ȱ Indicationsȱ andȱ Implicationsȱ ofȱ Copperȱ Artifactsȱ fromȱ Navinal,ȱ Aȱ Harappanȱ Siteȱ inȱ Kachchh,ȱ Gujarat,ȱ Westernȱ Indiaȱ ȱ Ambikaȱ Patel1,ȱ Rajeshȱ S.V.2,ȱ Bradȱ Chase3,ȱ Saleemȱ Shaikh4,ȱ Y.S.ȱ Rawat5,ȱ Abhayanȱ G.S.2,ȱ Ajitȱ Kumar2,ȱ Haseenȱ Rajaȱ R.2,ȱ Charusmitaȱ Gadekar6,ȱ Akinoriȱ Uesugi7,ȱ P.ȱ Ajithprasad6,ȱPrabhinȱSukumaran8ȱandȱRenjinimolȱM.N.2ȱ ȱ 1.ȱȱ DepartmentȱofȱMuseology,ȱTheȱMaharajaȱSayajiraoȱUniversityȱofȱBaroda,ȱVadodara,ȱ Gujaratȱ(Email:ȱ[email protected])ȱ 2.ȱ Departmentȱ ofȱ Archaeology,ȱ Universityȱ ofȱ Kerala,ȱ Kariavattomȱ Campus,ȱ Thiruvananthapuram,ȱKeralaȱ–ȱ695581ȱ(Email:ȱ[email protected];ȱabhayangs@ȱ gmail.com;ȱ[email protected];ȱ[email protected];ȱrenjinirenju50@ȱgmail.com)ȱ 3.ȱ DepartmentȱofȱAnthropologyȱandȱSociology,ȱAlbionȱCollege,ȱMichigan,ȱUSAȱ(Email:ȱ [email protected])ȱ 4.ȱ Departmentȱ ofȱ Archaeology,ȱ Krantiguruȱ Shyamjiȱ Krishnaȱ Vermaȱ Kachchhȱ University,ȱKachchh,ȱGujaratȱ(Email:ȱ[email protected])ȱ 5.ȱ Gujaratȱ Stateȱ Archaeologyȱ Department,ȱ Gandhinagar,ȱ Gujaratȱ (Email:ȱ [email protected])ȱ 6.ȱ Departmentȱ ofȱ Archaeologyȱ andȱ Ancientȱ History,ȱ Theȱ Maharajaȱ Sayajiraoȱ Universityȱ ofȱ Baroda,ȱ Vadodara,ȱ Gujaratȱ (Email:ȱ [email protected];ȱ [email protected])ȱ 7.ȱ Kansaiȱ University,ȱ 3Ȭ3Ȭ35ȱ YamateȬcho,ȱ Suita,ȱ Osakaȱ 564Ȭ8680ȱ Japanȱ (Email:ȱȱ [email protected])ȱ 8.ȱ Departmentȱ ofȱ Civilȱ Engineering,ȱ Chandubhaiȱ S.ȱ Patelȱ Instituteȱ ofȱ Technology,ȱ Charotarȱ Universityȱ ofȱ Scienceȱ andȱ Technology,ȱ Changa,ȱ Anand,ȱ Gujaratȱ (Email:ȱ [email protected])ȱ ȱ ȱ Received:ȱ30ȱSeptemberȱ2014;ȱAccepted:ȱ24ȱOctoberȱ2014;ȱRevised:ȱ15ȱNovemberȱ2014ȱ Heritage:ȱJournalȱofȱMultidisciplinaryȱStudiesȱinȱArchaeologyȱ2ȱ(2014):ȱ545Ȭ592ȱ ȱ ȱ Abstract:ȱGujaratȱhasȱyieldedȱvarietyȱofȱcopperȱartifactsȱfallingȱintoȱtheȱIndusȱrealm.ȱInȱtheȱabsenceȱofȱ problemȱorientedȱstudiesȱonȱcopperȱinȱGujaratȱtillȱdate,ȱitȱisȱnecessaryȱtoȱexamineȱtheȱcopperȱobjectsȱfromȱ theȱexcavatedȱandȱexploredȱHarappanȱsitesȱtoȱenhanceȱourȱunderstandingȱofȱtypology,ȱtheirȱtechnologyȱ andȱuse,ȱtheȱtrajectoryȱofȱdevelopmentȱofȱcopperȱmetallurgyȱandȱitsȱchangeȱduringȱtheȱaforesaidȱperiod.ȱ Anȱendeavorȱofȱtypologicalȱandȱcompositionalȱanalysesȱwillȱenableȱusȱinȱansweringȱmanyȱquestionsȱaboutȱ Harappanȱcopperȱtechnology.ȱTheȱpresentȱpaperȱisȱaȱpreliminaryȱstudyȱofȱtheȱcopperȱartifactsȱfromȱtheȱ surfaceȱcollectionȱofȱtheȱsiteȱNavinal,ȱKachchh,ȱGujarat.ȱTypological,ȱchemicalȱcompositionalȱandȱmicroȱ structuralȱ studiesȱ wereȱ undertakenȱ duringȱ thisȱ work.ȱ Theȱ majorȱ objectsȱ identifiedȱ areȱ beads,ȱ chisel/bar/ingot,ȱ hook,ȱ knifeȱ blade,ȱ nail,ȱ ring,ȱ sheet,ȱ spatula,ȱ foldedȱ stripsȱ (tube),ȱ wireȱ andȱ prills.ȱ CompositionȱanalysisȱrevealedȱCuȬSn;ȱCuȬZn;ȱandȱCuȬSnȬZnȱalloys.ȱTheȱmicrostructuresȱrevealedȱheatȱ treatmentsȱappliedȱwhileȱfabricationȱforȱincreasingȱitsȱhardnessȱandȱtensileȱstrength.ȱȱ ȱȱ

ȱ ISSNȱ2347ȱ–ȱ5463ȱHeritage:ȱJournalȱofȱMultidisciplinaryȱStudiesȱinȱArchaeologyȱ2:ȱ2014 

ȱ Keywords: Navinal,ȱ Copper,ȱ Indusȱ Civilization,ȱ Typology,ȱ Metallography,ȱ Scanningȱ ElectronȱMicroscope,ȱEnergyȱDispersiveȱXȬrayȱ ȱ ȱ Introductionȱ TheȱIndusȱCivilizationȱisȱwellȱknownȱforȱitsȱimpressiveȱarrayȱofȱartifactsȱmadeȱoutȱofȱaȱ wideȱrangeȱofȱrawȱmaterialsȱnamelyȱstone,ȱmetal,ȱclay,ȱshellȱandȱbone.ȱAmongȱthemȱ copperȱ mightȱ haveȱ beenȱ theȱ mostȱ extensivelyȱ usedȱ rawȱ materialȱ toȱ produceȱ diverseȱ forms.ȱ Copperȱ objectsȱ haveȱ beenȱ unearthedȱ fromȱ eachȱ ofȱ theȱ Indusȱ citiesȱ (Marshallȱ 1931;ȱMackayȱ1938,ȱ1943;ȱVatsȱ1940;ȱRaoȱ1979,ȱ1985;ȱBishtȱ1997;ȱKenoyerȱ1998;ȱLalȱ1985)ȱ asȱwellȱasȱsmallerȱsitesȱ(Shafferȱ1982;ȱHedgeȱetȱal.ȱ1988;ȱAgrawalȱ1999;ȱSonawaneȱetȱal.ȱ 2003;ȱ Bhanȱ etȱ al.ȱ 2004).ȱ Theȱ earlyȱ excavationȱ reportsȱ fromȱ MohenjoȬDaroȱ (Marshallȱ 1931;ȱ Mackayȱ 1938)ȱ provideȱ basicȱ /ȱ generalȱ typologicalȱ descriptionsȱ ofȱ Indusȱ copperȱ tools,ȱ weapons,ȱ vesselsȱ andȱ personalȱ ornaments.ȱ Thisȱ typologicalȱ terminologyȱ wasȱ subsequentlyȱusedȱwithoutȱmuchȱchangeȱforȱaȱmajorityȱofȱtheȱlaterȱexcavationȱreportsȱ andȱresearchȱworksȱofȱIndusȱsitesȱ(Vatsȱ1940;ȱMackayȱ1943,ȱRaoȱ1979;ȱJoshiȱ1990;ȱLalȱ 1985).Evidenceȱ suchȱ asȱ seals,ȱ humanȱ andȱ animalȱ figurines;ȱ mirrors;ȱ toolsȱ suchȱ asȱ knives,ȱ blades,ȱ saws;ȱ weaponsȱ suchȱ asȱ spearsȱ andȱ arrowȱ heads;ȱ ornamentsȱ suchȱ asȱ beads,ȱringsȱandȱbangles;ȱhouseholdȱmaterialsȱsuchȱasȱdishes,ȱpotsȱandȱotherȱvessels;ȱ objectsȱofȱreligiousȱimportanceȱsuchȱasȱparasu/razorȱandȱitemsȱofȱeconomicȱsignificanceȱ suchȱasȱscaleȱpans,ȱtabletsȱetc.ȱfromȱvariousȱexcavatedȱandȱexploredȱsitesȱindicateȱthatȱ copperȱ andȱ copperȱ alloysȱ wereȱ usedȱ toȱ makeȱ varietyȱ ofȱ artifactsȱ byȱ theȱ Harappan/Chalcolithicȱ craftsȱ peopleȱ (Marshallȱ 1931;ȱ Mackayȱ 1938;ȱ Kenoyerȱ 1998;ȱ Vidaleȱ2000;ȱVidaleȱandȱMillerȱ2000).ȱAlthoughȱtheȱartifactȱarrayȱofȱcopper/bronzeȱinȱ theȱ Harappanȱ contextȱ isȱ highȱ inȱ numberȱ andȱ variety,ȱ theyȱ stillȱ doȱ notȱ receiveȱ dueȱ researchȱattentionȱfromȱresearchersȱandȱremainȱasȱaȱpoorlyȱstudiedȱartifactȱclass.ȱ ȱ Gujaratȱhasȱyieldedȱarchaeologicalȱremainsȱdemonstratingȱaȱhighȱdegreeȱofȱvariabilityȱ amongȱ theȱ culturalȱ traditionsȱ presentȱ duringȱ theȱ fourthȱ throughȱ secondȱ millenniumȱ BC.ȱMaterialȱcultureȱandȱsubsistenceȱpatternȱstudiesȱindicateȱthatȱChalcolithicȱGujaratȱ wasȱ populatedȱ byȱ diverseȱ communitiesȱ duringȱ theȱ Regionalization,ȱ Integrationȱ andȱ LocalizationȱErasȱrepresentedȱbyȱChalcolithicȱsettlementsȱcharacterizedȱbyȱtheȱpresenceȱ ofȱceramicȱtraditionsȱsuchȱasȱAnarta,ȱPreȬPrabhas,ȱBlackȱandȱRedȱWare,ȱReservedȱSlipȱ Ware,ȱ Preȱ Urbanȱ Harappanȱ Sindhȱ Typeȱ Pottery,ȱ Micaceousȱ Redȱ Ware,ȱ Classicalȱ Harappan,ȱ Sorathȱ Harappan,ȱ Prabhasȱ Ware,ȱ Lateȱ Sorathȱ Harappan,ȱ Lustrousȱ Redȱ Ware,ȱMalwaȱWare,ȱJorweȱWareȱasȱwellȱasȱaceramicȱsettlementsȱofȱhunterȬgatherers.ȱ AllȱofȱtheȱexcavatedȱHarappanȱsitesȱ(thoseȱwhichȱshowȱstrongȱpresenceȱofȱHarappanȱ materialȱculture)ȱandȱHarappanȱaffiliatedȱChalcolithicȱsitesȱinȱGujaratȱnamelyȱLothal,ȱ Dholavira,ȱ Surkotada,ȱ Shikarpur,ȱ Kanmer,ȱ Bagasra,ȱ Kuntasi,ȱ Padri,ȱ Nagwada,ȱ Loteshwar,ȱ Motipipli,ȱ Datrana,ȱ Padriȱ etc.ȱ (fig.ȱ 1)ȱ togetherȱ withȱ theȱ largeȱ numberȱ ofȱ exploredȱsitesȱ(aroundȱ750ȱsites)ȱfromȱGujaratȱhaveȱyieldedȱaȱwideȱvarietyȱofȱcopperȱ artifacts.ȱInȱtheȱabsenceȱofȱproblemȱorientedȱstudiesȱonȱcopperȱinȱGujaratȱtoȱdate,ȱitȱisȱ necessaryȱ toȱ examineȱ theȱ copperȱ objectsȱ fromȱ theȱ excavatedȱ andȱ exploredȱ sitesȱ toȱ

546ȱ Patelȱetȱal.ȱ2014:ȱ545Ȭ592 enhanceȱ ourȱ understandingȱ ofȱ theȱ copperȱ artifacts,ȱ theirȱ technologyȱ andȱ use,ȱ theȱ trajectoryȱ ofȱ developmentȱ ofȱ copperȱ metallurgyȱ andȱ itsȱ changeȱ duringȱ theȱ aforesaidȱ eras.ȱȱ ȱ

ȱ Figureȱ1:ȱLocationȱMapȱofȱallȱtheȱexcavatedȱsitesȱinȱGujaratȱandȱNavinalȱ ȱ Theȱ useȱ ofȱ analyticalȱ approachesȱ enhancesȱ theȱ understandingȱ ofȱ metalȱ artifacts,ȱ especiallyȱ copperȱ andȱ itsȱ alloysȱ andȱ canȱ provideȱ aȱ wayȱ toȱ understandȱ theȱ growth,ȱ developmentȱandȱchangesȱinȱtechnologicalȱtraditionsȱ(ifȱany)ȱinȱtheȱHarappanȱcontextȱ inȱ Gujarat.ȱ Anȱ endeavorȱ ofȱ detailedȱ typologicalȱ analysisȱ andȱ compositionalȱ analysesȱ directedȱ atȱ trackingȱ theȱ compositionȱ ofȱ artifactȱ typesȱ willȱ enableȱ usȱ toȱ answerȱ importantȱ questionsȱ aboutȱ Harappanȱ copperȱ metallurgyȱ suchȱ as,ȱ whetherȱ theȱ useȱ ofȱ alloysȱareȱrestrictedȱtoȱcertainȱtypesȱorȱproductionȱtechniques?ȱWhatȱareȱtheȱreasonsȱforȱ theȱ developmentȱ ofȱ special/specificȱ craftȱ specialization?ȱ Whatȱ wouldȱ haveȱ beenȱ theȱ impactȱofȱtheȱintroductionȱofȱnewȱtechnologiesȱonȱtheȱerstwhileȱsociety?ȱWasȱthereȱanyȱ interȬregionalȱinteractionȱnetwork?ȱWhatȱwasȱtheȱdegreeȱofȱinteractionȱbetween/withinȱ theȱHarappanȱsites/regions?ȱTheȱpresentȱpaperȱisȱanȱattemptȱtowardsȱansweringȱsomeȱ ofȱtheȱaforesaidȱproblemsȱbyȱstudyingȱtheȱtypologyȱandȱcompositionȱofȱcopperȱartifactsȱ fromȱtheȱsiteȱofȱNavinalȱinȱGujarat.ȱ ȱ Locatedȱ onȱ theȱ marginȱ ofȱ Gulfȱ ofȱ Kachchhȱ inȱ Mundraȱ talukaȱ ofȱ Kachchhȱ District,ȱ Navinalȱ (22qȱ 49’ȱ 17.5”ȱ N,ȱ 69qȱ 35’ȱ 49.9”ȱ E)ȱ isȱ aȱ siteȱ showingȱ culturalȱ remainsȱ ofȱ theȱ IntegrationȱandȱLocalizationȱerasȱofȱIndusȱCivilization.ȱTheȱsiteȱ(fig.ȱ1)ȱwasȱdiscoveredȱ inȱ 1950sȱ byȱ P.P.ȱ Pandyaȱ ofȱ Departmentȱ ofȱ Archaeology,ȱ Saurashtra.ȱ Itȱ wasȱ firstȱ

547ȱ ISSNȱ2347ȱ–ȱ5463ȱHeritage:ȱJournalȱofȱMultidisciplinaryȱStudiesȱinȱArchaeologyȱ2:ȱ2014  reportedȱbyȱS.R.ȱRaoȱinȱ1963ȱandȱwasȱassignedȱRangpurȱIIBȱphaseȱofȱHarappanȱcultureȱ ofȱ Gujarat.ȱ Laterȱ inȱ 2011,ȱ theȱ siteȱ wasȱ exploredȱ byȱ P.ȱ Ajithprasadȱ ofȱ theȱ Maharajaȱ Sayajiraoȱ Universityȱ ofȱ Barodaȱ andȱ inȱ 2012ȱ byȱ A.S.ȱ Gaurȱ ofȱ Nationalȱ Instituteȱ ofȱ Oceanography.ȱInȱ2013,ȱtheȱsiteȱlocatedȱinȱtheȱforestȱlandȱ(LandȱSurveyȱNumberȱ223/5)ȱ wasȱ exploredȱ byȱ aȱ jointȱ teamȱ fromȱ theȱ Universityȱ ofȱ Kerala,ȱ Kachchhȱ University,ȱ AlbionȱCollegeȱ–ȱUSA,ȱGujaratȱStateȱArchaeologyȱDepartmentȱandȱM.ȱS.ȱUniversityȱofȱ Barodaȱ toȱ understandȱ itsȱ archaeologicalȱ potentials.ȱ Aȱ longȱ termȱ multidisciplinaryȱ internationalȱ researchȱ projectȱ entitledȱ ‘Archaeologicalȱ Excavationȱ atȱ Navinalȱ inȱ Mundraȱ Taluka,ȱ Districtȱ Kachchhȱ andȱ Explorationȱ inȱ Kachchhȱ District,ȱ Gujarat’ȱ hasȱ beenȱlaunchedȱwithȱfinancialȱsupportȱfromȱUniversityȱofȱKeralaȱandȱtheȱArchaeologicalȱ ResearchȱandȱConservationȱProgram:ȱIndiaȱandȱPakistanȱ(ARCPIP).ȱTheȱobjectivesȱofȱ thisȱ projectȱ areȱ toȱ understandȱ theȱ levelȱ ofȱ integrationȱ whichȱ existedȱ amongȱ theȱ Regionalȱ Chalcolithicȱ Culturesȱ andȱ Classicalȱ Harappansȱ foundȱ atȱ theȱ siteȱ andȱ toȱ understandȱ theȱ economicȱ productionȱ andȱ interȱ regionalȱ interactionȱ networkȱ thatȱ existedȱ duringȱ theȱ Integrationȱ Eraȱ inȱ Kachchhȱ (Gadekarȱ etȱ al.ȱ 2014,ȱ Rajeshȱ etȱ al.ȱ inȱ press).ȱ ȱ Systematicȱ explorationsȱ duringȱ 2013Ȭ14ȱ underȱ theȱ projectȱ atȱ Navinalȱ (fig.ȱ 2)ȱ haveȱ revealedȱ theȱ remainsȱ ofȱ aȱ ceramicȱ assemblageȱ belongingȱ toȱ theȱ Integrationȱ andȱ LocalizationȱErasȱ(c.ȱ2600Ȭ1600ȱBC);ȱterracottaȱobjects;ȱcompleteȱshellsȱandȱshellȱobjects;ȱ varietiesȱofȱbeadsȱofȱstone,ȱshellȱandȱterracotta;ȱstoneȱamulet;ȱgrindingȱstones;ȱhammerȱ stones;ȱlithicȱtoolsȱandȱassociatedȱdebitageȱandȱlargeȱnumbersȱofȱbrokenȱcopperȱtools.ȱ Aȱ numberȱ ofȱ animalȱ skeletalȱ remainsȱ foundȱ fromȱ theȱ siteȱ showȱ saltȱ andȱ calciumȱ encrustationȱ suggestingȱ substantialȱ antiquity.ȱ Largeȱ numbersȱ ofȱ charredȱ andȱ uncharredȱotolithsȱofȱvarietyȱofȱfishesȱandȱfishȱvertebraeȱwereȱalsoȱcollectedȱfromȱtheȱ site.ȱHugeȱquantitiesȱofȱcompleteȱandȱbrokenȱsmallȱshellsȱ(probablyȱedible)ȱandȱlithicȱ debitageȱareȱfoundȱscatteredȱallȱoverȱtheȱsurfaceȱofȱtheȱpartiallyȱdisturbedȱsite.ȱManyȱ structuralȱpartsȱofȱstoneȱandȱindicatorsȱofȱcraftȱproductionȱ(potteryȱproduction,ȱstoneȱ toolȱproduction,ȱcopperȱworkingȱandȱshellȱworking)ȱareȱvisibleȱatȱvariousȱpartsȱofȱtheȱ siteȱ(Gadekarȱetȱal.ȱ2014,ȱRajeshȱetȱal.ȱinȱpress).ȱ ȱ Theȱcopperȱobjectsȱandȱevidenceȱforȱcopperȱworkingȱrecoveredȱfromȱsurfaceȱofȱtheȱsiteȱ includeȱfragmentsȱofȱspatulas,ȱpoints,ȱhooks,ȱwires,ȱbladeȱofȱaȱknife,ȱsheets,ȱbeadsȱandȱ ringsȱ besidesȱ prills/nodules,ȱ wasteȱ materialsȱ andȱ crucibleȱ fragments.ȱ Noȱ convincingȱ evidenceȱofȱcopperȱsmeltingȱhasȱbeenȱfoundȱfromȱtheȱsite.ȱTheȱrecoveryȱofȱsomeȱcoarseȱ clayȱcruciblesȱwithȱcopperȱadheringȱinȱthemȱpointȱtoȱtheȱfactȱthatȱtheyȱwereȱusedȱinȱ meltingȱ theȱ copperȱ (Rajeshȱ etȱ al.ȱ inȱ Press).ȱ Theȱ majorityȱ ofȱ theȱ copperȱ objectsȱ wereȱ probablyȱmadeȱatȱtheȱsiteȱusingȱsandȱmouldsȱthatȱwouldȱleaveȱveryȱlittleȱorȱnoȱtracesȱ forȱtheȱarchaeologistsȱ(Bhanȱetȱal.ȱ2004).Typologicalȱandȱcompositionalȱanalysisȱwereȱ conductedȱforȱtheȱcopperȱartifactsȱandȱaȱdiscussionȱofȱtheȱsameȱfollows.ȱȱ ȱ Typologyȱ Studiesȱ dealingȱ withȱ summariesȱ andȱ typologiesȱ ofȱ materialsȱ fromȱ theȱ Indusȱ Regionȱ datingȱ fromȱ 5thȱ toȱ 2ndȱ millenniaȱ BCȱ wereȱ attemptedȱ byȱ Yuleȱ (1985);ȱ Chakrabartiȱ andȱ

548ȱ Patelȱetȱal.ȱ2014:ȱ545Ȭ592

Lahiriȱ(1996);ȱAgrawalȱandȱKharakwalȱ(2003);ȱHoffmanȱandȱMillerȱ(2005)ȱetc.ȱHowever,ȱ exceptȱnotableȱworkȱbyȱYuleȱ(1985)ȱandȱKenoyerȱandȱMillerȱ(1999)ȱtheȱaspectsȱrelatedȱ toȱproduction,ȱdetailedȱtypologicalȱcategorizationȱandȱtheirȱspecificȱuse,ȱexaminationȱofȱ changeȱinȱfunctionalȱtypesȱandȱuseȱoverȱaȱperiodȱofȱtime,ȱconsumptionȱandȱdistributionȱ patterns,ȱalloyȱpatternsȱetc.ȱofȱcopperȱremainȱeitherȱunderstudiedȱorȱscanty.ȱTheȱworksȱ onȱ typologyȱ ofȱ copperȱ artifactsȱ byȱ Yuleȱ (1985)ȱ andȱ Kenoyerȱ andȱ Millerȱ (1999)ȱ addressedȱ theȱ needȱ forȱ aȱ formalizedȱ typologyȱ forȱ Indusȱ copperȱ objects.ȱ Yuleȱ (1985)ȱ proposedȱ aȱ roughȱ andȱ detailedȱ classificationȱ systemȱ forȱ vesselsȱ andȱ ornaments.ȱ Comparedȱ toȱ Yule’sȱ (1985)ȱ work,ȱ Kenoyerȱ andȱ Miller’sȱ (1999)ȱ classificationȱ structureȱ forȱtheȱmetalȱobjectsȱfromȱChanhuȬdaroȱisȱmuchȱmoreȱspecificȱwhichȱaȱcombinationȱofȱ morphologicalȱandȱfunctionalȱtypology.ȱȱ ȱ

ȱ Figureȱ2:ȱDigitalȱElevationȱModelȱofȱHarappanȱSettlementȱatȱNavinalȱ ȱ BecauseȱtheȱcopperȱassemblageȱfromȱtheȱsurfaceȱcollectionȱofȱNavinalȱisȱfragmentaryȱinȱ nature,ȱdevelopingȱaȱpreciseȱclassificationȱsystemȱwasȱanȱextremelyȱdifficultȱtask.ȱ476ȱ artifacts/fragmentsȱ (Appendixȱ 1,ȱ figs.ȱ 3Ȭ7)ȱ alongȱ withȱ 10ȱ crucibleȱ fragmentsȱ (Tableȱ 1,ȱ figs.ȱ8Ȭ11)ȱandȱwastesȱofȱcopperȱworkingȱ(790.24ȱgm)ȱ(fig.ȱ12)ȱwereȱrecoveredȱfromȱtheȱ site.ȱȱBasedȱonȱmorphologicalȱmeasurementsȱ(length,ȱbreadth,ȱthicknessȱandȱweight)ȱaȱ preliminaryȱclassificationȱwasȱdoneȱandȱcategoriesȱwereȱassigned.ȱTheyȱareȱbeadsȱ(fig.ȱ 13),ȱ chisel/bar/ingot,ȱ hook,ȱ bladeȱ ofȱ aȱ knife,ȱ nail,ȱ ring,ȱ sheet,ȱ spatula,ȱ foldedȱ stripsȱ (tube),ȱ wire,ȱ prillsȱ (fig.ȱ 14)ȱ etc.ȱ Ampleȱ numberȱ ofȱ theȱ fragmentaryȱ artifactsȱ andȱ theirȱ spatialȱdistributionȱonȱtheȱsurfaceȱofȱtheȱsiteȱalongȱwithȱcrucibleȱfragmentsȱandȱwastesȱ

549ȱ  ISSNȱ2347ȱ–ȱ5463ȱHeritage:ȱJournalȱofȱMultidisciplinaryȱStudiesȱinȱArchaeologyȱ2:ȱ2014  ofȱ copperȱ workingȱ highlightȱ theȱ roleȱ ofȱ copperȱ andȱ copperȱ workingȱ atȱ theȱ siteȱ andȱ undoubtedlyȱ pointȱ toȱ theȱ secondaryȱ productionȱ ofȱ objectsȱ throughȱ meltingȱ andȱ theȱ extensiveȱ useȱ ofȱ toolsȱ forȱ variousȱ craftȱ andȱ otherȱ relatedȱ activities.ȱ Systematicȱ excavationsȱcanȱsupplementȱdetailȱinsightsȱinȱthisȱdirection.ȱȱ ȱ Tableȱ1:ȱListȱofȱCrucibleȱFragmentsȱfromȱNavinalȱ Sl.ȱ Antiquityȱ Conditionȱ Diameterȱ Weightȱ Part Texture Remarks No.ȱ Numberȱ inȱcmȱ inȱgmȱ 1ȱ 8ȱ BrokenȱȬȱ9.70ȱ Bodyȱ Coarseȱ Copperȱadheringȱtoȱ itsȱinternalȱSurfaceȱ 2ȱ 55ȱ BrokenȱȬȱ5.97ȱ Bodyȱ Coarseȱ Copperȱadheringȱtoȱ itsȱinternalȱSurfaceȱ 3ȱ 4.1ȱ Brokenȱ 11ȱ 72.36ȱ Baseȱ Coarseȱ Copperȱadheringȱtoȱ itsȱinternalȱSurfaceȱ 4ȱ 4ȱ Brokenȱ 10ȱ 26.76ȱ Rimȱ Coarseȱ Copperȱadheringȱtoȱ itsȱinternalȱSurfaceȱ 5ȱ 9ȱ BrokenȱȬȱ14.60ȱ Bodyȱ Coarseȱ Copperȱadheringȱtoȱ itsȱinternalȱSurfaceȱ 6ȱ 55.1ȱ BrokenȱȬȱ2.06ȱ Bodyȱ Coarseȱ Copperȱadheringȱtoȱ itsȱinternalȱSurfaceȱ 7ȱ 7ȱ BrokenȱȬȱ1.87ȱ Bodyȱ Coarseȱ Copperȱadheringȱtoȱ itsȱinternalȱSurfaceȱ 8ȱ 5ȱ BrokenȱȬȱ10.21ȱ Bodyȱ Coarseȱ Copperȱadheringȱtoȱ itsȱinternalȱSurfaceȱ 9ȱ 6ȱ BrokenȱȬȱ6.31ȱ Bodyȱ Coarseȱ Copperȱadheringȱtoȱ itsȱinternalȱSurfaceȱ 10ȱ 4.2ȱ BrokenȱȬȱ1.68ȱ Bodyȱ Coarseȱ Copperȱadheringȱtoȱ itsȱinternalȱSurfaceȱ ȱ 350 314 300 250 200 150 100 57 63 50 2 112 3 4 8 8 5 8 0 ȱ Prill Nail Bead Point Ring Ingot Sheet Hook ȱ ȱ ȱ Spatula Fragment Fragment Fragment Celt/Ingot ȱ ȱ ȱ Punch Wire Sheet Knife Chisel/Bar Tube/Folded ȱ Figureȱ3:ȱTotalȱNumberȱofȱCopperȱObjectsȱfromȱNavinalȱ

550ȱ Patelȱetȱal.ȱ2014:ȱ545Ȭ592

ȱ Figureȱ4:ȱUnidentifiedȱCopperȱObjectsȱfromȱNavinalȱ ȱ Inȱtermsȱofȱquantityȱofȱeachȱcategory,ȱprillsȱformȱtheȱmajorȱgroupȱ(66%)ȱfollowedȱbyȱ sheetȱstripsȱ(13.2%)ȱandȱringȱ(12%)ȱrespectively.ȱEachȱofȱspatula,ȱwireȱandȱpunchȱpointsȱ constituteȱ1.7%;ȱnailsȱandȱknifeȱfragmentsȱcompriseȱ0.8%ȱandȱ0.6%ȱrespectivelyȱandȱtheȱ beadsȱandȱhooksȱconstituteȱ0.4%ȱeachȱofȱtheȱcollectionȱandȱtheȱrestȱareȱveryȱminimalȱinȱ quantity.ȱ ȱ Toȱassignȱcategoriesȱsuchȱasȱtools/implements/weaponsȱtoȱthisȱsurfaceȱcollectionȱwasȱ quiteȱ difficult.ȱ Theȱ absenceȱ ofȱ completeȱ specimensȱ ofȱ knivesȱ andȱ otherȱ implementsȱ probablyȱ indicateȱ theȱ exchangeȱ ofȱ finishedȱ products.ȱ Theȱ surfaceȱ evidenceȱ onlyȱ constitutesȱ theȱ waste/fragmentsȱ orȱ theȱ suitableȱ materialȱ forȱ recycling/reworking.ȱ Theȱ sheetȱfragmentsȱwereȱpossiblyȱpartȱofȱknivesȱ/blades.ȱTheȱoccurrenceȱofȱsmallȱnumberȱ ofȱ beadsȱ (oneȱ havingȱ aȱ goldȱ coveringȱ onȱ oneȱ end)ȱ andȱ ringsȱ indicateȱ theȱ useȱ ofȱ ornamentsȱ andȱ theȱ wireȱ fragmentsȱ withȱ theirȱ variationȱ inȱ thicknessȱ indicateȱ theirȱ multipleȱusesȱinȱcraftȱandȱartȱproductions.ȱȱ ȱ Crucibleȱfragmentsȱwithȱcopperȱadheringȱtoȱthemȱhaveȱbeenȱrecoveredȱfromȱtheȱsite.ȱ Crucibleȱfragmentsȱconstituteȱ2%ȱofȱtheȱtotalȱcollectionȱofȱcopperȱrelatedȱartifactsȱandȱ theirȱweightȱrangesȱfromȱ4.99gmȱtoȱ7.5gmȱ(fig.ȱ4).ȱInȱtheȱabsenceȱofȱproperȱrims/basesȱ (withȱtwoȱexceptions),ȱassigningȱexactȱshapesȱtoȱtheȱcruciblesȱisȱdifficult.ȱTheȱdiscoveryȱ ofȱcruciblesȱfromȱNavinalȱsimilarȱtoȱthoseȱfromȱSurkotadaȱ(Joshiȱ1990)ȱandȱtheȱpresenceȱ ofȱ kilnȱ wastersȱ andȱ slagȱ perhapsȱ demonstrateȱ localȱ smithyȱ practicesȱ ofȱ copper;ȱ however,ȱabsenceȱofȱoreȱmakesȱitȱdifficultȱtoȱestimateȱintensityȱofȱtheȱsame.ȱȱThoughȱ theȱcruciblesȱfromȱNavinalȱcouldȱrepresentȱsmallȱscaleȱsmeltingȱofȱhighȱqualityȱcopper,ȱ dueȱtoȱtheȱlackȱofȱclearȱcontextualȱevidenceȱitȱappearsȱmoreȱlikelyȱmeltingȱratherȱthanȱ smeltingȱ(Millerȱ1994).ȱFurtherȱarchaeometricȱstudiesȱcanȱprovideȱaȱclearerȱideaȱaboutȱ theȱexactȱfunctionȱofȱtheseȱterracottaȱcrucibles.ȱȱ 551ȱ  ISSNȱ2347ȱ–ȱ5463ȱHeritage:ȱJournalȱofȱMultidisciplinaryȱStudiesȱinȱArchaeologyȱ2:ȱ2014 

ȱ Figureȱ5:ȱBrokenȱCopperȱObjectsȱfromȱNavinalȱ ȱ Metallographyȱȱ Sinceȱmetalsȱholdȱwithinȱthemȱtheȱhistoryȱofȱtheirȱmaking,ȱtechnicalȱstudiesȱofȱmetalȱ artifactsȱ areȱ widelyȱ usedȱ toȱ unravelȱ theȱ mysteriesȱ ofȱ theȱ metalȱ technologyȱ throughȱ time.ȱ Metallographyȱ isȱ theȱ scientificȱ disciplineȱ ofȱ examiningȱ andȱ determiningȱ theȱ constitutionȱ andȱ theȱ underlyingȱ structureȱ (orȱ spatialȱ relationshipsȱ between)ȱ ofȱ theȱ constituentsȱ inȱ metals,ȱ alloysȱ andȱ materialsȱ (Voortȱ etȱ al.ȱ 2004).ȱ Theȱ examinationȱ ofȱ structureȱ mayȱ beȱ doneȱ overȱ aȱ wideȱ rangeȱ ofȱ lengthȱ scalesȱ orȱ magnificationȱ levels,ȱ

552ȱ Patelȱetȱal.ȱ2014:ȱ545Ȭ592

ȱ Figureȱ6:ȱCopperȱWiresȱandȱRingsȱfromȱNavinalȱ ȱ rangingȱfromȱaȱvisualȱorȱlowȬmagnificationȱ(~20×)ȱexaminationȱtoȱmagnificationsȱoverȱ 1,000,000×ȱwithȱelectronȱmicroscopes.ȱMetallographyȱmayȱalsoȱincludeȱtheȱexaminationȱ ofȱcrystalȱstructureȱbyȱtechniquesȱsuchȱasȱXȬrayȱDiffraction.ȱHowever,ȱtheȱmostȱfamiliarȱ toolȱofȱmetallographyȱisȱaȱlightȱmicroscope,ȱwithȱmagnificationsȱrangingȱfromȱ~50ȱtoȱ 1000×ȱ andȱ theȱ abilityȱ toȱ resolveȱ microstructuralȱ featuresȱ ofȱ ~0.2ȱΐmȱ orȱ larger.ȱ Otherȱ majorȱexaminationȱtoolȱinȱmetallographyȱisȱtheȱScanningȱElectronȱMicroscopeȱ(SEM).ȱ Comparedȱtoȱtheȱlightȱmicroscope,ȱtheȱSEMȱexpandsȱtheȱresolutionȱrangeȱbyȱmoreȱthanȱ twoȱordersȱofȱmagnitudeȱtoȱapproximatelyȱ4ȱnmȱinȱroutineȱinstruments,ȱwithȱultimateȱ valuesȱbelowȱ1ȱnm.ȱUsefulȱmagnificationȱcoversȱtheȱrangeȱfromȱtheȱStereomicroscope,ȱ theȱ entireȱ rangeȱ ofȱ theȱ Lightȱ Microscopeȱ toȱ muchȱ ofȱ theȱ rangeȱ ofȱ theȱ Transmissionȱ

553ȱ ISSNȱ2347ȱ–ȱ5463ȱHeritage:ȱJournalȱofȱMultidisciplinaryȱStudiesȱinȱArchaeologyȱ2:ȱ2014 

Electronȱ Microscopeȱ (TEM)ȱ forȱ possibleȱ viewingȱ fromȱ 1,000×ȱ toȱ >100,000×.ȱ Theȱ SEMȱ alsoȱprovidesȱaȱgreaterȱdepthȱofȱfield,ȱwithȱdepthȱofȱfocusȱrangingȱfromȱ1ȱΐmȱatȱ10,000×ȱ toȱ2ȱmmȱatȱ10×,ȱwhichȱisȱlargerȱbyȱmoreȱthanȱtwoȱordersȱofȱmagnitudeȱcomparedȱtoȱtheȱ LightȱMicroscope.ȱThusȱMetallographicȱstudiesȱhaveȱalwaysȱbeenȱofȱimmenseȱhelpȱinȱ assessingȱtheȱsmeltingȱandȱsmithyȱtechniquesȱwhileȱcompositionȱanalysisȱcanȱenhanceȱ theȱunderstandingȱofȱprovenience,ȱimpurityȱpatternȱandȱalloyȱpatterns.ȱ ȱ

ȱ Figureȱ7:ȱSheetȱFragmentsȱfromȱNavinalȱ ȱ Earlierȱ studiesȱ ofȱ Harappanȱ copperȱ artifactsȱ fromȱ Rangpurȱ (Raoȱ 1963)ȱ andȱ Somnathȱ (Hegdeȱ 1965)ȱ revealedȱ alloyȱ patternsȱ ofȱ copperȬtinȱ withȱ lowȱ andȱ highȱ tinȱ bronzes.ȱ Studiesȱ ofȱ artifactsȱ fromȱ Lothalȱ (Raoȱ 1979,ȱ 1985)ȱ thoughȱ indicatedȱ lowȱ andȱ highȱ tinȱ bronzes;ȱ theȱ absenceȱ ofȱ arsenicȱ inȱ theȱ copperȱ artifactȱ compositionȱ isȱ noteworthy.ȱ Presently,ȱ theȱ availableȱ analyticalȱ dataȱ indicatesȱ thatȱ allȱ objectsȱ fromȱ Kuntasiȱ wereȱ madeȱ ofȱ copperȱ devoidȱ ofȱ arsenicȱ andȱ tinȱ (Dhavalikarȱ etȱ al.ȱ 1996)ȱ thoughȱ crossȱ checkingȱ isȱ neededȱ forȱ furtherȱ clarification.ȱȱChemicalȱ (EDXRFȱ andȱ ASS)ȱ analysisȱ ofȱ

554ȱ Patelȱetȱal.ȱ2014:ȱ545Ȭ592 copperȱartifactsȱfromȱNagwadaȱindicateȱthatȱtheȱaxesȱwereȱmadeȱofȱpureȱcopperȱandȱaȱ chiselȱwasȱanȱalloy,ȱi.e.,ȱbronzeȱ(Seshadriȱ1990;ȱ1992).ȱBagasra,ȱ(Sonawaneȱetȱal.ȱ2003;ȱ Bhanȱ etȱ al.ȱ 2004;ȱ Chaseȱ 2010)ȱ oneȱ ofȱ theȱ significantȱ Harappanȱ sitesȱ havingȱ copperȱ workingȱandȱuniqueȱartifactsȱsuchȱasȱboneȱhandleȱknivesȱandȱaȱhoardȱ(copperȱpotȱwithȱ eightȱbanglesȱandȱaȱcelt).ȱTheseȱwereȱsubjectedȱtoȱpreliminaryȱtypologicalȱstudyȱandȱ conservationȱ(Patelȱ2005Ȭ06)ȱfollowedȱbyȱcompositionȱanalysisȱ(PatelȱandȱAjithprasadȱ inȱpress).ȱTheȱchemicalȱcompositionȱofȱtwoȱchosenȱsamples;ȱaȱbangleȱ(BSRȱ6310)ȱandȱ ringȱ(BSRȱ4494)ȱwereȱdeterminedȱbyȱusingȱEnergyȱDispersiveȱXȬrayȱ(EDAX)ȱmethod.ȱ Theȱ objectsȱ wereȱ deeplyȱ corrodedȱ andȱ hadȱ mineralizedȱ toȱ aȱ greatȱ extentȱ withȱ heavyȱ encrustation.ȱDueȱtoȱthis,ȱtheȱcompositionȱindicatedȱhighȱyieldȱofȱoxygenȱandȱchlorine.ȱȱ Zincȱ wasȱ presentȱ inȱ bothȱ theȱ objectsȱ andȱ Arsenicȱ alsoȱ showedȱ itsȱ presenceȱ inȱ smallȱ quantities.ȱLeadȱisȱabsentȱinȱbothȱtheȱobjects.ȱIronȱisȱpresentȱinȱbothȱtheȱobjectsȱandȱIronȱ beingȱ aȱ commonȱ constituentȱ inȱ copperȱ oresȱ likeȱ chalcopyrite,ȱ pyroliteȱ etc.,ȱ itȱ usuallyȱ passesȱ onȱ toȱ theȱ metalȱ whileȱ smelting.ȱ Completeȱ removalȱ ofȱ ironȱ fromȱ theȱ oreȱ isȱ difficult,ȱasȱitȱrequiresȱhighȱtemperatureȱasȱ1200oC.ȱThisȱindicatesȱthatȱtheȱoreȱusedȱatȱ Bagasraȱ hadȱ ironȱ contentȱ inȱ itȱ andȱ alsoȱ theȱ smeltingȱ mightȱ haveȱ beenȱ doneȱ belowȱ 1200oC.ȱ ȱ Tenȱrepresentativeȱsamplesȱ(Tableȱ2)ȱfromȱNavinalȱwereȱsubjectedȱtoȱanalysisȱbyȱusingȱ JEOLȱ JSMȬ5610LVȱ Scanningȱ Electronȱ Microscopeȱ toȱ estimateȱ andȱ understandȱ theȱ elementalȱcomposition,ȱalloyȱpatternsȱasȱwellȱasȱmicrostructures.ȱTheȱsampleȱselectionȱ wasȱdoneȱbasedȱonȱaȱvarietyȱofȱcategoriesȱidentified.ȱAllȱobjectsȱwereȱcorrodedȱonȱtheȱ surface.ȱInȱorderȱtoȱremoveȱtheȱencrustationȱandȱcorrosionȱlayersȱonȱtheȱsurfaceȱandȱtoȱ exposeȱtheȱcleanȱlowerȱlayerȱtoȱgetȱauthenticȱresults,ȱtheȱsurfaceȱwasȱpolishedȱbyȱusingȱ abrading/sandȱpaper.ȱ ȱ 5

4

33 3

2 2

11 1

0 4.99 9.99 74.99 29.99 14.99 ȱȬ ȱȬ ȱȬ ȱȬ ȱȬ 5 0 70 25 10 ȱ Figureȱ8:ȱWeightȱofȱCrucibleȱFragmentsȱ(inȱgram)ȱfromȱNavinalȱ

555ȱ ISSNȱ2347ȱ–ȱ5463ȱHeritage:ȱJournalȱofȱMultidisciplinaryȱStudiesȱinȱArchaeologyȱ2:ȱ2014 

ȱ Figureȱ9:ȱShapesȱofȱCruciblesȱfromȱNavinalȱ ȱ

ȱ Figureȱ10:ȱExternalȱSurfaceȱofȱCrucibleȱFragmentsȱfromȱNavinalȱ

556ȱ Patelȱetȱal.ȱ2014:ȱ545Ȭ592

ȱ Figureȱ11:ȱInternalȱSurfaceȱofȱCrucibleȱFragmentsȱfromȱNavinalȱ ȱ Thoughȱallȱtheȱobjectsȱanalyzedȱindicateȱtracesȱofȱtinȱ(Sn),ȱthoseȱwithȱmoreȱthanȱ1%ȱofȱ Snȱinȱthisȱstudyȱareȱconsideredȱalloysȱandȱinȱsuchȱcase,ȱtwoȱofȱtheȱartifactsȱ(NVLȱ35ȱandȱ NVLȱ 29)ȱ indicateȱ compositionȱ ofȱ bronze.ȱ Atȱ theȱ sameȱ timeȱ NVLȱ 35ȱ withȱ aȱ highȱ percentageȱofȱtinȱi.e.ȱ14.59%ȱcanȱbeȱconsideredȱasȱhighȱtinȱbronze.ȱȱ ȱ Theȱornamentsȱ(ringsȱandȱbeads)ȱalongȱwithȱotherȱartifactsȱhadȱaȱminimalȱamountȱofȱ zincȱinȱthem.NVLȱ53withȱ3.95%ȱofȱZincȱandȱnominalȱamountȱofȱTinȱinȱitȱmakesȱitȱaȱCuȬ Znȱalloy,ȱaȱcompositionȱofȱbrass.ȱThusȱtheȱcompositionȱstudyȱclearlyȱrevealsȱthatȱNVLȱ 29ȱandȱNVLȱ35ȱareȱtheȱalloysȱofȱCuȬSnȬZn.ȱȱ

557ȱ ISSNȱ2347ȱ–ȱ5463ȱHeritage:ȱJournalȱofȱMultidisciplinaryȱStudiesȱinȱArchaeologyȱ2:ȱ2014 

ȱ Figureȱ12:ȱWastesȱofȱCopperȱWorkingȱfromȱNavinalȱ ȱ

ȱ Figureȱ13:ȱCopperȱBeadsȱ(oneȱwithȱgoldȱrivetting)ȱfromȱNavinalȱ

558ȱ Patelȱetȱal.ȱ2014:ȱ545Ȭ592

ȱ Figureȱ14:ȱCopperȱPrillsȱfromȱNavinalȱ ȱ Outȱ ofȱ theȱ tenȱ analysedȱ samples,ȱ fourȱ areȱ Arsenicȱ Bronzesȱ havingȱ moreȱ thanȱ 1%ȱ Arsenicȱ inȱ them.ȱ Arsenicȱ isȱ aȱ commonȱ constituentȱ ofȱ manyȱcopperȱ oresȱ likeȱ energiteȱ andȱfamitiniteȱandȱpassesȱonȱtoȱtheȱmetalȱunlessȱitȱisȱroastedȱforȱaȱlongȱperiodȱofȱtimeȱ atȱ aȱ temperatureȱ higherȱ thanȱ 5000C.ȱ However,ȱ theȱ presenceȱ ofȱ Arsenicȱ inȱ analysedȱ samplesȱ doesn’tȱ implyȱ itsȱ deliberateȱ additionȱ inȱ copperȱ forȱ castingȱ ring/bangleȱ butȱ mostȱprobablyȱindicatesȱuseȱofȱarsenicȱore.ȱ ȱ Amongȱtheȱtenȱanalysedȱsamples,ȱleadȱisȱabsentȱinȱfive.ȱAlthough,ȱitsȱtracesȱareȱfoundȱ inȱ threeȱ otherȱ specimens.ȱ Twoȱ specimens,ȱ NVLȱ 36ȱ andȱ NVLȱ 38ȱ indicatedȱ comparativelyȱhigherȱconcentrationȱi.e.ȱ1.91%ȱandȱ4.27%ȱrespectively.ȱItȱappearsȱthatȱ Leadȱ mightȱ haveȱ beenȱ addedȱ deliberatelyȱ inȱ copperȱ forȱ makingȱ theȱ objectsȱ moreȱ workable.ȱ However,ȱ dueȱ toȱ itsȱ absenceȱ inȱ otherȱ analysedȱ objects,ȱ itȱ isȱ difficultȱ toȱ presumeȱtheȱuseȱofȱleadȱinȱcastingȱorȱinȱanyȱotherȱprocesses.ȱTheȱpercentageȱofȱcopperȱ isȱvariesȱinȱdifferentȱobjectsȱandȱitȱisȱperhapsȱdueȱtoȱvaryingȱdegreesȱofȱmineralization.ȱ Asȱ farȱ asȱ corrosionȱ isȱ concerned,ȱ majorȱ corrosionȱ productsȱ areȱ oxidesȱ followedȱ byȱ chlorides.ȱAllȱofȱtheȱrepresentativeȱsamplesȱhaveȱencrustationȱonȱtheȱsurface.ȱ

559ȱ ISSNȱ2347ȱ–ȱ5463ȱHeritage:ȱJournalȱofȱMultidisciplinaryȱStudiesȱinȱArchaeologyȱ2:ȱ2014 

Tableȱ2:ȱElementalȱCompositionȱofȱSelectedȱCopperȱObjectsȱfromȱNavinalȱ Sl.ȱ An.ȱ Objectȱ Cuȱ Snȱ Znȱ Asȱ Pbȱ Oȱ Clȱ Cȱ Siȱ Sȱ No.ȱ No.ȱ 1ȱ NVLȱ Sheet/ȱ 82.64ȱ 0.8ȱȬȱȬȱȬȱ 3.57ȱ 2.99ȱȬȱȬȱ Ȭȱ 2.1ȱ Stripȱ 2ȱ NVLȱ Sheet/ȱ 80.07ȱ 0.14ȱ 0.58 Ȭȱ Ȭȱ 3.51ȱ 5.70ȱȬȱȬȱ Ȭȱ 16ȱ Bladeȱ 3ȱ NVLȱ Foldedȱ 67.53ȱ 0.42ȱ 3.95 Ȭȱ Ȭȱ 16.49ȱ 11.61ȱȬȱ ȬȱȬȱ 53ȱ Sheet/ȱ Tubeȱ 4ȱ NVLȱ Ringȱ 85.20ȱ 0.75ȱ 0.32 Ȭȱ 1.91ȱ 11.82ȱȬȱ Ȭȱ Ȭȱ Ȭȱ 36ȱ 5ȱ NVLȱ Beadȱ 62.09ȱ 0.42ȱ 0.42 Ȭȱ Ȭȱ 19.10ȱ 5.28ȱ 12.70ȱȬȱ Ȭȱ 44ȱ 6ȱ NVLȱ Wireȱ 65.99ȱ 5.79ȱ 2.23 2.37ȱ 0.52ȱ 21.36ȱ 1.18ȱ 12.70ȱȬȱ Ȭȱ 29ȱ 7ȱ NVLȱ Hookȱ 76.89ȱ 0.07ȱȬȱ 1.77ȱȬȱ 5.59ȱ 0.38ȱ 14.82ȱ 0.48ȱ Ȭȱ 41ȱ 8ȱ NVLȱ Nailȱ 86.11ȱ 0.30ȱȬȱȬȱ 4.27ȱ 6.22ȱ 2.16ȱȬȱ 0.94ȱ Ȭȱ 38ȱ 9ȱ NVLȱ Ringȱ 55.87ȱ 14.59ȱ 1.10 1.17ȱ 0.51ȱ 20.19ȱ 0.65ȱ 5.19ȱ 0.50ȱ 0.38 35ȱ 10ȱ NVLȱ Wireȱ 85.02ȱ 0.07ȱ 0.84 1.38ȱ 0.28ȱ 4.86ȱȬȱ 7.55ȱȬȱ Ȭȱ 39ȱ ȱ Microstructuresȱȱ Microstructuralȱstudiesȱcanȱbringȱoutȱmoreȱinformationȱonȱmanufacturingȱtechniques.ȱ Theȱimportanceȱofȱmicrostructureȱtoȱtheȱpropertiesȱofȱmetalsȱandȱalloysȱhasȱlongȱbeenȱ recognized.ȱ Grainȱ size,ȱ twins,ȱ andȱ theȱ size,ȱ shapeȱ andȱ distributionȱ ofȱ secondȬphaseȱ particlesȱareȱimportantȱinȱdeterminingȱtheȱbehaviorȱofȱmostȱstructuralȱmetals.ȱProcessȬ controlȱ parametersȱ areȱ establishedȱ toȱ provideȱ specificȱ grainȱ sizes.ȱ Theȱ number,ȱ size,ȱ andȱdistributionȱofȱsecondȬphaseȱparticles,ȱsuchȱasȱinclusions,ȱareȱfrequentlyȱspecified,ȱ andȱ quantitativeȱ metallographicȱ proceduresȱ haveȱ beenȱ developedȱ toȱ describeȱ microstructure.ȱ Thereforeȱ opticalȱ (light)ȱ characterizationȱ ofȱ theȱ microstructuresȱ ofȱ metalsȱandȱalloysȱisȱessential.ȱItȱinvolvesȱtheȱidentificationȱandȱmeasurementȱofȱphases,ȱ precipitatesȱandȱconstituents,ȱtheȱdeterminationȱofȱtheȱsizeȱandȱshapeȱofȱtheȱgrains,ȱtheȱ extentȱ ofȱ twinning,ȱ someȱ ofȱ theȱ characteristicsȱ ofȱ grainȱ boundariesȱ andȱ otherȱ observableȱ defects.ȱ Solidification,ȱ solidȬstateȱ transformation,ȱ deformation,ȱ andȱ annealingȱ microstructuresȱ areȱ theȱ fourȱ basicȱ typesȱ inȱ metalsȱ andȱ alloysȱ (Voortȱ etȱ al.ȱ 2004).ȱPolishedȱspecimensȱofȱtwoȱrepresentativeȱsamplesȱ(NVLȱ53ȱandȱNVLȱ35)ȱfromȱ Navinalȱ wereȱ preparedȱ forȱ microȱ structuralȱ studies.ȱ Atȱ firstȱ theȱ specimensȱ wereȱ polishedȱ byȱ usingȱ variousȱ gradesȱ ofȱ abrasiveȱ papers.ȱ Diamondȱ pasteȱ wasȱ usedȱ forȱ polishingȱtheȱspecimensȱonȱtheȱpolishingȱwheels.ȱTheȱpolishedȱsamplesȱwereȱetchedȱbyȱ

560ȱ Patelȱetȱal.ȱ2014:ȱ545Ȭ592 theȱpreparedȱetchant,ȱammoniumȱhydroxideȱ(5parts),ȱhydrogenȱperoxideȱ(3parts)ȱandȱ waterȱ(5parts).ȱ ȱ Specimenȱ1ȬȱNVLȱ53ȱ(FoldedȱSheet/Tube)ȱ Theȱsheetȱrevealedȱdifferentialȱcorrodedȱareas,ȱwithȱelongatedȱstripȱlikeȱfeatures,ȱcracksȱ andȱpittingȱ(fig.15).ȱTheȱelongatedȱpatchȱshowsȱextendedȱoxidation.ȱTheȱmicrostructureȱ indicateȱaȱcopperȱbaseȱandȱtinȱalloyȱelementȱphaseȱwithȱshinyȱcrystalsȱofȱTinȱ(theseȱcanȱ beȱseenȱnearȱandȱaroundȱtheȱbigȱblackȱspotȱinȱtheȱfigure)ȱandȱtheȱgrainȱstructuresȱareȱ seenȱ inȱ rolledȱ mannerȱ linearlyȱ stretchedȱ inȱ theȱ upwardȱ directionȱ (Fig.ȱ 16).ȱ Theȱ oneȱ sidedȱ elongationȱ ofȱ theȱ crystalȱ structureȱ perhapsȱ indicatesȱ theȱ rollingȱ ofȱ theȱ sheetȱ duringȱfabrication.ȱThisȱkindȱofȱplasticȱdeformationȱbelowȱcertainȱtemperaturesȱgivesȱ directionalȱ propertiesȱ toȱ theȱ finalȱ productȱ andȱ alsoȱ addsȱ toȱ itsȱ hardnessȱ andȱ tensileȱ strength.ȱTheȱsheetȱfragmentȱappearsȱtoȱbeȱaȱpartȱofȱaȱknifeȱorȱaȱbladeȱandȱmightȱhaveȱ workedȱforȱincreasingȱtheȱhardnessȱandȱtensileȱstrengthȱforȱimprovingȱtheȱpropertyȱofȱ theȱtool/implement.ȱ ȱ Specimenȱ2ȱ–ȱNVLȱ35ȱ(Ring)ȱ Theȱ microstructureȱ ofȱ theȱ ringȱ whichȱ isȱ CuȬTinȱ alloyȱ based,ȱ onȱ compositionȱ analysisȱ revealedȱevidenceȱofȱtheȱeffectsȱofȱheatȱtreatmentȱitȱunderwentȱduringȱfabrication.ȱTheȱ crossȱ patternȱ indicatesȱ twoȱ phasesȱ i.e.ȱ heatingȱ followedȱ byȱ quenchingȱ andȱ alsoȱ repeatedȱheatingȱandȱquenchingȱ(fig.ȱ17).ȱThisȱhighȱtinȱbronzeȱringȱmightȱhaveȱbeenȱ castedȱandȱthenȱheatȱtreatedȱforȱfinalȱshapingȱfollowedȱbyȱpolishing.ȱȱ ȱ

Figureȱ15:ȱMicrostructureȱofȱSpecimenȱ1ȱ–ȱNVLȱ53ȱfromȱNavinalȱ

561 ISSNȱ2347ȱ–ȱ5463ȱHeritage:ȱJournalȱofȱMultidisciplinaryȱStudiesȱinȱArchaeologyȱ2:ȱ2014 

Figureȱ16:ȱMicrostructureȱofȱSpecimenȱ1ȱ–ȱNVLȱ53ȱfromȱNavinalȱ ȱ

Figureȱ17:ȱMicrostructureȱofȱSpecimenȱ2ȱ–ȱNVLȱ35ȱfromȱNavinalȱ

562ȱ Patelȱetȱal.ȱ2014:ȱ545Ȭ592

Conclusionȱ Theȱ copperȱ objectsȱ recoveredȱ fromȱ Navinalȱ includedȱ beads,ȱ chisel/bar/ingot,ȱ hook,ȱ bladeȱ ofȱ aȱ knife,ȱ nail,ȱ ring,ȱ sheet,ȱ spatula,ȱ foldedȱ stripsȱ (tube),ȱ wire,ȱ prillsȱ etc.ȱ Theseȱ objectsȱ wereȱ composedȱ variouslyȱ ofȱ CopperȬTinȱ (CuȬSn);ȱ CopperȬZincȱ (CuȬZn)ȱ andȱ CopperȬTinȬZincȱ(CuȬSnȬZn)ȱalloys.ȱAsȱfarȱasȱtheȱcompositionȱofȱartifactsȱfromȱNavinalȱ isȱconcernedȱtheyȱareȱmoreȱorȱlessȱsimilarȱtoȱtheȱcompositionȱofȱartifactsȱfromȱsitesȱsuchȱ asȱRangpurȱandȱSomnath.ȱArtifactsȱfromȱLothalȱhaveȱindicatedȱtheȱabsenceȱofȱarsenicȱ whileȱtheȱsamplesȱfromȱNavinalȱrevealedȱtracesȱofȱarsenicȱinȱthemȱandȱthisȱprobablyȱ indicatesȱtheȱexploitationȱofȱaȱdifferentȱoreȱsourceȱorȱaȱdifferentȱproductionȱtechnique.ȱ Theȱ microstructuresȱ indicateȱ thatȱ forgingȱ mightȱ haveȱ beenȱ theȱ methodȱ ofȱ objectȱ shapingȱbyȱapplicationȱofȱbothȱhotȱandȱcoldȱwork.ȱTheȱspecimensȱalsoȱindicatedȱcyclesȱ ofȱannealingȱandȱhotȱandȱcoldȱwork.ȱSurfaceȱfinishingȱtreatmentsȱwereȱnotȱobservedȱ duringȱtheȱstudy.ȱȱ ȱ Systematicȱscientificȱstudiesȱofȱcopperȱworkingȱwastes,ȱcruciblesȱandȱfinishedȱobjectsȱ fromȱ Navinalȱ canȱ contributeȱ moreȱ toȱ ourȱ understandingȱ aboutȱ rawȱ materialȱ procurement,ȱcopperȱproductionȱandȱdistributionȱofȱfinishedȱobjectsȱandȱroleȱofȱtheȱsiteȱ inȱinterregionalȱinteractionȱnetwork.ȱAȱmethodicalȱexcavationȱandȱcarefulȱcollectionȱofȱ archaeologicalȱremainsȱisȱnecessaryȱatȱNavinalȱinȱorderȱtoȱanswerȱtheȱissuesȱsuchȱasȱtheȱ changesȱ inȱ rawȱ materialȱ procurement,ȱ productionȱ techniquesȱ inȱ differentȱ culturalȱ phases,ȱtheȱcopperȱworkingȱareasȱwithinȱtheȱsiteȱandȱtheȱgroupȱofȱinhabitantsȱengagedȱ inȱcopperȱproduction.ȱ ȱ Acknowledgementsȱ WeȱwouldȱlikeȱtoȱacknowledgeȱtheȱArchaeologicalȱSurveyȱofȱIndiaȱwhoseȱsupportȱhasȱ madeȱtheȱexplorationȱpossibleȱuponȱwhichȱtheȱpresentȱworkȱisȱbased.ȱWeȱwouldȱlikeȱtoȱ thankȱ theȱ Universityȱ ofȱ Keralaȱ andȱ theȱ Archaeologicalȱ Researchȱ andȱ Conservationȱ Program:ȱIndiaȱandȱPakistanȱprogramȱ(administeredȱbyȱtheȱCenterȱforȱSouthȱAsiaȱatȱ theȱUniversityȱofȱWisconsinȬMadison)ȱforȱresearchȱfunding.ȱWeȱwouldȱlikeȱtoȱexpressȱ ourȱgratitudeȱtoȱUniversityȱGrantsȱCommissionȱforȱtheȱfinancialȱsupportȱprovidedȱtoȱ Ambikaȱ Patelȱ byȱ whichȱ compositionȱ analysisȱ andȱ microȱ structuralȱ studiesȱ becameȱ feasible.ȱȱWeȱalsoȱextendȱourȱthanksȱtoȱProf.ȱVandanaȱRao,ȱDepartmentȱofȱMetallurgy,ȱ TheȱMaharajaȱSayajiraoȱUniversityȱforȱherȱhelpȱinȱSEMȱandȱEDAXȱanalysis.ȱWeȱalsoȱ thankȱ allȱ MAȱ studentsȱ (1stȱ andȱ 3rdȱ semester)ȱ fromȱ theȱ Universityȱ ofȱ Keralaȱ forȱ theȱ fieldworkȱundertakenȱbyȱthem.ȱItȱwouldȱnotȱhaveȱbeenȱpossibleȱwithoutȱtheȱsupportȱofȱ SarpanchȱMr.ȱGajendraȱSinghȱandȱpeopleȱofȱNavinalȱvillage.ȱȱ ȱ Referencesȱ Agrawal,ȱD.ȱP.ȱandȱJ.ȱS.ȱKharakwal.ȱ2003.ȱBronzeȱandȱIronȱAgeȱinȱSouthȱAsiaȱȬȱArchaeologyȱ ofȱSouthȱAsia.ȱAryanȱBookȱInternational.ȱNewȱDelhi.ȱȱȱ Agrawal,ȱD.ȱP.ȱ1999.ȱTheȱRoleȱofȱCentralȱHimalayasȱinȱIndianȱArchaeometallurgy.ȱInȱ MetalsȱinȱAntiquity,ȱS.ȱM.ȱYoung,ȱM.ȱPollard,ȱA.ȱM.ȱP.ȱBuddȱandȱR.ȱA.ȱIxter.ȱ Eds.ȱBasingȱStokeȱPress.ȱOxford.ȱpp.ȱ193Ȭ199.ȱȱ

563ȱ ISSNȱ2347ȱ–ȱ5463ȱHeritage:ȱJournalȱofȱMultidisciplinaryȱStudiesȱinȱArchaeologyȱ2:ȱ2014 

BhanȱK.ȱK.,ȱV.ȱH.ȱSonawane,ȱP.ȱAjithprasadȱandȱS.ȱPratapchandran.ȱ2004.ȱȱExcavationsȱ ofȱ anȱ Importantȱ Harappanȱ Tradingȱ andȱ Craftȱ Productionȱ Centerȱ atȱ Goladhoroȱ (Bagasra),ȱ onȱ theȱ Gulfȱ ofȱ Kutch,ȱ Gujarat,ȱ India.ȱ Journalȱ ofȱ InterdisciplinaryȱStudiesȱinȱHistoryȱandȱArchaeology.ȱVol.ȱ1(2).ȱpp.153Ȭ158.ȱȱȱ Bisht,ȱ R.ȱ S.ȱ 1997.ȱ Dholaviraȱ Excavations:ȱ 1990Ȭ94.ȱ Facetsȱ ofȱ Indianȱ CivilizationȱȬȱRecentȱ perspectivesȱ–ȱ(EssaysȱinȱHonourȱofȱProf.ȱB.ȱB.ȱLal):ȱVol.ȱIȱ(PrehistoryȱandȱRockȬ Art,ȱProtoȱHistory).ȱJ.ȱP.ȱJoshi,ȱD.ȱK.ȱSinha,ȱS.ȱC.ȱSaran,ȱC.ȱB.ȱMishraȱandȱG.ȱS.ȱ Gaur.ȱ(Eds.).ȱAryanȱBooksȱInternational.ȱNewȱDelhi:ȱ107Ȭ120.ȱȱ Chakrabarti,ȱD.ȱK.ȱandȱN.ȱLahiri.ȱ1996.ȱCopperȱandȱitsȱAlloysȱinȱAncientȱIndia.ȱMunshiramȱ ManoharlalȱPublishersȱPvt.ȱLtd.ȱNewȱDelhi.ȱ Chase,ȱB.ȱA.,ȱ2010.ȱSocialȱchangeȱatȱtheȱHarappanȱsettlementȱofȱGolaȱDhoro:ȱaȱreadingȱ fromȱanimalȱbones.ȱAntiquityȱ84:ȱ528–543.ȱ Dhavalikar,ȱ M.ȱ K.,ȱ M.ȱ R.ȱ Ravalȱ andȱ Y.ȱ M.ȱ Chitalwala.ȱ 1996.ȱ Kuntasi:ȱ Aȱ Harappanȱ Emporiumȱ onȱ Westȱ Coast.ȱ Deccanȱ Collegeȱ Postȱ Graduateȱ andȱ Researchȱ Institute.ȱPune.ȱ Gadekarȱ ,ȱ C.,ȱ S.V.ȱ Rajesh,ȱ S.ȱ Shaikh,ȱ B.ȱ Chase,ȱ Y.ȱ S.ȱ Rawat,ȱ A.ȱ Patel,ȱ G.ȱ S.ȱ Abhayan,ȱ V.Vinod,ȱ A.ȱ Kumarȱ andȱ P.ȱ Ajithprasad.ȱ 2014.ȱ Typologicalȱ Analysisȱ ofȱ Chalcolithicȱ Lithicȱ Assemblageȱ fromȱ Navinal,ȱ Districtȱ Kachchh,ȱ Gujarat,ȱ WesternȱIndia.ȱManȱandȱEnvironmentȱXXXIXȱ(1):ȱ92Ȭ105.ȱ Hegde,ȱK.ȱT.ȱM.ȱ1965.ȱChacolithicȱȱPeriodȱCopperȱMetallurgyȱinȱIndia.ȱUnpublishedȱPhDȱ Thesis.ȱMaharajaȱSayajiraoȱUniversityȱofȱBaroda.ȱVadodara.ȱ Hegde,ȱK.ȱT.ȱM.,ȱV.ȱH.ȱSonawane,ȱD.ȱR.ȱShah,ȱK.ȱK.ȱBhan,ȱP.ȱAjithprasad,ȱK.ȱKrishnanȱ andȱ S.ȱ Pratapchandran.ȱ 1988.ȱ Excavationȱ atȱ Nagwadaȱ 1986ȱ andȱ 87:ȱ Aȱ preliminaryȱReport.ȱManȱandȱEnvironmentȱXIIȱ:ȱ55Ȭ65.ȱ Hoffman,ȱB.ȱC.ȱandȱMiller,ȱH.ȱM.ȱ2009.ȱProductionȱandȱCompositionȱofȱCopperȱbaseȱ MetalsȱinȱtheȱIndusȱCivilization.ȱJournalȱofȱȱWorldȱPrehistoryȱ22.ȱpp.ȱ237Ȭ264.ȱȱ Joshi,ȱJ.ȱP.ȱ1990.ȱExcavationsȱatȱSurkotadaȱ1971Ȭ72ȱandȱExplorationȱinȱKutch.ȱMemoirsȱofȱ theȱ Archaeologicalȱ Surveyȱ ofȱ India,ȱ No.ȱ 87.ȱ Archaeologicalȱ Surveyȱ ofȱ India.ȱ NewȱDelhi.ȱ Kenoyer,ȱJ.ȱM.ȱ1998.ȱAncientȱCitiesȱofȱtheȱIndusȱValleyȱCivilization.ȱAmericanȱInstituteȱofȱ PakistanȱStudies.ȱOxfordȱUniversityȱPress.ȱKarachi.ȱȱȱȱ Kenoyer,ȱ J.ȱ M.ȱ andȱ H.ȱ M.ȱ L.ȱ Miller.ȱ 1999.ȱ Metalȱ Technologiesȱ ofȱ theȱ Indusȱ Valleyȱ TraditionȱinȱPakistanȱandȱWesternȱIndia.ȱTheȱEmergenceȱandȱDevelopmentȱofȱ Metallurgy.ȱV.ȱC.ȱPiggot.ȱ(Ed.).ȱUniversityȱMuseum.ȱPhiladelphia:ȱ107Ȭ151.ȱ Lal,ȱB.ȱB.ȱ1985.ȱReportȱonȱtheȱChemicalȱAnalysisȱandȱExaminationȱofȱMetallicȱandȱotherȱ Objectsȱ fromȱ Lothal.ȱ Lothalȱ aȱ Harappanȱ Portȱ Town.ȱ (1955Ȭ62).ȱ Vol.ȱ 2.ȱ Memmoirsȱ ofȱ Archaeologicalȱ Surveyȱ ofȱ India.ȱ No.ȱ 78.ȱ S.ȱ R.ȱ Raoȱ (Ed.).ȱ ArchaeologicalȱSurveyȱofȱIndia.ȱNewȱDelhi.ȱȱ Mackay,ȱE.ȱJ.ȱH.ȱȱ1943.ȱChanhuȱȬDaroȱExcavations.ȱ1935Ȭ36.ȱAmericanȱOrientalȱSociety.ȱ NewȱHaven.ȱ Mackay,ȱE.ȱJ.ȱH.ȱ1938.ȱFurtherȱExcavationsȱatȱMohanjodaro,ȱVol.ȱIȱandȱII.ȱGovernmentȱofȱ India.ȱNewȱDelhi.ȱ

564ȱ Patelȱetȱal.ȱ2014:ȱ545Ȭ592

Marshall,ȱJ.ȱ1931.ȱMohenjodaroȱandȱtheȱIndusȱCivilization,ȱVols.ȱIȱȬȱIII.ȱArthurȱProbsthain.ȱ London.ȱȱ Miller,ȱ H.ȱ 1994.ȱ Metalȱ Processingȱ atȱ Harappaȱ andȱ Mohenjodaro:ȱ Informationȱ fromȱ Nonmetalȱ Remains.ȱ Southȱ Asianȱ Archaeologyȱ 1993.ȱ A.ȱ Parpolaȱ andȱ P.ȱ Koskikallio.ȱ(Eds.).ȱȱAnnalesȱofȱAcademiaeȱScientiarumȱFennicae.ȱSeriesȱB.ȱ Volȱ.ȱ271.ȱHelsinki:ȱȱ497Ȭ510.ȱ Patel,ȱA.ȱ2005Ȭ2006.ȱCopperȱArtifactsȱfromȱBagasraȱ(GolaȱDhoro),ȱaȱHarappanȱSiteȱofȱ Gujarat,ȱWesternȱIndia.ȱPuratattvaȱ36:ȱ222Ȭ231.ȱ Patel,ȱA.ȱandȱP.ȱAjithprasad.ȱ(inȱPress).ȱDocumentingȱContext,ȱTypeȱandȱCompositionȱ ofȱ Harappan/Chalcolithicȱ Copperȱ Artifactsȱ fromȱ Bagasra.ȱ Proceedingsȱ ofȱ Bhujȱ Roundȱ Table,ȱ Internationalȱ Conferenceȱ onȱ Gujaratȱ Harappansȱ andȱ Chalcolithicȱ Cultures.ȱ Researchȱ Instituteȱ forȱ Humanityȱ andȱ Nature,ȱ Kyoto,ȱ GujaratȱStateȱDepartmentȱofȱArchaeology,ȱGandhinagarȱandȱJRNȱRajasthanȱ Vidyapeeth,ȱUdaipur.ȱBhuj.ȱ RajeshȱS.V.,ȱSaleemȱShaikh,ȱBradȱChase,ȱY.S.ȱRawat,ȱAmbikaȱPatel,ȱAbhayanȱG.S.,ȱAjitȱ Kumar,ȱ Charusmitaȱ Gadekar,ȱ Haseenȱ Rajaȱ R.,ȱ Akinoriȱ Uesugi,ȱ Vinodȱ V.,ȱ Renjinimolȱ M.N.ȱ andȱ Prabhinȱ Sukumaranȱ (inȱ Press).ȱ Craftȱ Productionȱ atȱ Navinal:ȱAȱHarappanȱSettlementȱinȱKachchhȱDistrict,ȱGujarat.ȱAtulyaȱVarso.ȱȱ Raoȱ 1985ȱ Rao,ȱ S.ȱ R.ȱ 1985.ȱ Lothalȱ Aȱ Harappanȱ Portȱ Townȱ (1955Ȭ62).ȱ Memoirsȱ ofȱ theȱ Archaeologicalȱ Surveyȱ ofȱ Indiaȱ 78ȱ Vol.ȱ II.ȱ Archaeologicalȱ Surveyȱ ofȱ India.ȱȱ NewȱDelhi.ȱ Rao,ȱS.ȱR.ȱ1963.ȱExcavationȱatȱRangpurȱandȱotherȱExplorationsȱinȱGujarat.ȱAncientȱIndiaȱ 18ȱandȱ19:ȱ5Ȭ207.ȱ Rao,ȱS.ȱR.ȱ1979.ȱLothalȱAȱHarappanȱPortȱTownȱ(1955Ȭ62).ȱMemoirsȱofȱtheȱArchaeologicalȱ SurveyȱofȱIndiaȱ78ȱVolumeȱI.ȱArchaeologicalȱSurveyȱofȱIndia.ȱȱNewȱDelhi.ȱ Shaffer,ȱ J.ȱ G.ȱ 1982.ȱ Harappanȱ Culture:ȱ Aȱ Reconsideration.ȱ Inȱ Harappanȱ Civilizationȱ aȱ ContemporaryȱPerspective.ȱG.ȱL.ȱPossehl.ȱ(Ed.).ȱOxfordȱandȱIBHȱPublishing.ȱ NewȱDelhi.ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ Sonawane,ȱ V.H.,ȱ P.ȱ Ajithprasad,ȱ K.K.ȱ Bhan,ȱ K.ȱ Krishnan,ȱ S.ȱ Pratapachandran,ȱ A.ȱ Majumdar,ȱ A.ȱ K.ȱ Patelȱ andȱ J.ȱ Menon.ȱ 2003.ȱ Excavationsȱ atȱ Bagasraȱ 1996Ȭ 2003:ȱAȱPreliminaryȱReport.ȱManȱandȱEnvironmentȱXXVIIIȱ(2):ȱ21Ȭ50.ȱ Vats,ȱM.ȱS.ȱ1940.ȱExcavationsȱatȱHarappa,ȱVol.ȱ2.ȱGovernmentȱofȱIndia.ȱDelhi.ȱ Vidale,ȱM.ȱ2000.ȱTheȱArchaeologyȱofȱIndusȱCrafts:ȱIndusȱcraftsȱpeopleȱandȱwhyȱweȱstudyȱthem.ȱ IstitutoȱItalianoȱperȱl’Africaȱeȱl’Orientale.ȱRome.ȱ Vidale,ȱM.,ȱandȱH.ȱMiller.ȱ2000.ȱOnȱtheȱDevelopmentȱofȱIndusȱTechnologicalȱVirtuosityȱ andȱitsȱRelationȱtoȱSocialȱStructure.ȱInȱSouthȱAsianȱArchaeologyȱ1997,ȱIstitutoȱ Italianoȱperȱl’Africaȱeȱl’OrientaleȱandȱIstitutoȱUniversitarioȱOrientale.ȱRomeȱ andȱNaples.ȱpp.ȱ115Ȭ132.ȱ Voort,ȱG.ȱF.ȱV.,ȱG.ȱM.ȱLucasȱandȱE.ȱP.ȱManilova.ȱ2004.ȱMetallographyȱanȱIntroduction,ȱ Metallographyȱ andȱ Microstructures.ȱ Vol.ȱ 9.ȱ ASMȱ Handȱ book,ȱ ASMȱ International,ȱUSA.ȱ Yule,ȱ P.ȱ 1985.ȱ Metalȱ workȱ ofȱ theȱ Bronzeȱ Ageȱ inȱ India.ȱ C.ȱ H.ȱ Beck’scheȱ VerlagbuchȬ handlung.ȱMunich.ȱ

565ȱ ISSNȱ2347ȱ–ȱ5463ȱHeritage:ȱJournalȱofȱMultidisciplinaryȱStudiesȱinȱArchaeologyȱ2:ȱ2014 

ȱ

566ȱ Patelȱetȱal.ȱ2014:ȱ545Ȭ592

ȱ

567ȱ ISSNȱ2347ȱ–ȱ5463ȱHeritage:ȱJournalȱofȱMultidisciplinaryȱStudiesȱinȱArchaeologyȱ2:ȱ2014 

ȱ

568ȱ Patelȱetȱal.ȱ2014:ȱ545Ȭ592

ȱ

569ȱ ISSNȱ2347ȱ–ȱ5463ȱHeritage:ȱJournalȱofȱMultidisciplinaryȱStudiesȱinȱArchaeologyȱ2:ȱ2014 

ȱ

570ȱ Patelȱetȱal.ȱ2014:ȱ545Ȭ592

ȱ

571ȱ ISSNȱ2347ȱ–ȱ5463ȱHeritage:ȱJournalȱofȱMultidisciplinaryȱStudiesȱinȱArchaeologyȱ2:ȱ2014 

ȱ

572ȱ Patelȱetȱal.ȱ2014:ȱ545Ȭ592

ȱ

573ȱ ISSNȱ2347ȱ–ȱ5463ȱHeritage:ȱJournalȱofȱMultidisciplinaryȱStudiesȱinȱArchaeologyȱ2:ȱ2014 

ȱ

574ȱ Patelȱetȱal.ȱ2014:ȱ545Ȭ592

ȱ

575ȱ ISSNȱ2347ȱ–ȱ5463ȱHeritage:ȱJournalȱofȱMultidisciplinaryȱStudiesȱinȱArchaeologyȱ2:ȱ2014 

ȱ

576ȱ Patelȱetȱal.ȱ2014:ȱ545Ȭ592

ȱ

577ȱ ISSNȱ2347ȱ–ȱ5463ȱHeritage:ȱJournalȱofȱMultidisciplinaryȱStudiesȱinȱArchaeologyȱ2:ȱ2014 

ȱ

578ȱ Patelȱetȱal.ȱ2014:ȱ545Ȭ592

ȱ

579ȱ ISSNȱ2347ȱ–ȱ5463ȱHeritage:ȱJournalȱofȱMultidisciplinaryȱStudiesȱinȱArchaeologyȱ2:ȱ2014 

ȱ

580ȱ Patelȱetȱal.ȱ2014:ȱ545Ȭ592

ȱ

581ȱ ISSNȱ2347ȱ–ȱ5463ȱHeritage:ȱJournalȱofȱMultidisciplinaryȱStudiesȱinȱArchaeologyȱ2:ȱ2014 

ȱ

582ȱ Patelȱetȱal.ȱ2014:ȱ545Ȭ592

ȱ

583ȱ ISSNȱ2347ȱ–ȱ5463ȱHeritage:ȱJournalȱofȱMultidisciplinaryȱStudiesȱinȱArchaeologyȱ2:ȱ2014 

ȱ

584ȱ Patelȱetȱal.ȱ2014:ȱ545Ȭ592

ȱ

585ȱ ISSNȱ2347ȱ–ȱ5463ȱHeritage:ȱJournalȱofȱMultidisciplinaryȱStudiesȱinȱArchaeologyȱ2:ȱ2014 

ȱ

586ȱ Patelȱetȱal.ȱ2014:ȱ545Ȭ592

ȱ

587ȱ ISSNȱ2347ȱ–ȱ5463ȱHeritage:ȱJournalȱofȱMultidisciplinaryȱStudiesȱinȱArchaeologyȱ2:ȱ2014 

ȱ

588ȱ Patelȱetȱal.ȱ2014:ȱ545Ȭ592

ȱ

589ȱ ISSNȱ2347ȱ–ȱ5463ȱHeritage:ȱJournalȱofȱMultidisciplinaryȱStudiesȱinȱArchaeologyȱ2:ȱ2014 

ȱ

590ȱ Patelȱetȱal.ȱ2014:ȱ545Ȭ592

ȱ

591ȱ ISSNȱ2347ȱ–ȱ5463ȱHeritage:ȱJournalȱofȱMultidisciplinaryȱStudiesȱinȱArchaeologyȱ2:ȱ2014 

ȱ

592ȱ