone, mica, rice, and sugarcane, while ing in the 1980s the number of publica­ goods that moved out were cotton, wheat tions that adopt this methodology has and other grains, beads, lac, dyes, and grown steadily, and Monica Smith's mono­ forest derivatives. At the same tiIne, the graph is a welcome addition to this list. study of ceramics shows a wider shared The principal focus of her survey project material culture in the greater Vidarbha re­ over two field seasons in 1994-1995 was gion. Of the 1531 identifiable rims from the site of Kaundinyapura located on the Kaundinyapura, 71 percent of the collec­ banks of the river Wardha in the Vidarbha tions matched Early Historic rim forms region of central India and a smaller con­ from other sites in the Vidarbha region. temporary settlement at Dhamantari. Dur­ An analysis of archival data relating to the ing the course of two seasons' work she resources of the region led the author to collected more than 35,000 ceramic sherds suggest a household-level production of as well as objects of stone, metal, and shell. durable goods made from locally available It is the results of this survey work that are materials, such as chert, coinciding with discussed in Chapters 5, n, and 7 and form surplus production of agricultural and forest the core of the study, while the five other products. chapters attempt to place this material Another issue on which the site surf.lce within the wider perspective of trading survey provides interesting data is the activities and social organization. intrasite distribution of artif.1cts. The high According to the excavator of the site in density of building material, such as bricks the '19nOs, M. G. Dikshit, settlement began and tiles on the northernmost and south­ at Kaundinyapura in the Iron Age Mega­ ernmost mounds at Kaundinyapur, has lithic phase and continued until A.D. 250, been taken to indicate residel1tial areas, after which the site was reoccupied be­ whereas a high concentration of irregular tween A.D. 13()() and 1nO(). Within this basalt blocks at the very far south suggests a long tillle span of the site's history, Smith lookout post. The southern mound con­ focuses on the Early Historic period tained ;1 higher density of tiles and was defined as extending fi'om third century associated with elite residence as compared n.r.. to the fourth century A.D. A caveat is to the northern mound, a suggestion fur­ necessary at this stage; because ceramic ther supported by the presence of the typologies for the later periods are not rig­ lookout post. In contrast, building materials orously established, it may often be difficult are scarce in the middle area of the site to separate Early Historic pottery from th;1t suggesting a nonresidential use of the site. of the later period. Based on the distribution of ceramics, Site surtlce surveys are good for provid­ several activity zones were demarcated ;It ing details of site fimction, habitation size, the site. Thus, the northern and southern the location of elite and non-elite ;Heas, residential mounds were associated with 406 ASIAN PERSPECTIVES FALL 2003 storage functions, while the density of fine In the section titled "Soci:11 Cohesion ceramics from the central area was linked and Early Historic period," Smith refers to to marketing functions, which did not re­ religion (Buddhism and Jainism) and lan­ quire a high level of architectural invest­ gl1:1ge (Sanskrit and Pr:1krit) as fostering ment. Tables, illustrations, and maps fur­ shared identities and maintaining strong ther supplement the discussion and analysis social ties. However, she does not explain of the site surface survey results and indi­ why Hinduism as religion and Tamil :1S cate a valid research design. langu:1ge :1re left out of reckoning, since In contrast, Chapters 2, 3, and 4 strike there is adequate evidence for the pres­ a discordant note on several counts and ence of both in the period under discus­ cle;lrly there is a mismatch between prac­ sion. Satavahana rulers refer to themselves tice and theory. Chapter 2 presents an as unique brahmanas, are compared in overview of available anthropological liter­ prowess to Epic heroes, perform Vedic ature on "Material Culture and Social Or­ sacrifices and invoke Hindu deities, even ganization," but this survey of literature ei­ though the epigraphs are inscribed in Bud­ ther contradicts or is at variance with the dhist monastic sites. Clearly, no simple chapters that follow. Smith accepts that, connections are possible. Similarly, Tamil "trade is not primarily political in origin; was used both for inscriptions in South In­ that is, political circumstances can affect, dia as well as for bilingual portrait coins of thwart or £lcilitate trade, but it is not the the later Satavahana rulers. direct motivation for that trade." Yet a Chapter 4 is a discussion of trade in the major part of Chapter 3 is devoted to a dis­ subcontinent in the Early Historic period, cussion of the polities of the Early Historic which is viewed at three levels: long dis­ period, without an explanation as to why tance, regional, and local. On the one this should then be necessary. While the hand, Smith accepts Aexibility between author bemoans the fact that there are no these categories and states that, "the divi­ texts that provide information about the sions between local, regional, and long­ bureaucracy, she does not attempt an ar­ distance exchange are relative and can shift chaeological analysis of the large number depending on the size and center of one's of inscriptions or land-grants dated to the frame of reference" (p. 15). On the other, Early Historic period. however, she emphasizes the distinctive Similarly, though the author accepts nature of oceanic long-distance trade al­ that, "objects are invested with symbolic most exclusively devoted to high-value value and are utilized to visually reinforce goods. What she does not discuss is the social categories and relationships," this as­ singular distribution pattern of each of" the pect of trade is not elaborated on. There is m:ljor category of "foreign" objects (viz. brief mention of the use of shell as a sym­ Roman coins, amphorae, gems, ;llld ceL1­ bol, which grew altel' the Early Historic pe­ mil'S in the subcontinent). Cle;lrly, e;lch of riod (p. 2H) and somevvhat cursory refer­ these "high-value goods" circuhted within ences to beads and clay bullae made in distinctive networks and this has 1:lrger imitation of Roman coins. The pioneering implicatiollS f()r the n;Hure of trade in this work of Peter FLlllcis on beads finds no period. space 111 her discussion, which is illStead The author rightly accepts that the tran­ reduced to a st:ltement of origins of the sition from a megalithic to an Early His­ stone used in beadmaking (p. 25). S:lnd­ toric phase in the Vidarblu region may stone and mica ;lre referred to as soci:11 actu;llly be linked by more continuities m:1rkers and though she mentions rice ;IS an than discontinuities. Cert;linly, Early His­ import into the region, nukes no allusion toric sites are larger and were home to of the complex archaeology of rice that no larger popu1:ltions and particip;Hion and doubt inAuenced the use of rice in ritual donation to religious est:1blishments were a and social interaction (compare 1(,11' exam­ measure of soci;ll integration than meg;dith ple, Kumar ]'JHH). construction. At the same time, ;1 survey of BOOK REVIEWS the published archaeological data indicate altars for the performance of Vedic sacrifi­ interesting shifts in core areas over time. cial rituals. In comparison to the 140 Paleolithic sites, There IS little congruence between 67 percent of which are clustered in Chan­ theory proposed in the book and the results drapur District, few Neolithic or Chal­ of the site surface survey. One also misses colithic sites have been reported from discussion and analysis of the published ar­ Vidarbha. There is an increase in the nUllJ­ chaeological data fi·om a large number of ber of sites in the Iron Age and 77 mega­ sites in Vidarbha that have been explored lithic sites are known. Of these, 64 percent and excavated over the years. Early His­ or 50 sites are in Nagpur District alone. toric trade has been a much discussed and Almost 69 percent (40 of the 58 sites) of debated theme among Indian scholars, but the Early Historic sites and major temple this is barely noticed either in Smith's dis­ complexes also cluster in the Nagpur and cussion or her bibliography. As a result, Bhandara districts. How is this clustering to while at the micro-level of site sur(lce sur­ be explained? vey, Smith's survey methodology is good, What is £lr more important is the shift in the projection of her results at the macro­ the cultural orientation of the sites from level remains unconvincing. Peninsular India in the megalithic period to the Ganga Plains in the Early Historic pe­ REFERENCE CITED riod. This is amply attested by the archaeo­ KUMAIl, T. logical excavations at Mansar, which led to 1988 History or Rirc ill III dill: Mythology, the recovery of not only Buddhist religious Cllltllrc IIl1d Agrirlllturc. Delhi: Gyan architecture, but also Shiva temples and Publishing House.