High Quality
Open the downloaded document, and select print from the file menu (PDF reader required).
Find Situation
Some long-lost artefacts from southeastern Baluchistan are offered here as a tribute to acolleague whose publication activity reveals a committment to an ancient Near Eastwhich is broadly defined, taking into account more than the areas which a previousgeneration of archaeologists considered "orthodox". From a small test excavation whichMirza Sher Muhammad conducted on a mound known as the Sohr Damb (red mound),near Nal in the Jahlawan Division of the Kalat State in the year 1903 (later Sir) JohnMarshall catalogued an unknown kind of prehistoric pottery(2).Excavations which the
Hazara Pioneers carried out here in 1908 followed yielding 250 pottery vessels(3).Bizanjau Saidar salvaged further vessels from the mound in 1923 or 1924 (4). In May and
June of 1925 H. Hargreaves retested the site with what workmen he could divert from theharvest. 270 mostly well-preserved pottery vessels and other finds were recovered andmost published, if only in a rudimentary way. Such pot-counts reflect the archaeologicalstandards of the day. Nonetheless, one must admit that he laid the cornerstone for thestudy of the Sohr Damb (usually simply refered to as Nal) and its culture. Some curioussilver objects were excavated which for what ever reason did not appear in the finalreport (Pl. 1 andFig. 1.1-3
). The definition of the so-called Nal Culture and its relationsto its neighbours, particularly the Harappa Culture, have been controversial over the years because little comparative source material has been available(5).330 by 200 m in width and 15 m in height, the Sohr Damb is the largest hill in the Nalarea(6). Habitational remains less then 2 m in depth cover a geologically formed hill(7).
At its northwestern foot Hargreaves's labourers excavated a triangular surface designated"A" near the old diggings still visible at that time. Thirteen squarish "rooms" and"courtyards" without extant entrances, constructed of large quarried stone, and preservedup to three courses high came to light which contained burials. As opposed to the upper portion of the mound, traces of roofing and/or burning were lacking. So Hargreaves,"Whether these stone structures are the remains of deserted and ruined habitations or whether designed originally for funerary purposes cannot at present be asserted, but whenexcavated the whole area was found to be devoted entirely to the purposes of a necropolisand human remains and funerary pottery were found down to the floor level and in astratum nowhere more than four feet in thickness. Several methods of inhumation appear to have been practised at the same time"(8).Hargreaves states that the stone walls of
Area A probably were preserved to their original height, save a possible additionalsuperstructure of mud brick. This could indicate either a ruined dwelling or a burialstructure. A lack of three-dimensional measurements hinders the stratigraphicinterpretation of the burials in relation to the building structure. The fractional burials lieat several heights in the thick layer of debris in relation to the floor. This can be explained1
by their having been sunk into the runoff over a long period after this part of thesettlement had long fallen out of use (9).
Chronology
Hargreaves distinguished the scant pottery from area D atop the mound in terms of form,fabric and decoration from that of the graves at the foot below(10).S. Piggott classified
the former as of the "Zhob culture"(11). G. Dales stated more precisely that the cemetery(Dales's Phase D) is earlier than "the settlement" (especially Area D and F) and classifiedthe pottery of the former, a copper seal (from Area F) and a dagger (Area D) in hissubsequent Phase E for the entire region(12).This dagger fits nicely in the inventory of
the Harappa Culture and belongs in its early phase(13).It seems unnecessary to treat the Sohr Damb as a mound with simply two periods, one of early burial and a second of subsequent settlement, to judge from the excavator'sdescription. The graves of Area A may lie on an earlier abandoned part of the Nal Periodsettlement. The graves do not seem to be contained in the buildings in a regularlyreocurring way and may postdate them(14). If this is true, the settlement belonging to thecemetery would then lie on some other place, probably on the mound. The architecturalfeatures of the adjacent Areas B and G show the same size and orientation, and also belong to this early part of the settlement. Hargreaves sees no difference in the Nal pottery of areas A and G which consequently links them roughly to each other chronologically(15).Despite the poor preservation and limited extent of the documented
architecture, two kinds of buildings seem visible in the plan - the plastered irregular chambers of Area D atop the mound and the stone "houses" below.In 1965 Dales dated the Nal cemetery to the first half of the third millennium BCE byvirtue of comparisons of the associated wheel-turned pottery shapes and polychromedecoration with those in Mundigak III1-6 (map, Fig. 3
) (16).
Imported pottery from Nal occurred there as well(17).Pottery vessels of Nal type
occurred in 1975 in Shahr-i Sokhta (Seistan/Turan) in the northern part of the cemeterythere(18). The excavator has assigned them to Phase 4 of Period III which he dates to ca.2450-2300 BCE largely on the evidence from radiocarbon, later than the other suggesteddatings for the Nal cemetery and its pottery(19).The publication of the finds presumably
would result in a redating of the graves or an adjustment of the chronology at Shahr-iSokhta. This same pottery also occured at Niai Buthi in Las Belas(20). A potterysynchronism exists between the Nal cemetery and Period IIID at Said Qala in AfghaniBaluchistan(21). Two radiocarbon assays from Mundigak III and Said Qala III are of third millennium date(22). Nal pottery also occurs in Togau (northern Baluchistan)Periods III and IV(23). Period A (=1) of once-coastal Balakot (a mere 88 kmnorthnorthwest of Karachi) can de described as belonging to the basic Nal tradition of southeastern Baluchistan (24). Recently further comparisons by means of pottery
affinities with Nindowari (just south of Nal) have been noted(25).2
Nal is stratigraphically earlier than the Kulli Phase(26). Furthermore at Surab (northernLas Belas) Nal occupations are later than the Kili Gul Mohammad Phase. Some overlapdoes, however, occur between the Nal and Kechi Beg Phases in Surab III. Finally, Naland Damb Sadaat Phases are partially contemporary, as indicated by the intrusive DambSadat wares in Surab IV and Nal pottery in Mehrgarh VII(27). Following S. Piggott,M.R. Mughal placed Nal und Nundara in his early Harappan complex(28),reiterating the
relative dating of the pottery of Nal type. But in recent years the similarities of the Naland Amri pottery have been less emphasized owing to refinements of our knowledge of the pottery of the entire region, and because Nal is now more definitely linked to a pottery tradition of its own - that of Baluchistan. W. Fairservis understood the Nalcemetery as an expression of the Kulli Culture(29). In a recent study of the Kulli Culture, Nal is excluded as a relative(30).Hargreaves described the inhumations as fractional and, but for a single adult and threeinfants, only partial skeletons occurred in his excavation. The skeletons are mixed andappear also from the published photos and descriptions to be disturbed, i.e. with little or no visible order of the finds and skeletal remains is preserved. A variety of grave goodsincluding pottery vessels, metal objects and animal remains. Hargreaves unearthed mostof the copper implements in the loci A3 and A5 respectively on an earth and stone floor, partly in close association with either skeletal remains or other antiquities(31).Several
tools in A3 seemed to him part of a disturbed burial(32).In his discussion of Nal had
D.H. Gordon known the associated non-functional silver finds (see below), he perhapswould have held some or all of our metallic finds for grave goods (33). It is useful to note
here that the attractive (fugitive) polychrome and bichrome Nal wares originally litteredthe entire site(34)which is rare in cemeteries. This should be taken as evidence of theextensive disturbances prior to and during the early excavations. Such sherds alsooccurred in Area B, E, G, the latter which can be confirmed as belonging to the cemetery(35). B. de Cardi points out that only rarely does true polychrome Nal pottery occur in thesettlements of Surab(36). This pottery at Nal is clearly a funerary ware.
The New Finds
Hargreaves's excavation report of 1929 lists copper and silver objects which herecovered. Those of silver were not described in greater detail than "[No.] 20 silver foil.Eight fragments of brittle and oxidized silver foil. Largest fragment 201 mm in length.One fragment shows small parallel flutings in repousé... A5" (37). The "eight fragments"
catalogued belong actually to the three objects of our study. Hargreaves's near omissionin the excavation report of the silver objects from locus A5 seems to have been anoversight. Perhaps they were in the process of restoration and for this reason unavailable.The finds have been cleaned and show no clear signs of oxidation to the naked eye.A silver dagger-like blade (Fig. 1.1) and in the same material an unusual implement (Fig.
1.2), both which I examined and recorded in 1985, are on permanent exhibition in the National Museum in Delhi. Hargreaves also mentions the silver "unidentified object, No.20" on p. 33 which is probably the "cult object" (quotation marks mine) in our 3
Add a Comment