sign in sign up
<<
Home , Kalibangan, Mehrgarh

Some Legacy of the Early Iron Age : Harappan Tradition

Shantanu Vaidya1 and Yogesh Mallinathpur M.1

1. Deccan College Post Graduate and Research Institute, Pune 411006, Maharashtra,

Received: 22 September 2013; Accepted: 11 October 2013; Revised: 20 October 2013 Heritage: Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies in Archaeology 1 (2013): 244‐261

Abstract: Burials are known in the archaeological cultures of the Indian subcontinent from the period. By the Early Iron Age period these burials become very elaborate and dominate the landscape as monuments generally termed as megalithic monuments. However these burial traditions which appear in the Early Iron Age period have had a background of the earlier burial traditions. In the Harappan context, there have been excavated many sites which have yielded burial grounds prominent among them are , , , Sanauli, , and so on. An examination of the burials with reference to the appendages, burial traditions such as grave offerings, positions and physical types involved, it can be said that the burials of the Early Iron Age period did have an influence of these Harappan traditions on them. An attempt is made here to understand the influence or rather the legacy carried forward by these Early Iron Age burials from the Harappan burial traditions along with the traditions which they had inherited from the local and communities.

Keywords: Burial Practices, Palaeolithic, Mesolithic, Harappan Civilization, Early Iron Age, Peninsular India,

Introduction The phenomenon of progress in life towards ultimate end was probably understood much earlier than the concept of death related ritual began. Mourning or a kind of feeling penitence for loss of near and dear ones are even seen in the case of animals. The feeling of departing must have been painful to them, when one sees often, for instance, a mother monkey holding the dead baby till it decomposes and falls apart. It is also evident in case of birds, especially crows and animals like elephants, who show similar kind of behaviour. The Early Man must have felt for the departing kith and kin and taken care for a respectable appropriate enduring parting. The ritual of burials for the dead can be traced back to the in and Middle East. Evidence comes from the site of Kebara in Israel where the skull of the dead is removed. Along with these, burials of children from and France are found with stone slabs covering them (Stringer and Andrews 2012: 154‐5). Such convincing evidence has not been available as yet for any such practice of intentional burials Vaidya and Mallinathpur 2013: 244‐261 during the Palaeolithic period in India. Archaeological evidences start appearing when we arrive at the Mesolithic phase of . In India, Archaeological evidence for some such intentional burial custom appears in India during the Mesolithic period (Pal 2002, Sankalia et al. 1964).

Death of an individual is a passionate observable fact of all life forms including beings and is, therefore, well represented and the concept of life after death is apparent in many cultures. This is very well represented in ancient cultures like the Egyptian, Mesopotamian and Chinese cultures. In the Indian context there are references in ancient literature about death as only mode of transformation and not an end to the process of birth and death. The phenomenon of death is regarded only as the death of the body and not of the soul, which is believed to take new forms and continue in the cycle of life and death of the world. In the Bhagvad Gita’s Adhyaya 2 (Sloak no. 22) Krishna says ‘Vasamsi Jirnani Yatha Vihay Navani Gruhnani Naroparani Tatha Sharirani Vihay Jirnani Anyati Sanyati Navani Dehe’ which conceptually tells the same process. Hence in the subcontinent, most probably, we come across the concept of life after death in a more elaborate way. Also it can be safely said that the funerary customs have continued in the Indian subcontinent though not physically.

The disposal of the dead is a very important rite in every society. It can be seen in various forms in all the cultures even today as it was seen in the past. It differs from community to community as the ideas and concepts change in terms of time, space and form. Even disposal of dead differs in the community with regards to age, sex, of death, economic conditions, strata of the society and changing concepts and ideologies of the society. It reflects the social and ideological background of the individual and the social group which is responsible for his particular position.

In Indian context, death ritual and physical types are known from the Upper Palaeolithic period but they are well documented and known properly from the Mesolithic period onwards.

The authors have made an attempt here to figure out if the Harappan burial tradition has in any way influenced the burial practices of the Early Iron Age period in peninsular India. It is first essential to briefly review the evidences earthed out pertaining to mortuary practices in both these cultural periods.

Burial Practices in the Harappan Civilisation The Harappan civilization is one of the most advanced and complex civilizations of the ancient world. Among the sites, cemeteries are found at Harappa, Nal, Lothal, Kalibangan, Sanauli and Farmana.

Mehrgarh At Mehrgarh, infant burials were found. 19 box‐like chambers made of mud‐ set on the edge of the site were found. The boxes were 60 cm in length, 45 cm wide and 15‐ 25 cm deep. Only one burial had an offering of two disc shaped in its neck.

245

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

Burials of children around 3‐4 years of age were placed in flexed position in mud‐ graves. In one of the clay box measuring 110 x 80 cm the skeleton was found lying on its right side in a flexed position oriented east‐west. The skeleton was associated with two plates, one below the hands and the other close to the arms and adorned with a necklace of white beads (probably steatite) alternating with and beads and with bracelets of tiny white beads (probably steatite) around the wrists (Jarrige 1986, 1989).

Kalibangan At Kalibangan burials were of various types and placed in different localities in the cemetery. In one instance, an oblong pit contained the body laid in extended position in north‐south orientation. Pots were kept around the skull region (fig. 1) and the pit was filled either with same earth or mixed with compact white speckled clay. There were pot burials in oval or circular pits. It contained an urn surrounded by several pots without any skeletal material or ash. These burials were located to north of extended burial area. Similarly, one other pit burial type was of rectangular or oblong grave devoid of any skeletal material. However, they contain typical Harappan pots in varying numbers, almost always lying at the bottom. Uniformly laid bands of fine sand, clay and watermarks on the bottom suggest that the pit was probably kept open for subsequent ritual purpose. In a single group, there are maximum ten burials, their number varying from group to group, but generally in the range of six to ten. Each group consists of at least one rectangular pot burial and mostly extended human burials. Each clan or families had different groups of burials probably allotted a particular area almost of the same size in the cemetery which were used by the member of that particular family only. One of the burials had different architectural features. It was a rectangular grave pit measuring 4 x 2 m and was lined on all four sides with typical Harappan mud bricks (fig. 2). The walls stood in conical fashion, with the inner space gradually widening towards bottom and the inner sides of the walls were plastered with mud and lime plaster. The pit contained more than 70 pots of various shapes and sizes may be of an important man. In one of the burials three disarticulated skulls and several other fragmentary bones were found, probably died in same time accidentally (Sharma 1972, 1982, 1999).

Nal Two groups of burials were found during excavation, one group having a few bones in earthen vessels and the other group having fragments mixed with earth and kept in pots.

Harappa Though some skeletons were found while excavating in the settlement area, it was the excavation at cemetery R37 and H at Harappa, provided evidence of burial customs of the period. The deceased were buried in pits of varied dimensions. Mostly the body was placed in an extended position, with head approximately towards the north. Grave‐pits varied in dimensions, ranging from 10 to 15 feet in length, 2 ½ to 10 feet in

246

Vaidya and Mallinathpur 2013: 244‐261 width, and dug to a depth of 2 to 3 feet from the surface. The pit was generally wider towards the head. This was probably to accommodate large number of pots offered as grave goods. They were mostly kept near the head but some also at the feet and a few along the sides and occasionally below the body. Most of the types were similar to the findings from the habitation of the Mature Harappan phase. In some burials, besides human skeleton remains, a few decayed animal bones were also present. A small handled lamp was placed at the feet of the dead. At cemetery H were found jar burials and also earth burials. Along with these, fractional burials were also noticed. In cemetery R37 in the mature phase were also found wooden coffins. Some burials had antimony rods, pearls and shells and as grave goods. In the excavation conducted in 1986‐90, almost 90 skeletons were recovered. They were in supine position and some had the wooden coffin marks on them (Dales and Kenoyer 1991). The burial pottery had painted motifs such as birds, (ram). This suggests the connection with animal sacrifices.

Farmana Near the habitation site of Farmana in the Ghaggar basin (Rohtak district, Haryana) was found a huge cemetery of the Mature Harappan phase. The cemetery was an accidental discovery, while the excavations at the habitation site were in progress in 2008. The cemetery is located outside the habitation as in the case of R37 and cemetery H. The cemetery is in the natural field and the dead have been interred in pits dug sometimes 50 cm deep and sometimes 1 m, in some instances pits were only at the surface level. Out of the 70 burials traced so far, 52 have been excavated. There were three types of burials viz. Primary, secondary and symbolic (Shinde et al. 2010: 19). In the primary burial, the dead were placed in supine position with head towards the north and legs towards the south. Thus it follows the orientation of Harappa (R37). However orientation like northwest‐ southeast and northeast‐ southwest is also seen. In secondary burials, only a few skeletal remains are found. In symbolic burials there are no skeletal remains. Instead only the grave goods like pottery and ornaments are found. In all the burials, pots were offered as grave good. Along with them ornaments such as anklets of beads of semi‐precious stones, of beads, bangles were found as grave goods. In some cases a clay box/coffin is found to be made and the dead is placed within (Shinde et al. 2010: 18). This also reminds one of the Kalibangan cemeteries. The orientation NW‐SE is more dominant towards the end phase and is found later continuing at the Late Harappan cemetery of Sanauli (Shinde etal. 2010: 63). The number of burials is also more towards the end phase of the Mature phase (phase IIC here).

Sanauli Sanauli (fig. 3) was an accidental discovery in 2004 and is so far one of the finest necropolis of the Late Harappan period. It is located on Saharanpur road about 60 kms from Delhi. It was subjected to excavations in 2005 and 116 burials were excavated (Sharma et al. 2006). Out of these 52 were extended burials, 35 were secondary burials and 29 were symbolic burials. The dead were laid in an extended position and

247

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

northwest‐southeast orientation. They were interred in pits. The grave goods generally had pottery and dish‐on‐stand dominated the ceramic assemblage. Among the inhumations (fig. 4) was found a double burial of two males and were probably brought from somewhere else and rituals were performed here (Sharma et al. 2006: 169). Beads of agate and steatite were found as grave goods. Such a double burial is also known from Lothal. There is also a unique example of triple burial (fig. 5) among the inhumations. Three skeletons along with two urn burials were found. The three skeletons were secondary in nature and interred together probably because they had some family ties. It has yielded pottery lids having the ox or bull . The pottery, in all the burials was placed near the head. Among the symbolic burials no skeletal material is found. However there are a few symbolic burials with grave goods hitherto unknown in Harappan burials and signifying the high civic and complex attainment of the Harappan society. One burial was found with an antenna sword (fig. 6) and a sheath (Burial 14). Burial 28 was found with two dish‐on‐stands and copper container resembling a human torso having 28 tiny copper objects within. It also has a burnt brick wall running parallel to the burial on the eastern side. There were burials having gold objects in them. This was seen in both secondary and primary burials. Likewise, in Burial 95, it was a female who was ornamented with neck fitted gold and semi‐ precious stone ornament, whereas a pair of heart shaped gold bangles were in her hands (fig. 7). A copper bowl was also placed below her hip. There were six child burials. One among them (Burial 36) had an of agate around the left hand and a necklace of four agate beads around the neck (Sharma et al. 2006). Very interesting was the recovery of a trough like object of clay which seemed to have become hard and red due to firing. The excavators believe that it was used for since ash and charred bones were found in it (fig. 8). At Sanauli there were also evidence of animals like goat and ox sacrificed along with the dead. Goat from Burial 5 and ox from burial 52 and 53 were recovered. Also lids with bird motifs were found. All these point towards the ritual aspect. The excavators have tried to link them to references in the Rig Veda and the AtharvaVeda (Sharma et al. 2006: 178).

Dholavira The site of ia a massive and huge site of the Harappan civilization. It was excavated by R.S. Bisht from 1989 to 2003. It was extensively excavated and is one of the largest metropolises of the Harappan civilization. The site has given good evidences of extreme and advanced urban characters. The site has also yielded a cemetery along with the urban metropolis. There were various types and discussed by Bisht recently (Bisht etal. 2012). The site has yielded chambers like built up memorial, of stone slabs and having capstones, rock cut chambers. Along with these , circular in plan and made by rubble filling and oval in plan were found. The third type was that large stone lined circles. These were excavated and not much information is published about their internal offerings and remains. But it has been established that inhumation, fractional and memorial burials were the forms of disposal. There were also large mounds and circular shaped burials. In these mounds were rock cut chambers containing funerary remains (Bisht et al. 2012).

248

Vaidya and Mallinathpur 2013: 244‐261

Figure 1: Symbolic Burial Type, Kalibangan (After Sharma 1998)

Figure 2: Burial Having Mud Brick Wall, Kalibangan (After Sharma 1998)

249

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

Figure 3: Burial Ground, Sanauli (after Sharma et al. 2006)

Figure 4: Inhumation Burial, Sanauli (After Sharma et al. 2006)

250

Vaidya and Mallinathpur 2013: 244‐261

Figure 5: Triple Burial, Sanauli (After Sharma et al. 2006)

Figure 6: Symbolic Burial with Antenna Sword, Sanauli (After Sharma et al. 2006)

251

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

Figure 7: Burial with Gold Ornaments, Sanauli (After Sharma et al. 2006)

Figure 8: Clay Trough for Cremation, Sanauli (After Sharma et al. 2006)

Burials in the Early Iron Age of Peninsular India The megalithic cemetery is located almost in all instances away from the settlement. The cemeteries are generally situated in a barren landscape, characterized by rocky outcrops, foothills, small hillocks and small streams. The habitations were separated from the burials by means of either a natural stream or river or natural landscapes.

Physical Types of Disposal of Dead in Early Iron Age Peninsular India The typology of the of South India was first discussed in detail and an attempt to classify them was done by Krishnaswamy (1949). Sundara (1979) has

252

Vaidya and Mallinathpur 2013: 244‐261 categorized the physical types of disposal of dead in three main types: Chamber tombs, unchambered burials and monuments.

The chamber is generally a box‐like, square or oblong in plan and has a slab upright following the plan, known as orthostat. On the top is a covering stone known as capstone. The chamber may be completely underground, partly concealed or it may fully raised from the ground. Accordingly it is called as , dolmenoid cist and respectively. The cist may have either a port‐hole or it may have a passage; both served the purpose of inserting periodical offerings. The burial also may have a slab in the centre which may create compartments and such a chamber is known as transpeted cist. The burial types in the chambered tombs are passage chambers, port‐ hole cists, oblong chambers, topikals, kudaikals, rock‐cut .

The passage chambers are having three orthstats and on the fourth side there are two small slabs from both ends and having a small gap in between to provide an entrance. And there is rubble packing on all sides tp provide stability and the chamber is covered up to the top end of the orthostats. The passage chambers (cists) are either in Brahmi ‘Ka’ shape. There is sometimes a circle enclosing the cist and is much seen in northern Karnataka. The passage in the chamber continues to the peripheral boulders of the circle.

In port‐hole cists the shape is again Brahmi Ka type and also swastika type. The port‐ hole is circular and sometimes of U shape. They however follow the plan and embellishment of the passage chamber (cist) type. They are abundant in Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka and also in parts of northern Tamil Nadu.

There are also oblong cists which are erected along the same plane as above. They are sometimes transepted along the length and sometimes also along the width making compartments in them. Yelleswaram, Brahmagiri (figs. 9‐11), Kesarapalle, Uppalpadu, Raigir (Nalagonda), Iralabanda, Satanikota, Agiripalli (Moorti 1994) are some major sites excavated yielding the chamber burials types such as those with port‐hole and having transepts.

Apart from these there are Topikals (Hat stones), Kudaikals (umbrella stones) and rock cut caves are also found (Sundara 1979). In the unchambered burials, there are pit burials, sarcophagus and urns. The pit burials are ovaloid, oblong or elliptical in plan. A pit is dug and then the skeleton or remains are interred in them. Pit circles are sometimes having peripheral stones without packing and sometimes have a heap of cairn and rubble packing and it has a peripheral . Pit circles having rubble filling and peripheral stones are present in all sites in Vidarbha with some internal (Deo 1985, Mohanty 1993) and known from Nagarjunakonda.

Sarcophagus means eating flesh. Sarcophagus is a burnt clay trough having two rows of hollow legs ranging from 4 to 12. It is sometimes boat shaped and sometimes of zoomorphic shape. The sarcophagus has a lid to cover it and in the trough mortal

253

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

remains and other grave goods are interred. It is found sometimes in a cist or in a pit circle. Ram shaped sarcophagus is from Sankhavaram in Cuddapah district. Sarcophagi are known from Chitoor, Iralabanda, Khammam, Dongatogu, Agiripalli (Krishna district), Peddamarrur (Mahbubnagar), Chingleput, Jonawada (Nellore; it has tc sarcophagi in the burial), Gajjakonda (Prakasham) (Rao 1988, Moorti 1994), Jadigenahalli, Bangalore; has many sarcophagi (fig. 12) (Seshadri 1960).

Urn burials are in which the mortal remains are interred. A pyriform huge urn of thick, coarse section with bulgeous body and truncated bottom is there and it contains human skeletal remains or the whole skeleton and other burial pottery are all found in a pit. At the top above the mouth of the urn many a times there may be placed a stone slab. The Adichanallur urn‐burial site excavated by Alexander Rea (1903) is well known. In Chingleput region, medium sized urn burials with one or two or more pyriform urns are found in the burial pits that may carry cairn at the top. Porkalam, Pudukkottai (fig. 13) and Amirthamangalam are respective instances in this regard. Agiripalli has legged urn burial (Moorti 1994). At Maski also is found an Urn burial (fig. 14) (Thapar 1957). Similar urns are also reported from Tadakanhalli (IAR 1978‐79: 45‐6, Moorti 1994).

Apart from the above mentioned typical physical types there are also stone alignments and avenues which are associated with the megalithic culture. But their affinity needs to be confirmed. There are also some anthropomorphic figures reported in association with the megalithic graves. They are reported from Sanur (Moorti 1994), RajanKollur and Kumati (fig. 15) (IAR 1996‐97: 40).

Figure 9: Port‐hole Cist (Chamber), Brahmagiri (after Wheeler 1947)

254

Vaidya and Mallinathpur 2013: 244‐261

Figure 10: Port‐hole Cist (Chamber), Brahmagiri (after Wheeler 1947)

Figure 11: Port‐hole Cist (Chamber), Brahmagiri (after Wheeler 1947)

255

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

Figure 12: Sarcophagus, Jadigenahalli (after Seshadri 1956)

Figure 13: Pyriform Urn, Pudukkottai Museum

Grave Goods and Associated Remains After an overview of the physical types there is also a need to see the remains in them. The graves generally have skeleton or fragmentary skeletal remains in them. Thus the graves have primary and secondary burials in them. Apart from these many burials are devoid of any skeletal remains and only have offerings. Such types can be called as memorial burials. The burials generally have a variety of grave good offerings and these offerings very according to rank and profession. They include iron artefacts such as daggers, , , swords, agricultural , craftsmen tools (chisel, ), household objects, beads of semi‐precious stones, ornaments like bangles, amulets, horse remains and horse ornaments (horse gear, stirrups, bits and horse head

256

Vaidya and Mallinathpur 2013: 244‐261 ornaments) and pottery. The burials also sometime include the remains of more than one individual. There are various animals sacrificed in the burials. Animals like goat, horse and bull is sacrificed. Such evidences of the remains concerned to horse come from the sites like Naikund (Deo and Jamkhedkar 1982), Borgaon (IAR 1980‐81), Takalghat‐Khapa (Deo 1970), Raipur (Deglurkar and Lad 1992), Pochampad, Yeleswaram, Maski (Thapar 1957), Sanur (Moorti 1994), Mahurjhari (Deo 1973) and many others. are found in Naikund and in many sites of South India. Goat is found with mortal remains in Ramapuram, whereas there is found graffiti of goat on one of the burial pots in Raipur. There is also a goat motif on the finial of pottery lids of the burial pottery from Mahurjhari and other sites from Vidarbha.

Figure 14: Urn Burial, Maski (after Thapar 1957)

Conclusions A brief look at the burial pattern, traditions and the concept of life after death in both of these cultures was undertaken here to point out the importance of Harappan burial tradition in understanding the Early Iron Age burial tradition.

The Harappan people practiced inhumation, secondary and memorial burial traditions. They had devised various physical types such as pits, chambers (mud bricks and stone), urns and jar burials and at occasions had made troughs of clay or wood or mud for interring the dead. These types are well known from sites discussed above. These types can be seen to have influenced the physical types of disposal used in megalithic period. In megalithic period there was a widespread use of the chamber or cist type. There were advanced in embellishments and elaboration was seen in them as compared to the Harappan ones. The chambers had entrances; plans vary in shape,

257

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

and have different internal architecture like multiple chambers, transepts and so on. However they are only adding upon the tradition of an oblong or rectangular chamber known to the earlier people especially the Harappans. The megalithic people have invariably used the pit circle type. Though it carries a considerable influence of its predecessors in South India i.e. Neolithic‐Chalcolithic period, one cannot deny that similar pit inhumations were practiced by the Harappans and they have lined out a specific periphery for these graves as is in the case of Early Iron Age graves, where the pits are lined by the cairn filling or pebble and boulders. Such cairn is used for packing in burial in the Chalcolithic period as seen at Ramapuram, but these burials are located within the settlement, whereas in the megalithic phase they move outside the settlement. This use of a separate burial ground is however a Harappan practice.

Figure 15: Anthropomorphic Figures, Kumati (IAR 1996‐97)

Thus it can be said that there was a mixture or assimilating of traditions not known in earlier phases by the Early Iron Age people maintaining their own traditions. The Harappans had used jar/urns on a large scale in the Late Harappan phase (cemetery H). This type is also practiced widely by the megalithic people of South India and urns are invariably found from the tip of the peninsula up to the Vidarbha region. The urn and burial pottery also bears depictions like a graffiti figure of ram is seen at Raipur. Such animal graffiti is very common in the cemetery H urns. Sarcophagi are seen in the form of legged urns in Harappans. The sarcophagi type is also practiced on a large scale in South India and there are many sites yielding the same.

The Harappan burials had a relation with animal offerings. They are seen in the form of animal remains (ram and bull from Sanauli), animal motifs (lids having bull figurines at sanauli, goat/ram depicted on urns, peacock and bird motif on urns) (fig. 16). The Harappan tradition of animal sacrifice was also seen among the megalithic

258

Vaidya and Mallinathpur 2013: 244‐261 people. The megalithic sites yield similar remains. Sites like Ramapuram have yielded remains of goat/ram in the burials and there is depiction of ram on the lids of burial pottery from Vidarbha (Deo 1973). There is also evidence of bird motifs on the lids of copper vessels from Mahurjhari (Deo 1973). At Naikund, a bull is found in one of the burials (Deo and Jamkhedkar 1982). Thus the importance of these animals as a part of funeral practices was probably firmly established by this period. However it was Harappan civilization which established such practices and they were probably transcended to the other regions due to cultural contacts and later adopted by the Early Iron Age people.

Figure 16: Bull and Burial Pottery Lid with Bull Finials (After Sharma et al. 2006)

It should also be noticed that the practice of symbolic burial, in which only the grave goods such as pottery and artefacts were offered was also a popular practice among the Harappans. This was also seen among the Early Iron Age people. The preceding cultures had a very few instances of such symbolic burials (one known from Inamgaon). However in the megalithic period there is an increase in such memorial monuments. They are known as avenues, and also alignments. Among the pit and chamber burials also one comes across similar symbolic and memorial burials and hence it can be termed as another cultural influence.

A brief review has helped to highlight how the legacy of the Harappan burial tradition was carried forward by the early Iron Age people. They adopted certain traditions which might have passed on to their predecessors i.e. Neolithic‐Chalcolithic people of the peninsula due to cultural contacts. However the physical types and ritual practices might have been only elaborated and energy towards developing a complex typology was only possible when the society had become more complex and the economic and social relations had intensified. This was probably happening in the megalithic society since it was a ranked society (Moorti 1994).

It can be said that there was a major cultural exchange among the populations of the South Asian region. It was only upon the economy and also the social relations that the traditions exchanged and transcended could appear or disappear. This small survey of mortuary influences and mortuary practices of two different regions has been carried out to show this same process of cultural change and cultural behaviour, due to which there are these appearances and disappearances of certain cultural traditions.

259

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

References Bisht R.S., Y.S. Rawat and K.C. Nauriyal. 2012. Funerary Architecture of the Dholavira Harappans. Paper presented at the 21st conference of the EASAA. Paris. Dales G.F. and J.M. Kenoyer. 1991. Summaries of Five Seasons of Research at Harappa (District Sahiwal, Punjab, ), 1986‐1990 In Harappan Excavations 1986‐90 A Multidisciplinary Approach to Third Millennium Urbanism (Ed. R.H. Meadow), pp. 185‐262. Wisconsin‐ Madison: Press. Deglurkar G.B. and G. Lad. 1992. Megalithic Raipur. Pune: Deccan College. Deo, S.B. 1973. Mahurjhari Excavations (1970‐72). Nagpur: Nagpur University. Deo, S.B. 1985. The Megaliths: Their Culture, Ecology, Economy and , Recent Advances in Indian Archaeology (Eds. S.B. Deo and K Paddayya), pp. 89‐99. Pune: Deccan College. Deo, S.B. and A.P. Jamkhedkar. 1982. Excavations at Naikund (1978‐80). Bombay: Department of Archaeology and Museums, Government of Maharashtra. Indian Archaeology – A Review, Archaeological Survey of India. Jarrige, J.F. 1986. Excavations at Mehrgarh‐, Pakistan Archaeology 10‐22: 63‐131. Jarrige,J.F. and M.U. Hassan. 1989. Funerary complexes in Baluchistan at the end of the Third Millennium in the light of recent discoveries at Mehrgarh, in SAA: 1985 (Eds. K. Frifelt and Per Sorensen.) pp. 150‐166. London: Curzon Press. Krishnaswamy V.D. 1949. Megalithic types of South India. Ancient India 5: 35‐45. Mohanty R.K. 1993‐94. Vidarbha Megaliths: A New Perspective for Field Investigations, Bharati, Bulletin of the Department of Ancient Indian History, Culture and Archaeology, Banaras Hindu University, 1993‐94, 20 (Pts.I & II): 59‐69. Moorti, U.S. 1994. Megalithic Culture of South India: Socio‐Economic Perspectives. Varanasi: Ganga Kaveri Publishing House. Pal, J. N. 2002. The Mesolithic Phase in the Ganga Valley in Recent Studies in Indian Archaeology (Ed. K. Paddayya) pp. 60‐80, New Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal Publishers Pvt. Ltd. Pal, J. N. 2002. The Mesolithic Phase in the Ganga Valley in Recent Studies in Indian Archaeology (Ed. K. Paddayya) pp. 60‐80, New Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal Publishers Pvt. Ltd. Rao, K.P. 1988. Deccan Megaliths. Delhi: Sundeep Prakashan. Sankalia, H. D. 1964. Excavations at Langhnaj. Pune: Deccan College.Sharma,A.K. 1972. Harappan cemetery at Kalibangan: A Demographic survey, in (Ed. S.B.Deo) ACSP pp: 113‐116. Nagpur: Nagpur University. Seshadri, M. 1960. Report on the Jadigenahalli Megalithic excavations for the year 1957, Mysore; Department of Archaeology. Sharma, A.K. 1972. Harappan Cemetery at Kalibangan: A Demographic survey, in (Ed. S.B. Deo) ACSP pp: 113‐116. Nagpur: Nagpur University.

260

Vaidya and Mallinathpur 2013: 244‐261

Sharma, A.K. 1982. The Harappan cemetery at Kalibangan: a Study, in Harappan Civilization (Ed. G.L.Possehl) pp. 297‐299. New Delhi: Oxford and IBH. Sharma, A.K. 1999. The Departed Harappans at Kalibangan. Sharma, D.V., K.C. Nauriyal and V.N. Prabhakar 2006. Excavations at Sanauli 2005‐06: A Harappan Necropolis in the Upper Ganga‐Yamuna Doab, Puratattva No. 36: 166‐179. Shinde, V.S., T. Osada, A. Uesugi and Manmohan Kumar 2010. Harappan Necropolis at Farmana in the Ghaggar Basin, New Delhi: Indian Archaeological Society. Stringer, C. and P. Andrews. 2012. The Complete World of , New York: Thames and Hudson. Sundara, A. 1979. Typology of Megaliths in south India. Essays in Indian Protohistory (Eds. D.P. Agarwal and D.K. Chakrabarti), pp 331‐40, New Delhi; B.R. Publishing Corporation Wheeler R. E. M. 1947‐48. Brahmagiri and Chandravalli 1947: Megalithic and other cultures in the Chitaldurg District, Mysore State. Ancient India 4: 181‐ 310. Wheeler, R. E. M. 1947‐48. Brahmagiri and Chandravalli 1947: Megalithic and other cultures in the Chitaldurg District, Mysore State. Ancient India 4: 181‐ 310.

261