INDIAN ARCHAEOLOGY 1975-76 —A REVIEW EDITED BY B. K. THAPAR Director General Archaeological Survey of India ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF INDIA GOVERNMENT OF INDIA NEW DELHI 1979 Cover; The shrine of Khwaja Abu Nasar Parsa, Balkh, Afghanistan 1979 ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF INDIA GOVERNMENT OF INDIA Price : Rs. 60-00 PRINTED AT NABA MUDRAN PRIVATE LTD., CALCUTTA, 700004 PREFACE The present issue of the Review, in its content, follows the pattern of its predecessors, viz. incorporating material submitted by the various agencies engaged in archaeological work in the country, to whom I am beholden for their cooperation. This is the third issue to be brought out during the year 1979, and if everything goes well, the issue for 1976-77, which is already in the press, may come out within a couple of months. I heartily thank my colleagues in the Survey who have helped me in editing and seeing the volume through the press, as also Messers Naba Mudran Private Ltd., Calcutta, for bringing out these issues within such a short period. Readers would recall that as a result of the recommendations of a Committee, set up by one of the Sections of the Conference on Asian Archaeology, held in New Delhi in December 1961, to consider the problem of terminology in Indian prehistory, especially relating to the various hunting and food gathering stages, the terms Early, Middle and Late Stone Ages were accepted to be used in the subsequent issues of the Review (commencing from 1961-62). Since then considerable field-work in prehistoric and Quaternary studies has been done in India, and the position has appreciably changed: a blade-and-burin industry, recalling the Upper Palaeolithic of Europe has been identified in various regions of India, in stratigraphical horizons underlying the deposits belonging to the so-called Late Stone Age; and some similarities between the post Acheulian flake industries of the so-called Indian Middle Stone Age and those of the Middle Palaeolithic of Europe have been recognized. Both these factors call for a revision of the terminology agreed upon in 1961, and the adoption, in its place of the terminology of European prehistory. Let not this suggestion be taken without unnecessary presaration. It is not intended that prehistoric cultures of India present a similar succession of technological and chronological stages as those of Europe. There are obvious pit-falls in the wide application of the cultural terms, especially in view of the environmental diversity and the size of the country, which may show different 'culture cycles' and phases of regional specialization. For example, the blade-and-burin industry, grouped under the Upper Palaeolithic of India, is not necessarily to be correlated with the Wurm Galciation as its counterpart in Europe. A standardized sequence for Indian prehistoric cultures can only be built through intensive stratigraphic studies in the various regions, including those relating to the fluctuations of the sea-level. Till then the terminology of European prehistory, which indeed has wormed its way deeply into the literature, a five-fold division, Lower Palaeolithic, Middle Palaeolithic, Upper Palaeolithic, Mesolithic and Neolithic is being adopted. Caution, however, has to be exercised even in its application, for all microliths-using communities need not necessarily be Mesolithic. We may wherever necessary suitably qualify these divisions to retain their identity without much overtone. I would earnestly request the contributors to use this terminology while submitting their material for the Review. New Delhi 22 October 1979 B. K. THAPAR CONTENTS PAGE I. Explorations and Excavations ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 1 Andhra Pradesh, 1; Bihar, 6; Chandigarh, 9; Gujarat, 10; Haryana 16; Himachal Pradesh, 18; Jammu and Kaslimir, 18; Karnataka, 19; Kerala, 22; Madhya Pradesh, 23; Maharashtra, 31; Meghalaya, 36; Orissa, 37; Punjab, 37; Tamil Nanu, 39; Uttar Pradesh, 42; West Bengal, 57. II. Epigraphy ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 60 Sanskritic and Dravidic instriptions, 60 Andhra Presh, 60; Bihar, 61; Gujarat, 62; Karnataka, 62; Kerala, 62; Madhya Pradesh, 63; Maharashtra, 63; Tamil Nadu, 63; Uttar Pradesh, 65. ... Arabic and Persian inscriptions, 66. Andhra Pradesh, 66; Bihar, 66; Delhi, 67; Gujarat, 67; Madhya Pradesh, 68; Maharashtra, 68; Rajasthan, 68; Uttar Pradesh, 69; West Bengal, 7Q. III. Numismatics and Treasure trove ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 72 Andhra Pradesh, 72; Gujarat, 72; Madhya Pradesh, 73; Maharashtra, 73; Punjab, 73; Rajasthan, 73; Uttar Pradesh, 74. IV. Other Important Discoveries ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 75 Andhra Pradesh, 75; Bihar, 75; Gujarat, 75; Haryana, 76; Jammu and Kashmir, 76; Karnataka, 76; Kerala, 76; Madhya Pradesh, 76; Punjab, 77; Rajasthan, 77; Uttar Pradesh, 78; Wes. Bengal, 78. V. Radiocarbon dates ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 79 Andhra Pradesh, 79; Gujarat, 80; Haryana, 80; Karnataka, 81; Maharashtra, 81; Rajasthan, 82; Tamil Nadu, 83; Uttar Pradesh, 84; West Bengal, 85. VI. Palaeobotanical and Pollen Analytical Investigations ... ... ... ... ... ... 86 Bihar, 86; Gujarat, 86; Jammu and Kashmir, 86; Karnataka, 86; Maharashtra, 87; Punjab, 87; Rajasthan, 87; Uttar Pradesh, 88. VII. Museums ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 89 VIII. Preservation of monuments ... ... ... • •••• .. ... …. 96 Monuments of National importance, 96. Central Circle, 96; Eastern Circle, 98; Frontier Circle, 102; Mid-eastern Circle, 102; Northern Circle, 104; North-western Circle, 108; Southern Circle, 110; South-eastern Circle, 115; Southwestern Circle, 118; Western Circle, 121. Monuments maintained by the States, 123. Andhra Pradesh, 123; Assam, 123; Gujarat, 123; Kerala, 124; Maharashtra, 125; Orissa, 125; Punjab, 125; Rajasthan, 125; West Bengal, 126. IX. Expedition Outside India ... ... ... 127 Archaeological Reconnaissance in the Farah Region, Afghanistan, 127. Preservation of Buddhist Shrines at Bamiyan and a Timurid Shrine at Balkh, Aghanistan, 127. The Big Buddha at Bamiyan, 127; Structural preservation, 127; Chemical preservation, 128. The Shrine of Khwaja Abu Nasar Parsa at Balkh, 128; Structural preservation, 128. X. Archaeological Chemistry ... … 129 Treatment of Monuments and Paintings, 129. Andhra Pradesh, 129; Bihar, 129; Delhi, 129; Himachal Pradesh, 129; Kamataka, 130; Kerala, 130; Madhya Pradesh, 131; Maharashtra, 131; Orissa, 133; Punjab, 134; Rajasthan, 134; Tamil Nadu, 134; Uttar Pradesh, 135; West Bengal, 136. Treatment of Excavated objects and Museum exhibits, 137. Analyses and research, 137. XI. Archaeological Gardens ••• ••• 138 Andhra Pradesh, 138; Delhi, 138; Goa, 139; Jammu and Kashmir, 139; Karnataka, 139; Kerala, 140; Madhya Pradesh, 140; Maharashtra, 140; Orissa, 140; Punjab, 141; Rajasthan, 141; Uttar Pradesh, 141. XII. Publications ................................................................................................................. … 143 Publications of the Survey, 143. Other Publications, 143. INDIAN ARCHAEOLOGY 1975-76 —A REVIEW I. EXPLORATIONS AND EXCAVATIONS ANDHRA PRADESH 1. EXPLORATION IN DISTRICT CUDDAPAH.—In the course of exploration, Sarvashri I. K. Sarma and D. Hanumantha Rao of the South-eastern Circle of the Archaeological Survey of India1 discovered near Mungapet, 10 km from Kodur on the road leading to Rajampet an extensive Middle Palaeolithic site yielding tools of the scraper-blade industry, mostly of chert and jasper. 2. EXPLORATION IN DISTRICT GUNTUR.—Shri D. Hanumantha Rao of the South-eastern Circle of the Survey discovered a Durga temple, locally known as Rupalamma Gudi, at Terala in Palnad Taluk. The temple shows traits of both the Dravida and Vesara orders, recall ing features of the Eastern Ganga temples of Mukhalingam and the early Chalukyan temples at Alampur. The garbha-griha and the mandapa of the temple are still to be seen preserved within the debris. It is noteworthy that temples of this order are rare in this region. 3. EXPLORATION AND EXCAVATION AT KEESARAGUTTA HILL, DISTRICT HYDERABAD.— Extensive exploration of the Keesaragutta hill, situated at a distance of about 40 km from Hyderabad, by the Department of Archaeology and Museums, Government of Andhra Pradesh, revealed remnants of an extensive fortification wall around the hill, enclosing an area of about 3 to 4 km. The fortification wall, made of rubble foundation with brick superstructure (brick-size: 50 x 25 x 8 cm) and provided with screening walls and three entrance gateways with guard rooms on all the sides excepting the south and a few openings in the walls towards water-sources, is datable to the early historical times. Opposite the Ramalingesvara temple on the hill, thirty lingas of black basalt, with rounded tops and octagonal shafts, bearing incised brahma-sutras, were found arranged in four rows on brick pedestals, at a regular interval of 3-5 m. A similar linga in brick, found here, testifies that bricks were also used for making lingas. Of the two label inscriptions in Telugu characters of Vishnukundin copper-plates, one reads Tulachu- vanru, meaning carvers. Besides, vestiges of a number of brick temples were also seen all over the area. It would appear, therefore, that in the early stages, the temples were made entirely of bricks, with stone replacing bricks gradually. Excavation was conducted in the area north of the tank on the slope of the hill with a view to ascertaining the nature and chronology of the brick temples. Digging revealed a huge five- roomed brick structure with 2-m thick walls, showing a rectangular hall and a square porch