See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/302960135

Chalcolithic Rajasthan

Article · January 2014

CITATIONS READS
0 8,107

1 author:

Amrita Sarkar
Deccan College Post-Graduate and Research Institute
16 PUBLICATIONS 20 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Amrita Sarkar on 12 May 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Editorial Note
V.2. Chalcolithic [While this essay is a straightforward narrative of the
different aspects of the Chalcolithic development in
Rajasthan southeast and northeast Rajasthan, one may like to put a
different orientation on the authorsí discussion. First, the
Ahar culture is here chronologically divided into the early,
middle and late phases, with its beginning going back to
c. 3300 BC and the terminal phase to c. 1500 BC. That
not everything is secure about this chronology is evident
from the second authorís publication (A. Sarkar,
Chalcolithic and modern potting at Gilund, Rajasthan, a
cautionary tale, Antiquity 86 (329), 2011, 994-1007),
where she puts these two points at 3600 and 1800 BC
respectively. On the basis of the radiocarbon dates from
Balathal, one may even argue for a still earlier date for
the beginning of the Chalcolithic in this area. In fact, the
available radiocarbon dates should put the beginning of
Balathal in the second half of the 5th millennium BC and
in fact it is very perplexing that the authors should ignore
these early Balathal dates without any explanation.
Secondly, the threefold chronological division of the Ahar
Chalcolithic is still arbitrary, without the basis of such
divisions being made clear. Thirdlyóand this, we
believe, is very importantó, the essay does not
emphasise that the question of the Rajasthan Chalcolithic
cannot be disassociated from the question of the
beginning of the Neolithic and metallurgy in the region.
The claim of the Aravallis as an independent centre of
agriculture and metallurgy was put forward by the first
editor of this volume in 1995 (The Archaeology of
Ancient Indian Cities, Delhi 1995: OUP) long before
Arunima Kashyapís research conclusively showed the
presence of agriculture in the so-called Mesolithic level
of Bagor early in the 6th millennium BC and later. Although
he has restated this idea in a number of places there
seems to be a general reluctance to accept it because it
has never been supported by anybody else. Arunima
Kashyapís research may be put in the context of the
earlier archaeological work done in the Aravallis and what
 Protohistoric Foundations
466
she has found at Bagor will also in all likelihood be found
in the context of Ganeshwar.
The sequence of the related discoveries and their
implications is as follows. V.N. Misra excavated Bagor in
Bhilwara and sought, following a long established
tradition of invoking external contacts to explain
anything in Indian archaeology, typological parallels for
the copper arrowheads from Period II of the site among
various sites of West Asia and elsewhere outside India. A
new phase of research began with R.C. Agrawalaís
excavations at Jodhpura near Kotputli and Ganeshwar
near Nim-ka-Thana. The importance of the Jodhpura
excavations was that the ochre-coloured pottery from
the site was radiocarbon dated to the late 4th millennium
BC (calibrated). His excavations at Ganeshwar yielded
this pottery in association with a large number of copper
implements which thus could be put in the late 4th
millennium BC as well. It should also be noted that after
the Ganeshwar excavations, it could be realised that the
arrowheads of Bagor (Period II) were generically similar
to the Ganeshwar arrowheads. The radiocarbon dates of
Bagor II also belonged to the later part of the 4th
millennium BC (calibrated). Thus, there cannot be any
dispute about the Ganeshwar copper metallurgical
tradition belonging to the late 4th millennium BC,
because, although Ganeshwar does not have any
radiocarbon date of its own, it can be dated on the basis
of its sharing the ochre-coloured pottery of Jodhpura
and the arrowhead types of Bagor. Comparisons with
various copper object finds in the Harappan zone of
Rajasthan, the copper hoard belt of the upper Ganga
Plain, and some Chalcolithic sites of Malwa showed that
the source of these finds was the early copper
manufacturing belt of the Aravallis. Thus,it was clear that
at least by the later part of the 4th millennium BC, there
was a rich copper metallurgical tradition in the Aravallis.
After R.C. Agrawala, to whom goes the full credit of
realising the important role of Ganeshwar in the
dissemination of copper implements in a large number
of north Indian sites, retired, Ganeshwar was excavated
again by P. Chakravarty and V. Kumar. Microliths
continued to occur throughout the sequence of three
periods, and constituted the sole remains of Period I.
There were a few copper implements in Period II but
the find of copper implements was singularly rich in
Period III. Unless we assume that the transition to the
copper manufacturing of Period II was achieved by the
microlith-using hunter-gatherers of Period I, which was
not plausible, we have to accept the idea that the
microlith-using level of Ganeshwar I had an element of
agriculture in it just as Bagor I was found to possess
domesticated cattle, sheep and goats and after
Kashyapís research, some crop-remains as well. The
calibrated date of Bagor I falls in the 6th-5th millennia BC
and the same date should be applicable to Ganeshwar I
of Chakravarty and Kumarís excavation. On the whole,
there is now enough ground to argue for the presence
of an agricultural economy in the Aravallis as early as the
6th-5th millennia BC and the presence of an extensive
tradition of copper metallurgy in the same region in the
late 4th millennium BC.
This premise has been strongly supported by the dates
from Balathal and Gilund. There should be no hestitation
to put the beginning of Balathal in the 5th millennium
BC, and the beginning of the occupation at Gilund too
should date from this period because the same type of
ëreserved-slipí ware occurs in both these contexts. There
is a radiocarbon date (calibrated) of 5550 BC for an
aceramic and ceramic 60 cm thick microlithic level on
the eastern face of site Gilund 2. Like Bagor I, this
ëmesolithicí level is also likely to contain an element of
agriculture. The radiocarbon dates from Ojiyana are not
consistent, but there are two 6th millennium BC dates,
two second millennium BC dates and one first millennium
BC date for the Ahar culture level of the site. It has yielded
an extensive agricultural assemblage: hulled barley,
naked barley, bread wheat, dwarf wheat, rice, sorghum
millet, ragi millet, foxtail millet, lentil, field-pea, chick-
pea, Lathyrus, green gram, black gram, moth bean, horse-
gram, linseed, sesame, safflower, and a variety of grasses
and weeds (Pokharia, A.K. 2008. Record of
Macrobotanical Remains from the Aravalli Hill, Ojiyana,
Rajasthan: Evidence for Agriculture-Based Subsistence
Economy. Current Science 94(5): 612-22).
The authors of this essay somehow ignore this crop
evidence from Ojiyana. Even though Ojiyana, which lies
near Asind in the Bhilwara district, is potterywise a part
of the Ahar culture, the site shows a geographical context
which seems to be different from the geographical
contexts of Balathal, Gilund and Ahar. There is a small
 Chalcolithic Rajasthan
467
hill in the roughly 10 ha land of the archaeological site of
Ojiyana. This hill has, according to the local villagers,
yielded archaeological remains, and according to the brief
report of Indian ArchaeologyóA Review, there is a
fortification wall made of stone rubble around the
occupational area which in addition shows signs of
deliberate planning in the lay-out of its streets. Sites of
this type seem to require detailed investigations.
We believe that the total archaeological evidence is
enough to support the claim of an early and independent
beginning of agriculture and metallurgy in the Aravallis.
This cannot be related to Baluchistan or any other
development and must have contributed in its own way
to these developments in Haryana and the upper
Gangetic Plain, two areas close to the Aravalli range.]
h of sites ascribed to the Ahar culture is 111,
Fig. 1. Chalcolithic sites in Rajasthan.
INTRODUCTION
There are two major Chalcolithic traditions of
the early 4th millennium BC in Rajasthan along
the eastern edge of the Aravallisóthe Ahar
culture, identified at Ahar in the outskirts
of Udaipur in 1954-55 (IAR 1954-55:14-15
Sankalia et al. 1969) and the Ganeshwar-
Jodhpura culture identified at Jodhpura near
Kotputli and Ganeshwar near Nimka Thana
(Agrawala and Kumar 1982).
The Ahar culture is the earliest farming based
culture in Rajasthan and dates to the Chalcolithic
period, i.e. c. 3600 BCñ1800 BC. The total number
 Protohistoric Foundations
468
Fig. 2. Structures unearthed in Balathal.
distributed in the district of Chittaurgarh,
Bhilwara, Udaipur, Dungarpur, Tonk, Ajmer,
Jaipur and Dhaulpur. Over 80% of the sites are
concentrated in the three districts of Chittaurgarh,
Bhilwara and Udaipur which form the core of
Mewar (Misra 2007: 155). Our information about
the culture comes from the principal excavated
sites of Ahar (IAR 1954-55: 14; 1955-56: 11;
Sankalia 1969), Gilund (IAR 1957-58: 45 IAR
1959-60: 41-46; Possehl and Shinde 2001;
Shinde 2000; Shinde et al. 2002; Shinde et al.
2004), Balathal (Misra et al. 1995, 1997; Misra
1997; Sinha 1999; Misra and Mohanty 2001;
Misra 2007; Mishra 2008) and Ojiyana (Meena
and Tripathy 2000, 2001). Apart from these, the
site of Marmi, also known as Purani Marmi
(Mohanty et al. 2000), was subjected to small
scale excavations.
ARCHITECTURE
The architecture of the Ahar culture can be
divided into two categoriesñdomestic and
public. Stone, mud and mud brick were the
principal materials employed in the construction.
At Balathal the public architecture consists of a
fortified enclosure and a boundary wall around
the settlement. The fortified enclosure is located
right in the centre of the settlement and is made
of stone, mud and mud bricks. The width of the
fortification ranges from 4.3m to 5m on the top
and 6m to 7m at the base. The height ranges
from 3.5m to 4 m. The outer boundary wall is
found on the eastern periphery of the settlement
and is made of flattish stones set in mud mortar
in two phases. The domestic architecture
consists of residential structures and is found in
eight phases. Structural phases I to IV are
represented by the simple fragmentary remains
of mud and wattle and daub structures followed
by small squarish structures made of mud bricks.
Phase V is represented by a plan of large multi-
room structure. Structural phase VI shows a spurt
of structural activity and has provided the richest
architectural evidence. Three residential
 Chalcolithic Rajasthan
469
Fig. 3. Ahar houses: Reconstructions (after Sankalia 1974).
complexes consisting of a number of rectangular
and squarish rooms of varied dimensions were
exposed. These structures might have
functioned as dwelling places, storage units with
circular clay bins and some as kitchen areas as
is evident from the presence of hearths or
chulhas. One of the structures, numbered 13,
has a roughly circular fire pit in the central part
with a diameter of 80cm. Structural phase VII is
represented by a large number of structures, but
the absence of refinement suggests the
beginning of decline in the settlement. The most
noteworthy structure in this phase is a pottery
kiln measuring 5m x 4.5m inside a room in the
structure and has been identified as the
residence of a potter. Structural phase VIII is
the last Chalcolithic structural phase and is
represented by flimsy, small-sized structures
suggesting a significant economic decline
(Shinde 2008).
The public architecture in Gilund consisting
of a large structural complex of five north-south
running parallel walls, each about 20m long and
a fortification was unearthed. The set of parallel
walls is made of reddish mud bricks with yellow
mortar and mud-plastered exterior. This belongs
to the Mature Chalcolithic phase of the site. The
excavators identify this structure with a
warehouse (Shinde and Possehl 2001). An
underground clay bin was found in the
northwestern corner of the parallel walls and it
contained over 100 seal impressions. These
impressions were made from seals both round
and rectilinear and the designs are essentially
geometric. (Possehl et al. 2004). Five structural
levels of the Mature phase were identified in
the index trench on GLD-1. These levels
represent well-made floors, well preserved
mud walls, rectangular rooms with floors made
of alternate layers of silt and clay rammed hard
 Protohistoric Foundations
470
Fig. 4. Parallel walls unearthed in Gilund.
and plastered, and tandoor (underground oven).
It is a horizontal tandoor lying in the north-south
direction. In the Upper or Late Chalcolithic level
the structures are mostly small, rectangular mud
brick structures, with a few wattle-and-daub
ones of mud-plastered and rammed floors. Big
circular storage pits were also found associated
with the structures.
Ojiyana has reported some domestic and
public architecture. The domestic architecture
consists of multichambered house complexes
made of stone with kitchens, open courtyards
and living rooms whereas the late phase yielded
wattle and daub structures (Meena 2000). There
is also evidence of public architecture although
the details are inadequately known (Meena and
Tripathy 2000 and 2001). A thick stone wall
plastered with mud is said to be part of a granary
where wheat was stored and the floor indicates
that the granary was destroyed by a fire. Another
example of public architecture is a fortification
wall of stone.
POTTERY
Sarkar (2011) classifies the Ahar culture pottery
into four groups on the basis of the technique of
production prevalent among the traditional
potters of southeast Rajasthan: Red Ware, Grey/
Black Ware, Black and Red Ware (BRW) and
Buff Ware. This technique of production
involves the manufacturing process starting from
the preparation of clay to the firing stage. Each
group is further classified on the basis of the
surface treatment and the texture of the clay.
The Thick Red Slipped Ware is the coarse-
to-medium grained ware applied with a thick
bright slip on the outer surface. The shapes
include large and narrow mouthed globular jars
and pots and medium-sized handis (wide-
mouthed, and carinated vessel with constricted
necks), decorated with incised designs in the
form of wavy lines, criss-cross incisions, herring
bone patterns and chevrons. The Coarse Red
Ware is of coarse fabric and unslipped, and the
forms comprise wide mouthed globular jars,
large dishes and shallow bowls and basins, also
decorated with incised lines. The Thin Red
Slipped Ware is of fine fabric and has a highly
burnished thin slip on the outer surface and rim
portion of the inner surface. The major shape is
a convex-sided deep bowl of small and medium
size with an everted, bevelled or beaded rim.
Tan Wares are the sturdiest and of fine fabric,
with carinated shallow basins of beaked/beaded
rims, large, step- sided dishes and few bowls.
The Reserved Slip Ware has vessels that were
applied with two slips on the external surface,
first treated with a thin slip usually of light red
colour followed by a second slightly thicker slip
of a darker colour. Before the second slip would
dry completely, the decorative patterns were
executed by scooping out a part of the slip by a
comb-like instrument. Since no rim sherds were
found in this ware type, the definite
morphologies could not be ascertained.
The Black and Red Ware (BRW) is found in
coarse as well as fine fabric and the vessels are
painted with white pigment over the black inner
as well as the rim portion of the outer surface.
 Chalcolithic Rajasthan
471

type are narrow mouthed, globular jars and

medium sized,carinated handis. Plain Grey
Wares have no decoration. The major forms in
this type are basins and dishes with a few narrow
mouthed globular pots.

TECHNOLOGY
Recent metallurgical investigation on a
Chalcolithic copper nail from Balathal has
revealed that the process of cold deformation
after initial casting was used by the Aharians and
the corrosion rate of the Chalcolithic copper was
only marginally higher than that of modern
copper (Srivastav et al. 2003). Several small
roughly made copper celts have been found in
Ahar. The copper tools found from Balathal
include knives, razors, chisels and flat axes. A
tanged-cum-barbed arrowhead found on the
surface of the site may also belong to the
Chalcolithic period.

SUBSISTENCE AND ECONOMY

Fig. 5. Different pottery types. The palaeobotanical study from the site of
Balathal done by Kajale (1996) reveals the
The painted designs are mostly geometric presence of wheat (Triticum cf aestivum linn.),
comprising straight and wavy lines, both vertical barley (Triticum sp.), rice grains (Oryza sativa
and horizontal, dashes and concentric arcs. The Linn.), panicum millet (Panicum sp.), Setaria
major shapes in the finer variety are shallow, millet (Setaria sp.), green gram (Vigna radiata
small sized and medium sized bowls, both
convex-profiled and carinated with knife-edged
rim. In the coarser variety, we have shallow
small basins and a few wide-mouthed handis.
The Buff Ware is fine grained and occurs in
small quantities. The surface is applied with
cream coloured slip which is powdery and
comes off if rubbed. The available sherds do
not throw light on its shapes.
Slipped Grey Wares are profusely decorated
with incised designs in geometric patterns
between the slipped and the unslipped portions Fig. 6. Copper objects from Ahar-Banas complex
of the vessels. The major shapes in this ware (courtesy: Deccan College).
 Protohistoric Foundations
472
Fig. 7. Terracotta bull figurines.
L. Wilczek), black gram (Vigna mungo L.
Hepper), common pea (Pisum arvense Linn.),
Bengal gram (Cicer areitinum Linn), trianthema/
portulaca (Triannthema sp./Portulaca sp.),
Indian jujube (Zizyphus jujuba Lamk.),
argemone type (Argemone mexicana type),
wild ladyís finger type (Ablemoschus sp.),
medicago type (Medicago sp.), Italian millet
(Setaria italica), jobís tear (Coix lachryma-jobi
Linn.) and coporlite of sheep/goat.
Fig. 8. Terracotta rubber.
The faunal study from the site of Ahar
(Sankalia et al. 1969), Balathal (Thomas and
Joglekar 1996, Tetso 2007) and Gilund (Landt
in press) uncovers the presence of cattle,
buffalos (Bubalus bubalis), goats (Capra hircus),
sheep (Ovis aries), pigs (Sus domesticus) and
dogs (Canis familiaris) among the domesticated
species and elephants (Elephas maximux),
gaurs (Bos gaurus), nilgais (Boselaphus
tragocamelus), black bucks (Antilope
cervicapra), four-horned antelopes (Tetracerus
quadricornis), chitals (Axis axis), sambars
(Cervus unicolor), boars (Sus scrofa), hares
(Lepus nigricollis), mongooses (Herpestes
edwardsi), rats (Rattus ratus), pea fowls (Pavo
cristatus), fowls (Gallus gallus), tortoises, fresh
water fish and nine species of molluscs including
marine cowrie shells among the wild species.
SOCIAL ORGANISATION AND RELIGION
The ethnographic analysis of village life in the
neighbourhood implies the existence of a family
or a joint family unit. The presence of multi-
roomed residential structures, multi-unit chulhas,
a supposedly community cooking place (Misra
et al. 1997) also supports this assumption. The
construction of public architecture in the form
of a huge fortification, a boundary wall and the
magazine type warehouse in Gilund would
require large-scale mobilisation of labour and
funds which would be possible only through a
central authority. Sinha (1998, 1999) supports
this view and argues that the Chalcolithic cultures
worked under a chiefdom organisation with a
clear evidence of social stratification and
economic hierarchy with the principal central
authority resting in the hands of a chief.
The presence of hundreds of terracotta bull
figurines, both stylised and naturalistic, in the
sites of Purani Marmi and Ojiyana might indicate
the presence of bull cult that was practised by
 Chalcolithic Rajasthan
473
these people. The Ojiyana bulls are unique in
the sense that they are painted in white and
seldom in black. These white painted bull
figurines are unparalleled in contemporary
cultures and are proposed by the excavators as
the probable cult objects (Meena and Tripathy
2001).
OTHER MATERIAL CULTURE
The terracotta and clay objects include beads,
bangle fragments, containers of various sorts,
dabbers, ear studs and spools, figurines, both
human and animal, clay sealings, sling balls, jar
stoppers, toy pots, votive lamps and wheels.
Faience beads are reported in tubular and
truncated barrel shapes. The faience beads
recovered from Ahar are coated with a thin blue
glaze like those found at Navdatoli (Sankalia et
al. 1969: 165). Antiquities such as hopscotch,
game pieces, worked sherds, as well as graffiti
and potterís marks on pottery were classified
as re-used pottery. The stone objects include
beads of carnelian and other semi-precious
stones like crystal and lapis lazuli, bead
polishers, sling balls, vessel fragments, a variety
of grinding stones, as well as a vast array of
lithics. The different shapes represented among
beads are barrel, spherical, cylindrical, tubular,
bicone, truncated, etc. The metal objects found
at the sites include bangles, kohl-sticks, knife-
blades, chisels, coins, agricultural implements,
points, nails, and rings. The shell antiquities
include bangle fragments, beads, and cowries,
inlay pieces, ear studs and worked shells.
Among the bone objects are found ground bone
tools and points.
CHRONOLOGY
The earliest cultural phase, i.e. Ia at Ahar gives
three dates of V-58-Tr J- 1940±95 BC; V-55-Tr
K- 1875±120 BC and V-56-Tr Y- 1765±95 BC
From Ahar Phases Ib and Ic there are two dates
of TF 34-Tr E- 1725±110 BC and TF 32-Tr A-
1550±110 BC respectively. These are all
uncalibrated. Forty-five radiocarbon dates (30
from the Chalcolithic level and 15 from the Early-
Historic level) are available from the site of
Balathal, all derived from charcoal samples and
administered independently by two laboratories-
23 by the Physical Research Laboratory (PRL),
Ahmedabad and 22 by the Birbal Sahni Institute
of Palaeobotany (BS), Lucknow (Misra 2005).
Among these 30 Chalcolithic dates, six count
weight considering their context and also the
maximum and minimum ranges that they
provide. These dates are PRL 1925-2400-1830
BC , PRL 1846-2620-2290 BC , PRL 1984-2560-
2290 BC, PRL 1937- 2470-2150 BC, PRL 1928-
3360-2280 BC and PRL 1930- 2580-2290 BC There
is one published date from charcoal samples of
the site of Gilund from the Late Ahar Banas
phase: BETA-1040702- 1742 BC (calibrated).
Considering all these dates in association with
the material assemblages found in the site the
Ahar Culture can be subdivided into three
phases.
(i) Early Ahar Phaseóc. 3300ñ2600 BC
(ii) Mature Ahar Phaseóc. 2600ñ2000 BC
(iii) Late Ahar Phaseóc. 2000ñ1500 BC
AUTHORSHIP
The recent starch grain analysis (Kashyap 2006)
conducted on the microlithic tools and soil
samples from the ceramic phase of the
Mesolithic site of Bagor provides evidence of
Eleusine (finger millet), Sorghum (jowar) and
Hordeum (barley). The site also produces
evidence for the domestication of animals
(Shinde 2004). Thus, it could be possible that
these Mesolithic groups adopted an agrarian
lifestyle and settled in the restricted but congenial
 Protohistoric Foundations
474
environments that provided better resources and
rise to the Chalcolithic farming communities in
Mewar. There are evidences that suggest that
the regions of north Gujarat and Mewar appear
to be important zones in the process of
domestication and the emergence of farming
communities as is evidenced from the sites of
Padri in Gujarat (Shinde 1998) and Balathal in
Rajasthan (Shinde 2000). Prasad and Enzel
(2006) have most recently collated the available
palaeoclimate records from India. However,
there is no consensus among scholars regarding
the climatic conditions of the Holocene in
western India.
Clues to Aharian prehistory are also provided
by the ethnographic studies carried out in the
rural areas of the Mewar region (Nagar 1967,
Mishra 2007, Sarkar 2011). These ethnographic
studies do reveal certain points of similarity
between the prehistoric culture and the present
ethnic communities residing in the same area.
However, there is no way of establishing any
relationship between the present communities
and the prehistoric ones.
AHAR CULTURE WITH RESPECT TO THE OTHER
CHALCOLITHIC CULTURES IN NORTHWEST INDIA
The cultures that are physically closest to Ahar-
Banas include the Harappans in Gujarat to the
south, the Kayatha culture to the east and the
Ganeshwar-Jodhpura cultural complex to the
north. According to Misra (2007: 180), the Tan
ware found from the sites of the Ahar culture is
almost identical with the Harappan ware of
Gujarat. Recently from the Harappan site of
Kanmer, white painted Black and Red Ware
similar to white painted Black and Red Ware
from Ahar is reported (Kharakwal et al. 2011).
A few sherds of thin red slipped ware exactly
similar to the characteristic thin red slipped ware
of the Ahar-Banas complex in Mewar were
recovered from the Harappan site of Farmana
in Haryana (Shinde). A small number of etched
carnelian beads found in layers 1b and 1c at Ahar
(Sankalia et al. 1969) and a faience bead found
at Ojiyana are also indicative of Harappan and
Aharian interactions. At the Chalcolithic site of
Kayatha in Madhya Pradesh, phase II is
characterised by a huge quantity of Ahar culture
pottery and stylised bull figurines similar to the
ones found from the site of Marmi. The
relationship between Ganeshwar-Jodhpura and
Ahar cultures is restricted to the similarities in
incised pottery and the use of copper from a
similar source.
GANESHWAR-JODHPURA CULTURAL COMPLEX
(GJCC)
Not much in known about the GJCC as compared
to the Ahar culture because of limited excavation
as well as the scanty published materials. The
GJCC illustrates an indigenous development that
sustains a larger regional economic need for
copper products.
Archaeological research at the site of
Jodhpura commenced with a field season in
1972-73. The excavation reports of Jodhpura
have reconstructed a five-period cultural
sequence for the site. Period I is represented
by the occurrence of the characteristic
Ganeshwar-Jodhpura ceramic type. Period II is
marked by the use of plain black-and-red ware,
represented mostly by the dish and the bowl.
The material found in this layer has been
compared to the black-and-red ware found at
Noh. Period III is marked primarily by the
presence of Painted Grey Ware (PGW). Period
IV is considered distinct based on the presence
of Northern BlackPolished Ware (NBP) and an
unslipped red ware, and Period V is
 Chalcolithic Rajasthan
475
distinguished by the prevalence of Sunga and
Kushan pottery (IAR 1972-73: 29-30; IAR 1978-
79: 30).
The initial documentation of the copper
material from Ganeshwar took place in 1977,
which led to three seasons of excavations at the
site between the years 1979-84 (IAR 1972-73:
29-30, 1979- 80: 62-5, 1981-82: 61-2, 1983-84:
71-2; Kumar 1977: 28-33; Agrawala 1978a: 72-
5). Three periods have been reported, namely,
Mesolithic (Period I), Chalcolithic (Period II) and
Iron age (Period III).
Period I is marked by a deposit of 30 to 50
cm. The characteristic of this layer is the large
number of microliths and animal bones, which
has led the excavators to refer to this layer as
the Mesolithic or Late Stone Age level (IAR 1987-
88: 101-102; Hooja and Kumar 1997: 328). The
raw materials used for the microliths were
primarily chert and quartz (IAR 1987-88: 101-
102). The lowermost levels of Period I illustrate
a high number of bones of small game and birds,
while the later levels have larger animal bones
present in the archaeological record. Unlike the
smaller bones, the larger bones are always found
charred and broken and often split open, which
might suggest marrow extraction. The bones
recovered from the excavation have been
attributed to wild fauna (IAR 1981-82: 61-62;
IAR 1987-88: 101-102; Hooja and Kumar 1997:
329).
Period II, which is the Chalcolithic deposit
of 40-60 cm, has been divided into two phases-
I and II. Phase I continues to document high
percentages of microliths and animal bones, has
a few documented copper implements and a
distinct ceramic assemblage. Additionally, the
excavations have uncovered the evidence for
circular hut outlines and floors paved with river
pebbles and schist slabs, most likely quarried
from the nearby rocks (IAR 1981-82: 61-62,
1983-84: 71-72; IAR 1987-88: 101-102; Hooja
and Kumar 1997: 329). The copper from this
phase is not in very large quantities. The
excavators have concluded that this phase marks
the introduction of copper to Ganeshwar, along
with the transition from a predominantly
ëMesolithicí to a Chalcolithic way of life (Hooja
and Kumar 1997: 329).
Phase II at Ganeshwar is represented by the
high percentage of copper implements found
in the excavations. The copper artefacts include
arrowheads, rings, bangles, chisels, balls, and
celts (IAR 1981-82: 61-62; IAR 1988-89: 76-78).
This phase has also documented round terracotta
cakes.
Period III at Ganeshwar is represented by
the iron age at Galvashram, with the presence
of iron smelters and iron slag. The excavators
have identified two smelters in the early phase
of smelting. The excavators stated that as the
site is located in the deposits of haematite and
magnetite, the iron age residents may have
extracted metal directly through a primitive
furnace. Based on their observations, it seemed
that one of the furnaces may have been used
for extracting the bloom, and the other for heating
during the forging (IAR 1987-88: 101-102). The
ceramics documented from this period are wheel
thrown red ware, with medium to fine fabric
treated with a wash or slip.
The site of Jodhpura (also known as Ghartool
Ghat, Tehsil Kot Putli, District Jaipur; N 27’ 35í
51", E 76’ 06í 85") was first excavated in 1972.
The mound is to the east of the River Sabi. The
site is estimated to be about 8 hectares in size
and about 400 meters in elevation. The
excavation reports of Jodhpura have
reconstructed a five-period cultural sequence for
the site. Period I is represented by the
occurrence of the characteristic Ganeshwar-
Jodhpura ceramic type.
 Protohistoric Foundations
476
TECHNOLOGY
The GJCC people were skilled in copper
technology. In the subsequent excavations of
the site of Ganeshwar, over 1000 copper
implements have been documented in
association with the characteristic GJCC ceramic
assemblages. The copper artefacts included
arrowheads, beads, rings, bangles, fishhooks,
pins, spearheads, celts and balls. The excavators
of the site contend that these artefacts were
made from local copper sources from around
the site, specifically the chalcopyrite ore
prevalent in the region. A double spiral-headed
copper pin belongs to the later phase
MICROLITHIC INDUSTRY
The microliths belong to a highly evolved
geometric industry. The principal tool types are
blunted back blades, obliquely blunted blades,
lunates, triangles, trapezes and points. Flakes,
cores and burins are also present. The raw
materials used are quartz, chert, garnet,
chalcedony and jasper.
OTHER MATERIAL CULTURE
The small finds from the GJCC sites include
beads, grinding stones, terracotta cakes/lumps
and various bone/shell objects such as bangles
and beads. Examples of beads from the GJCC
contexts include those made from terracotta,
mottled stone, carnelian, steatite, and copper
(IAR 1981-82: 61-62; IAR 1988-89: 76-78).
Grinding stones, saddle querns, mortars and
pestles are found at most GJCC sites (IAR 1981-
82: 61-62). Perhaps one of the most intriguing
finds from the GJCC context is from the site of
Sarangpura, a town just outside of Jaipur. It is a
copper nude ëyogií figure in the ëmeditation
poseí. This particular figure has been compared
to the priest king from the site of Mohenjodaro
(Hooja and Kumar 1997: 331).
POTTERY
The characteristic GJCC ceramic corpus is
specific to Period II at Ganeshwar and Period I
at Jodhpura. This is also the corpus that has been
all grouped under the so-called ëOCPí ware. It
is important to re-emphasise that the GJCC
material is distinct from the Gangetic OCP, which
is later, and has different vessel forms. It has
two distinct categories. The first one is thin Dull
Red Ware having paintings in black and white
strokes akin to the Early Harappan Sothi
tradition. The shapes can be classified into three
groups- i) storage jars, ii) vases, iii) basins, iv)
bowls, v) lids, and vi) miniature pots.
The paintings on the pots are geometric in
nature. The pottery is partly handmade and
partly wheel-made. Most of it is made on
micaceous coarse clay and very inadequately
fired, producing a dark, smoky core. It is highly
fragile and begins to crumble fast after exposure,
though a small number of sherds are made of
well-levigated fine clay and are well fired with
an ocherish core and are fairly sturdy. They are
finer in texture and surface treatment.
STRUCTURES
The quantity of structures is extremely poor. The
residential structures include mud platforms with
partitions, storage pits, and floors with postholes.
The walls are made of stone blocks and boulders.
CHRONOLOGY
The excavators have dated Period I of
Ganeshwar to around 3800 BC and Period II to
2800-2000 BC on the basis of C-14 dates from
Jodhpura. Based on the excavation report in IAR,
the GJCC Red Ware is the earliest level at
Jodhpura, and the carbon samples from the
upper levels of Period I at Jodhpura were tested
at the Physical Research Laboratory (PRL) in
Ahmedabad, which Agrawala and Kumar argue
 Chalcolithic Rajasthan
477
provided a range from 2500ñ2200 BC, pushing
the beginning of Period I at Jodhpura back to
2800ñ2700 BC (1982: 125; Allchin and Allchin
1982: 253) and some publications even as early
as 3000ñ2800 BC (Agrawala 1984: 160). The
calibrated dates from Jodhpura provide a slightly
REFERENCES
Agrawala, R.C. 1978a. Archaeological Discoveries at
Ganeshwar, Rajasthan. Archaeological Studies 3:
72-5.
óñ. 1978b. Copper Celts and an Indus Arrowhead from
Kulhade-Ka-Johad, District Sikar, Rajasthan. Man
and Environment 2: 123-124.
óñ. 1979a. More Copper Finds from Rajasthan. Man
and Environment 3: 91-2.
óñ. 1979b. Three Copper Objects from Ganeshwar,
Rajasthan. Journal of Oriental Institute, University
of Baroda 28 (3-4): 159-160.
óñ. 1984. Aravalli, the Major Source of Copper for the
Indus and Indus-related Cultures. In B.B. Lal and
S.P. Gupta (eds.), Frontiers of the Indus
Civilisation. Delhi: Books and Books, pp. 157-62.
Agrawal, D.P., R. Dhir, R.V. Krishnamurthy, V.N. Misra,
S.Nanda, and S. Rajguru. 1978. Multiple Evidence
for Climatic Change in Rajasthan. In H.S. Mann
(ed.), Arid Zone Research and Development.
Jodhpur: Scientific Publishers, pp. 1-18.
Agrawala, R.C. and V. Kumar. (1982) 1993. Ganeshwar-
Jodhpura Culture: New Traits in Indian
Archaeology. In G.L. Possehl (ed.), Harappan
Civilisation: A Recent Perspective. New Delhi:
American Institute of Indian Studies and Oxford
Publishing Co.
Allchin, Bridget and Raymond Allchin. 1982. The Rise of
Civilisation in India and Pakistan. Cambridge
University Press: Cambridge.
Ameri, Marta Elena. 2010. Sealings at the Edge of Third
Millennium Middle Asian Interaction Spheres: The
View from Gilund, Rajasthan, India. Ph.D.
Dissertation. Institute of Fine Arts, New York
University.
different picture, placing ëthe upper levelsí of
the GJCC strata at Jodhpura between c. 2900ñ
2500 cal. BC. Thus, there is no unanimity and
agreement regarding the dates and further
radiometric dates from Ganeshwar are required
in order to throw more light on the chronology.
Dikshit, K.N. and A. N. Sinha. 1982. The Ganeshwar
Culture ñ An Appraisal. Puratattva 11: 120-122
Gupta, Anil K. 2004. Origin of Agriculture and
Domestication of Plants and Animals Linked to
Early Holocene Climate Amelioration. Current
Science Vol. 87 (1): 54-59.
Hooja, R. and Vijay Kumar. 1997. Aspects of the Early
Copper Age. In R. Allchin and B. Allchin (eds.),
Rajasthan. South Asian Archaeology 1995
Proceedings of the 13th Conference of the
European Association of South Asian
Archaeologists: Vol. 1. New Delhi: Oxford and IBH
Publishing Co., pp. 323-340.
Kajale, M.D. 1996. Palaeobotanical Investigations at
Balathal: Preliminary Report. Man and
Environment Vol XXI (1): 98-102.
Kashyap, Arunima. 2006. Use Wear and starch Grain
Analysis: An integrated Approach to
Understanding the Transition from Hunting
Gathering to Food production at Bagor, Rajasthan,
India. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis. Michigan:
Michigan State University.
Kharakwal, J.S., Y.S. Rawat and Toshiki Osada. 2011.
Annual Report of Excavation at Kanmer 2007-2008
and 2008-2009. In Toshiki Osada and Akinori
Uesugi (ed.), Linguistics, Archaeology and the
Human Past, Occassional Paper 10. Japan: Indus
project, Resaerch Institute for Humanity and
Nature.
Kumar, V. 1977. Excavations at Jodhpura. Journal of
the Rajasthan Institute of Historical Research,
15(1): 28-33.
Landt, J. Matthew. Preliminary Report on the Faunal
Remains from Gilund.
 Protohistoric Foundations
478
Misra, V.N. 1997. Balathal: A Chalcolithic Setlement in
Mewar, Rajasthan, India; Results of First Three
Seasons Excavation. South Asian Studies (13): 251-
273.
óñ. 2005. Radiocarbon Chronology of Balathal, District
Udaipur, Rajasthan. Man and Environment XXX
(1): 54-60.
óñ. 2007. Rajasthan: Prehistoric and Early
Historic Foundations. New Delhi: Aryan Books
International.
Misra, V.N., V. Shinde, R.K. Mohanty, Kurush Dalal, Anup
Misra, Lalit Pandey and Jeevan Kharakwal 1995.
Excavations at BalathalóTheir Contribution to the
Chalcolithic and Iron Age Cultures of Mewar
Region, Rajasthan. Man and Environment XX (1).
57-80.
Misra, V.N., V. Shinde, R.K. Mohanty, Lalit Pandey and
Jeevan Kharakwal. 1997. Excavation at Balathal,
Udaipur District, Rajasthan with Special Reference
to Chalcolithic Architecture. Man and
Environment XXII (2). 35-59.
Misra, V.N. and R.K. Mohanty. 2001. A Rare Chalcolithic
Pottery Cache from Balathal, Rajasthan. Man and
Environment XXVI (2).
Mishra, Anup. 2008. Beyond Pots and Pans: A Study of
Chalcolithic Balathal. Bhopal and New Delhi:
IGRMS and Aryan Book International.
Meena, B.R. 2000. Recent Excavations in Rajasthan.
Archaeological Survey of India, Jaipur Circle.
Meena, B.R. and A. Tripathi. 2000. Excavations at
Ojiyana. Puratattva 30: 67-73.
óñ. 2001. Further Excavations at Ojiyana, Puratattva
31: 73-77.
Mohanty, R.K., Anup Mishra, P.P. Joglekar, P.K. Thomas,
Jeevan Kharakwal and Tama Panda 1999-2000.
Purani Marmi: A Late Ahar Culture Settlement in
Chitaurgarh District, Rajasthan. Puratattva 30: 132-
141.
Nagar, Malti. 1967. The Ahar Culture: An Archaeological
and Ethnographic Study. Ph.D. Thesis
(Unpublished). Poona University.
Possehl, Gregory L., Vasant Shinde and M. Ameri. 2004.
The Ahar Banas Complex and the BMAC. Man and
Environment XXIX (2): 18-29.
Prasad, S. and Y. Enzel 2006. Holocene Palaeoclimates
of India. Quaternary Research 66: 442ñ53.
Rizvi, Uzma. 2007. Introduction to Configuring the Space
In Between: Redefining the Ganeshwar-Jodhpura
Cultural Complex (GJCC). Unpublished Ph.D.
Thesis. University of Pennsylvania.
Robbins, Gewn, Veena Mushrif, V.N. Misra, R.K. Mohanty
and V.S. Shinde. 2007. Human Skeletal Remains
from Balathal: a Full Report and Inventory. Man
and Environment XXXII (2): 1-25.
Sankalia, H.D., S.B. Deo and Z. Ansari. 1969. Excavations
at Ahar (Tambavati). Poona: Deccan College
Post-Graduate and Research Institute.
Sarkar, Amrita. 2011. Chalcolithic and Modern Potting at
Gilund, Rajasthan: A Cautionary Tale. Antiquity 85
(in press).
Shinde, Vasant. 1998. Pre-Harappan Padri Culture in
SaurashtraóThe Recent Discovery. South Asian
Studies 14: 1-10.
óñ. 2000. The Origin and Development of the
Chalcolithic in Central India. Bulletin of Indo
Pacific Prehistory Association 19.
óñ. 2002. The Emergence, Development and Spread
of Agricultural Communities in South Asia. In
Yoshinori Yasuda (ed.), The Origins of Pottery
and Agriculture. New Delhi: Roli Books Pvt Ltd.
óñ. 2008. Emergence and Growth of Village Life in
Mewar, Rajasthan, India: The Recent Evidence. In
Ellen Raven (ed.), South Asian Archaeology 1999.
Groningen: Edbert Fosten, pp. 135-142.
Shinde, V. and G.L. Possehl 2001. A Report on the
Excavation at Gilund, 1999-2000. In Catherine
Jarrige and Vincent Lefevre (eds.), South Asian
Archaeology , Vol I. Paris.
Shinde, Vasant, S. Sinha Deshpande and G.L. Possehl.
2002. The Ceramic Assemblages in Protohistoric
Mewar (Rajasthan) with Special Reference to
Gilund and Balathal. Puratattva 32: 5-24.
 Chalcolithic Rajasthan
479
Shinde, V.S., Shweta Sinha Deshpande and Y. Yasuda.
2004. Human Response to Holocene Climate
Changes in Western India between 5th and 3rd
Millenniums BC. In Monsoon and Civilisation. New
Delhi:Roli Books, pp. 383-406.
Sinha, B.P. 1997. Copper in Indian Chalcolithic with
Special Reference to Bihar.In J.P. Joshi (ed.), Facets
of Indian Civilisation: Recent Perspectives. Essays
in Honour of Prof. B.B. Lal. New Delhi: Aryan
Books International,vol.1, pp. 264-74.
Sinha, S. 1998. Study of Chalcolithic Social Organisation
in Central India: A Case Study of Balathal. M.A.
Dissertation. Deccan College.
View publication stats
Sinha, Deshpande S. 1999. Chalcolithic Social
Organisation in Central India: A Case Study of
Balathal. Puratattva 29: 50-59.
Srivastav, A., R. Balasubramaniam and V.N. Misra. 2003.
Metallurgical Investigation on a Chalcolithic Copper
Nail from Balathal. Man and Environment XXVIII
(1): 33-40.
Thomas, P.K. and P.P. Joglekar. 1996. Faunal Remains
from Balathal, Rajasthan: A Preliminary Report. Man
and Environment XXI (1): 91-97.
Tetso, David. 2007. Archaeozoological Aspects of the
Ahar Culture of Rajasthan with Special Reference
to Balathal, District Udaipur, Rajasthan. Ph.D. Thesis
(Unpublished). Pune: Deccan College.
[VS & AS]