South Asian Archaeology 2007 Special Sessions 2 The Gilund Project: Excavations in Regional Context Proceedings of the 19th Meeting of the European Association of South Asian Archaeology in Ravenna, Italy, July 2007 Edited by Teresa P. Raczek Vasant Shinde BAR International Series 2132 2010 Published by Archaeopress Publishers of British Archaeological Reports Gordon House 276 Banbury Road Oxford OX2 7ED England [email protected] www.archaeopress.com BAR S2132 South Asian Archaeology 2007, Special Sessions 2 The Gilund Project: Excavations in Regional Context Proceedings of the 19th Meeting of the European Association of South Asian Archaeology in Ravenna, Italy, July 2007 © Archaeopress and the individual authors 2010 ISBN 978 1 4073 0673 5 Printed in England by CMP (UK) Ltd All BAR titles are available from: Hadrian Books Ltd 122 Banbury Road Oxford OX2 7BP England [email protected] The current BAR catalogue with details of all titles in print, prices and means of payment is available free from Hadrian Books or may be downloaded from www.archaeopress.com 8. Indices of Interaction: Comparisons between the Ahar-Banas and Ganeshwar Jodhpura Cultural Complex Uzma Z. Rizvi As part of a larger publication on Gilund excavations, this farming and pastoral resources, as well as for minerals, chapter refocuses attention on interactions marked in the the most important of which is copper. Khetri, the largest materiality of cultures beyond the Ahar-Banas Complex, copper source in Rajasthan, has been exploited since specifically, in comparison with that of the Ganeshwar antiquity, and continues today as one of the major Jodhpura Cultural Complex (GJCC). Towards that goal, resources for copper production in India.1 this chapter will first contextualise the GJCC and provide background for the types of artefacts unique to the GJCC GJCC is synonymous with the Ganeshwar Culture, corpus. Due to the relatively early stages of research in Jodhpura Culture, Ganeshwar-Jodhpura Copper Complex the GJCC, this chapter will focus primarily on ceramic and the Ganeshwar-Jodhpura Culture (Agrawala and comparisons, although some copper arrowheads are also Kumar 1982, 130; Agrawal et al. 1978; Dikshit and Sinha referred to in this study. 1982, 120; Hooja and Kumar 1997, 323-324). This study will refer to this area as the Ganeshwar Jodhpura Cultural There are some very clear limits to this project; firstly, Complex (GJCC) based upon the initial reports by R. C. that the ceramic corpus of both complexes is Agrawala and V. J. Kumar; a complex based on the two understudied and thus any result presented here is used to type sites, Ganeshwar (Tehsil Neem Ka Thana; District further interpretation, not necessarily to determine final Sikar; geo coordinates N 27° 40' 46", 75° 48' 93" E) and results. This work is based on stylistic evaluations used Jodhpura (Tehsil Kot Putli; District Jaipur; geo specifically to gauge which time period might provide the coordinates: N 27° 35' 51", 76° 06' 85" E). Choosing to best contrast for understanding contact and interaction name the cultural area as a complex simultaneously between the GJCC and the Ahar-Banas Complex. In the honors the terminology that Agrawala and Kumar resulting assessment, I argue that given the few mid-third provided and does not limit the understanding of the area millennium BC overlaps in ceramic style, it may prove to as connected to one site or function. be a more fruitful venture to study interaction in an earlier time period between the two complexes and earlier The GJCC 2003 survey results are available in my PhD settlements at Bagor; and in tandem with that shift, to dissertation (Rizvi 2007) and have been presented at look at the connections between the production of previous EASAA meetings (London 2005) and thus are microliths and copper arrowheads. Additional not extensively discussed in this chapter except to excavations and artefact studies are needed to develop provide context to the comparison. The survey results this interpretation, but studies such as that presented here include GJCC settlement sites, sites covered with vitrified help with retooling research questions and are thus useful. metal waste, sites that had visible surface evidence for furnaces and smelters, sites where copper raw material Contextualising the GJCC may be mined or collected, and sites where copper hoards had been reported from local newspapers. Located in Northeastern Rajasthan, the GJCC is a collection of third millennium BC settlements bound The material culture that is characteristic of the GJCC together by a shared cultural language that encompass includes ceramics, copper, microliths, and small finds. similarities in material culture, production of copper The small finds from the GJCC sites include beads, tools, and geographic proximity to copper mines grinding stones, terracotta cakes/lumps, and various (Agrawala and Kumar 1982; IAR 1972-73; 1973-74; bone/shell objects such as bangles and beads. Grinding 1979-80; 1981-82; 1983-84; 1987-88; 1988-89; Hooja stones, saddle querns, morters, and pestles are found at and Kumar 1997; Rizvi 2007). The GJCC is east of the most GJCC sites (Rizvi 2007). A vast majority of the Harappan culture, to the north-east of Ahar-Banas microliths at Ganeshwar demonstrate a well-articulated Complex, north/north west to the Kayatha Culture and at geometric industry (IAR 1981-82, 61-62). Raw material a later date, west of the OCP-Copper Hoard sites (Figure for the microliths includes quartz, chert, chalcedony and 8.1). Located within the regions of the Aravalli Hill jasper (IAR 1981-82, 61-62; Rizvi 2007). Range, primarily along the Kantli, Sabi, Sota, Dohan and Bondi rivers, the GJCC is the largest copper producing The ceramics from the GJCC are largely wheel-made, community in third millennium BC South Asia, with 385 with few examples cited as hand made (IAR 1987-88, sites documented (Rizvi 2007, 192-222). Archaeological 101-102). The corpus is broadly divided into three indicators of the GJCC were documented primarily in Jaipur, Jhunjhunu, and Sikar districts of Rajasthan, India, and include Incised ware, Reserved Slip ware and copper 1 artefacts (Figure 8.2). This part of India is known for its For colonial accounts of copper exploitation in this region, see Imperial Gazetteer of India: Rajputana 1908, pp. 52, 71. 51 THE GILUND PROJECT, 1999-2005 Figure 8.1 Map of Middle Asian Interaction Sphere (MAIS) (Map courtesy of G. L. Possehl) Figure 8.2 Map of Rajasthan, with districts surveyed underlined (Base map courtesy of G. L. Possehl) 52 UZMA Z. RIZVI: INDICES OF INTERACTION Figure 8.3 GJCC ceramic assemblages Top Left: Ganeshwar surface survey 2000, medium red ware. Bottom Left: Reserved Slip Ware,Courtesy Hawa Mahal, Jaipur. Right: Incised Ware, Courtesy Hawa Mahal, Jaipur. categories based on ware types, that is, coarse, medium and fine (Figure 8.3). The following descriptions are based on excavators’ notes and reports from IAR 1987-88 and survey in 2000 and 2003. The coarse wares from the GJCC make up a small percentage of the corpus; they are predominantly of micaceous coarse clay, inadequately fired, with a dark smoky core, and remnants of reddish brown slip and are fragile and crumble easily. Vessel forms include jars and basins. In contrast, the medium wares are well-fired and sturdy vessels, manufactured with finely levigated clay, including some sherds with mica added as a tempering agent, represented by forms including dish-on-stand, basins, troughs, lids, jars, vases and bowls decorated with incised designs. Typically, the vases have vertical handles attached between rim and shoulder. These red wares have painted decorations with brighter and evenly distributed colour, suggesting a faster and heavier wheel (IAR 1987- 88, 101-102; Rizvi 2007). The fine wares are wheel made and are lightweight, of finely levigated clay. There are three types of the fine red wares: dull red ware, fine red ware and Reserved Slip Figure 8.4 Copper arrowheads from Ganeshwar, wares. Reserved Slip wares are distinct due to the specific 1978-79 excavations (Photographs taken by U. Rizvi) 53 THE GILUND PROJECT, 1999-2005 decorative technique applied to the shoulder of the forms of the copper arrowheads, celts, fishhooks and vessels. There are examples of this technique in various bangles. For example, the copper corpus from one season other forms from other sites in Rajasthan, such as at Early of excavation (1978-79) includes over 1000 pieces from Harappan levels at Kalibangan, and Ahar-Banas sites, Ganeshwar alone. Approximately 40% of the corpus such as Balathal, and Ojiyana, however at the GJCC there consists of arrowheads, clearly marked as a special craft are few examples of this technique in any other form industry on site (Figure 8.4). Metallurgical analyses of beyond the vase/jar (Rizvi 2007). two specimens from the site of Ganeshwar reveal objects that are manufactured with a high percentage of pure Copper artefacts from the GJCC are a hallmark of the copper content, with traces of lead and arsenic alloying material associated with this culture, specifically, the (Agrawala and Kumar 1982, 127-128 and see Figure 8.5). Object Cu Sn Fe Pb Zn Ni As Ag Celt 97.0 0.1 - 1.0 0.1 0.6 0.3 0.2 Arrowhead 96.5 0.2 0.2 0.03 0.25 0.04 1.0 0.3 Figure 8.5 Metallurgical analysis of copper materials from Ganeshwar, Rajasthan (Table taken from Agrawala and Kumar 1982, 127-128) Dates (Cal.) GJCC Ahar-Banas Harappan Bagor (Site) Kayatha (site) 3000 BC Early Early Early Period II 2500 BC Early Early