ANCIENT HISTORY
3. INDUS VALLEY CIVILIZATION
Recent Discoveries and Changing Perspectives
In the initial years after its discovery, the Mesopotamian links were crucial for dating the Harappan
civilization, and some archaeologists tended to compare the two. This led to many questionable
theories about Harappan origins and the nature of the Harappan economy and polity. In recent
decades, scholars have become very conscious of the earlier bias and acknowledge the need to view
the Harappan civilization independently rather than through a Mesopotamian lens.
Another feature of the early decades of Harappan studies was an emphasis on urban settlements,
especially Mohenjodaro and Harappa. Apart from being the first sites of the culture to be excavated,
these two cities seemed to stand out by virtue of their size and architectural features. However, several
other sites are now known to be as large or even larger than them, e.g., Rakhigarhi in Haryana, and
Dholavira in Gujarat. Scholars have increasingly directed attention to the smaller, less imposing sites,
including towns and villages. These include the site of Allahdino (near Karachi), a village settlement
that measures only about 5 ha, but which reveals all the main features of the Harappan civilization.
Another recently excavated site is Balu in Haryana, a small fortified rural settlement that has yielded a
rich variety of plant remains.
Although Harappan sites share certain common features, there are also significant regional and inter-
site differences. These are visible, for instance, in the layout of settlements and in the crops that
people grew and consumed. There are also differences in the types, range, and frequency of artefacts.
For instance, at Allahdino, the typical black-on-red Harappan pottery formed only 1 per cent of
the total pottery finds.
The mud-brick platforms in the southern part of the citadel complex at Kalibangan, which have
been interpreted as ‘fire altars’, do not occur at most other sites.
There are also differences in the frequency of various funerary practices across sites. For
instance, postcremation burials were much more numerous at Harappa than at Mohenjodaro.
All this suggests a variety of subsistence strategies, food habits, craft traditions, religious beliefs,
cultic practices, and social customs.
The nature and function of certain structures have also been re-considered in recent years. For
example:
There is good reason to question whether the ‘great granaries’ at Mohenjodaro and Harappa were
granaries at all.
Less acceptable is Leshnik’s suggestion (1968) that the dockyard at Lothal was not a dockyard
but an irrigation reservoir.
The re-interpretation of structures has important implications for the understanding of the
Harappan social and political systems. For instance, the so-called ‘granaries’ used to be cited to
, support the theory of a strong, centralized state.
Recent excavations at Harappan sites reflect the changes in approaches, goals, and techniques within the
discipline of archaeology. There has also been greater use of scientific techniques, including the analysis of
bone and teeth remains, which provide very specific information about the diet and health of the Harappans.
Origin, date, extent, characteristics, decline, survival and significance, art and architecture.
,
,
3. INDUS VALLEY CIVILIZATION
Recent Discoveries and Changing Perspectives
In the initial years after its discovery, the Mesopotamian links were crucial for dating the Harappan
civilization, and some archaeologists tended to compare the two. This led to many questionable
theories about Harappan origins and the nature of the Harappan economy and polity. In recent
decades, scholars have become very conscious of the earlier bias and acknowledge the need to view
the Harappan civilization independently rather than through a Mesopotamian lens.
Another feature of the early decades of Harappan studies was an emphasis on urban settlements,
especially Mohenjodaro and Harappa. Apart from being the first sites of the culture to be excavated,
these two cities seemed to stand out by virtue of their size and architectural features. However, several
other sites are now known to be as large or even larger than them, e.g., Rakhigarhi in Haryana, and
Dholavira in Gujarat. Scholars have increasingly directed attention to the smaller, less imposing sites,
including towns and villages. These include the site of Allahdino (near Karachi), a village settlement
that measures only about 5 ha, but which reveals all the main features of the Harappan civilization.
Another recently excavated site is Balu in Haryana, a small fortified rural settlement that has yielded a
rich variety of plant remains.
Although Harappan sites share certain common features, there are also significant regional and inter-
site differences. These are visible, for instance, in the layout of settlements and in the crops that
people grew and consumed. There are also differences in the types, range, and frequency of artefacts.
For instance, at Allahdino, the typical black-on-red Harappan pottery formed only 1 per cent of
the total pottery finds.
The mud-brick platforms in the southern part of the citadel complex at Kalibangan, which have
been interpreted as ‘fire altars’, do not occur at most other sites.
There are also differences in the frequency of various funerary practices across sites. For
instance, postcremation burials were much more numerous at Harappa than at Mohenjodaro.
All this suggests a variety of subsistence strategies, food habits, craft traditions, religious beliefs,
cultic practices, and social customs.
The nature and function of certain structures have also been re-considered in recent years. For
example:
There is good reason to question whether the ‘great granaries’ at Mohenjodaro and Harappa were
granaries at all.
Less acceptable is Leshnik’s suggestion (1968) that the dockyard at Lothal was not a dockyard
but an irrigation reservoir.
The re-interpretation of structures has important implications for the understanding of the
Harappan social and political systems. For instance, the so-called ‘granaries’ used to be cited to
, support the theory of a strong, centralized state.
Recent excavations at Harappan sites reflect the changes in approaches, goals, and techniques within the
discipline of archaeology. There has also been greater use of scientific techniques, including the analysis of
bone and teeth remains, which provide very specific information about the diet and health of the Harappans.
Origin, date, extent, characteristics, decline, survival and significance, art and architecture.
,
,
