Editorial Note

II.4.4. External Trade [The purpose of the present essay is to highlight the
three basic issues related to the Indus-west Asiatic contact
in the form of trade: the items traded and their contexts,
the routes by which the contact was maintained, and
finally, the perception of this ancient trade in the context
of well-documented traditional trade between these
areas. The historical and ethnographic documentation
of the commercial links maintained over a wide region
of central and west Asia including the Gulf is voluminous
and has regrettably not yet been sorted out in detail,
area by area or phase by phase.
The network of Indian trade in central Asia and the
USSR has been alluded to by a Russian scholar Igor. Y.
Kotin (St. Petersburg State University, Museum of
Anthropology and Ethnography of Russian Academy of
Sciences) in an article available on the internet. The first
record is obtained from the 17th century when Indian
traders went to Astrakhan, a trading port of the Volga
delta. By this period they were also noticed as far as
Isphahan in Iran and Kizlyar in north Caucasus. Indian
artisans were invited by the Tsar, Alexei Mikhaylovich,
to Moscow to introduce textile industry there. The
tradition of such contacts persisted for a long period,
being subjected all the while to the cross-currents of the
local history. This is only a fragment of the larger overall
story. The point is that the Indus traders may be seen as
the forerunners of this trade. The mechanism of their
trade could not have deviated much from its traditional
framework.]

h
The first category of the basic data on the external
trade of the Harappan Civilisation (Chakrabarti
1990) comprises the Harappan and Harappan-
related objects found in Afghanistan,
Turkmenistan, Iran, Mesopotamia and the Gulf
region. The second category is formed by the
 Pr o to h i sto r i c Fo u n d a ti o n s
208
objects from the latter countries at the Harappan
Civilisation sites in the subcontinent.
In Afghanistan, the most important related
discovery is Shortughai, approachable from the
south side of the Hindukush by the Khowak
pass. This came up in response to the Harappan
need for Badakhshan lapis, the tin of north
Afghanistan and Central Asia, and the horses of
Tadjikistan, and it might also represent a
traditional geopolitical concern with the region.
The miscellaneous Harappan finds in north
Afghanistan, mostly carnelian beads etched with
white designs and occasional Harappan seals,
come from the looted graves of the Bactria area,
of which Mazar-i-Sharif may be considered a
central point. It is possible that some of these
finds are related to the Mature Harappan context.
The two earliest calibrated dates from the site
of Dashly 3, which shows trefoil designs and
humped bulls as decorations on alabaster plates
and kidney-shaped vases of steatite as evidence
of its Harappan contacts, fall before the mid-
third millennium BC, but a number of dates from
the same site show the continuity of the site till
the middle of the second millennium BC. Apart
from two etched carnelian beads at Mundigak,
there is no evidence of the Harappan contact
with any south Afghanistan site.
In South Turkmenia, the major sites which
have yielded some evidence of Harappan
contact are Altyn Tepe, Namazga Tepe and
Gonur Tepe. The important evidence from Altyn
Tepe consists of a square soapstone/alabaster
seal with two Harappan pictographs, a tall
perforated cylindrical jar, an etched carnelian
bead and possibly segmented faience beads.
Namazga has yielded an ithyphallic terracotta
figure which as a type can be related to the
Harappan Civilisation. Gonur Tepe has yielded
Harappan seal.
There are relevant sites in both north and
south Iran. In north Iran there are three sites,
Hissar, Shah Tepe and Marlik, all yielding
primarily etched carnelian beads, although a
long barrel-cylinder carnelian bead has also been
reported from Marlik. The north Iranian route
which passes through the southern side of the
Elburz range has Hissar and Shah Tepe on it,
but Marlik is located to the north of the Elburz.
Besides, Marlik is dated between the end of the
second millennium and the beginning of the first
millennium BC. In view of the generally late date
of Marlik, the Harappan finds here may be
heirlooms; on the other hand, they may also
suggest a direct contact because the Harappan
Civilisation itself continued in some form till
c.1300 BC.
The relevant south Iranian sites are Shahdad,
Tepe Yahya, Jalalabad, Kalleh Nissar, some
indeterminate places in Luristan, and Susa.
Shahdad is at the edge of the south Iranian desert
Dasht-i-Lut, and it yielded a large number of
etched carnelian beads. In addition to an etched
carnelian bead found on the surface, Tepe
Yahya, located to the southeast of Kirman,
yielded a sherd having directly above its base a
Harappan stamp seal with only Harappan
pictographs, an etched carnelian bead and a
ëterracotta typeí object with a square sealing in
the middle. This square sealing depicts a man
seated in the lotus position with a headdress and
upraised hands. These examples are all found
in Tepe Yahya IVA whose terminal date, when
calibrated, is around 2800 BC . The site of
Jalalabad in the Persepolis Plain of Fars yielded
8 long-barrel cylinder carnelian and 3 etched
carnelian beads on the surface. Kalleh Nisar in
the Luristan region between the Fars plain and
southwest Iran yielded an unspecified number
of etched carnelian beads. There are also reports
of three Harappan seals in Luristan. There are
 Exter n a l Tr a d e
209

Fig. 1. External trade network of the Harappan Civilization (after Lahiri 1992).

two Harappan-related seals from Susa, one a
cylinder seal with badly done Harappan
characters, and the other a circular seal with
similar characters. There are also long barrel-
cylinder carnelian and etched carnelian beads
at Susa. Shahdad, Tepe Yahya, Jalalabad, Kalleh
Nisar and Susa all lie on the east to the west
southern route of Iran. Shahr-i-Sokhta at its
eastern end in Iranian Seistan has shown
fragments of a Xancus pyrum shell, which
possibly came from the Gujarat coast. There is
also a report of a cylinder seal with Harappan
inscription from Iranian Seistan. At Jiroft in the
Halil Valley of southeastern Iran, the finds of
two Harappan seals have been noted.
The Harappan and Harappan-related objects
occur in Bahrain, Failaka, Sharjah and the Oman
peninsula in the Gulf area. Ras al-Qala (round
seals with Harappan pictographs and Harappan
weights in the Akkadian level), Hajjar (a pear-
shaped seal with Harappan characters) and
Hamad (a typical Harappan seal) are there in
Bahrain. In the Kassite context of Failaka there
are two round seals with Harappan characters.
At Tell Abraq in Sharjah there are two Harappan
weights and an ivory comb, the latter assigned
to Bactria on account of a flower decoration on
it. Ras al-Junayaz in Oman has shown an
Harappan inscribed sherd, a typical Harappan
steatite seal and an ivory comb in association
 Pr o to h i sto r i c Fo u n d a ti o n s
210
with the remains of a wooden boat coated with
bitumen. More Harappan pottery and beads have
been claimed to have been discovered in Oman
but the publication details are seldom clear.
Harappan and Harappan-related objects,
mostly beads and seals, come from both south
and north Iraq. There are four indisputably
Harappan seals: two from Kish and one each
from Lagash and Nippur. A typical Harappan
seal with the impression of cloth on its back was,
according to the dealer who sold it, from Umma.
Two specimens of rectangular/square seals with
concentric square designs which occur in the
Harappan context have been found in
Mesopotamia, one each from Tell Asmar and
Tepe Gawra. There are at least six round seals
with a bull and Harappan pictographs from Ur
but more finds of this type, although without
contexts, have been reported from Ur, Lagash
and possibly other sites. Three cylinder seals in
Mesopotamiaótwo from Ur and one from Tell
Asmaróshow Harappan influence in the form
of humped bull/ elephant/rhinoceros. A
rectangular stamp seal of dark steatite from Ur
was considered by its excavator L. Woolley to
be providing evidence of Harappan contact,
because the rectangular shape itself is associated
with the Harappan. This seal was dated by him
to the Royal Graves of the site. The Royal
Graves of Ur have also yielded Harappan long
barrel-cylinder carnelian and etched carnelian
beads. The latter occur at Kish, Nippur, Assur
and Tell Asmar as well. There are also
miscellaneous bits of evidence cited as proof of
Harappan-Mesopotamia contact. Mention may
be made among them of a fragment of steatite
vase from Tell Agrab, which shows a humped
bull tethered in front of a building. Ur has also
yielded a Harappan weight and dice have been
reported from Tepe Gawra and Al Hiba. Etched
carnelian beads have also been reported from
Abu Salabikh and Tell Brak (a site in northeast
Syria but very much within the north
Mesopotamian orbit). There are three ithyphallic
terracottas as well from Nippur.
The foregoing account is a short summary
of the actual Harappan artefacts found in the
Gulf, Afghanistan, Iran, and north and south
Mesopotamia. The chronological range of these
finds is from the period of the Royal Graves of
Ur, roughly 2600 BC to the Kassite levels of about
the 14th century BC, with a strong focus on the
Sargonid context of c. 2325 BC or a little earlier.
In the internal area of the Harappan
Civilisation, a Gulf-type round seal was reported
from the surface at Lothal. A seal with the whorl
motif has been found in the context about 14th
century BC at Bet Dwaraka. A few cylinder seals
showing motifs of the Harappan Civilisation
occur at Kalibangan, Rakhigarhi and
Mohenjodaro. Along with these finds, one has
to consider the occurrence of steatite/chlorite
vessel fragments bearing hut motif at
Mohenjodaro and Dholavira. There is also an
area of the study of various motifs and designs,
such as the presence of a heroóa ëGilgameshí-
like figureóbetween two lions/tigersóon a
number of seals from Mohenjodaro. This shows
that there were other elements of cross-cultural
interactions between Mesopotamia on the one
hand and the Harappan area on the other.
The number of Harappan and Harappan-
related artefacts is much more in west and
central Asia and the Gulf than vice versa.
Secondly, the Mesopotamian term Meluhha
means perhaps the general area to the east of
Mesopotamia and not necessarily the Harappan
area alone. The point to make here is that there
was a network of traditional trade covering the
entire region between the Harappan and
Mesopotamia right up to the nineteenth century,
and it would historically be correct to view the
 Exter n a l Tr a d e
211
external trade of this civilisation from this
perspective. Among the Indian exports we can
consider, apart from textiles, the most important
staple of Indian trade through the centuries, such
luxury items as ivory combs, specific types of
carnelian beads, dice, polished stone weights,
objects made of shells of a particular variety etc.
In the nineteenth century, Oman sent to India
pearls, mother-of-pearl, dried limes, fresh fruit
and salt fish, i.e. items which would not easily
be identified in archaeology. The Harappan
finds in the Ras-al-Had peninsula of Oman,
which happens to be the landfall of the ships
sailing with the help of the monsoon winds from
Gujarat to Oman, strongly suggest that the use
of the monsoon winds was known to the
Harappan traders.
The issue of routes is fairly straightforward.
The Hindukush was crossed and the Harappan
traders must have been familiar with its high
passes. Once in the Oxus Valley, the Harappan
traders had no difficulty of movement in that
region including Turkmenia. They were also
familiar with the routes in north and south Iran.
Mesopotamia was approached both through Iran
and the Gulf, the latter accessed through
navigation based on the knowledge of the
monsoon.
REFERENCE
Chakrabarti, Dilip K. 1990. The External Trade of the
Indus Civilisation. Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal.
[DKC]