Oilseeds, Spices, Fruits and Flavour in the Indus Civilisation T J

Home , Banawali, Chanhudaro, Farmana, Hulas, Kacchi Plain, Kanmer

Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports 24 (2019) 879–887

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jasrep

Oilseeds, spices, fruits and flavour in the Indus Civilisation T J. Bates

Joukowsky Institute for Archaeology and the Ancient World, Brown University, United States of America

ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT

Keywords: The exploitation of plant resources was an important part of the economic and social strategies of the people of South Asia the Indus Civilisation (c. 3200–1500 BCE). Research has focused mainly on staples such as cereals and pulses, for Prehistoric agriculture understanding these strategies with regards to agricultural systems and reconstructions of diet, with some re- Archaeobotany ference to ‘weeds’ for crop processing models. Other plants that appear less frequently in the archaeobotanical Indus Civilisation record have often received variable degrees of attention and interpretation. This paper reviews the primary Cropping strategies literature and comments on the frequency with which non-staple food plants appear at Indus sites. It argues that Food this provides an avenue for Indus archaeobotany to continue its ongoing development of models that move beyond agriculture and diet to think about how people considered these plants as part of their daily life, with caveats regarding taphonomy and culturally-contextual notions of function.

1. Introduction 2. Traditions in Indus archaeobotany

By 2500 BCE the largest Old World Bronze Age civilisation had There is a long tradition of Indus archaeobotany. As summarised in spread across nearly 1 million km2 in what is now Pakistan and north- Fuller (2002) it can be divided into three phases: ‘consulting palaeo- west India (Fig. 1). The importance of agriculture to the Indus Civili- botanist phase’ (pre-1947–1974), ‘professional archaeobotanists phase’ sation has been noted by numerous authors (Marshall, 1931; Wheeler, (1974–1988), and ‘self-critical archaeobotany phase’ (1988–present). 1968; Fairservis, 1961, 1967; Vishnu-Mittre, 1974; Vishnu-Mittre and Over 140 Indus sites have been excavated, with over 60 reporting ar- Savithri, 1982; Chakrabarti, 1988; Weber, 1999, 2003; Fuller and chaeobotanical remains (Fuller and Madella, 2002; Possehl, 2002; Madella, 2002; Singh et al., 2008; Weber et al., 2011a; Petrie, 2013; Weber et al., 2011b; Bates, 2016; Petrie and Bates, 2017; Bates et al., in Petrie et al., 2016, 2017; Petrie and Bates, 2017; Bates et al., in prep.). prep.). This rich archaeobotanical tradition has resulted in a wide array However, our understanding of Indus agriculture, specifically the of data and discussions of the roles of plants in the Indus Civilisation, strategies relating to plants, derives from an archaeobotanical record with their use in environmental reconstruction (Madella, 2003; Madella that has likely been biased towards the remains of cereals and pulses and Fuller, 2006; Weber et al., 2011a; Farooqui et al., 2013; Petrie that have a better chance of survival (Hillman, 1981, 1984; Jones, et al., 2017), discussions on their role as material culture and tech- 1984a, 1984b; Jones, 1985; Weber, 1991, 1999, 2003; Stevens, 1996, nology (Kenoyer, 2004; Lancelotti, 2010, 2018; Lancelotti and Madella, 2003; Fuller, 2002; Fuller and Madella, 2002; Harvey and Fuller, 2005; 2012; Wright et al., 2012), through to models of Indus agriculture and Fuller and Harvey, 2006; Margaritis and Jones, 2006; Fuller and subsistence (Vishnu-Mittre, 1974; Vishnu-Mittre and Savithri, 1982; Stevens, 2009; Reddy, 1994, 1997, 2003; Fuller et al., 2014; Bates et al., Saraswat, 1992; Reddy, 1994, 1997, 2003; Weber, 1999; Weber and 2017a). Such skewing of the literature fails to take into account a more Fuller, 2008; Pokharia et al., 2014; Petrie et al., 2016; García-Granero holistic understanding of the aims of agricultural strategies - the crea- et al., 2016, 2017a, 2017b; Bates et al., 2017a, 2017b, 2017c; Petrie tion of food. This article aims to synthesise the existing primary ar- and Bates, 2017), to name but a few. A wide variety of species have chaeobotanical data on oilseeds, spices and fruits, and to explore how been reported (Bates, 2016), with over 260 genera/species noted across these have been interpreted in Indus archaeobotany. It will consider published reports of Indus and Painted Grey Ware period sites (Bates, how these approaches have affected our understanding of Indus ar- 2016; Petrie and Bates, 2017; Bates et al., in prep.). The vast majority of chaeobotanical datasets and outline how the developing field of Indus these however are incidental finds, single seeds, or reported simply in Civilisation foodways is changing this and is beginning to redress im- presence/absence form, preventing further analysis (Fuller and balances in interpreting different archaeobotanical remains. Madella, 2002; Weber et al., 2011b; Bates, 2016; Bates et al., in prep.). In many cases the finds are rarities — present only at a single site rather

E-mail address: [email protected]. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jasrep.2019.02.033 Received 1 November 2018; Received in revised form 22 February 2019; Accepted 25 February 2019 2352-409X/ © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. J. Bates Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports 24 (2019) 879–887

Fig. 1. Map of the Indus Civilisation and Painted Grey Ware periods showing the distribution of excavated sites, based on published data as of publication date of paper. Based on reported excavations in Indian Archaeology, a Review and Possehl (2002). than pan-regionally (Fuller and Madella, 2002; Weber et al., 2011b; to the way they have been interpreted – cereals, and to a lesser extent Bates, 2016; Bates et al., in prep.). In recent years attempts to bring pulses, are viewed as the staple food source, the basic fare of Indus life. together the systematically collected, quantified records have shown Indeed, Weber (1999: Fig. 4) modelled the relationship between interesting patterns of Indus agricultural strategy. Weber et al. (2011a) Indus archaeobotanical remains, creating a tiered system of im- and Petrie and Bates (2017) explored how Indus farmers may have portance. Tier I plants were, he argued, those “most abundant species exploited their environmental setting to create more complex seasonal recovered and those most crucial to the subsistence system” (Weber, and multi-cropping strategies according both to regional and micro- 1999: Fig. 4). Looking across to Weber (1999: Table 1) in which the tier ecological variation. In-depth quantified analyses at sites such as Har- system is equated to finds from Harappa and Rojdi, Tier I plants include appa (Weber, 2003), Rojdi (Weber, 1989, 1991), Oriyo Timbo and wheat and barley at Harappa and millets at Rojdi. Tier II plants under Babar Kot (Reddy, 1994, 1997, 2003), Farmana (Weber et al., 2011b), Weber's (1999) scheme are “cultivated crops of lesser importance” Shortughai (Willcox, 1991), Kunal and Balu (Saraswat and Pokharia, (Weber, 1999: Fig. 4), such as peas, lentils, some oilseeds like flax, and 2001, 2002), Loteshwar, Datrana and Vaharvo Timbo (García-Granero fruits like jujube at both Harappa and Rojdi (Weber, 1999: Table 1). et al., 2015, 2016, 2017a, 2017b), Kanmer (Kharakwal et al., 2008, Tier III on the other hand includes “a mix of cultivated and wild species 2011), and Masudpur I, Masudpur VII, Dabli vas Chugta, Burj and Ba- that play a minor role in subsistence” (Weber, 1999: Fig. 4) such as hola (Bates, 2016; Petrie et al., 2016; Bates et al., 2017a, 2017b, 2017c; melon at Rojdi and Harappa or even rice at Harappa (Weber, 1999: Petrie and Bates, 2017), amongst others, have allowed for an explora- Table 1). However, while Weber (1999: Table 1 & Fig. 4) discusses the tion of plant origins, crop processing, and individual agricultural stra- presence of Tier II and III crops at Harappa and Rojdi, with a greater tegies utilised by different Indus communities. As Weber (1999) has focus on pulses than fruits when thinking about the Tier II crops, he commented, these studies however, have tended to focus on the often goes on to focus throughout the rest of the paper on “only the main better preserved remains, the cereals and pulses, rather than rarer cereal grains found at each site, those taxa that account for the majority elements of assemblages. These biases relate both to the quantity of of the recovered seeds in most samples and top the hierarchy in each remains – cereals and pulses make up a far greater number of the re- model” (Weber, 1999: 821). mains (see sections SI.3–SI.7 in Petrie and Bates, 2017: supplementary It is perhaps timely then to return to the published primary ar- information and Tables 5.3.a–c in Weber, 2003 for example) – but also chaeobotanical literature to explore what Tier II and III plants were

880 J. Bates Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports 24 (2019) 879–887

Table 1 Saccharum sp. which he notes could be either sugar or nobil cane, a Summary of literature review data. possible fodder or food in times of scarcity dependant on species or use. Number of macrobotanical taxa Overall 62 At Rojdi Areca sp. is another example of the fine line between exploring possible food and non-food plants in the Indus as this includes betel Identified to generic group/type 6 palm, but is only identified to genus level and is therefore not discussed Identified to genus 20 further beyond listing presence (Weber and Vishnu-Mittre, 1989: 179). Identified species 36 However alongside these less certain plants there are a wide range of plants that have been identified to a level that provide more confidence Number of microbotanical taxa Overall 13 and that therefore can be explored as to their possible exploitation as foods or additives to Indus cooking, ranging from oilseeds like Brassica Identified to generic group/taxa 2 juncea (brown mustard) at sites like Banawali (IAR 1994–5; Saraswat Identified to family 2 Identified to genus 7 and Pokharia, 2000), to spices like Trigonella foenum-graceum (fenu- Identified to species 2 greek) at Rohira (Saraswat, 1986), Kunal (Saraswat and Pokharia, 2002) and Banawali (IAR 1994-5; Saraswat and Pokharia, 2000), and fruits like Juglans regia (walnut) at Hulas (Saraswat, 1993). Number of sites (macrobotanical) Overall 45 Microbotanical datasets (Supplementary Data Table 2) have also Periods Pre-Harappan 1 been adding to our understandings of Tier II and III plants in recent Early Harappan 15 years. Starch analysis in particular, seen at Farmana (Kashyap and Mature Harappan 17 Weber, 2010; Weber et al., 2011b) and Datrana (García-Granero et al., Late Mature Harappan 3 Late Harappan 13 2017a), has provided insight in plants that might otherwise not have Site specific chronology 4 survived archaeologically. At Farmana a range of spices including Harappan (generic) 12 Zingiber sp. (ginger) and Curcuma sp. (turmeric) were noted along with Date range provided 5 soft tissue vegetables like Solanum sp. (eggplant) and fruits like Man- PGW 3 gifera sp. (mango) on grinding stones, pottery and teeth (Kashyap and Weber, 2010; Weber et al., 2011b). Weber et al. (2011b: 820) point out Number of sites (microbotanical) Overall 13 that through this method they can not only identify hidden plant use but also explore associations between plants (getting closer perhaps to Periods Pre-Harappan 2 Early Harappan 3 recipes) and between plants and material culture. It is interesting that Mature Harappan 5 ginger was also noted, though only through one starch grain, at Datrana Late Mature Harappan 1 (García-Granero et al., 2017a). Phytolith analysis at several sites has Late Harappan 3 supported macrobotanical finds of date palm, cannabis and sugarcane Harappan (generic) 1 Date range provided 1 (Madella, 1997, 2003; García-Granero et al., 2015, 2016, 2017a, PGW 2 2017b; Bates, 2016; Bates et al., 2017a), while also suggesting that banana may have been utilised as Musa sp. leaf phytoliths have been found (Madella, 1997, 2003; García-Granero et al., 2015, 2016, 2017a, present at Indus Civilisation sites beyond the oft-discussed cereals and 2017b; Bates, 2016; Bates et al., 2017a; see Fuller and Madella, 2009 pulses and consider what this range of plants might mean to under- for discussion of banana origins, spread and use in the Indus and in standing Indus diet or food cultures. South Asia more broadly).

2.1. A review of the published data 2.1.1. The utilitarian fallacy in archaeobotanical interpretation One concern relating to the exploration of non-staple crops will Given the diverse sampling and quantification methods present in always be the issue of the utilitarian fallacy, as discussed at length by the Indus archaeobotanical publication record current to October 2017 Fuller and Madella (2002: 345–348) in relation to Chenopodium album (Weber et al., 2011b; Bates, 2016; Petrie and Bates, 2017), rather than at Rojdi (Weber, 1989, 1991) (see also Weber et al., 2011b for modern trying to compare and quantify the records across sites for Tier II and III uses; and Fuller, 2002; Fuller et al., 2014 for further discussion of the plants, this paper will instead focus on looking at what plants were utilitarian fallacy in archaeobotany). The notion that all seeds on site potentially available and how they have been presented in the primary must have a function pervades the discussion of Indus archaeobotany literature. Table 1 summarises the findings of the literature review. Full (Fuller and Madella, 2002; Fuller, 2002). Several reports assume that all data can be found in Tables 1 and 2 of the Supplementary Information. seeds had some function such as being famine food, medicine or fodder Table 1 in the Supplementary Information outlines the macro- (Fuller and Madella, 2002; Fuller, 2002). botanically preserved genus/species noted by authors as possible An example of the over-interpretation of archaeobotanical remains (human) foods at Indus sites that fall into Weber's (1999: Fig. 4) Tier II to explain their presence on site can be seen in the discussion of possible and III, barring cereals and pulses. Those taxa identified only to Family stimulants at Kunal (Saraswat and Pokharia, 2002: 133). Although only level were not included (e.g.: Papaveraceae or Brassicaceae). The ma- a single seed of Cannabis sativa, Ephedra sp. and two of Datura stramo- jority of these are seed remains, with the exception of Allium sativum nium were found at the site, a discussion of their possible role as sti- (garlic), found in clove form at Balu and Farmana (Saraswat and mulants and for their “medicinal properties” is carried out, with re- Pokharia, 2001; Kashyap and Weber, 2010; Weber et al., 2011b). In ference to much later texts, religious practices and non-Indus total 62 accessions have been identified that have the potential to have references. This is not to say that these plants may not have been used been used as foods or food additives (spices or for adding flavour). In for such functions at Indus sites, but that additional information such as some cases the plants have been identified to genus level such as assemblage and context is needed to determine this further. Brassica sp. (mustard type) and Papaver sp. (poppy type), but others Taphonomy is a critical aspect for understanding the formation of have been identified further to species level, such as Ziziphus nummu- archaeobotanical assemblages (see Fuller et al., 2014 for a summary of laria, Ziziphus jujube and Ziziphus mauritiana, species of jujube or ber previous discussions). There are multiple pathways for plant materials fruit This differing level of identification has resulted in many ofthe to reach a site, including both human action, environmental vectors and discussions in the literature being unclear as to their use in Indus life — accidental factors. The possible causes of preservation by charring are for example at Rojdi, Weber (1989: 241) notes the presence of not restricted to human cooking or use. Hillman (1981) suggested that

881 J. Bates Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports 24 (2019) 879–887 plants generally reach fire through the drying or parching ofcrop 2.1.2. Discussions on preparation, use and origin products, burning diseased crops, use of dung fuel, or by accidents such Assumptions about the role of fruits regardless of whether they are as during cooking. Dung fuel could be a major source of plant matter at wild species or cultivated are often made (see for example discussions sites, including plants that have been identified as foods under a utili- of Cordifolia grandis in Bates, 2016 and Petrie and Bates, 2017; and tarian approach. Cattle dung is often used as a fuel source in South Grewia sp. in Tengberg, 1999). While infrequently identified taxa that Asian villages rather than wood (Harris, 2000). Herbivorous animals have the potential to have been incorporated into the Indus archae- grazing on pastures or crop stubble, or being fed crop processing waste, obotanical assemblage as either weeds or as part of human practices produce a plant rich dung which, when dried makes a clean fuel that have sometimes been treated as insignificant or over-interpreted burns without smells. Further plant material can be added to the dung through a utilitarian lens, fruits have also often been over-interpreted. to increase the burn-potential of the dung. The impact that dung fuel Despite being present on sites often in low numbers, they are commonly has on charred macrobotanical remains has been explored previously described as important parts of Indus food ways. For example, Saraswat by scholars such as Hastorf and Wright (1998), Miller (1984), Miller and Pokharia (2002: 128) comment that they “played a significant role” and Smart (1984), Rosen (2005), Lancelotti (2010) and Lancelotti and despite forming only a small proportion of the finds at the site of Kunal. Madella (2012) but has been critiqued by scholars such as Reddy How fruits were handled is often discussed without evidence for fruit (1997) and Fuller et al. (2014). In particular Reddy (1997) and Fuller preparation in the archaeological record — at Kunal “as in antiquity as et al. (2014) highlight the possible range of other sources for seeds on today, both fresh and dried grapes were eaten. Fresh fruits are dried in archaeological sites beyond dung fuel, the disjunction between the in- the sun to form sweet raisins” (Saraswat and Pokharia, 2002: 128) and terpretative models applied to different regions and between the in- at Balu jujube fruit are also noted as possible medicine as today “they terpretations made concerning similar hunter-gatherer and farming are often dried and used in native medicine as cooling, anodyne and archaeobotanical assemblages. Recent research by Lancelotti (2018) tonic” (Saraswat and Pokharia, 2001: 168). Weber (1989: 265) simi- has explored the fuel resources of several Indus sites and suggests that larly describes the ways jujube is used today, from eating it to using it dung played an important role as a fuel source alongside wood, but the as a fodder to using the bark for tanning and medicine and building relationships between grazing, chaff inclusion and dung in the Indus is material. As Margaritis and Jones (2006) demonstrated in their study of complex, requiring us to think carefully about how the taphonomic grape processing, additional evidence such as skins and taphonomised pathways of many plants are disentangled. seeds are required to explore such activities, and the preservation This holds true even for plants that may be considered ‘food’. At the pathways of these are complex and uncommon. A lack of caution then site of Farmana Kashyap and Weber (2010) suggest that starch grains in Indus archaeobotany has often been applied to ‘edible fruits’ from dental calculus may show cattle eating similar foods to humans, (Tengberg, 1999: 8). including spices like turmeric and ginger, both identified at the site. The properties of plants are also sometimes of more interest than the Again however, there are many taphonomic pathways that could ac- assemblage or contextual associations of the archaeobotanical remains. count for this, including animals eating human food scraps. It does This can be seen in the way Linum usitatissimum (linseed) is discussed. however highlight the importance of considering the issue of dung fuel At Miri Qalat linseed is discussed as a fibre (Tengberg, 1999: 8) while at as a route for seeds entering a site, and thus for considering if a plant Kanmer (Pokharia et al., 2011: 1844) and Masudpur I (Bates, 2016; survived as a deliberate human food, in dung as animals eating human Petrie and Bates, 2017) it is explored as oilseed. In all three cases a food, or as something that animals may have eaten while being delib- review of these interpretations is perhaps warranted with more in- erately foddered or while freely grazing. depth contextual and artefactual reference. There is increasing evidence This notion of grazing also brings to light another interesting ta- available from Indus and northern South Asian for fibre use, stretching phonomic pathway for Indus oilseeds, spices and fruits — that of weeds, back to the use of cotton at Neolithic Mehrgarh (see Moulherat et al., and the taphonomic pathway of crop processing. While defining plant 2002). Jute has been identified in fibre form at Harappa (Wright et al., remains as agricultural weeds is a difficult topic in archaeobotany as 2012), and jute/hemp at Farmana (Weber et al., 2011b: 815). In ad- definitions of ‘weeds’ are culturally and practice specific, it is important dition to this evidence not only for fibre exploitation and complex to consider as crop processing is key route for seeds entering a site. weaving systems (see Wright et al., 2012 for discussion of technolo- Seeds can be accidentally gathered in during harvest and brought to gies), there is evidence for non-plant based fibre exploitation in the site, and are then removed through the crop processing stages. Crop form of wild silk at Harappa and Chanhu Daro (Good et al., 2009). This processing models have become an important tool for exploring social suggests therefore that careful exploration of the full assemblage, organisation through plant remains and agricultural labour organisa- context and taphonomy of any fibre/oilseed remains is essential for tion (Hillman, 1981, 1984; Jones, 1984a, 1984b; Jones, 1985; Weber, determining the use of plants such as Linum usitatissimum or even 1991; Stevens, 1996, 2003; Fuller, 2002; Harvey and Fuller, 2005; Gossypium herbaceum/arboreum, both of which can be used for fibres but Fuller and Stevens, 2009; Reddy, 1997, 2003; Fuller et al., 2014). also for other functions such as oils (Singh et al., 1965). Over-interpretive utilitarian approaches thus ignore the potential Discussions about the origin of plants are often dominant in many for seeds to provide information on other aspects of agricultural orga- studies. This also holds true for several of the Tier I plants as well, see nisation such as crop processing, foddering and dung fuel, or even for example Weber (1989), Weber and Fuller (2008), Pokharia et al. further to think about ecological information for exploring agricultural (2014) on the origins of millets and Willcox (1991), Liu et al. (2017) strategies like manuring or ploughing (e.g.: Jones, 1981, 1984a, 1984b, and Lister et al. (2018) and on wheat and barley. Tier II and III plants 1985, 1986; van der Veen, 1992; Stevens, 1996). These alternative however are particularly explored in archaeobotanical reports as to approaches assume that non-crop remains do not necessarily have a whether they have exotic or native origins in South Asia. For example ‘function’ but are instead sources of information more broadly and need dedicated sections of the archaeobotanical reports of Kunal (Saraswat to be explored in their own right. and Pokharia, 2002) and Miri Qalat (Tengberg, 1999) are devoted to In the case of the Cannabis sativa, Ephedra sp. and Datura stramonium exploring the domestication of Vitis sp. (grape) despite the small at Kunal, Saraswat and Pokharia (2002) explore their presence as numbers of seeds at both sites. These discussions are perhaps prominent possible wild taxa growing in the area and their potential to provide as they tie into wider debates for exploring social organisation and for information on cultivation practices or environmental conditions the implications they have for understanding trade networks and value around the site. However Saraswat and Pokharia (2002:133) argue that systems in the past (Fuller and Madella, 2002; Weber, 2003; Weber “Early Harappans in all likelihood would have not afforded to neglect et al., 2011b; see also Boivin et al., 2014). these plants” and favour instead the utilitarian interpretation based on later texts, religious practices and non-Indus references.

882 J. Bates Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports 24 (2019) 879–887

2.2. The problems of preservation and publication been found at 45 sites, making them present across two-thirds of the sites in the published archaeobotanical literature (Bates et al., forth- The lack of study of Tier II and III plants may be due in part to the coming). This suggests, as Weber et al. (2011b: 820) comment, that irregular use of flotation as a practice on Indus sites (see Kashyap and spices, flavourings and additions to the staple cereals and pulses were Weber, 2010; García-Granero et al., 2017a, 2017b). Weber et al. not rare or unusual but a regular part of the Indus diet. (2011b: 809) note that due to the lack of flotation and thus recovery The ubiquity of these plants across sites shows that it is important to “fibre and oilseeds producing plants (cotton, linseed and sesame) and explore them in greater detail within future archaeobotanical analyses, that roots and tubers (ginger, turmeric and yams) have rarely been as they affect our understanding of Indus agricultural strategies and recovered at Harappan sites (Fuller and Madella, 2002). Tropical fruits aims (Weber et al., 2011a; Wright, 2010; Petrie and Bates, 2017; Bates (natives such as mango, jamun and amala) and spices (such as black et al., in prep.). These plants are not restricted by seasonality, for ex- pepper, nutmeg, cinnamon, clove and asafoetida) which might have ample Linum usitatissimum (linseed) is rabi (winter), Capparis decidua been a part of the Harappan diet (Kenoyer, 1998) are also minimally (karira) is zaid (summer) and Sesamum indicum (sesame) is kharif represented or missing from archaeobotanical record”. This could, (monsoonal) in season (Chakrabarti, 1988; Kumar et al., 2002; Rai, however, also be due to differential preservation. While cereals and 2004; Asawa, 2006; Kumar, 2006; Punia et al., 2011; Singh et al., 2011; pulses have both crop processing and cooking pathways that involve Mondal et al., 2014; Petrie and Bates, 2017), nor are they all grown in a fire (parching, roasting boiling for example —see Hillman, 1981, 1984; single year, as while Trigonella foenum-graceum (fenugreek) is grown as Jones, 1984a, 1984b; Jones, 1985; Weber, 1991; Stevens, 1996, 2003; an annual, Ricinus communis (castor oil) grows as a perennial and the Fuller, 2002; Harvey and Fuller, 2005; Fuller and Harvey, 2006; Fuller fruit trees only grow as long term investments in land (Petrie and Bates, and Stevens, 2009; Reddy, 1994, 1997, 2003; Fuller et al., 2014; Bates 2017). These plants also grow in a range of environments and under et al., 2017a), fruits, whole unprocessed spices and vegetal remains like different growing conditions (Petrie and Bates, 2017), affecting the leaves or identifiable tuber fragments are unlikely to regularly reach kinds of labour invested in interacting with them (Petrie and Bates, fire during preparation or cooking (Fuller and Madella, 2002; Fuller 2017). As such they need to be incorporated into the main archae- et al., 2014; see also Margaritis and Jones, 2006). The discovery of obotanical discussions, interpretations and modelling of Indus en- Allium sativum (garlic) cloves at Balu and Farmana (Saraswat and vironments, agriculture and ‘diet’. Pokharia, 2001; Weber et al., 2011b) therefore deserves recognition as Thinking about Tier II and III plants alongside staples might also it is rare that whole cloves undamaged by food preparation would reach allow us to move beyond agriculture and ‘diet’ to think about plant use fire in order to be charred. The presence of garlic at two sites suggests as social construct. As Sherratt (1991: 50) has argued, “we do not eat that this was a crop familiar to Indus people in the region, but that it species, we eat meals”, and these meals are, as Hastorf (2016: 2) has may have been missed at other sites due to a lack of preservation or pointed out, made up of a series of categorisations of what is and is not recovery. classed as food. This notion of food and meals, rather than diet and Starch analysis has been raised as a method for adding new in- agriculture, has become increasingly important in the wider field of formation in situations where the preparation method or preservation archaeobotany (see Gumerman IV, 1997; Smith, 2006; Twiss, 2012; pathways of plants would result in a lack of macrobotanical preserva- Hastorf, 2016), and is a burgeoning field in Indus archaeology as well. tion (Kashyap and Weber, 2010; Weber et al., 2011b; García-Granero Work by Chase (2012a, 2012b, 2014) has explored how different et al., 2017a, 2017b). The discovery of species previously unknown to cuts of meat and animal products were used by Indus peoples as part of the Indus such as Zingiber sp. (ginger) at both Farmana and Datrana “inclusionary ideologies” but also markers of social difference. Chase (Kashyap and Weber, 2010; Weber et al., 2011b; García-Granero et al., (2012a, 2012b) has argued that at the site of Bagasra, Gujarat, the 2017a, 2017b) have opened up new questions regarding cooking butchery and cooking technologies demonstrate social difference and practices and ideas about recipes. However the practice of starch ana- inclusion, and that while the tools used for meat preparation do not lysis has been called into question relating to the preservation pathways seem to have differed across Bagasra, and the initial stages in meat of starch in archaeological contexts (Briggs et al., 2000; Butts and butchery would suggest that people living inside and outside the walled Briggs, 2011; Mercader et al., 2018a). The wide range of destructive areas of the site acquired meat from a common market source, the way agents that can attack starch and the lack of data relating to the ways this meat was prepared and used shows different recipes, which could starch could be preserved over such long periods of time has been relate to different ideologies or identities. Fuller and Rowlands (2011; raised as an issue (Adu and Oades, 1978; Barton, 2009; Henry et al., see also Fuller, 2005) have explored how cooking technologies may link 2009; Collins and Copeland, 2011; Crowther, 2012; Henry, 2015; to Indus identities. They argue that existing culinary traditions influ- Hutschenreuther et al., 2017; Mercader et al., 2018a), as has the theory ence how readily new food items are adopted. This additive process is of the protection of starch in microniches in artefacts given the size of thus linked to the traditional culinary “template” (Fuller and Rowlands, the destructive agents (Dorn, 1998; Golubic and Schneider, 2003; Luef 2011: 38) of the region. In South Asia in particular they suggest that a et al., 2015; Mehta and Satyanarayana, 2016; Pedergnana and Ollé, frontier between culinary styles existed, between grinding/bread 2018; Xhauflair et al., 2017; Mercader et al., 2018a), and problems technologies to the west and sticky/boiling technologies to the east. The relating to identification and cooking distortions, along with sampling Indus foodway, they argue, was influenced by the grinding/bread tra- strategies have been explored (Henry et al., 2009; Collins and dition (Fuller and Rowlands, 2011: Fig. 5.2). This may account for why Copeland, 2011; Copeland and Hardy, 2018; Mercader et al., 2018a, rice, a sticky/boiling food, was not readily adopted in some areas of the 2018b). This therefore suggests that while the starch grains from the Indus such as at Harappa. Madella (2014: 226) points out “Indus society Indus have provided some interesting lines of enquiry for exploring constructed bonds and relationships through alternative and less ob- Indus Tier II and III plants and their uses, some caution is needed, and vious ways” and their use of crops may have been yet another part of more investigation of the preservation and analytical pathways is this. The slow adoption of rice may have been linked to a social re- needed. sistance to this crop, tastes or ideas of social identity, or indicate that rice was a restricted and controlled food, its consumption linked with 3. The future of holistic Indus archaeobotany? social class or identities (Madella, 2014). Microbotanical approaches are also addressing the notion of Indus What is apparent from the review of the published archaeobotanical foodways. Although there remain issues with starch analysis (see literature is the wide range of these lesser discussed plants, including Mercader et al., 2018a), Kashyap and Weber's (2010) and Weber et al.'s both wild and cultivated species of oil/fibre seed, fruits and spices. (2011b: 820) interpretation of the starch granules at Farmana went While these are not found in great quantities at most sites, they have beyond discussing the individual components of the dataset to look at

883 J. Bates Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports 24 (2019) 879–887 the links between specific types of plants and different material culture, invaluable advice and guidance both throughout her PhD, post-doctoral alongside evidence for people eating them from the analysis of starches work and on this paper. She would also like to extend her deepest trapped in dental calculus. It provided a demonstration of different food thanks to Dr. Katherine Brunson for her ever insightful comments that preparation and consumption practice (Weber et al., 2011b: 820; see have improved this paper greatly. also Goody, 1982: 37), and thought through ideas of food combinations and cooking methods. Such approaches, and those being trialled by Appendix A. Supplementary data Suryanarayan and colleagues using lipid and residue analysis (Sur- yanarayan et al. forthcoming) to look at cooking practices and recipes, Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https:// are moving beyond faceless models to consider more agentive, huma- doi.org/10.1016/j.jasrep.2019.02.033. nised understandings of how people used food in the past. Combined with more rigorous quantified and contextual analysis of macro- References botanical remains of all plant species from sites, these approaches will allow us to take the next step in building a picture of Indus plant use — Adu, J.K., Oades, J.M., 1978. Utilization of organic materials in soil aggregates by bac- one of the actual goals of Indus plant growing, the creation of food for teria and fungi. Soil Biol. Biochem. 10, 117–122. Asawa, G.L., 2006. Irrigation and Water Resources Engineering. New Age International, cooking and eating. New Delhi. Developing these ideas of Indus foodways is the next step, it is al- Barton, H., 2009. Starch granule taphonomy. In: Haslam, M., Robertson, G., Crowther, A., lowing Indus archaeology to move beyond ‘subsistence’ and ‘diet’. One Nugent, S., Kirkwood, L. (Eds.), Archaeological Science under a Microscope: Studies in Residue and Ancient DNA Analusis in Honour of Thomas H. Loy. ANU E Press, further approach to bring to these models maybe to consider the notion Canberra, pp. 129–140. of flavour. This will help in the goals laid outby Kashyap and Weber Bates, J., 2016. Social Organisation and Change in Bronze Age South Asia: A Multi-proxy (2010), Fuller and Rowlands (2011), Weber et al. (2011b), Chase Approach to Urbanisation, Deurbanisation and Village Life Through Phytolith and (2012a, 2012b, 2014), and Madella (2014) in creating this more Macrobotanical Analysis. PhD. University of Cambridge, Cambridge. Bates, J., Singh, R.N., Petrie, C.A., 2017a. Exploring Indus crop processing: combining agentive and realistic picture of the Indus Civilisation. Hastorf (2016) phytolith and macrobotanical analyses to consider the organisation of agriculture in has noted that today we associate specific flavours with certain dishes, northwest India c. 3200–1500 BC. Veg. Hist. Archaeobotany 26, 25–41. cuisines and even cultural groups, and that there is no reason to think Bates, J., Petrie, C.A., Singh, R.N., 2017b. Cereals, calories and change: exploring approaches to quantification in Indus archaeobotany. Archaeol. Anthropol. Sci. 1–14. that people in the past would not have done so as well. For example in Bates, J., Petrie, C.A., Singh, R.N., 2017c. Approaching rice domestication in South Asia: the Han Dynasty tomb #1 of Lady Dia and the neighbouring tomb #3 in new evidence from Indus settlements in northern India. J. Archaeol. Sci. 78, 193–201. the Yangtze, the food stores and their bamboo tags have allowed ar- Bates J., Garcia-Granero J.J., Petrie C.A., Madella M., Singh R.N. and Ajithprasad P. (in prep.), Shaping ‘Indusness’: food as an integrative material culture in the Indus ci- chaeologists to identify both the seasonings favoured by Han nobility vilisation of South Asia, J. Anthropol. Archaeol. and their preparation methods: salt, sugar, honey, soy sauce and shih Benecke, N., Neef, R., 2005. Faunal and plant remains from Sohr Damb/Nal: a prehistoric (salted darkened beans), used to make keng stews of seasoned boiled site (c.3000–2000 BC) in Central Balochistan, Pakistan. In: Franke-Vogt, U., Weisshaar, H.-J. (Eds.), South Asian Archaeology 2003. Linden Soft, Aachen, pp. grains and vegetables (Yü, 1977). Using a foodways approach (see for 81–91. example Goody, 1982; Messer, 1984; Fischler, 1988; Gumerman IV, Besenval, R., 1994. The 1992–1993 field-seasons at Miri Qalat: new contributions tothe 1997; Smith, 2006; Twiss, 2012; Hastorf, 2016) and flavour principle as chronology of protohistoric settlement in Pakistani Makran. In: Parpola, A., Koskikallio, P. (Eds.), South Asian Archaeology 1993. Helsinki, Annales Academiae suggested by Rozin (1973, 1982), for example, could allow Indus ar- Scientiarum Fennicae, pp. 81–91. chaeologists to being think about how foodways developed and were Besenval, R., Marquis, P., 1993. Excavations at Miri Qalat (Pakistani Makran): results of used as part of daily life in the expression of identity. Such a change in the first field-season (1990). In: Gail, A.J., Mevissen, G.J.R. (Eds.), South Asian mindset, with caveats of caution regarding the interpretation of remains Archaeology 1991. Steiner, Stuttgart, pp. 31–48. Bisht, R.S., 2009. Paradigms of the Harappan engineering at Dholavira. In: Srivastava, outlined in this paper, will perhaps create a more dynamic under- V.K., Singh, M.K. (Eds.), A Festschrift in Honour of Professor D.K. Bhattacharya. standing of Indus plant use. Palaka Prakashan, Delhi. Bisht, R.S., Asthana, S., 1979. Banawali and some other recently excavated Harappan sites in India. In: Taddei, M. (Ed.), South Asian Archaeology 1977, pp. 223–240 Naples. Acknowledgements Boivin, N., Crowther, A., Prendergast, M., Fuller, D.Q., 2014. Indian Ocean food globa- lisation and Africa. Afr. Archaeol. Rev. 31, 547–581. This paper developed out of research conducted for the Land, Water Briggs, D.E.G., Evershed, R.P., Lockheart, M.J., 2000. The biomolecular paleontology of continental fossils. Paleobiology 26, 169–193. and Settlement project, which has been investigating human–environ- Butts, S.H., Briggs, D.E.G., 2011. Silicification through time. In: Allison, P.A., Bottjer, D.J. ment relations in northwest India. It presents material gathered for a (Eds.), Taphonomy: Aims and Scope Topics in Geobiology. Springer, Dordrecht, pp. literature review that formed part of the author's PhD dissertation, but 411–434. Chakrabarti, D.K., 1988. A History of Indian Archaeology from Beginning to 1947. much of that information is being presented in new ways here, and its Munshiram Manoharlal Publishers, New Delhi. scope has also been expanded. That PhD research was funded by the Chase, B., 2012a. More than one way to skin a goat? Domestic technologies of the Indus Arts and Humanities Research Council (AHRC), United Kingdom (Grant Civilisation in Baluchistan and Gujarat. In: Lefevre, V. (Ed.), Orientalismes Dd l'archaeologie Au Musee. Melanges Offert a Jean-Francois Jarrige. Brepols Publishers No. 1080510), and this paper has been written up while she has been n.v, Turnhout, pp. 161–176. the Trevelyan Research Fellow in Archaeology & Anthropology at Chase, B., 2012b. Crafting Harappan cuisine on the Saurashtran Frontier of the Indus Selwyn College, University of Cambridge and a Post-doctoral Research Civilisation. In: Graff, S.R., Rodriguez-Alegria, E. (Eds.), The Menial Art of Cooking, Associate at the Joukowsky Institute for Archaeology and the Ancient Archaeological Studies of Cooking and Food Preparation. The University Press of Colorado, Denver, pp. 145–172. World, Brown University. The Land, Water and Settlement project ran Chase, B., 2014. On the pastoral economies of Harappan Gujarat: faunal analyses at from 2007 to 2014 and was primarily funded by a Standard Award from Shikarpur in context. Heritage 2, 1–22. the UK India Education Research Initiative United Kingdom (UKIERI) Collins, M.J., Copeland, L., 2011. Ancient starch: cooked or just old? PNAS 108, E145 author reply E146. under the title ‘From the collapse of Harappan urbanism to the rise of Copeland, L., Hardy, K., 2018. Archaeological starch. Agronomy 8, 4. the great Early Historic cities: Investigating the cultural and geo- Costantini, L., 1979. Plant remains at Pirak. In: Jarrige, J.-F., Santoni, M. (Eds.), Fouilles graphical transformation of northwest India between 2000 and 300 BC’. de Pirak. Diffusion de Boccard, Paris, pp. 326–333. Costantini, L., 1981. Palaeoethnobotany at Pirak: a contribution to the 2nd millennium Smaller grants were also awarded by the British Academy's Stein Arnold BC of the Sibi-Kacchi Plain, Pakistan. In: Hartel, H. (Ed.), South Asian Archaeology Fund, United Kingdom, the Isaac Newton Trust, the McDonald Institute 1979. Dietrich Reimer, Berlin, pp. 271–278. for Archaeological Research, United Kingdom, and the Natural Costantini, L., 1987. Appendix B. Vegetal remains. In: Stacul, G. (Ed.), Prehistoric and Protohistoric Swat, Pakistan. Instituto Italiano per il Medio es Estremo Oriente, Rome, Environment Research Council (NERC), United Kingdom. The author pp. 155–165. would like to thank the co-directors of the Land, Water and Settlement Costantini, L., 1990. Harappan agriculture in Pakistan: the evidence from Nausharo. In: project Dr. Cameron A. Petrie and Prof. R. N. Singh, who have been Taddei, M. (Ed.), South Asian Archaeology 1987. Instituto Italiano per il Medio es Estremo Oriente, Rome, pp. 321–332. sources of important insights throughout the project and provided

884 J. Bates Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports 24 (2019) 879–887

Crowther, A., 2012. The differential survival of native starch during cooking andim- from cooking. J. Archaeol. Sci. 36, 915–922. plications for archaeological analyses: a review. Archaeol. Anthropol. Sci. 4, Hillman, G.C., 1981. Reconstructing crop husbandry practices from charred remains of 221–235. crops. In: Mercer, R. (Ed.), Farming Practice in British Prehistory. Edinburgh Dales, G., 1979. The Balakot Project: summary of four years of excavations in Pakistan. In: University Press, Edinburgh, pp. 123–161. Taddei, M. (Ed.), South Asian Archaeology 1977. Instituto Italiano per il Medio es Hillman, G.C., 1984. Interpretation of archaeological plant remains: the application of Estremo Oriente, Naples, pp. 241–274. ethnographic models from Turkey. In: van Zeist, W., Casparie, W.A. (Eds.), Plants and van der Veen, M., 1992. Crop husbandry regimes, an archaeobotanical study of farming in Ancient Man — Studies in Paleaoethnobotany. A.A. Balkema, Rotterdam, pp. northern England 1000 BC–AD 500. In: Sheffield Archaeological Monographs. 114–152. Department of Archaeology and Prehistory, University of Sheffield, Sheffield. Hutschenreuther, A., Watzke, J., Schmidt, S., Büdel, T., Henry, A.G., 2017. Archaeological Dhavalikar, M.K., 1996. Kuntasi and the Indus Civilisation, in: Kuntasi: A Harappan implications of the digestion of starches by soil bacteria: interaction among starches Emporium on West Coast. Deccan College Postgraduate and Research Institute, Pune, leads to differential preservation. J. Archaeol. Sci. Rep. 15, 95–108. pp. 371–374. Indian Archaeology, a Review 1958–9; 1962–3; 1968–9; 1969–70; 1970–1; 1972–3; Dorn, R.I., 1998. Rocking Coatings. Elsevier, New York. 1974–5; 1975–6; 1977–8; 1978–9; 1979–80; 1980–1; 1981–2; 1982–3; 1983–4; Fairservis, W.A., 1961. The Harappan Civilization: New Evidence and More Theory. 2055 1984–5; 1985–6; 1986–7; 1987–8; 1988–9; 1989–90; 1990–1; 1992–3; 1993–4; American Museum Novitates. 1994–5; 1995–6; 1996–7; 1997–8; 1998–9. Fairservis, W.A., 1967. The Origin, Character and Decline of an Early Civilisation. 2302 Jarrige, J.-F., 1989. Excavation at Nausharo. Pak. Archaeol. 24, 21–68. American Museum Novitates. Jarrige, J.-F., Lechevallier, M., 1979. Excavations at Mehrgarh, Baluchistan: their sig- Farooqui, A., Gaur, A.S., Prasad, V., 2013. Climate, vegetation and ecology during nificance in the prehistorical context of the Indo-Pakistan borderlands. In: Taddei,M. Harappan period: excavations at Kanjetar and Kaj, mid-Saurashtra coast, Gujarat. J. (Ed.), South Asian Archaeology 1977. Instituto Italiano per il Medio es Estremo Archaeol. Sci. 40, 2631–2647. Oriente, Naples, pp. 463–535. Fischler, C., 1988. Food, self and identity. Soc. Sci. Inf. 27, 275–292. Jarrige, J.-F., Quivron, G., Jarrige, C., 2011. Nindowari, Pakistan: la Culture de Kulli: Ses Franke-Vogt, U., 2005. Excavations at Sohr Damb/Nal: results of the 2002 and 2004 Origines et Ses Relations Avec la Civilisation de l'Indus (The Kulli Culture: Its Origins seasons. In: Franke-Vogt, U., Weisshaar, H.-J. (Eds.), South Asian Archaeology 2003. and Its Relations with the Indus Civilization). Ginkgo, Paris. Deutsches Archaeologishes Institut, Aachen, pp. 63–76. Jones, G.E.M., 1984a. Interpretation of archaeological plant remains: ethnographic Fuller, D.Q., 2002. Fifty years of archaeobotanical studies in India: laying a solid foun- models from Greece. In: van Zeist, W., Casparie, W.A. (Eds.), Plants and Ancient Man dation. In: Settar, S., Korisettar, R. (Eds.), Indian Archaeology in Retrospect III: — Studies in Paleaoethnobotany. A.A. Balkema, Rotterdam, pp. 43–61. Archaeology and Interactive Disciplines. Manohar, New Delhi, pp. 247–364. Jones, M.K., 1981. The development of crop husbandry. In: Jones, M.K., Dimbleby, G. Fuller, D.Q., 2005. Ceramics, seeds and culinary change in prehistoric India. Antiquity 79, (Eds.), The Environment of Man, the Iron Age to the Anglo-Saxon Period. British 761–777. Archaeological Reports, Oxford, pp. 95–127. Fuller, D.Q., Harvey, E.L., 2006. The archaeobotany of Indian pulses: identification, Jones, M.K., 1984b. The Ecological and Cultural Implications of Carbonised Seed processing and evidence for cultivation. Environ. Archaeol. 11, 219–246. Assemblages from Selected Archaeological Contexts in Southern Britain. D.Phil.. Fuller, D.Q., Madella, M., 2002. Issues in Harappan Archaeobotany: retrospect and pro- University of Oxford, Oxford. spect. In: Settar, S., Korisettar, R. (Eds.), Indian Archaeology in Retrospect II: Jones, M.K., 1985. Archaeobotany beyond subsistence reconstruction. In: Barker, G., Protohistory. Manohar, New Delhi, pp. 317–390. Gamble, C. (Eds.), Beyond Domestication in Prehistoric Europe, Investigations in Fuller, D.Q., Madella, M., 2009. Banana cultivation in South Asia and East Asia: a review Subsistence Archaeology and Social Complexity. Academic Press, London, pp. of the evidence from archaeology and linguistics. Ethnobot. Res. Appl. 7, 333. 107–128. Fuller, D.Q., Rowlands, M., 2011. Ingestion and food technologies: maintaining differ- Jones, M.K., 1986. The carbonised plant remains. In: Miles, D. (Ed.), Archaeology at ences over the long-term in West, South and East Asia. In: Bennet, J., Sherratt, S., Barton Court Farm, Abingdon, Oxon. Council for British Archaeology, Research Wilkinson, T.C. (Eds.), Interweaving Worlds — Systematic Interactions in Eurasia, 7th Report 50, Fische 9, London, pp. A1-9:B5. to 1st Millennia BC. Essays from a Conference in Memory of Professor Andrew Kajale, M., 1996. Palaeoethnobotanical investigations at Balathal: preliminary results. In: Sherratt. Oxbow Books, Oxford, pp. 37–60. Man and Environment XXI, pp. 98–102. Fuller, D.Q., Stevens, C.J., 2009. Agriculture and the development of complex societies. Kashyap, A., Weber, S.A., 2010. Harappan plant use revealed by starch grains from In: Fairburn, A., Weiss, E. (Eds.), From Foragers to Famers: Papers in Honour of Farmana, India. Antiq. Proj. Gall. 84, 326. Gordon C. Hillman. Oxbow Books, Oxford, pp. 37–57. Kenoyer, J.M., 1998. Ancient Cities of the Indus Valley. Oxford University Press, Karachi. Fuller, D.Q., Stevens, C.J., McClatchie, M., 2014. Routine activities, tertiary refuse and Kenoyer, J.M., 2004. Ancient textiles of the Indus Valley region. In: Bilgrami, N. (Ed.), labour organisation: social inferences from everyday archaeobotany. In: Madella, M., Tana Bana: The Woven Soul of Pakistan. Koel Publications, Karachi, pp. 18–31. Lancelotti, C., Savard, M. (Eds.), Ancient Plants and People, Contemporary Trends in Kesarwani, A., 2000. Balu: a fortified rural settlement in Haryana. Puratattva 31, Archaeology. University of Arizona Press, Tuscon, pp. 174–217. 140–152. García-Granero, J.J., Lancelotti, C., Madella, M., 2015. A tale of multi-proxies: integrating Khan, F.A., 1968. Pakistan Archaeology. Number 5. Department of Archaeology, Ministry macro- and microbotanical remains to understand subsistence strategies. Veg. Hist. of Education, Government of Pakistan, Karachi. Archaeobotany 24, 121–133. Kharakwal, J.S., Rawat, Y.S., Osada, T., 2008. Preliminary observations on the excavation García-Granero, J.J., Lancelotti, C., Madella, M., Ajithprasad, P., 2016. Millets and her- at Kanmer, Kachchh, India, 2006–2007. In: Occasional Paper 5: Linguistics, ders: the origins of plant cultivation in semiarid North Gujarat (India). Curr. Archaeology and the Human Past, pp. 5–24. Anthropol. 57, 149–173. Kharakwal, J.S., Rawat, Y.S., Osada, T., 2011. Annual report of excavation at Kanmer García-Granero, J.J., Gadekar, C.S., Esteban, I., Lancelotti, C., Madella, M., Ajithprasad, 2007–8 and 2008–9. Occas. Pap. 10, 71–104. P., 2017a. What is on the craftsmen's menu? Plant consumption at Datrana, a 5000- Khatri, J.S., Acharya, M., 1995. Kunal: a new Indus-Saraswati site. Puratattva 25, 84–86. year-old lithic blade workshop in North Gujarat, India. Archaeol. Anthropol. Sci. 9, Kumar, S., 2006. Climate change and crop breeding objectives in the twenty first century. 251–263. Curr. Sci. 90, 1053–1054. García-Granero, J.J., Lancelotti, C., Madella, M., 2017b. A methodological approach to Kumar, S., Bahl, J., Bansal, R., Gupta, A., Singh, V., Sharma, S., 2002. High economic the study of microbotanical remains from grinding stones: a case study in northern returns from companion and relay cropping of bread wheat and menthol mint in the Gujarat (India). Veg. Hist. Archaeobotany 26, 43–57. winter–summer season in north Indian plains. Ind. Crop. Prod. 15, 103–114. Golubic, S., Schneider, J., 2003. Microbial endoliths as internal biofilms. In: Krumbein, Lal, B.B., 1970. Perhaps the earliest ploughed field so far excavated anywhere inthe W.E., Paterson, D.M., Zavarzin, G.A. (Eds.), Fossil and Recent Biofilms: A Natural world. Puratattva 4, 1–3. History of Life on Earth. Springer, Dordrecht, pp. 249–263. Lal, B.B., 1997. The Earliest Civilisation of South Asia. Aryan Books, Delhi. Good, I.L., Kenoyer, J.M., Meadow, R.H., 2009. New evidence for early silk in the Indus Lancelotti, C., 2010. Fuelling Harappan Hearths: Human-Environment Interactions as civilization. Archaeometry 51, 457–466. Revealed by Fuel Exploitation and Use. PhD. University of Cambridge, Cambridge. Goody, J., 1982. Cooking, Cuisine and Class. A Study in Comparative Sociology. Lancelotti, C., 2018. “Not all that burns is wood”. A social perspective on fuel exploitation Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. and use during the Indus urban period (2600–1900 BC). PLoS One 13, e0192364. Goyal, P., Pokharia, A.K., Kharakwal, J.S., Joglekar, P.P., Rawat, Y.S., Osada, T., 2013. Lancelotti, C., Madella, M., 2012. The ‘invisible’ product: developing markers for iden- Subsistence system, paleoecology, and 14C chronology at Kanmer, a Harappan site in tifying dung in archaeological contexts. J. Archaeol. Sci. 39, 953–963. Gujarat, India. Radiocarbon 55, 141–150. Lister, D.L., Jones, H., Oliveira, H.R., Petrie, C.A., Liu, X., Cockram, J., Kneale, C.J., Gumerman IV, G., 1997. Food and complex societies. J. Archaeol. Method Theory 4, Kovaleva, O., Jones, M.K., 2018. Barley heads east: genetic analyses reveal routes of 105–139. spread through diverse Eurasian landscapes. PLoS One 13, e0196652. Harris, M., 2000. India’s Sacred Cow. In: Goodman, A.H., Dufur, A.H., Pelto, G.H. (Eds.), Liu, X., Lister, D.L., Zhao, Z., Petrie, C.A., Zeng, X., Jones, P.J., Staff, R.A., Pokharia, A.K., Nutritional Anthropology, Biocultural Perspectives on Food and Nutrition. Mayfield Bates, J., Singh, R.N., Weber, S.A., Motuzaite Matuzeviciute, G., Dong, G., Li, H., Lü, Publishing Company, Mount View, pp. 113–118. H., Jiang, H., Wang, J., Ma, J., Tian, D., Jin, G., Zhou, L., Wu, X., Jones, M.K., 2017. Harvey, E.L., Fuller, D.Q., 2005. Investigating crop processing using phytolith analysis: Journey to the east: diverse routes and variable flowering times for wheat and barley the example of rice and millets. J. Archaeol. Sci. 32, 739–752. en route to prehistoric China. PLoS One 12, e0187405. Hastorf, C.A., 2016. The Social Archaeology of Food, Thinking About Eating from Lone, F.A., Khan, M., Buth, G.M., 1987. Plant remains from Banawali, Haryana. Curr. Sci. Prehistory to the Present. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. 56, 837–838. Hastorf, C.A., Wright, M.F., 1998. Interpreting wild seeds from archaeological sites: a Luef, B., Frischkorn, K.R., Wrighton, K.C., Holman, H.-Y.N., Birarda, G., Thomas, B.C., dung charring experiment from the Andes. J. Ethnobiol. 18, 211–227. Singh, A., Williams, K.H., Siegerist, C.E., Tringe, S.G., Downing, K.H., Comolli, L.R., Henry, A.G., 2015. Formation and taphonomic processes affecting starch granules. In: Banfield, J.F., 2015. Diverse uncultivated ultra-small bacterial cells in groundwater. Marston, J.M., Warriner, C. (Eds.), Method and Theory in Palaeoethnobotany. Nat. Commun. 6. University Press of Colorado, Colorado, pp. 35–50. Luthra, J.C., 1936. Ancient wheat and its viability. Curr. Sci. 4, 489–490. Henry, A.G., Hudson, H.F., Piperno, D.R., 2009. Changes in starch grain morphologies Mackay, E.J.H., 1943. Chanhu-Daro Excavations, 1935–1936. American Oriental Society,

885 J. Bates Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports 24 (2019) 879–887

New Haven. Rai, D., 2004. Monitoring and assessment of groundwater resources in Western Uttar Madella, M., 1997. Phytolith analysis from the Indus Valley site of Kot Diji, Sindh, Pradesh. In: Abrol, I.P., Sharma, B.R., Sekhon, G.S. (Eds.), Groundwater Use in North- Pakistan. In: Sinclair, A., Slater, E., Gowlett, J. (Eds.), Archaeological Sciences 1995: West India. Centre for Advancement of Sustainable Agriculture, New Delhi, pp. Proceedings of a Conference on the Application of Scientific Techniques to the Study 27–32. of Archaeology. Oxbow Books, Oxford, pp. 294–302. Rao, K.R., Lal, K., 1985. Plant remains from Lothal. In: Rao, S.R. (Ed.), Lothal: A Madella, M., 2003. Investigating agriculture and environment in South Asia: present and Harappan Port Town 1955–62. Archaeological Survey of India, Delhi, pp. 667–684. future contributions of opal phytoliths. In: Weber, S.A., Belcher, W.R. (Eds.), Indus Reddy, S.N., 1994. Plant Usage and Subsistence Modelling: An Ethnoarchaeological Ethnobiology: New Perspectives from the Field. Lexington Books, Oxford, pp. Approach to the Late Harappan of Northwest India. PhD. University of Wisconsin- 199–249. Madison. Madella, M., 2014. Of crops and food, a social perspective on rice in the Indus Reddy, S.N., 1997. If the threshing floor could speak: integration of agriculture and Civilisation. In: Madella, M., Lancelotti, C., Savard, M. (Eds.), Ancient Plants and pastoralism during the Late Harappan in Gujarat, India. J. Anthropol. Archaeol. 16, People, Contemporary Trends in Archaeology. University of Arizona Press, Tucson, 162–187. pp. 218–236. Reddy, S.N., 2003. Discerning palates of the past: an ethnoarchaeological study of crop Madella, M., Fuller, D.Q., 2006. Palaeoecology and the Harappan Civilisation of South cultivation and plant usage in India. In: Ethnoarchaeological Series International Asia: a reconsideration. Quat. Sci. Rev. 25, 1283–1301. Monographs in Prehistory, Ann Arbor, Mich. Mardabandhu, S., Gaur, R.S., 1986. Sanghol Excavations 1987: some new evidences. Rosen, A.M., 2005. Phytolith indicators of plant and land use at Catalhoyuk. In: Hodder, I. Puratattva 17, 1–4. (Ed.), Inhabiting Catalhoyuk: Reports from the 1995–1999 Seasons. Catalhoyuk Margaritis, E., Jones, M., 2006. Beyond cereals: crop processing and Vitis vinifera L. Project, Vol. 4, Part A. McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research, University of ethnography, experiment and charred grape remains from Hellenistic Greece. J. Cambridge, Cambridge, pp. 203–212. Archaeol. Sci. 33, 784–805. Rozin, E., 1973. The Flavor Principle Cookbook. Hawthorn, New York. Marshall, J. (Ed.), 1931. Mohenjo-Daro and the Indus Civilisation. Arthur Probsthain, Rozin, E., 1982. The structure of cuisine. In: Barker, L. (Ed.), Human Food Selection. Ellis London. Horwood Ltd., Chichester, pp. 189–203. Mehta, D., Satyanarayana, T., 2016. Bacterial and archaeal α-amylases: diversity and Saraswat, K.S., 1986. Ancient crop-economy of Harappans from Rohira, Punjab amelioration of the desirable characteristics for industrial applications. Front. (c.2000–1700 BC). Palaeobotanist 35, 32–38. Microbiol. 7. Saraswat, K.S., 1990. Crop economy at ancient Mahorana, Punjab (c.2100–1900 BC). Mercader, J., Akeju, T., Brown, M., Bundala, M., Collins, M.J., Copeland, L., Crowther, A., Pragdhara 1, 83–88. Dunfield, P., Henry, A., Inwood, J., Itambu, M., Kim, J.-J., Larter, S., Longo,L., Saraswat, K.S., 1992. Archaeobotanical remains in ancient cultural and socio-economic Oldenburg, T., Patalano, R., Sammynaiken, R., Soto, M., Tyler, R., Xhauflair, H., dynamics of the Indian subcontinent. Palaeobotanist 40, 514–545. 2018a. Exaggerated expectations in ancient starch research and the need for new Saraswat, K.S., 1993. Plant economy of late Harappan at Hulas. Puratattva 23, 1–12. taphonomic and authenticity criteria. FACETS 3, 777–798. Saraswat, K.S., 1997. Economy of Barans at Sanghol (ca. 1900–1400 BC). Pragdhara 7, Mercader, J., Abtosway, M., Bird, R., Bundala, M., Clarke, S., Favreau, J., Inwood, J., 94–114. Itambu, M., Larter, F., Lee, P., Patalano, R., Soto, M., Tucker, L., Walde, D., 2018b. Saraswat, K.S., 2002. Balu (29°40′ N; 76°22′ E), district Kaithal. Ind. Archaeol. Rev. Morphometrics of Starch Granules from Sub-Saharan Plants and the Identification of 1996–7, 198–203. Ancient Starch. Saraswat, K.S., Pokharia, A.K., 2001. Harappan plant economy at ancient Balu, Haryana. Messer, E., 1984. Anthropological perspectives on diet. Annu. Rev. Anthropol. 13, Pragdhara 12, 153–172. 205–249. Saraswat, K.S., Pokharia, A.K., 2000. Palaeobotanical and pollen analytical investigations. Miller, N.F., 1984. The use of dung as fuel: an ethnographic example and an archae- Ind. Archaeol. Rev. 1994–5, 96–97. ological application. Paleo 10, 71–79. Saraswat, K.S., Pokharia, A.K., 2002. Palaeoethnobotanical investigations at early Miller, N.F., Smart, T.L., 1984. Intentional burning of dung as fuel: a mechanism for the Harappan Kunal. Pragdhara 13, 105–140. incorporation of charred seeds into the archaeological record. J. Ethnobiol. 4, 15–28. Sharma, G.B., Kumar, M., 1980. Excavations at Rohira. Puratattva 12, 125–127. Mishra, A., Arora, U.P., 2005. Excavations at Abhaipur 2005–6, district Pilibhit, Uttar Shaw, F.J., 1943. Vegetable remains. In: Mackay, E.J.H. (Ed.), Chanhudaro Excavations. Pradesh. Puratattva 23, 122–126. Yale University Press, New Haven, pp. 250–251. Misra, V.N., 1997. Balathal: a chalcolithic settlement in Mewar, Rajasthan, India. South Sherratt, A., 1991. Sacred and profane substances: the ritual use of narcotics in later Asian Stud. 13, 251–273. Neolithic Europe. In: Garwood, P., Jennings, D., Skeates, R., Toms, J. (Eds.), Sacred Mondal, S., Jeganathan, C., Sinha, N.K., Rajan, H., Roy, T., Kumar, P., 2014. Extracting and Profane. Oxford University Committee for Archaeology, Oxford, pp. 50–64 seasonal cropping patterns using multi-temporal vegetation indices from IRS LISS-III Monograph. data in Muzaffarpur District of Bihar, India. Egypt. J. Remote Sens. Space Sci.17, Singh, N.J., Kudrat, M., Jain, K., Pandey, K., 2011. Cropping pattern of Uttar Pradesh 123–134. using IRS-P6 (AWiFS) data. Int. J. Remote Sens. 32, 4511–4526. Moulherat, C., Tengberg, M., Haquet, J.-F., Mille, B., 2002. First evidence of cotton at Singh, R.N., Petrie, C.A., French, C.A.I., Goudie, A.S., Gupta, S., Tewari, R., Singh, A.K., Neolithic Mehrgarh, Pakistan: analysis of mineralized fibres from a copper bead. J. Sinha, R., Srivastava, R.K., Yadav, S., Singh, V.K., 2008. Settlements in context: re- Archaeol. Sci. 29, 1393–1401. connaissance in western Uttar Pradesh and Haryana, April and May 2008. In: Man Pedergnana, A., Ollé, A., 2018. Building an experimental comparative reference collec- and Environment XXXIII, pp. 71–87. tion for lithic micro-residue analysis based on a multi-analytical approach. J. Singh, U., Wadhwani, A.M., Johri, B.M., 1965. Dictionary of Economic Plants in India. Archaeol. Method Theory 25, 117–154. ICAR, New Delhi. Petrie, C.A., 2013. South Asia. In: Clark, P. (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Cities in World Smith, M.L., 2006. The Archaeology of food preference. Am. Anthropol. 108, 480–493. History. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 83–104. Srivastava, C., 2005. Plant economy at ancient Mahorana, Sangrur District, Punjab Petrie, C.A., Bates, J., 2017. ‘Multi-cropping’, intercropping and adaptation to variable (c.2300 BC–AD 200). In: Man and Environment XXX, pp. 94–102. environments in Indus South Asia. J. World Prehist. 30, 81–130. Stevens, C.J., 1996. Iron Age and Roman Agriculture in the Upper Thames Valley: Petrie, C.A., Bates, J., Higham, T., Singh, R.N., 2016. Feeding ancient cities in South Asia: Archaeobotanical and Social Perspectives. PhD. University of Cambridge, dating the adoption of rice, millet and tropical pulses in the Indus civilisation. Cambridge. Antiquity 90, 1489–1504. Stevens, C.J., 2003. An investigation of agricultural consumption and production models Petrie, C.A., Singh, R.N., Bates, J., Dixit, Y., French, C.A.I., Hodell, D.A., Jones, P.J., for prehistoric and Roman Britain. Environ. Archaeol. 8, 61–76. Lancelotti, C., Lynam, F., Neogi, S., Pandey, A.K., Parikh, D., Pawar, V., Redhouse, Tengberg, M., 1999. Crop husbandry at Miri Qalat, Makran, SW Pakistan. Veg. Hist. D.I., Singh, D.P., 2017. Adaptation to variable environments, resilience to climate Archaeobotany 8, 3–12. change: investigating land, water and settlement in Indus Northwest India. Curr. Thomas, K.D., 1983. Tarakai Qila: site, economy and environment. In: Proudfoot, B. (Ed.), Anthropol. 58, 1–30. Site, Environment and Economy. BAR International, Oxford, pp. 127–144. Pokharia, A.K., Kharakwal, J.S., Rawat, R.S., Osada, T., Nautiyal, C.M., Srivastava, A., Twiss, K., 2012. The archaeology of food and social diversity. J. Archaeol. Res. 20, 2011. Archaeobotany and archaeology at Kanmer, a Harappan site in Kachchh, 357–395. Gujarat: evidence for adaptation in response to climatic variation. Curr. Sci. 100, Vats, M.S., 1940. Excavations at Harappa. Archaeological Survey of India, Calcutta. 1833–1846. Vishnu-Mittre, 1974. Palaeobotanical evidence in India. In: Hutchinson, J. (Ed.), Pokharia, A.K., Kharakwal, J.S., Srivastava, A., 2014. Archaeobotanical evidence of Evolutionary Studies in World Crops: Diversity and Change in the Indian millets in the Indian subcontinent with some observations on their role in the Indus Subcontinent. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 3–30. civilization. J. Archaeol. Sci. 42, 442–455. Vishnu-Mittre, 1990. Plant remains. In: Joshi, J.P. (Ed.), Excavation at Surkotada. Pokharia, A.K., Agnihotri, R., Sharma, S., Bajpai, S., Nath, J., Kumaran, R.N., Negi, B.C., Archaeological Survey of India, Delhi, pp. 388–392. 2017. Altered cropping pattern and cultural continuation with declined prosperity Vishnu-Mittre, Savithri, R., 1982. Food economy of the Harappans. In: Possehl, G.L. (Ed.), following abrupt and extreme arid event at ~4200 yrs BP: evidence from an Indus Harappan Civilisation. Oxford and IBH Publishing Co. Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi, pp. archaeological site Khirsara, Gujarat, western India. PLoS One 12, e0185684. 205–221. Porteres, R., 1961. Plantes. In: Casal, J.-M. (Ed.), Fouilles de Mundigak. Librairie c. Wagner, G.E., 1990. Plant remains from Oriyo Timbo. In: Rissman, P., Chitalwal, Y.M. Kleincksieck, Paris, pp. 259–260. (Eds.), Harappan Civilisation and Oriyo Timbo. Oxford and IBH Publishing Co. Pvt. Possehl, G.L., 2002. Archaeology of the Harappan Civilisation: an annotated list of ex- Ltd., New Delhi, pp. 127–138. cavations and surveys. In: Settar, S., Korisettar, R. (Eds.), Indian Archaeology in Weber, S.A., 1989. Plant and Harappan Subsistence: An Example of Stability and Change Retrospect II: Protohistory. Manohar, New Delhi, pp. 421–482. from Rojdi. PhD. University of Pennsylvania. Possehl, G.L., Chitalwala, Y.M., Rissman, P., Wagner, G.E., 1983. Excavations at Rojdi Weber, S.A., 1991. Plants and Harappan Subsistence: An Example of Stability and Change 1982–3. Puratattva 13 (14), 146–149. from Rojdi. Oxford and IBH Publishing Co. Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi. Punia, M., Joshi, P.K., Porwal, M.C., 2011. Decision tree classification of land use land Weber, S.A., 1999. Seeds of urbanism: palaeoethnobotany and the Indus Civilisation. cover for Delhi, India using IRS-P6 AWiFS data. Expert Syst. Appl. 38, 5577–5583. Antiquity 73, 813–826.

886 J. Bates Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports 24 (2019) 879–887

Weber, S.A., 2003. Archaeobotany at Harappa: indications for change. In: Weber, S.A., Willcox, G., 1991. Carbonised plant remains from Shortughai, Afghanistan. In: Renfrew, Belcher, W.R. (Eds.), Indus Ethnobiology: New Perspectives from the Field. Lexington J.M. (Ed.), New Light on Early Farming: Recent Developments in Palaeoethnobotany. Books, Lanham, pp. 175–198. Edinburg University Press, Edinburg, pp. 139–153. Weber, S.A., Fuller, D.Q., 2008. Millets and their role in early agriculture. Pragdhara 18, Willcox, G., 1992. Some differences between crops of near eastern origin and those from 69–90. the tropics. In: Jarrige, C. (Ed.), South Asian Archaeology 1989. Monographs in World Weber, S.A., Vishnu-Mittre, 1989. Palaeobotanical research at Rojdi. In: Possehl, G.L., Archaeology, Wisconsin, pp. 291–300. Raval, M.H. (Eds.), Harappan Civilisation and Rojdi. Oxford and IBH Publishing Co. Wright, R.P., 2010. The Ancient Indus: Urbanism, Economy, and Society, Case Studies in Pvt. Ltd., Delhi, pp. 177–181. Early Societies. Cambridge University Press, New York. Weber, S.A., Barela, T., Lehman, H., 2011a. Ecological continuity: an explanation for Wright, R.P., Lentz, D.L., Beaubien, H.F., Kimbrough, C.K., 2012. New evidence for jute agricultural diversity in the Indus Civilisation and beyond. In: Man and Environment (Corchorus capsularis L.) in the Indus civilization. Archaeol. Anthropol. Sci. 4, XXXV, pp. 62–75. 137–143. Weber, S.A., Kashyap, A., Mounce, L., 2011b. Archaeobotany at Farmana: new insights Xhauflair, H., Pawlik, A., Forestier, H., Saos, T., Dizon, E., Gaillard, C., 2017. Use-related into Harappan plant use strategies. In: Shinde, V., Osada, T., Kumar, M. (Eds.), or contamination? Residue and use-wear mapping on stone tools used for experi- Excavations at Farmana, District Rohtak, Haryana, India, 2006–8. Research Institute mental processing of plants from Southeast Asia. Quat. Int. 427, 80–93. for Humanity and Nature, Kyoto, pp. 808–825. Yü, Ying-Shih, 1977. Han China. In: Chang, K.C. (Ed.), Food in Chinese Culture. Yale Wheeler, M., 1968. The Indus Civilisation, Supplementary Volume to the Cambridge University Press, New Haven, pp. 55–83. History of India, 3rd ed. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

887