Copper anthropomorph Indus Script hypertexts

deciphered. ḍh 'ram' Rebus: Медь [Med'] (Russian,

Slavic) 'copper' Rebus: meḍh 'helper of merchant'
Orthographic style of creating anthropomorph (sangaḍa 'joined animal parts') is a characteristic
feature of Indus Script cipher. Examples are: copper anthropomorphs found all over North India,
terracotta figurines of felines or bulls/bovines as anthropomorphs, i.e. attribution of a human
form to animal motifs. Hieroglyph-multiplex sangaḍa Rebus: sangara is a proclamation, an
orthographic representation in Indus Script Cipher, a metalwork catalogue.

Consistent with the Indus Script Corpora as catalogus catalogorum of metalwork, the
hieroglyph-multiplexes on the anthropomorphs may be deciphered as part of a metalwork lexis
in Meluhha.

Медь [Med'] (Russian, Slavic) 'copper' gloss is cognate with ḍ 'iron' (Munda) eḍ 'iron'
(Ho.) . The early semantics of the Meluhha word eḍ is likely to be 'copper metal'. Rebus:
meḍh 'helper of merchant'. Seafaring merchants of Meluhha !

The anthropomorphs are a proclamation (Rebus: sangara-- hieroglyph: sangaḍa 'joined animals
or animal parts'), ancient professional calling cards on ancient forms of tablets of metalwork
competence.

Copper anthropomorphs found in significant numbers are of two types: Type 1: (Without any
further texts or inscription) A body of a standing person (with head shaped like a sivalinga) with
arms signified by the curved horns of a ram. Type 2. The same form as Type 1 but with an added
hieroglyph: fish.

Indus Script Cipher explains hieroglyphs as hypertexts on the copper anthropomorphs

'antelope, ram'; Rebus: ḍ 'iron' (Mu.) eḍ iron (Ho.) Rebus: e 'helper of

merchant' (Prakritam. Desinamamala. Hemacandra) medh a sacrifice (Samskritam)

meḍ 'body' Rebus: ḍ 'iron'

meNḍha 'ram' Rebus: ḍ 'iron'
aya 'fish' Rebus: aya 'iron' ayas 'metal'
The body of a standing person with the legs drawn apart may also signify a
warrior. baTa 'warrior' Rebus: baTa 'furnace'.

Thus, the copper anthropomorphs signify metalwork, iron furnaces. The word meD is explained
as 'iron' in Munda and Ho. The same word is explained in Slavic languages as 'copper'. Such
transferance of signifying metals by th same gloss also occurs for the word loh which is
semantically explained as copper or iron or metal, in general.

Miedź, med' (Northern Slavic).

1
Corruptions from the German "Schmied", "Geschmeide" = jewelry.
Used in most of the Slavic and Altaic languages.

— Slavic
Мед [Med] Bulgarian
Bakar Bosnian
Медзь [medz'] Belarusian
Měď Czech
Bakar Croatian
Kòper Kashubian
Бакар [Bakar] Macedonian
Miedź Polish
Медь [Med'] Russian
Meď Slovak
Baker Slovenian
Бакар [Bakar] Serbian
Мідь [mid'] Ukrainian
http://www.vanderkrogt.net/elements/element.php?sym=Cu

The Sheorajpur anthropomorph (348 on Plate A) has a 'fish' hieroglyph incised on

the chest

2
 Title / Object:anthropomorphic sheorajpurFund
context:Saipai, Dist. KanpurTime of admission:1981Pool:SAI South Asian ArchaeologyImage
ID:213 101Copyright:Dr Paul Yule, HeidelbergPhoto credit:Yule, Metalwork of the Bronze in
India, Pl 23 348 (dwg)

http://bharatkalyan97.blogspot.in/2015/05/composite-copper-alloy-anthropomorphic.html
One anthropomorph had fish hieroglyph incised on the chest of the copper object, Sheorajpur,
upper Ganges valley, ca. 2nd millennium BCE, 4 kg; 47.7 X 39 X 2.1 cm. State Museum,
Lucknow (O.37) Typical find of Gangetic Copper Hoards. miṇḍāl markhor (Tor.wali) meḍho a
ram, a sheep (G.)(CDIAL 10120) Rebus: meḍh ‘helper of merchant’ (Gujarati) meḍ iron (Ho.)
meṛed-bica = iron stone ore, in contrast to bali-bica, iron sand ore (Munda) ayo ‘fish’ Rebus:
ayo, ayas ‘metal. Thus, together read rebus: ayo eḍh ‘iron stone ore, metal merchant.’
A remarkable legacy of the civilization occurs in the use of ‘fish‘ sign on a
copper anthropomorph found in a copper hoard. This is an apparent link of the ‘fish’ broadly
with the profession of ‘metal-work’. The ‘fish’ sign is apparently related to the copper object
which seems to depict a ‘fighting ram’ symbolized by its in-curving horns. The ‘fish’ sign may
relate to a copper furnace. The underlying imagery defined by the style of the copper casting is
the pair of curving horns of a fighting ram ligatured into the outspread legs (of a warrior).
Hieroglyhph: eraka 'wing' Rebus: eraka, arka 'copper'.In 2003, Paul Yule wrote a remarkable
article on metallic anthropomorphic figures derived from Magan/Makkan, i.e. from an Umm an-
Nar period context in al-Aqir/Bahla' in the south-western piedmont of the western Hajjar chain.
"These artefacts are compared with those from northern Indian in terms of their origin and/or
dating. They are particularly interesting owing to a secure provenance in middle Oman...The
anthropomorphic artefacts dealt with...are all the more interesting as documents of an ever-
growing body of information on prehistoric international contact/influence bridging the void
between south-eastern Arabia and South Asia...Gerd Weisgerber recounts that in winter of

3
1983/4...al-Aqir near Bahla' in the al-Zahirah Wilaya delivered prehistoric planoconvex 'bun'
ingots and other metallic artefacts from the same find complex..."
In the following plate, Figs. 1 to 5 are anthropomorphs, with 'winged' attributes. The metal finds
from the al-Aqir wall include ingots, figures, an axe blade, a hoe, and a cleaver (see fig. 1, 1-8),
all in copper alloy.

Fig. 1: Prehistoric metallic artefacts from the Sultanate of Oman: 1-8 al-Aqir/Bahla'; 9 Ra's al-
Jins 2, building vii, room 2, period 3 (DA 11961) "The cleaver no. 8 is unparalleled in the
prehistory of the entire Near East. Its form resembles an iron coco-nut knife from a reportedly
subrecent context in Gudevella (near Kharligarh, Dist. Balangir, Orissa) which the author
examined some years ago in India...The dating of the figures, which command our immediate
attention, depends on two strands of thought. First, the Umm an-Nar Period/Culture dating
mentioned above, en-compasses a time-space from 2500 to 1800 BC. In any case, the presence

4
of “bun“ ingots among the finds by nomeans contradicts a dating for the anthropomorphic
figures toward the end of the second millennium BC. Since these are a product of a simple form
of copper production, they existed with the beginning of smelting in Oman. The earliest dated
examples predate this, i.e. the Umm an-NarPeriod. Thereafter, copper continues to be produced
intothe medieval period. Anthropomorphic figures from the Ganges-Yamuna Doab which
resemble significantly theal-Aqir artefacts (fig. 2,10-15) form a second line of evidence for the
dating. To date, some 21 anthropomorphsfrom northern India have been published." (p. 539; cf.
Yule, 1985, 128: Yule et al. 1989 (1992) 274: Yule et al 2002. More are known to exist,
particularly from a large hoard deriving from Madarpur.)

5
Fig. 2: Anthropomorphic figures from the Indian Subcontinent. 10 type I, Saipai, Dist. Etawah,
U.P.; 11 type I, Lothal, Dist. Ahmedabad,Guj.; 12 type I variant, Madarpur, Dist. Moradabad,
U.P.; 13 type II, Sheorajpur, Dist. Kanpur, U.P.; 14 miscellaneous type, Fathgarh,
Fig. 2: Anthropomorphic figures from the Indian Subcontinent. 10 type I, Saipai, Dist. Etawah,
U.P.; 11 type I, Lothal, Dist. Ahmedabad,Guj.; 12 type I variant, Madarpur, Dist. Moradabad,
U.P.; 13 type II, Sheorajpur, Dist. Kanpur, U.P.; 14 miscellaneous type, Fathgarh,Dist.
Farrukhabad, U.P.; 15 miscellaneous type, Dist. Manbhum, Bihar.
The anthropomorph from Lothal/Gujarat (fig. 2,11), from a layer which its excavator dates to the
19 th century BCE. Lothal, phase 4 of period A, type 1. Some anthropomorphs were found
stratified together with Ochre-Coloured Pottery, dated to ca. 2nd millennium
BCE. Anthropomorph of Ra's al-Jins (Fig. 1,9) clearly reinforces the fact that South Asians
travelled to and stayed at the site of Ra's al-Jins. "The excavators date the context from which the

6
Ra’s al-Jins copper artefact derived to their period III, i.e. 2300-2200 BCE (Cleuziou & Tosi
1997, 57), which falls within thesame time as at least some of the copper ingots which are
represented at al-Aqir, and for example also in contextfrom al-Maysar site M01...the Franco-
Italian teamhas emphasized the presence of a settled Harappan-Peri-od population and lively
trade with South Asia at Ra's al-Jins in coastal Arabia. (Cleuziou, S. & Tosi, M., 1997, Evidence
for the use of aromatics in the early Bronze Age of Oman, in: A. Avanzini, ed., Profumi
d'Arabia, Rome 57-81)."
"In the late third-early second millennium, given the presence of a textually documented
'Meluhha village' in Lagash (southern Mesopotamia), one cannot be too surprised that such
colonies existed 'east of Eden' in south-eastern Arabia juxtaposed with South Asia. In any case,
here we encounter yet again evidence for contact between the two regions -- a contact of greater
intimacy and importance than for the other areas of the Gulf."(Paul Yule, 2003, Beyond the pale
of near Eastern Archaeology: Anthropomorphic figures from al-Aqir near Bahla' In: Stöllner,
T. (Hrsg.): Mensch und Bergbau Studies in Honour of Gerd Weisgerber on Occasion of his 65th
Birthday. Bochum 2003, pp. 537-542).
https://www.academia.edu/1043347/Beyond_the_Pale_of_Near_Eastern_Archaeology_Anthrop
omorphic_Figures_from_al-Aqir_near_Bahl%C4%81_Sultanate_of_Oman )
See: Weisgerber, G., 1988, Oman: A bronze-producing centre during the 1st half of the 1st
millennium BCE, in: J. Curtis, ed., Bronze-working centres of western Asia, c. 1000-539 BCE,
London, 285-295.
With curved horns, the ’anthropomorph’ is a ligature of a mountain goat or markhor (makara)
and a fish incised between the horns. Typical find of Gangetic Copper Hoards. At Sheorajpur,
three anthropomorphs in metal were found. (Sheorajpur, Dt. Kanpur. Three anthropomorphic
figures of copper. AI, 7, 1951, pp. 20, 29).
One anthropomorph had fish hieroglyph incised on the chest of the copper object, Sheorajpur,
upper Ganges valley, ca. 2nd millennium BCE, 4 kg; 47.7 X 39 X 2.1 cm. State Museum,
Lucknow (O.37) Typical find of Gangetic Copper Hoards. miṇḍāl markhor (Tor.wali) meḍho a
ram, a sheep (G.)(CDIAL 10120) Rebus: meḍh ‘helper of merchant’ (Gujarati) meḍ iron (Ho.)
meṛed-bica = iron stone ore, in contrast to bali-bica, iron sand ore (Munda) ayo ‘fish’ Rebus:
ayo, ayas ‘metal. Thus, together read rebus: ayo eḍh ‘iron stone ore, metal merchant.’
A remarkable legacy of the civilization occurs in the use of ‘fish‘ sign on a
copper anthropomorph found in a copper hoard. This is an apparent link of the ‘fish’ broadly
with the profession of ‘metal-work’. The ‘fish’ sign is apparently related to the copper object
which seems to depict a ‘fighting ram’ symbolized by its in-curving horns. The ‘fish’ sign may
relate to a copper furnace. The underlying imagery defined by the style of the copper casting is
the pair of curving horns of a fighting ram ligatured into the outspread legs (of a warrior).
An elaboration of the copper anthropomorph occurs on a Haryana artifact.

7
 An animal-headed anthropomorph http://www.business-
standard.com/article/specials/naman-ahuja-is-mastering-the-art-of-reaching-out-
114092501180_1.html

The hieroglyphs are: 1. crocodile; 2. one-horned young bull; 3. anthropomorph (with ram's
curved horns, body and legs resembling a person)
See: http://bharatkalyan97.blogspot.in/2014/01/crocodiles-help-scholar-link-indus.html

Indus Script cipher readings of hieroglyph-multiplexes on this artifact are:

1. eḍho a ram, a sheep (Gujarati)(CDIAL 10120) Rebus: eḍ 'iron' (Ho.)

2. meD 'body' Rebus: meD 'iron' baTa 'warrior' Rebus: baTa 'furnace'
3. khoṇḍ, kõda 'young bull-calf' Rebus: kũdār ‘turner’. क द ों kōnda ‘engraver, lapidary setting or
infixing gems’ (Marathi)
4. kāru 'crocodile' (Telugu) Rebus: kāruvu 'artisan' (Telugu) khār 'blacksmith' (Kashmiri)

http://bharatkalyan97.blogspot.in/2015/05/composite-copper-alloy-anthropomorphic.html

8
Saipal, Dist. Etawah, UP. Anthropomorph, type I. 24.1x27.04x0.76 cm., 1270 gm., both sides
show a chevron patterning, left arm broken off (Pl. 22, 337). Purana Qila Coll. Delhi (74.12/4) --
Lal, BB, 1972, 285 fig. 2d pl. 43d

http://heidicon.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/heidicon/239/213101.html

http://katalog.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/cgi-bin/titel.cgi?katkey=900213101

9
 From Lothal was reported a fragmentary Type 1 anthropomorph
(13.0 pres. X 12.8 pres. X c. 0.08 cm, Cu 97.27%, Pb 2.51% (Rao), surface ptterning runs
lengthwise, lower portion slightly thicker than the edge of the head, 'arms' and 'legs' broken off
(Pl. 1, 22)-- ASI Ahmedabad (10918 -- Rao, SR, 1958, 13 pl. 21A)

The extraordinary presence of a Lothal anthropomorph of the type found on the banks of River
Ganga in Sheorajpur (Uttar Pradesh) makes it apposite to discuss the anthropomorph as a
Meluhha hieroglyph, since Lothal is reportedly a mature site of the civilization which has
produced nearly 7000 inscriptions (what may be called Meluhha epigraphs, almost all of which
are relatable to the bronze age metalwork of India).

http://bharatkalyan97.blogspot.in/2014/01/meluhha-hieroglyphs-snarling-iron-of.html

http://www.clevelandart.org/art/2004.31 Anthropomorphic Figure, c. 1500 - 1300 BC

India, Bronze Age. copper, Overall - h:23.50 w:36.50 d:0.50 cm (h:9 1/4 w:14 5/16 d:3/16
inches). Norman O. Stone and Ella A. Stone Memorial Fund 2004.31

10
Copper hoards from the Gangetic valley, India. Of the type not found in Bactria.

Antennae-hilted swords of copper.

http://archaeologyonline.net/artifacts/19th-century-paradigms-5

11
 Anthropomorphic figure

India
Indus civilization (ca. 3300-1300 B.C.)
ca. 1500 B.C.
Sculpture in bronze
H 19 cm x W 30,50 http://www.axel-vervoordt.com/en/art-antiques/ancient-oriental/pre-
columbian/#!/anthropomorphic-figure

Anthropomorphic figures formed from copper. Northern India, Doab region, circa 1500-1200
BCE

12
"Two composite anthropomorphic / animal figurines from Harappa. Whether or not the
masks/amulets and attachable water buffalo horns were used in magic or other rituals, unusual
and composite animals and anthropomorphic/animal beings were clearly a part of Indus
ideology. The ubiquitous "unicorn" (most commonly found on seals, but also represented in
figurines), composite animals and animals with multiple heads, and composite
anthropomorphic/animal figurines such as the seated quadruped figurines with female faces,
headdresses and tails offer tantalizing glimpses into a rich ideology, one that may have been
steeped in mythology, magic, and/or ritual transformation. Approximate dimensions (W x H(L) x
D) of the larger figurine: 3.5 x 7.1 x 4.8 cm. (Photograph by Richard H. Meadow)"
Source: http://www.harappa.com/figurines/72.html
Aligrama, Swat
1600 - 500 BC
The Gandhara (or Swat) grave culture emerged ca. 1600 BC, and flourished in Gandhara,
Pakistan from 1500 BC to 500 BC. Simply made terracotta figurines were buried with the
pottery, and other items are decorated with simple dot designs. Horse remains were found in at
least one burial.

13
Anthropomorphic burial urn.
Photo pubweb.cc.u-tokai.sc.jp
The Gandhara grave people have been conjecturally associated by certain Indian archeologists
with early Indo-Aryan speakers, and the Indo-Aryan migration into South Asia, which cross-bred
with indigenous elements of the remnants of the Indus Valley Civilization (Cemetery H). There
is no evidence that they spoke an Indo-Aryan language.
http://rolfgross.dreamhosters.com/IndianArtArchitecture/PostIndusValley/Post%20Indus-
Valley%20Cultures.html

14
Anthropomorph bull. Man's face on a terracotta bull. http://www.harappa.com/figurines/1.html
A group of terracotta figurines from Harappa "After many decades of research, the Indus
Civilization is still something of an enigma -- an ancient civilization with a writing system that
still awaits convincing decipherment, monumental architecture whose function still eludes us, no
monumental art, a puzzling decline, and little evidence of the identity of its direct descendants. In
a civilization extending over an area so vast, we expect to find monumental art and/or
architectural symbols of power displaying the names of the powerful. Instead, we find an
emphasis on small, elegant art and sophisticated craft technology. In this so-called "faceless
civilization," three-dimensional representations of living beings in the Harappan world are
confined to a few stone and bronze statues and some small objects crafted in faience, stone, and
other materials - with one important exception. Ranging in size from slightly larger than a human
thumb to almost 30 cm. (one foot) in height, the anthropomorphic and animal terracotta figurines
from Harappa and other Indus Civilization sites offer a rich reflection of some of the Harappan
ideas about representing life in the Bronze Age. (Photograph by Georg Helmes)."

15
http://www.harappa.com/figurines/49.html Feline figurine with "coffee bean" eyes from
Harappa. "It has been suggested that some feline figurines have anthropomorphic facial features.
While features such as "coffee bean" eyes are unusual, the facial features of many animal
figurines are stylized. Such features as beards are not necessarily anthropomorphic features, but
may represent either tigers’ ruffs or lions’ manes. Variations in facial features may represent
differences in wild felines rather than anthropomorphization. Approximate dimensions (W x
H(L) x D): 4.1 x 12.2 x 6.1 cm. (Photograph by Richard H. Meadow)"

 The Internet Journal of Biological Anthropology

 Volume 3
 Number 1Prehistory Of The Chotanagpur Region Part 4: Ethnoarchaeology, Rock Art,
Iron And The Asuras

Abhik Ghosh, PhD

Department of Anthropology, Panjab University
http://print.ispub.com/api/0/ispub-article/5134

16
Keywords

chotanagpur, ethno-archaeology, india, iron, prehistory, rock art

Citation
A Ghosh. Prehistory Of The Chotanagpur Region Part 4: Ethnoarchaeology, Rock Art, Iron And
The Asuras. The Internet Journal of Biological Anthropology. 2008 Volume 3 Number 1.
Abstract
This paper discusses for interrelated aspects of prehistoric and proto-historic cultures from the
Chotanagpur region of India. It begins by looking at the ethno-archaeological data from the
region. Then, it goes on to discuss the various kinds of rock art sites in the entire region. Third, it
looks at the iron sites in the region. Finally, it looks at the phenomenon often described as Asura
sites or Asura cultures in the region. All these elements would be studied to glean important facts
regarding the prehistoric sites in the region and to attempt to find ways to understand their
cultures. It is hoped that this paper would generate many studies that expand the scope of this
paper to incorporate more data and many more ideas for a further and better understanding of
these early cultures.

Introduction
In this continuing saga of human expansion in the Chotanagpur region, it is necessary to note the
fact that there are many communities in the region which have lifestyles and cultures from which
we may learn about the earlier pre-historic and proto-historic communities of the region.
Archaeologists practicing this arena of knowledge are called ethno-archaeologists. Through the
works of a number of ethno-archaeologists, the first section of the paper will attempt to delineate
the variety of cultural models that will attempt to make sense of the Chotanagpur prehistoric
material from the past[123].
The conclusions from this material will then lead us into the study of the symbols and findings of
the huge number of rock art material from the region. This will add on to our knowledge of the
way early cultures thought about their environments and their lives. It would add on the
knowledge of ethno-zoology/palaeo-zoology to the earlier data of the region. Some of the data is
available in the adjoining states of Orissa, Madhya Pradesh and West Bengal, rather than solely
in the heartland of the Bihar/Jharkhand region.
The complexity and variety of iron-using and iron-making as well as iron-extracting
communities in India is amazingly diverse. In fact, there are so many kinds of cultures that are
involved in these processes that it would be entirely wrong to say that there has ever been a true
Iron Age community in India, and definitely not in the Chotanagpur region. These facts are
illustrated through the sites found showing iron usage.
Leading through this morass of data of the Chotanagpur region, finally, I shall describe the
complexity of information available regarding the Asuras of the region. The Asuras have been
studied ethno-archaeologically, they have been part of the iron-using and iron-making part of
Chotanagpur culture and, it is possible, they have been instrumental in forming some of the first
states in the region. The data available on the Asuras will thus be discussed in detail throwing
light on the various issues that emerge.
It is hoped that this paper will thus help us in formulating a better idea of the cultures that lived
during the prehistoric and proto-historic period in Chotanagpur.
The Data From Ethno-Archaeology

17
It must be stated here that often archaeologists have mistaken assumptions regarding what
constitutes a tribe. This is aided and abetted by the fact that even today anthropologists have also
defined tribes differently. Further, the term ‘tribe’ may be used as an econo-political type in an
evolutionary hierarchy of societies[4], or it may be used as a socio-cultural type, whether or not
evolutionarily connected to an earlier era. For details of the real problems that it generates, it
would be useful to look at the concept as a really occurring cluster of types some of which may
or may not be present[5].
The snake cults in the region have been discussed many times by others. There seem to be a
snake in the rock carvings found in the excavation of Sarjamhatu medium irrigation scheme near
Chaibasa. Further, Rajgir has many items which show snake being a venerated item dated to the
third century BC. This continues into the Manasa cult in Bengal. Such Naga figures also exist in
Vaisali and Kumrahar in Bihar between 2nd century BC to the 1st century AD. A Naga-
Panchami festival is still held in July-August in Bihar[6].
R. P. Sharma[7], in this context, argues out a gradual differentiation of peasantry from an earlier
tribal ancestry in the Indian context. However, due to a mixing up of the term ‘tribe’ with other
categories which may or may not be associated with it, his claims fall flat. Further, he has also
not noted, that perhaps what we have begun to call tribes may not have come into existence until
after the state came into existence in the region and a group of people was forced to create an
identity of its own, in opposition to state forces and definitely because of it[8]. Even if it
happened in a limited number of cases, it is still a valid enough possibility for it not to be
ignored.
Bhattacharya[9] comments on the terracotta snake found from Chirand and links it up with the
cultural aspects of the Bauris of Bankura district in West Bengal. Their worship of the cult
of Manasa is symbolically associated with their linkage to the king, and hence to power, prestige
and economic advantages.
Such studies have also been conducted very fruitfully in great detail on the Kanjars of Uttar
Pradesh by Malti Nagar and V.N. Misra[10] and on the Van Vagris of Rajasthan by V.N.
Misra[11].
As far as the metallurgy of the region is concerned, many authors have tried to link up the
metallurgy of local indigenous communities with the meals found from archaeological sites. Ray,
et al.[12] and Ray[13] have found that the Sithrias caste practise a brass working in an
indigenous style which is remarkably similar to the brass artifacts found at Kuanr.
In this regard, the structure of the indigenous iron-making communities as studied by Sarkar[14]
is of great importance. He divides the art of the blacksmith into two sections – the removal of
iron from the ore or smelting, and the fashioning of iron into other products or forging. He sees,
often, that the two are supported by two different groups of people. Sometimes, the two are
looked upon differently by local populations, one being kept lower than the other in the
hierarchy. The Agaria are a tribal community that have inhabited the Central Indian region and
their name comes from the word aag or fire. The Agaria were less numerous in the Ranchi
plateau but had become incorporated with the Asurs of the region. Lohars are a group of
communities who work on iron and they may have either a tribal or non-tribal origin. They were
often secluded and were of a low caste designation. He was required widely and most villages
had at least one Lohar. In the Santal Parganas, they trace their origin either from Birbhum,
Manbhum or Burdwan, as well as from Magahi.
It seems that in these areas, general use of iron had not started in the early historical period.
Thus, though mining and extraction of the metal was important to the states of the period, its use

18
seems to have remained unmentioned. In fact, the word Munda (as a tribe of this region is called)
also means a ball of iron. Tribal groups were mostly relegated to iron extraction and often the
ores were found in the forested and hilly regions which were claimed to be traditionally their
habitats. The iron of Bengal was famed for its malleability. In Birbhum, the iron smelters
included Santals, Bonyahs and Kols. Such activity was part-time and seasonal and was combined
with agriculture. ‘Iron earth’ was obtained either from the surface or by digging small shafts
under the ground. The extraction was normally in the open, but the smelting houses were like
blacksmith’s workshops and run by Kol-lohars, who were a non-agricultural group. They were in
contact with iron merchants and received advances from them. There were also others who sold
it to others and carried to iron markets called aurangs[15].
In Bihar and Jharkhand, such iron-smelting was an ancient craft in the Rajmahal Hills, Palamu-
Ranchi and Dhalbhum-Singhbhum regions. Many tribals participated. In the Rajmahals it was
the Kols, who were migrants with hunting as a subsidiary occupation or even some agriculture.
Then, there were the Agaria/Asurs of Ranchi and Chotanagpur, the Cheros and Bhoktas of
Palamau, Hos and Kharias of Dhalbhum, Korahs and Nyahs of Bhagalpur district, often on their
way to becoming settled agriculturists. They handed over iron to the Lohars for cash. In the
Rajmahal hills and Santal parganas there were larger forges and indications of organized, large-
scale and long-term smelting of iron also, leading to functional specialization and blacksmith
colonies. In Orissa, Patuas and Juangs created iron of the best quality. In Bonai it was done by
the Kols, probably from Singhbhum. It was a subsidiary craft practiced by Sambalpur villagers
along with agriculture. In Darjeeling, iron was manufactured but not smelted by the Kamins. In
Khasia hills it was done by the Garos, Khasis and Nagas, though this region had features
different from that of the Chotanagpur[15].
Thus, over time, the blacksmith became part of the caste hierarchy and often rose in it through
the process of Sanskritization while the iron-smelters remained lower in the hierarchy. While the
Lohars and Lohras were allowed to become smiths in the villages of Oraons, the Agarias were
not even allowed to use Oraon wells. Myths exist in the whole region, which separate the Gonds,
the Santals, Bhumij, Ho or Lohars from the iron-smelting tribes and they involve the invoking of
gods (like the Sun) to destroy the Asurs/Agarias. Thus, while these tribes worship the sun the
Asur-Agarias do not. The Kherwars, Cheros and Bhoktas similarly removed the Bhurs and
Marhs to Singhrauli or Kaimur where they were smelting iron. One group of Kols, under the
influence of the Oraons, started worshipping the sun, doing agriculture and left iron-smelting.
Another group ran from there, hid in the Bonai hills and started iron-smelting. Women in tribal
communities like the Agaria or Kol were allowed to work in the smelting process while the
Lohars did not allow women in their work. Such practices recreated this social division between
them. As Lohars from outside kept adjusting to the communities they stayed with, they also
became more and more confused in the adoption of these new cultural mores[15].
Tripathi and Mishra[16] also studied the iron-making communities in detail and found out that
the Mahuli Agarias produced white iron which was used for preparing weapons. A high grade
iron was also produced by the Parsa group of Agarias as well as the Kamis of Darjeeling.
Shahida Ansari[1718] has explained certain specific features of hunter-gatherers of the past using
the cultural practices of the Musahars, or rat-eaters, of Uttar Pradesh. It was claimed by the
author that some of the small animals carried in rock paintings include rats for eating. It is, of
course, a fact that a great deal can be learnt from such studies, especially relating to demography,
resource use, cultural practices, decision-making as well as housing structures and material

19
culture. Their settlement patterns have also been used as a method to study the settlement
patterns of archaeological sites in the Uttar Pradesh region, in order to understand them better.
Ansari[18] studied the Kols, Musahars and Tharus of U.P. to get a better idea of the way clay
storage bins are used in the Neolithic period. Mahisdal (1380±105 BC and 1085±110 BC for
Period I Chalcolithic) and Pandu Rajar Dhibi (1012±120 BC for Period II Chalcolithic), among
others, were analyzed in this category. From Mahisdal in the 2nd millennium BC layer Rice
(Oryza sativa L.) were found while the same was found in the first half of the 2ndmillennium BC
layer at Pandu Rajar Dhibi.
Mohanta, et al.[19] have discovered 17 iron-smelting sites of prehistoric origin in the
Mayurbhanj district. They argue against a diffusion of iron-smelting technology into the area and
claim that it was produced indigenously. Iron is dated here to about the second half of the first
millennium B.C. but it could have been earlier. Whether it was the prime mover in the clearing
of forests and initiating agriculture is still not clear.
Further, Ray[13] also comments that the megalithic structure creation is a cultural habit of the
present day Bhumij tribe, who erect such big stones over the charred bones of their ancestors.
Such practices may have continued from the Neolithic.
Ray and Chakraborty[20] studied the Santals in the West Bengal region and saw the major use of
pottery was by these tribals, yet they did not know how to make pottery. This function was
performed by Hindu potters. As a result, such Hindu potters aided in a way the Santal habit of
mixing hunting-gathering with an agricultural way of life.
The Rock Art Of The Region
In 1915 Percy Brown with C.J. Balding and C.W. Anderson found the rock paintings at
Singanpur[21]. These were made with red ochre and the iron oxide was found in the rocks of the
cave. Suspecting that the present floor was not the original one, it was excavated to a depth of 18
inches to 2.5 feet, yielding some pieces of rock crystal, coloured quartz, a small lump of red
ochre and agate flakes. The weapons depicted include clubs, bows and axes. According to N.K.
Chowdhury, these were drawn on felspathic sandstones, probably of the Dharwar period. The
removal of felspars due to weathering has led to the friability.
The rock paintings found from Hazaribagh in Bihar became popular due to the efforts of Bulu
Imam, who had contacted INTACH in order to publicise and protect these paintings through
printed book/s[22] and web sites. The sites are found at Isko, Thathangi, Raham and Satpahar (1-
9) in Hazaribagh district; Ranigadar, Naadiha, Fioluhar (Kauwakola), Sarkanda (Kakolata Fall
Area) in district Nawada; Baltharva, Sankarpur in district Gaya and Mukwa, Pateshar, Jhapla,
Hathidah, Dugha in district Kaimur.
They are often made of white or black paints. Neumayer[23] tries to give these paintings the
context that is present in the Vindhyan rock paintings, comparing styles and patterns to show
similarities and differences. He reaches the conclusion that one could not achieve any decision
relating to dates from this site though it is possible that were linked to the Mesolithic settlements
in the Vindhyan region. Further, the Oraons and other tribes in the region use similar styles of
paintings even today in their depiction of various scenes on their bridal huts which they had been
calling Khowar. Hence, due to this nomenclature, the tribal Khowar art has been transformed
from the ancient past to the present day has been the claim of Bulu Imam and others. The proof
of such a claim is still awaited though some tools have been picked up from the floor of the cave
(Singh; 1996-97: personal communication). The linkage of the tools on the floor with the period
of the paintings is still not clear.

20
Prasad[24] calls it the Vratya tradition. Here, again, it is claimed that skins may have been used
for painting where caves were not available, and after the Palaeolithic it may have been a lost art
which was again ‘reawakened’ many years later. It is claimed here that flint burins of various
types and sizes were employed. The pigments used were red haematite or other oxides of iron
and lime. Most of this was available in the nearby area. The painting was done by fingers or with
a spatula, a crude brush like a frayed end of a twig or a pad of fur. A liquid binder must have
been used for the paint whose identity has yet to be established. Prasad claims that a pastoral
economy has mainly male deities. The paintings depict an organized catching of animals for
domestication. A man carries a baby animal over his shoulder while a tall ‘superman’ stands with
a prominent phallus observing. A dancing woman has been drawn using the form of a petroglyph
using sharp stones. Other animals, including a dinosaur-type of animal are also seen. In Kaimur
community dancing is seen as among the present-day tribals of the region. Other symbols seem
to be magical or religious.
The rock engravings in the rock-shelters of Orissa (part of which are within the Chotanagpur
plateau region) have been referred to by Neumayer with respect to the context of the Mesolithic
in the region. They include Vikramkhol and Ulap in Sambalpur district (the former reported by
K.P. Jayaswal[25] in 1933), Gudahandi and Yogimath (Nuwapara district), Manikmoda and
Ushakothi (Sundargarh district) and Pakhna Pathar (Mayurbhanj district). Since then twenty-one
more rock art sites have been added. Most of these are in district Sundargarh. It forms the
connecting link between the Central Indian Chhattisgarh region and the Eastern Indian
Chotanagpur region. The rock-art of this region resembles the rock-art sites in Central India[26].
The rock system is sedimentary, fossiliferous, purple ferruginous sandstone, silt-stone, shells and
grits. The rocks found here are soft, medium-grained sandstone and red shale of the Cuddapah
group and thus weathers easily. There are extensive plateaus and dense vegetation with several
seasonal and perennial nallahs and streams. At the peaks or edges of such regions the rocks have
been hollowed out naturally giving rise to rock shelters. Artifacts, including microliths, are also
found lying beside or are embedded in and around these shelters. At Vikramkhol, Jayaswal in
1933 had claimed that the inscriptions resembled a pictographic script from right to left
intermediary between the script of Brahmi and that of Mohenjodaro. The paintings include the
use of red and yellow ochre. He claimed, thus, that Brahmi was Indian and the Phoenician and
European scripts were developments from it. This was supported by N.P. Chakrabarti in 1936,
Charles Fabri[27] in 1936 and G.C. Mohapatra[28] in 1982. However, Gordon[29] in 1960
disagreed with this view, claiming that there was no script to be seen among these inscriptions.
This was also agreed as not being a script by Pradhan[26].
The microliths found include blades, backed points, lunates, trapeze, triangles, tined arrow-
heads, burins, fluted cores, flakes and chips, lumps of ground haematites, hand-made mat-
impressed pottery and wheel made pottery (Lekhamoda VI), ringstones, hammer-stones and celts
extending from the Mesolithic period to the Neolithic-chalcolithic period. In all the cases
engravings have been found with the paintings. The engravings were filled with dark red ochre
or rubbed with moist haematite lumps. In their stylistic nature and their symbolism, they differ
from the Central Indian rock paintings (though faint resemblances exist) and may have had a
ritual purpose as among the wall paintings of the Saora and Santal, engravings among the
Juangs, Kondhs or Gonds of tribal Orissa. Thus, an ethno-archaeological method of analysis
might be more suitable in this context[26].
Erwin Neumayer[30] also reported more sites from Sambalpur and Sundargarh districts of Orissa
– Osakothi or Ushakothi, Phuldungri, Brahmanigupha, Chhenga Pahar, Bridge Rock,

21
Lakhamara, Sargikhol, Chhichiriakhol, Ulapgarh and Titliabahal. Again, he could not discern
any similarities between these images and those in Central India.
The Problem Of The ‘Asura’ Sites
Over a hundred sites were described by S.C. Roy over the years (see an outline in Roy[31]).
They were described as Asur sites due to local mythology, Asur garhs or forts and Asur sasans or
burial grounds. In fact, the great slabs of stones on some of these Asur graves had been removed
by the Mundas for the graves of their ancestors. Roy saw them as having the following basic
features (after Chakrabarti[32]):
They were always on elevated areas conveniently located on the banks of a water course and
eminently suited for defence.
They had foundations of brick buildings, large tanks, cinerary urns, copper ornaments and stone
beads, copper celts and traces of iron-smelting. The antiquity of the stone temple ruins and stone
sculptures found associated with some reputed Asura sites was unlikely to be applicable to them.
The period covers a wide chronological horizon, though Roy’s assertion that they cover the
Stone, Copper and early Iron Age are wrong. They are mostly within the early historic period.
Further, S.C. Roy divided two kinds of urns found in the graves as belonging to Group A or
Group B. Group A in Khuntitoli included large earthenware urns not found by him earlier in
Ranchi and Singhbhum excavations. Group A and Group B in this village were separated by a
water channel. Group B urns were of the usual ghara shape that he normally found in such graves
in the district. In both cases, the contents of the urns do not indicate any differences. He also
indicates that since the area had seen prolonged use, perhaps one group (group A) was more
advanced and had a more improved pattern of urn than group B which might have been an earlier
form. The slabs were supported like a seat with four stones on four corners ‘like a house’ and the
size of the slab was no indication of the amount of grave goods included. Each slab was placed
East-West on its long axis.
The grave goods included bronze and copper chains, bracelets, anklets, finger rings, toe rings,
beads, bronze ankle bells, ear ornaments, dishes, bells, unstamped copper coins, iron arrowheads,
rings, jugs (some spouted) with patterns on them and bones, which had been kept here after
burning. Below the level of the graveyard some Neolithic stone celts were also found. Here, after
the rains, Roy picked up stone crystal beads, arrowheads, axe-heads, stone cores and flakes from
7/8-15 feet below the brick foundations of Asur buildings. Shiva-lingas with the
encircling yonis were also present. Roy believed the Asurs to be the worshippers of these. At
Khuntitoli, a tiny metal figure of a man driving a plough drawn by two bullocks was ploughed up
near an Asur site.
Further small stools were found in regions like Palamau district, and such stools are still
worshipped and kept under trees, people believing them to have been there for many centuries.
Further, Roy also comments on the fact that even if Asurs invented the smelting of iron, there
were too few iron artifacts. Thus, he sees a four or three stage culture represented by the Asur
graves – first a Neolithic stage, over that a Copper Age and overlapping that an Iron Age. Under
this there may be some palaeolithic tools. Above this there may be Kushan coins. The Asurs of
yore seem to have great forts, were skilled potters and workers in copper, bronze and iron. The
currency involved coins of shells and small, round, thick pieces of copper.
A strong belief in the after-life was also inferred from the grave goods. The bodies were burnt,
then broken with a heavy stick and put into the cinerary urns. Some of the bones show injury
marks, one on a skull, if it be ante-mortem which is likely, resulted in the death of the individual.
The stature was between 4 feet 10 inches to 5 feet with good musculature. Such an injury that

22
resulted in death was inferred from a skull in Khuntitoli, Singhbhum district[33]. The skull
capacity was smaller and there were prominent cheek bones, with small jaws, face and slight
prognathism[34]. Caldwell[35] also analyzed the proportion of various metals in the artifacts
found.
Murray’s report in 1940 indicates his studies of Ruamgarh in 1926 of such a site from
Singhbhum district. There are problems of lumping all the cultural materials into one horizon
and then labeling it as being from 3rd-4thcenturies AD. The two crania found were not part of
the site itself but were found some way beside it due to the exposure of their burial and two
stones resting near them indicate a burial area. One was a male of between 22-26 years, the
other, also a male, between 17-21 years. They could possibly be linked to Mundas in the
region[33].
The skulls and skeletal material found from Bulandibagh and Kumrahar near Patna are dated to
about 2115 ± 250 BP (Kumrahar). The Kumrahar adult female skull was more recent and
different to the Bulandibagh young adult male[36].
Though the issue may be argued, there is no true megalithic formation present. The so-called
‘megalithic’ sites found in the district could be interpreted in a different way. The majority of the
tribals of the region, especially the Mundas and the Oraons, worship not only the forests, land,
river, and mountains but also the stones around them. Spirits are given a place in the hearth by
digging in a wooden block or a piece of stone. There is ancestor worship and many of the spirits
are those of ancestors. Hence, the usage of large stone pieces to mark graves or to extend the
usage to give a khunt or permanent place for a spirit cannot be extrapolated into an entire,
regulated practice and cultural features that is a hallmark of megalithic cultures in South India.
Secondly, there are problems with the dating of this practice since large stones or pulkhi are still
placed on top of the place where the remains of the dead are interred to this date in many tribal
villages, especially among the Mundas.
Thus, the ‘Asura’ sites are characterized by remains of brick buildings, traces of iron-smelting,
copper implements and ornaments, gold coins, stone implements, beads, silted up tanks, cinerary
urns, iron implements, potsherds, stone implements and sculptures. The pottery is of coarse
fabric, thick in section, terracotta red in colour and mostly wheelmade. It includes jars, bowls
and vases[32]. The radio carbon dates suggested that these finds belonged to the late centuries
B.C. and the early centuries A.D. Copper objects found sometimes overlap with these Asura
sites[37].
Two uncalibrated radiocarbon dates for some of these sites are TF-369 – 1970+90 BP (20 BC)
and TF-70 – 1850+100 BP (100 AD)[32].
Was there an Asura kingdom at the time? We cannot know this for certain. There are indications
that some of these sites were located on elevated areas which were highly defensible. It is
entirely possible that what is taken to be Asura finds may be the finds of two or more cultures
living in close association or trading, with one of them participating in early chiefdoms or states.
That the ‘Asura’ community was practicing trade with others is evident from the gold coins
found in some of the sites.
In Darbhanga district, Bihar, there is a fort called Asurgarh, about 40 miles from Darbhanga and
Madhubani. Supposedly, it had been settled by Asur Shah, a Muslim chieftain, some of whose
punch marked coins were also found. Locals claim the area to be old, if not Buddhistic in period,
but a Muslim chieftain would put it not older than 15th century. The name given to the chieftain
is also not complimentary[38].

23
What we know of present Asuras is very little. The 1981 Census shows them to be less than
8,000 in number. They remember that their sole earning used to be from smelting iron ore with
the help of charcoal. Few families maintain this practice now, and NGOs like Vikas Bharati in
Bishunpur are trying to train them and others to teach and re-learn these dying skills[3940].
Banerji-Sastri[41] tried to trace them through historical sources and found the earliest reference
to be around 2nd century BC. Earlier to this, they may have belonged to the land of the
Assyrians. It is claimed that the Ashurabsorbed the cultures of ancient Egypt and Babylon and
passed them on to India. They are known in history as Ashur about the 1200s (BC) after which
they disappear to re-emerge in the 10th century BC. The author claims they came to India
through sea routes rather than land ones.
They then became incorporated into Indian society, traveling into many of its parts. They became
the Brahmans who sat beside the various kings in India and were well-versed in astronomy and
medicine. They also collaborated and fought with a variety of different groups. They may have
become the kings of Magadh (now the Patna and Gaya districts of Bihar) and have left traces in
Rajgir and various other Central Indian sites along with the mythology of the sacrifice conducted
by Raja Janmejaya due to which all the snakes of the Chotanagpur region died, a mythology still
enacted by many tribals of the region[42].
Further, they were seafarers and traveled all over India often through waterways. They became
gradually absorbed into Indian society of that time, though some returned back to Assyria and
others went on to the Pacific. Small groups of them often lost at wars and hid in the jungles of
Chotanagpur, Nagpur, the North East, going to the places which carried their names, for they
brought to India their own serpent symbols of the Naga and that of Garuda[43].
Initially, it may be supposed that the defined Asuras of Sanskritic mythology of those who were
“of unintelligible speech”, “devoid of rites”, “following strange ordinances”, “without devotion”,
“not sacrificing”, “indifferent to the gods” and “lawless” were the tribals of the Chotanagpur and
other regions. However, this may not be entirely true, since Munda mythology refers to the
Asuras as being killed by their gods, the variety of Asura sites and their graveyards. Roy[44]
claims that the present-day Asurs took up the name of this ancient group and its iron-smelting.
These Asurs are divided into three kinds: there are the Soika Asurs, also called Agarias or Agaria
Asurs (the iron-smelters), the Birjias who have also taken up plaiting bamboo baskets, etc. with
iron-smelting and the Jait Asurs who live in villages, smelt iron and manufacture ploughshares
and other rude iron implements, some families also taking up agriculture and being Hinduised
neither marry nor interdine with other sections. Incidentally, iron-smelting Agarias are also
found in Uttar Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh states also[44].
The Birjias as well as the Soika Asurs have nomadic or migratory groups (uthlu) as well as
settled groups (thania). The settled Birjias are further divided into the Dudh Birjias who do not
eat beef and the Rarh Birjias who do. A further division among the Birjias are those who anoint
their brides and bridegrooms only with oil (Telia Birjias) and those who use vermilion as well as
oil (Sinduraha Birjias). The Asurs seem to have similar practices with the Mundas and the Birjias
seem to have clan as well as individual totems. They now practise only cremation of the dead
and there is no urn-burial. However, such burial is seen among the Hos and Mundas. In a
particular ritual called sanrsi-kulasi, iron implements are used to sacrifice fowl to ancient Asur
spirits in order that they continue giving them a plentiful supply of iron-ore. Though the two
tribes look similar, the title Asur seems to have been given to them because they practice iron-
smelting. The earlier Asurs were not from the same racial stock as the Mundas[44].

24
Roy[44] further avers that they were an earlier advanced group of people who lost to the Indo-
Aryans and escaped to the jungles. They were rapidly absorbed into the Indian groups through
intermarriage and the Bengalis contain a large proportion of this mixture also. They are also
found in Southern and Central India. He refers to them as the Nag branch of the Asurs and finds
similarities with Asur sites and the ruins of the Indus Valley civilization. He also feels that this
group may have had more than one division and may have been as widespread as the Indus
Valley sites.
In the mythology of the Mundas, there is an account of the existence of the Asuras, who were
iron-smelters, long before the advent of Mundas. The Asuras would not allow the Mundas to
stay. Hence, the Munda gods tried to intercede on behalf of the Mundas. When the Asuras still
refused to allow Mundas into their territory, the Asuras were punished by the gods. The men
went into their iron-smelting furnaces believing that they would find gold. Doors were shut on
them and they burnt to death. The women became part of the Munda tribe.
The dates match this version of mytho-history, for the first Munda King, Phanimukut Rai, was
crowned in 93 A.D. according to the Vansavali or genealogy kept by his 63rd descendant, the
present Maharaja of Chotanagpur.
The coming of the Oraons into the region is also clouded in mystery. Some accounts claim that
the Oraons were present at the coronation of Phanimukut Rai. Others claim that they lost their
kingdom when the Turkish Muslims attacked and won Rohtasgarh in 1198 A.D. Still others
vehemently declare that they were beaten by Sher Shah Suri who treacherously defeated them
and won Rohtasgarh from them in 1538 A.D., leaving them to flee to Chotanagpur[45].
It is also a matter of confusion that Oraons are a Dravidian language speaking group[46] while
the Asuras and the Mundas are an Austro-Asiatic language speaking group[46].
Apart from the Oraons, the Sauriya Paharia, the Mal Pahariya and the Gond speak the Dravidian
language. Hence, by this token it was believed that since all the other communities spoke either
Indo-Aryan or Austro-Asiatic languages they must have migrated from the Southern parts of
India. According to S.C. Roy, the route could not be ascertained but he suspected that a small
portion of this group settled in the Rajmahal hills and came to be called the Maler tribe. S.C. Roy
thus influenced his student to conduct a study on the Maler. The study of S.S. Sarkar on the
Maler of Rajmahal Hills disproved this hypothesis.
However, it is clear that the Oraons came after the Mundas had already established themselves in
the region. This can be seen from their mythological accounts. The Oraons of Ranchi district
frequently claim that they had to give up their language as well as their gods when they settled
on Munda land which may be seen even now. Then, many Oraons villages still have their old
Munda names. Finally, the original, communal land-ownership of the Mundas (known as
the khuntkatti) gave way to the present bhuinhari land tenure of the Oraons which is a
breakdown of the khuntkatti tenure. This land tenure also was broken down into a tenure system
for the later settlers and who were required as service providers (whether castes or tribes) for the
dominant caste or tribe of the village. This became the raiyati tenure.
Having delineated these problems, I again return to the issue of state formation or of the rise of
chiefdoms. The case of the Asuras makes it clear that there was trade with others outside this
area. Whether such Asuras can be linked to the Asuras of the Mahabharata period is a matter of
conjecture[40]. However, if the black or gray clayey layer is taken to be the site of a neolithic-
chalcolithic industry, then other evidences would have to be taken into account.
Iron is known from many regions in the area. At Barudih in Singhbhum district, an iron sickle
with a profusion of Neolithic celts and coarse black-and-red pottery has been dated to 1055/210

25
BC (calibrated to 140-830 BC). Further, in the Neolithic-Chalcolithic phase, a total of 80 sites
are recorded from Bengal alone. Of these, the iron-bearing layers of Bahiri, Pandu Rajar Dhibi
and Mangalkot yield dates around 1000 BC for their first iron-bearing levels[47].
It is necessary for a large population to go in for an intensification of their agriculture as arable
land decreases. However, early states need not have intensification of agriculture as a necessary
hallmark[48]. They may have a root crop agriculture tradition which would require the small-
sized celts and ring-stones found in the region[4950].
It is not yet clear when or how sedentary agricultural practices came into the region. The Oraons
claim that they first started practicing agriculture but there is no evidence to prove this. What is
clear is that the early inhabitants of Ranchi district did not solely practice sedentary agriculture.
All of them had alternative modes of livelihood.
Conclusions
Considering the fact that the Hathnora calvarium was dated to about 760,000 BP, it seems
important to find out the spread and dispersion of prehistoric cultures in India during the entire
period. The Chotanagpur region may be taken to be one geographic zone and thus it has been
taken as a unit, even though it spans many states. One of the states that it spans is Madhya
Pradesh, which includes the Hathnora region.
This tenuous link has been taken to include the fact that populations from these regions must
have passed through the region or even settled there. The diversity and specificity of the tools
found in the region need to be explained, if not through direct stratigraphic and other hard
evidences, then through the lens of a variety of theoretical approaches.
The data from ethno-archaeology teaches us that there is a very tenuous link between the current
classification of communities as ‘tribes’ or as ‘peasants’ since there is a deep interlinkage
between these two hypothetically created definitions. Also, many communities also traditionally
participated in metal-working and so their ‘simple’ or ‘primitive’ nature is thrown into doubt.
Different communities seem to have formed niches or economic-categories in between modern
communities. This model that is seen in the current context may also have been followed earlier.
As a result, it seems clear that earlier communities need not have followed one culture but would
have been composites of populations having many cultures, often interspersed and sharing traits
and ideas.
Thus, the iron using and iron making cultures of the past could not have been a unified Iron Age
but was a product of this past multi-cultural heritage where many cultures collected, smelted and
worked iron to help out and earn from the iron using communities that emerged.
The rock art-creating cultures are another offshoot of this complexity that is emerging in this
zone. There seems to be a large variety in these as well and spatially this is to be expected since
they are located in regions fairly separated. However, the rock art that is seen here seems to have
lent itself readily to being transmitted culturally to present generations of tribals in the Jharkhand
region who use such motifs as decorations on the mud walls of their huts even today. Also, there
seems to be a traditional sequence from one stage to the next and associated skeletal finds that
substantiate this.
The Asura sites are much more varied and interesting than they had appeared at first. It seems
that most states, grave goods and use of iron and other metals has often made early
archaeologists call them Asura sites, which has been linked with some mythological material or
researches into local folklore. However, the Asura sites seem to be developing into the same
pattern of variety within the structure that we see in the ethno-archaeological, iron using and iron
making and rock art contexts. Thus, they are also formed from a variety of cultures and

26
communities and their apparent similarity should not blind us to this basic reality. In the next
stage of analysis we shall see how the entire structure of the prehistory of the Chotanagpur
region may be seen from this perspective.

References

1. Ghosh, Abhik. 2008(a). Prehistory of the Chotanagpur region part 1: Making sense of the
stratigraphy, Internet Journal of Biological Anthropology 1(2).
2. Ghosh, Abhik. 2008(b). Prehistory of the Chotanagpur region part 2: Proposed stages,
Palaeolithic and the Mesolithic, Internet Journal of Biological Anthropology 2(1).
3. Ghosh, Abhik. 2009. Prehistory of the Chotanagpur region part 3: The Neolithic problem and
the Chalcolithic, Internet Journal of Biological Anthropology 2(2).
4. Sahlins, M.D. 1968. Tribesmen. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.
5. Ghosh, Abhik. 2004. Reasoning the Oraons out of being: A look at the concept called ‘tribe’,
P. K. Misra (ed.) Studies in Indian Anthropology: Festschrift to Professor Gopala Sarana. Jaipur
and New Delhi: Rawat Publications, pp. 105-132.
6. Prasad, H.K. 1960. The Naga-cult in Bihar, Journal of the Bihar Research Society 46(January-
December): 129-134.
7. Sharma, R.P. 1972-73. A socio-economic note on tribes and peasants, Puratattva 6: 60-63.
8. Fried, Morton H. 1975. The notion of tribe. Menlo Park, California: Cummings Publishing Co.
9. Bhattacharya, D. K. 1989. Terracotta worship in fringe Bengal, Ian Hodder (ed.) The Meaning
of Things: Material Culture and Symbolic Expression (One World Archaeology 6). London:
Unwin Hyman, pp. 12-22.
10. Nagar, Malti and V.N. Misra. 1990. The Kanjars – A hunting-gathering community of the
Ganga Valley, Uttar Pradesh, Man and Environment 15(2): 71-88.
11. Misra, V.N. 1990. The Van Vagris – “Lost” hunters of the Thar desert, Rajasthan, Man and
Environment 15(2): 89-108.
12. Ray, Ranjana, Sharmilla Majumdar, Sutapa Ghosh and Sutapa Mukhopadhyay. 1997. A
study on brass working communities in Pallahara region: An anthropo-archaeological approach,
Journal of the Department of Anthropology, Calcutta University 4(1): 51-59.
13. Ray, Ranjana. 2004. Man and culture in Eastern India: An anthropological study on quality
of life through time. Sectional President’s Address, 91st Session 2003-2004, Anthropological
and Behavioural Sciences, Chandigarh. Kolkata: The Indian Science Congress Association.
14. Sarkar, Smritikumar. 1997. From Agaria to Lohar: Blacksmiths in the tribal society of
colonial Eastern India, Journal of the Indian Anthropological Society 32: 139-154.
15. Dasgupta, P.C. 1997. The excavations at Pandu Rajar Dhibi, F. Raymond Allchin and Dilip
K. Chakrabarti (eds.) A Sourcebook of Indian archaeology vol. II. New Delhi: Munshiram
Manoharlal Publishers Pvt. Ltd., pp. 200-205.
16. Tripathi, Vibha and Arun K. Mishra. 1997. Understanding iron technology: An ethnographic
model, Man and Environment 22(1): 59-67.
17. Ansari, Shahida. 1999-2000. Small game hunting Musahars: An ethnoarchaeological
approach, Puratattva No. 30: 142-150.
18. Ansari, Shahida. 2000. Clay storage bins in India: An ethnoarchaeological study, Man and
Environment 25(2): 51-78.
19. Mohanta, Basanta K., Kishor K. Basa, Pranab K. Chattopadhyay and Tapan K. Das. 2003.
Pre-industrial iron smelting in Mayurbhanj, Northern Orissa: An ethnohistoric study, Man and

27
Environment 28(2): 81-90.
20. Ray, Ranjana and Falguni Chakraborty. 2004. Mesolithic stage in West Bengal: An appraisal,
Vinay Kumar Srivastava and Manoj Kumar Singh (eds.) Issues and Themes in Anthropology.
Felicitation volume in honour of Prof. D.K. Bhattacharya. Delhi: Palaka Prakashan, pp. 137-146.
21. Anderson, C.W. 1918. The rock paintings of Singanpur, Journal of the Bihar and Orissa
Research Society 4: 298-306.
22. Imam, Bulu. 1995. Bridal caves: A search for the Adivasi Khovar tradition. New Delhi:
INTACH.
23. Neumayer, Erwin. 1994-95. Rock paintings from Hazaribagh, Bihar, Puratattva 25: 80-84.
24. Prasad, Prakash Charan. 1992-93. Prehistoric rock paintings in Bihar, Puratattva 26: 87-88.
25. Jayaswal, K.P. 1933. The Vikramkhol inscription, Sambalpur district, The Indian Antiquary
62: 58-60.
26. Pradhan, S. 1995-96. Rock engravings in the rock shelters of upland Orissa, Puratattva 26:
32-42.
27. Fabri, C.L. 1936. The Vikramkhol rock inscription, Annual Report of Archaeological Survey
of India, 1930-34 I: 230.
28. Mohapatra, G.C. 1982. Notes on the Vikramkhol and Ushakothi rock-shelters in Orissa, Man
and Environment 6: 97-100.
29. Gordon, D.H. 1960. The prehistoric background of Indian culture, 2nd ed. Bombay.
30. Neumayer, Erwin. 1988-89. Rock pictures in Orissa, Puratattva 22: 13-24.
31. Roy, Sarat Chandra. 1920. Distribution and nature of Asur sites in Chota nagpur, Journal of
the Bihar and Orissa Research Society 6(Pt. III): 393-406.
32. Chakrabarti, Dilip K. 1993. Archaeology of Eastern India, Chotanagpur
plateau and West Bengal. New Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal.
33. Kennedy, Kenneth A.R. 1972. Anatomical description of two crania from Ruamgarh: An
ancient site in Dhalbhum, Bihar, Journal of the Indian Anthropological Society 7: 129-141.
34. Roy Chowdhury, Amal Kumar. 1920. Appendix I: Note on Asur bones, Journal of the Bihar
and Orissa Research Society 6(Pt. III): 407-408.
35. Caldwell, K.S. 1920. Appendix II: The result of analyses of certain ornaments found in Asur
sites, Journal of the Bihar and Orissa Research Society 6(Pt. III): 409-423 (with Appendices III
and IV).
36. Ray, Gautamsankar. 1972. A note on the human remains from Pataliputra, Journal of the
Indian Anthropological Society 7: 143-147.
37. Patil, D.R. 1963. The antiquarian remains in Bihar. Patna: Kashi Prasad Jayaswal Research
Institute.
38. Krishnan, H.R. 1939. Asurgarh – An unexplored ruin, Journal of the Bihar and Orissa
Research Society 25: 52-57.
39. Singh, R.P. 1993. Asur (in Hindi). Ranchi: Bihar Tribal Research Institute.
40. Ruben, Walter. 1940. The “Asur” tribe of Chota-nagpur: “Blacksmiths and devils in India,”
Man In India 20(4): 290-294.
41. Banerji-Sastri, A. 1926(a). The Asuras in Indo-Iranian literature, Journal of the Bihar and
Orissa Research Society 12: 110-139.
42. Banerji-Sastri, A. 1926(b). Asura expansion in India, Journal of the Bihar and Orissa
Research Society 12: 243-285.
43. Banerji-Sastri, A. 1926(c). Asura expansion by sea, Journal of the Bihar and Orissa Research
Society 12: 334-360.

28
44. Roy, Sarat Chandra. 1926. The Asurs – Ancient and modern, Journal of the Bihar and Orissa
Research Society 12: 147-152.
45. Ghosh, Abhik. 2002. History and culture of the Oraon tribe. Delhi: Mohit Publications.
46. Grierson, G.A. (Ed.). 1906. Linguistic survey of India vol. IV. Calcutta: Office of the
Superintendent of Government Printing.
47. Chakrabarti, Dilip K. and Nayanjot Lahiri. 1993-1994. The Iron Age in India: The beginning
and consequences, Puratattva No.24: 12-33.
48. Netting, Robert McC. 1990. Population, permanent agriculture, and politics: Unpacking the
evolutionary port-manteau, Steadman Upham (ed.) The Evolution of Political Systems.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 21- 61.
49. Bhattacharya, D.K. 1993. Is prehistory dead in India?, Journal of the Asiatic Society 35(3):
52-73. (Read in 1992 under Panchanan Mitra Lecture Series).
50. Bhattacharya, D.K. 1996. Towards a regional archaeology in India, K. M. Shrimali (ed.)
Indian Archaeology since Independence. Delhi: Association for the Study of History and
Archaeology, pp. 85-94.

http://ispub.com/IJBA/3/1/5134

Map of the Chota Nagpur ecoregion

Prehistory Of The Chotanagpur Region, India, Part 1: Making Sense Of The Stratigraphy

A Ghosh
Keywords
archaeology, bihar, chotanagpur, india, jharkhand, stratigraphy
Citation
A Ghosh. Prehistory Of The Chotanagpur Region, India, Part 1: Making Sense Of The
Stratigraphy. The Internet Journal of Biological Anthropology. 2007 Volume 1 Number 2.
Abstract
This paper, the first of a series, attempts to review the literature available on the various sites in
the entire Chotanagpur region. The reason for this is the fact that even though this region is
spread out over the states of Orissa, Madhya Pradesh, Bihar, Jharkhand and West Bengal, it has
its own specific kind of topology and topography. Very few archaeologists, geologists and
anthropologists have dealt with this entire range though all those who have worked here have

29
made comments on this issue. Hence, in this paper, I shall look at attempts to unify the
stratigraphic data of the region in order to find commonalities in this region. With such an
overview one may then be able to check out and find the reasons for the pattern of archaeological
records of this region and have an idea of the early prehistory of this region.

Introduction
The Chotanagpur region includes the Indian states of Bihar and Jharkhand. Parts of it extend out
into the states of Madhya Pradesh, Orissa and West Bengal also. For the purposes of this paper,
the earlier borders of the Chotanagpur region would be used as a marker for the study since it
simplifies the discussion of this area. It lies between 22° and 25° 30' N latitudes and between 83°
47' and 87° 50' E longitudes covering an area of about 86,239 sq. km. The average height of this
region is about 2,000 feet (see maps 1, 2 and 3). Further, its geographical region, though may
again be subdivided into other zones, seem to have similar overall characteristics. As a result of
this extension, many sites of the surrounding areas have also been discussed to look for
continuity and spatial distributions.
A second disclaimer, if you will. It is not possible to include in a brief research article the entire
encyclopaedic panoply of sites. I have thus selected and chosen in order to gain an idea of the
region as well as to reach certain conclusions. A preliminary outline of sites in the region and
communities studied for the purpose has been given in the appendices.
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Stratigraphy
The Chotanagpur region is mostly composed of Archaean granite and gneiss rocks with patches
of Dharwar series. Tertiary deposits are found in patches. Quaternary deposits cover a wide area.

It has been seen by some authors that Acheulian occurrences are well-known in India, ranging
from more than 350 to c. 150 kyr. “Although both Early and Late stages of the Acheulian have
been identified…stratigraphic profiles showing the sequential development are absent, and the
role of other factors, such as raw material variability for stone tool manufacture, has not been
thoroughly examined.”… “Given the location and characteristics of hominid settlements in the
Hunsgi-Baichbal Valley, and an inferred palaeo-monsoonal and semi-arid landscape on the
subcontinent, a model of dry season aggregation and wet season dispersal has been
hypothesized…Analysis of artefact assemblages has shown that the formation of Acheulian
localities was influenced by a variety of geomorphological processes, but that certain
technological and spatial distributions were the product of hominid behaviours…” (Korisettar
and Petraglia; 1998: 8-9).
“Most Acheulian occurrences in India have been placed using relative age estimates in the later
phases of the Acheulian, most presumably dating to the second half of the Middle Pleistocene
and to the Late Pleistocene. A set of uranium series dates places Acheulian sites comfortably to
above 350 kyr to c. 150 kyr” (Singhvi, Wagner and Korisettar; 1998: 71).
While the inhospitable terrain deters many, it is a surprise that this mineral rich zone has seen too
few detailed geological surveys in the past few years. Due to the mining areas, Singhbhum,
Dalbhum and surrounding areas have been surveyed recently but not other areas (see, for
instance, Sarkar; 1982, Bose, Mazumder and Sarkar; 1997, Mazumder and Sarkar; 2004 and
Mazumder; 2005 for some recent surveys). Urgent work is needed to be carried out in all these

30
areas in order to confirm the stratigraphies seen here. Of course, the nature of funding is often
dependent on the minerals thought to be found in the region.
A brief overview of the archaeological context of the region might help us to understand the
pattern and nature of human colonization in this area from the earliest days. I begin with a brief
summary of the layers found, as described by one author. Then, I shall show some of the
variations found. It is impossible to explain here the total extent and range of the variations
found. Finally, some authors have tried to link these variations into an overview. One of these
shall be discussed here.
Figure 4
The bedrock is of archaean age, and has granite, gneiss and micaceous schists (A).
Over this lies a layer of compact pebbly secondary laterite (B). This layer is not represented
everywhere. It is a product of the weathering of the laterite at higher levels and being deposited
at a lower level. The bed has pebble-sized fragments of laterite, often consolidated into hard
conglomerate, considered to have been formed at the beginning of Pleistocene, when the climate
became wet.
On this lies a thin bed of mottled clay, formed as a result of decomposition of Archaean rock (C).
In Singhbhum and Dhenkanal, a few choppers and hand axes were found at the junction of this
bed and the overlying bed of gravel conglomerate. Hence, prehistoric cultures started after this
period of mottled clay.
A layer of cemented gravel is laid with unconformity over this layer of mottled clay from 1m to
5m (D). On the banks of the main rivers, it may be lying directly on the bedrock. The bed may
have pebbles of local origin. After deposition, calcareous and ferruginous cement causes their
conglomeration. Along the riverbank this part is in complete submersion and is thus eroded in
high floods. Lower Palaeolithic tools, distinct in colour from their surrounding matrix from this
bed, then become heavily rolled. Those tools dug out are not rolled. Thus, perhaps, early man has
evolved co-evally with these gravels. The Toba ash deposit found a few kms. southwest of
Khamar has been dated to 0.3 myrs B.P. for the lower Palaeolithic culture from this bed.
The gravel conglomerate is overlaid by a bed of brown silt of about 1m 20cm thick. It is mixed
with sand, grit and calcareous concretions. Secondary carbonates show that it was formed in a
dry period and yields lower Palaeoliths (E).
On top of this is a layer of upper loose gravel bed, of about 1.5m to 2m thick, with the gravels
smaller in size, angular in nature compared to those in the lower gravel beds (F). They are mixed
with silt, sand, grit and lime concretions and again yield lower Palaeoliths.
Over this is a silt bed which is yellowish brown in colour and about 2m thick. It is finer in
texture than the lower silt. It is rich in lime and sticky when wet (G). It is supposed to have been
derived from the local ferruginous rocks and deposited during a dry period. Flake tools rich in
Levalloisean technique are found from this zone.
Further, on top are thin discontinuous layers of small gravels found in a complete section. These
are angular and about 1 cm in diameter. They are mixed with lime concretions, perhaps formed
at the shorter oscillations between wet and dry phases at the end of the Pleistocene period, the
Late Pleistocene being dated to about 19,000 years B.P. (H). It contains the last phase of the
Palaeolithic, rich in flake-blade and blade tools.
The final layer is a deposit of silt which is reddish brown in colour and is considered to be recent
in origin (I). It yields Mesolithic tools from its lower parts, Neolithic from its middle part and
chalcolithic culture from the surface (based on Ray; 2004).

31
Mohapatra in 1962 suggested a climatic background of the quaternary on the basis of
stratigraphy, with three climatic cycles of alternating wet and dry conditions. The formation and
deposition of lateritic gravel forms the starting point at the beginning of Pleistocene, going on to
the alternating beds of gravel and silt marking alternating wet and dry climates. Some regional
variability is present in the entire region (in Ray; 2004).
The account given by Ghosh in 1965-66 claims a slightly different stratigraphy. The red lateritic
secondary gravel is missing and a yellow and brown sticky clay take its place. In these layers are
found Late Stone Age tools. On top of this is a layer of red soil topped with recent alluvium
(Chakrabarti; 1993: 52).
Figure 5
Roughly, however, the boulders in a lateritic matrix yield lower palaeolithic tools. The lateritic
secondary gravel yields upper and middle palaeolithic industry and may be tentatively dated to
about 20,000 B.P. The yellow soil layer, sometimes inter mixed with gravel, may be expected to
yield mesolithic tools of the Early Holocene period.
At Bhimbandh, in the Kharagpur hills, the river sections of the Man were found to be as follows
(Singh; 1959):
(a)Bed Rock
(b)Yellow and sometimes Red soil. Cementations are present at some places. This layer was
formed in a period of less humidity. One tool was found in between the two layers, redeposited
in the rainy season.
(c)Boulder deposit. This layer was formed in a period of intense humidity.
(d)Red soils. This is the second phase of less humidity. This contains Middle Palaeoliths and
non-geometric microliths.
(e)Gray soils with ashy character mixed with gravels. This was laid in a dry period. Its grayness
was due to the vegetation which dried and burnt in the summer. It is associated with some tools
and potteries of later period.
Figure 6
At the Khiching region of Mayurbhanj district in Orissa, the following stratigraphy was observed
by Chakrabarti in 1990:
(a)Surface soil with coarse red sand.
(b)The upper layer grades to reddish brown silty clay.
(c)Pebbly gravel, well-sorted, poorly cemented, iron oxide coating on sand grains and pebbles.
(d)Pebbly-cobbly gravel, moderately sorted, cemented by hydrated oxides of iron,
implementiferous.
(e)Clay beds found under laterite layers of varying thickness, not fully exposed.
Near Burla, in Sambalpur District, Orissa, a two level stratigraphy was proposed by H.C. Sharma
(1994):
(a) a calcareous fissured clay (grey in colour) containing only pebble tools (chopper and
chopping tools).
(b) A lateritic boulder/pebble conglomerate containing handaxes, cleavers, choppers and a few
chopping tools.
On the other hand, Chattopadhyay and Saha (2004) propose a similar context for all surface finds
in the West Bengal region as follows and may be dated to the late Upper to Middle Pleistocene:
(a)Bed rock, mainly Archaean,
(b)Depositions of secondary or detrital laterite, and
(c)Alluvium.

32
 Figure 7
Basak (1997) had sited a succession of layers in the following manner at Dhuliapur, at the
Quaternary fill on the banks of the river Tarafeni:
(a)Thick reddish brown silt at the top, a terrace. On the surface one finds iron slag. Within 30 cm
are found ash lenses, burnt soil and bone fragments.
(b)Microlith yielding colluvial gravel.
(c)Calcrete nodules and tubules (rhizoconcretions) in a grayish brown silty loam. Calcrete
nodules are lag concentrates. Fragmentary and slightly abraded animal fossils are associated with
this, on top of the calcrete. This was dated by Fluorine/Phosphate ratio for 10 bone samples and
found to be 3-5 thus being close to Terminal Pleistocene. Fossils from Dhuliapur include black
buck (Antilope cervicapra), spotted deer (Axis axis) and Bos namadicus. Such specimens have
been found also from several river basins in parts of Bankura, Burdwan and Purulia districts of
West Bengal. Thus, the microlithic context was correlated with the semi-arid grassland situation
in the Terminal Pleistocene (18,000 – 10,000 B.P.). Thus, the authors confirm a Late Pleistocene
aridity existing in the region.
(d) A thick brownish yellow clayey loam, mottled and oxidized by the development of
desiccation cracks.
(e)Moderately consolidated gravel consisting of rounded to sub-rounded cobbles, pebbles of vein
quarz, quartzite, sandstone and some metamorphosed basic rocks. It is moderately sorted clast
supported gravel, cemented by calcareous material.
(f) Upper Lalgarh Formation. A few Lower Palaeolithic artifacts were recovered from here.
However, Chattopadhyay and Saha (2004) claim that in the Chotanagpur region the stratigraphy
is varied and the context dictates the one to be used. They give the geological succession of the
region as:
 Archaean
 Newer Dolerite
 Vindhyans
 Gondwana
 Rajmahal Trap
 Late Tertiary Gravels
 Laterite, and
 Alluvium.
A composite stratigraphy of Birbhum was seen from the following (Chakrabarti; 2002-2003: 24):
1. A thin veneer of humus
2. Yellowish brown to reddish brown silt and fine grained sand with grits of quartz and
chert (slope wash material)
3. Yellowish red silt and medium grained sand with iron oxide granules and grits of rock
fragments constituting mainly of vein quartz and chert (slope wash material), Holocene
4. Old surface built by alluvial and fluviatile fan Pleistocene sediments
5. Unconformity
6. Laterite bed comprising of nodules, quartz pebbles, fossil-woods in a clayey matrix
7. Plio-Pleistocene boundary
8. Unconformity
9. Yellowish felspathic mottled clayey bed
10. Conglomerate bed with pebbles of different rock types, fossil-woods, agate in a clayey
matrix

33
11. Yellowish-greyish mottled horizontally bedded sand and mud
12. Unconformity
13. Jurassic volcanic rocks of the Rajmahal Traps
14. Subsurface basement ridge of Gondwana rocks
15. Basement granitoid Precambrian rocks, at places intruded by dolerite dykes.
In 1982 Asok Kumar Datta tried to create a unified stratigraphy of the West Bengal region as
follows (p. 85):
Figure 8
In spite of all these attempts, it must be acknowledged that there are problems with the fixing of
the Plio-Pleistocene boundary itself, even after all the evidences have been taken into account
(Ganjoo; 1990).
Having put all of these issues into context, it may be seen that the Chotanagpur region has many
inherent complexities with regard to stratigraphy and the context of many of the sites found. A
majority of these sites are surface finds, showing that early human populations may have existed
here perhaps well into the historical period. Our present knowledge in these areas definitely
needs to be upgraded. So far, the geologists working here have been attracted by the monetary
worth of the minerals that are to be extracted from this mineral-rich zone. Their aims and
objectives for checking out the stratigraphy were different and guided by a certain kind of
political economy. Now, perhaps, a large number of them need to check out the areas mentioned
above to clarify the range and location of the strata that may house the artifacts of early human
beings. It is only then that we may begin to have an objective chronology of the region's rich
archaeological heritage.
References
r-0. Basak, Bishnupriya. 1997. Microlithic Sites in the Tarafeni Valley, Midnapur District, West
Bengal: A Discussion in Man and Environment, vol. 22, No. 2, pp. 11-28.
r-1. Bose, Pradip K., Rajat Mazumder and Subir Sarkar. 1997. Tidal Sandwaves and Related
Storm Deposits in the Transgressive Protoproterozoic Chaibasa Formation, India in Precambrian
Research, vol. 84, pp. 63-81.
r-2. Chakrabarti, Dilip K. 1993. Archaeology of Eastern India, Chotanagpur
Plateau and West Bengal. New Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal.
r-3. Chakrabarti, Subrata. 1990. The Stone Age Prehistory of Khiching, Orissa in Man and
Environment, vol. 15, No. 2, pp. 13-21.
r-4. Chakrabarti, Subrata. 2002-2003. Archaeology of Birbhum: The Past Informs the Present in
Puratattva, No. 33, pp. 23-33.
r-5. Chattopadhyay, R.K. and Sharmila Saha. 2004. Palaeolithic Jharkhand in Vinay Kumar
Srivastava and Manoj Kumar Singh (eds.) Issues and Themes in Anthropology. Felicitation
volume in honour of Prof. D.K. Bhattacharya. Delhi: Palaka Prakashan, pp. 183-221.
r-6. Datta, Asok Kumar. 1982. The Palaeohistory of Man and His Culture. Delhi: Agam Kala
Prakashan.
r-7. Ganjoo, R.K. 1990. The Plio-Pleistocene Boundary in India: A Reappraisal in Man and
Environment, vol. 15, No. 2, pp. 29-34.
r-8. Ghosh, A.K. 1966. Implementiferous Laterite in Eastern India in D. Sen and A.K. Ghosh
(eds.) Robert Bruce Foote Memorial Volume. Calcutta: Firma K.L. Mukhopadhyaya, pp. 149-
162.
r-9. Korisettar, Ravi and Michael D. Petraglia. 1998. The Archaeology of the Lower Palaeolithic:
Background and Overview in Michael D. Petraglia and Ravi Korisettar (eds.) Early Human

34
Behaviour in Global Context: The Rise and Diversity of the Lower Palaeolithic Record. London:
Routledge, pp. 1-22.
r-10. Mazumder, Rajat and Subir Sarkar. 2004. Sedimentation History of the Palaeoproterozoic
Dhanjori Formation, Singhbhum, Eastern India in Precambrian Research, vol. 130, pp. 267-287.
r-11. Mazumder, Rajat. 2005. Proterozoic Sedimentation and Volcanism in the Singhbhum
Crustal Province, Indian and Their Implications in Sedimentary Geology, in press.
r-12. Ray, Ranjana. 2004. Man and Culture in Eastern India: An Anthropological Study on
Quality of Life Through Time. Sectional President's Address, 91st Session 2003-2004,
Anthropological and Behavioural Sciences, Chandigarh. Kolkata: The Indian Science Congress
Association.
r-13. Sarkar, A.N. 1982. Structural and Petrological Evolution of the Precambrian Rocks in
Western Singhbhum, Bihar. Memoirs of the Geological Survey of India, vol. 113, pp. 1-97.
Calcutta: Director General, Geological Survey of India.
r-14. Sharma, H.C. 1994. Palaeolithic Finds Around Burla, District Sambalpur, Orissa in Man
and Environment, vol. 19, Nos. 1-2, pp. 285-290.
r-15. Singh, R.C. Prasad. 1959. Paleoliths From Bhimbandh in Journal of the Bihar Research
Society, vol. 45, Pt. 1-4, pp. 297-299.
r-16. Singhvi, Ashok K., Gunther A. Wagner and Ravi Korisettar. 1998. Techniques for the
Chronometry of the Palaeolithic: Evidence for Global Colonization in Michael D. Petraglia and
Ravi Korisettar (eds.) Early Human Behaviour in Global Context: The Rise and Diversity of the
Lower Palaeolithic Record. London: Routledge, pp. 23-83.

http://ispub.com/IJBA/1/2/12571

Prehistory Of The Chotanagpur Region Part 2: Proposed Stages, Palaeolithic And The
Mesolithic

A Ghosh
Keywords
chotanagpur, india, mesolithic, palaeolithic, prehistory
Citation
A Ghosh. Prehistory Of The Chotanagpur Region Part 2: Proposed Stages, Palaeolithic And
The Mesolithic. The Internet Journal of Biological Anthropology. 2007 Volume 2 Number 1.
Abstract
The archaeology of the Chotanagpur region, a plateau with an average height of 2000 feet above
sea level in central and eastern India, has remained very complex and confusing. It is time now
to rethink the entirety of research practices in the region and to put together the theories that
model the existence of human beings in the region. Initially, an attempt has been made to put
together the various theoretical approaches in the region, especially the industries and stages that
have been proposed by various authors. Next, the recent sites found in the region purporting to
be from the palaeolithic and Mesolithic periods have been highlighted. Finally, a set of
conclusions that may explain some of the phenomena seen through the imperfect data of material
culture are presented here. This, it is hoped, would lead to a better explanation of the prehistoric
sites found in the Chotanagpur region. Finally, it might prove to be a means of further

35
understanding the way prehistoric cultures have been manifesting themselves during the
Neolithic period.

Introduction
Having looked at the stratigraphy and the context of the sites found in the Chotanagpur region
(for details see Ghosh; 2008), it becomes apparent that the geological features of the region that
is now known as Jharkhand state and earlier called Bihar would not be sufficient to analyze the
human habitation in this region. These state divisions are more recent and the geological
conditions that gave rise to a similar Chotanagpur plateau were much more ancient. As a result, it
would be necessary to also look at the sites in the adjoining regions of Madhya Pradesh, Orissa
and West Bengal (see maps 11, 12 and 14) states in India which have a similar topography. The
character of many of the tools found in this region seem to show that this extension of the study
area is justified.
The topography and stratigraphy of the region has been detailed in a previous paper (Ghosh;
2008) and it shows that unraveling the context of any site is unlikely to be an easy prospect in
any part of the Jharkhand area except the Singhbhum region where, due to extensive mining
activities, a number of surveys had been conducted in the region by scholars from around the
world over the years. Having said that, a site by site study can often help to bring out emergent
qualities of such complex systems of explanation. Through those scholars who have attempted
overviews of stratigraphies and of the sites, we can perhaps gain a glimpse of what it was like to
have lived as a human on these hilly regions.
At initial analysis, it seems that there are few sites in this region that may attest to the existence
of humans. This has been, perhaps, because few of these sites have been in the primary context.
Sites in many other areas, often in the primary context, have been presented widely in the media
and in research papers. The sites here have not been so well known except to a select band of
scholars. The sites have been described on a regular basis over almost the past two centuries.
They have amounted to over a thousand well researched sites in the region. Some later scholars
have reviewed the early sites to see if they can yield further data. As a result, this rich yield
needs to be contextualized and put together.
This humble analysis given here, then, in no way is to be seen as one polemical of those stalwarts
who have pointed out through the morass of problems some of the emergent characteristics. It is
hoped to build upon these early studies. Also, anthropology is holistic and a social
anthropological approach may give rise to a different viewpoint than one that an archaeologist
may have. A collation of the recent data is thus felt to be necessary, if only to point out the way
to future researches.
Thus, in the initial stages, the various industries and stages of human palaeolithic industry
postulated by various authors has been taken into account. Then, an account of the palaeolithic
and Mesolithic industries have also been summarized with special focus on more recent sites.
Based on these certain conclusions have been attempted. Whether these conclusions are
warranted or not, it is hoped, further researches would be helpful in pointing out. Whatever be
the outcome, it is expected that the reader takes notice that the terms palaeolithic and Mesolithic
are taken with caution, in the ironic sense that is advocated by Rorty, in order that we may use it,
yet be ready to discard it should better terms be more suitable to the context found here.
Figure 1
Figure 1: Prehistoric Sites In The Birbhum District Of West Bengal
Figure 2

36
Figure 2: The Tarafeni Region Showing Prehistoric Sites In Midnapur District Of West Bengal,
India
Figure 3
Figure 3: Prehistoric Sites In Bankura District Of West Bengal
Table 1: Prehistoric Archaeological Sites In Some Parts Of The Chotanagpur Region
1.BIHAR AND JHARKHAND (22° 00' and 28° 30' N lat. and 83° 47' and 87° 50' E long.) 1.1
RANCHI/LOHARDAGA/GUMLA DISTRICTS (22° 22' and 22° 43' N and 84° 00' and 85° 54'
E) HISTORY S.C. Roy 1965-66 1968-69 V. Jayaswal (1978) V. Jayaswal (1978) S.R. Roy
(1975-76) S.R. Roy (1975-76) Bhakuadih Bhalua Dungri (3) (73 E/15) Bighatoli Birta Budhudih
Buradih Chainpur Chainpur North (73 A/4) Charma (10) (73 E/5) Chipri (19) (73 A/7, 23° 24'N;
84° 22'E) Chokahatu (73 E/16, 23° 10'N; 85° 48'E) Damari Daruharu Diankel Dubalabera
Ghagra (17) (73 A/11, 25° 35'N; 84° 35'E) Guram Hardag (7) (73 E/7) Harra Pahar 1 (73 A/4)
Harra Pahar 2 (73 A/4) Islampur Jamatoli Jamtoli (73 A/4) Jilin Buru Pahar (4) (73 E/7) Jojadih
(6) (73 E/12, 23° 05'N; 85° 35'E) Jumar Kamre (13) (73 E/7, 23° 25'N; 85° 15'E) Kandra Kanke
Road foothills Keraghagh Khijritoli Kochedaga Kondko (2) (73 E/11) Kuchagharia Kurumgarh
Lohardaga Malgaunsa Malgo 1 (73 A/7) Malgo 2 (73 A/7) Malgo 3 (73 A/7) Maranghada
Maranghatu McCluskieganj (15) (73 A/14, 73 E/12, 73 E/6) Murgu (14) (73 E/3, 23 25'N; 85°
10'E) Nawadih Nawagaon Nichitpur Paras River Project (11) (73 A/12, 23° 10'N; 84° 45'E)
Parasdhika (1) (73 E/7 or E/11) Pipratoli Pitar/Pithartoli (18) (73 A/11, 25° 15'N; 84° 30'E)
Potpoto Purnapani Rajadera Roshanpur (12) (73 A/16) Salam 1 (73 A/7) Salam 2 (73 A/7)
Sapahi Saradkel (8) (73 E/8, 23° 05'N; 85° 20'E) Tape (16) (73 E/7, 73 E/10) Torpa
Udhuru COPPER HOARD SITES Bahea (probably historical, but a stone celt also found)
Bandua Bartola Bassia P.S. Dargama (also Asur site) Harra Chowrah Darh Kamdara Khunti
subdivision Namkum Ranchi district, ancient graves, traditionally Asur ASURA SITES (2-5th
Century A.D.?) Akta Anigara (73 E/8) Arangi Arsande Bahea (73 E/11) Balagarh Bamni (73
E/5) Barhe Barkuli Bartua Baru Barudi Belwadag (73 E/8) Bichna (73 E/4) Birta Bisakhatanga
Borea (Bharompahar) Bundu (73 A/12) Burudih Buruma Chakla Chalho Chandapara
Chandrapur Chandwali Chichigara Chiraundi Chirna Churda Dargama (73 E/8) Da'som Deogain
Dhurua Digi Digri (73 E/8) Diuri Dorma Dulmi Dulua (73 E/4) Erkia (73 E/12) Etre Fuljhar
River Gajgaon (73 F/5) Garae Garai Gargaon (73 E/8) Garhatoli Gora Hansa (73 F/5) Hardi
Hitutola (73 E/8) Hurua Indpiri Ite Ithey Ithey, near Ranchi Jamri Jiki Kamia (73 E/8) Kamta
Kanthartoli Kathartoli Katkuari Kelo Kendua Kerke Khijri Khuntitola Kunjila (73 E/8)
Khuntitoli Koinjara Kongsea Korambe Kospur Kujram Kuli Ajan Kumkuma Lampadi Lapungdi
Lohardaga (73 A/11) Lowadi Lupungdi (73 E/8) Malatu Manmani Marngaontoli of Bamni
Mosmano Murud Namkum (73 E/7) Oskea (73 E/5) Otong-Ora Pandu (73 E/4) Patta Hesel Piridi
Pithoria Pokla (73 E/8) Raitondang Renroa Ridari (73 E/8) Rolagutu Rungrutoli (Patpur) Saheda
Sanrigaon Sargaon-Kaimlo border Saridkel Sidu Silagai Simbuya Sogra Soparam Sundari
Tanjara-Gara Tati Tirla Toner (73 E/5) Tringutu Bortola 1.2 PALAMAU DISTRICT (23° 20'
and 24° 39' N and 83° 20' and 84° 58' E) Akhra (11) (73 A/1, 23° 54'N; 84° 11'E) Amanat Bridge
(2) (72° D/4, 24 05'N; 84° 07'E) Bajna (6) (63 P/16) Bakhari Betla Birbandha (5) (63 P/16, 24°
06'N; 84° 50'E) Chandarpur (8) (72 D/8, 24° 02'N; 84° 26'E) Chhoti Bholi (13) (72 D/4, 24°
12'N; 84° 12'E) Chianki Dhekulia Durgabati Bridge (3) (72 D/4, 24° 09'N; 84° 03'E) Jhabar (9)
(72 D/4, 24° 0'N; 84° 12'E) Jinjoa Bridge (12) (72 D/4, 24° 09'N; 84° 11'E) Jorkot (10) (73 A/1,
23° 59'N; 84° 07'E) Maila Bridge (7) (72 D/4, 24° 03'N; 84° 09'E) Nawagarh Hill (14) (72 D/8,
24° 15'N; 84° 24'E) Palamau Patthar Chatti Pratappur Ranchi Road (15) (73 A/10, 23° 42'N; 84°
37'E) Ranka Kalan (4) (64 M/13, 23° 59'N; 83° 47'E) Shahpur (1) (72 D/4, 24° 02'N; 84°

37
02'E) COPPER SITES Hami Mahuadanr Saguna 1.3 HAZARIBAGH AND GIRIDIH
DISTRICTS (23° 25' and 24° 48' N. and 84° 29' and 86° 38' E) HISTORY Hughes (1865) A.K.
Ghosh K.P. Jaiswal Institute of Patna Baragunda (12) (72L/4, 24° 10'N; 86° 14'E) Barkagaon (6)
(73E/1, 23° 51'N; 85° 15'E) Barwe Bonga (9) (72H/8, 23° 05'N; 85° 24'E) Gola (1) (73E/10, 23°
30'N; 85° 45'E) Hesagarha (4) (73E/5, 23° 46'N; 85° 30'E) Karso (7) (72H/7, 24° 17'N; 85° 25'E)
Kusumdih (2) (73E/10, 23° 32'N; 85° 44'E) Mandu (5) (73E/5, 23° 47'N; 85° 29'E) Neropahar
(11) (72H/11, 24° 29'N; 85° 40'E) Pachamba (13) (72L/8, 24° 13'N; 86° 16'E) Paradih (10)
(72D/16, 24° 10'N; 84° 51'E) Paresnath Hillslope (14) (73I/1, 23° 58'N; 86° 10'E) Pundra (8)
(73D/16, 24° 03'N; 84° 58'E) Rajrappa Ramgarh Lele Bandha 'nullah' COPPER
SITES Baragunda Giridih (unspecified sites) Karharbari (72L/8) TIN SITES Nurungo (24° 10'N;
86° 05'E) ROCK ART SITES Dudhpani Isko Raham Satpahar (1-9) Thathangi 1.4
SINGHBHUM DISTRICT (21° 58' to 23° 36' N. and 85° E to 86° 54' E) HISTORY Capt.
Beeching (1868) V. Ball (1880) C.W. Anderson (1915; River Sanjai and its tributaries) P. Mitra
E.F.O. Murray (1941) S.C. Sinha (June 1950 to August 1951) D. Sen and others A.K. Ghosh
(1970) S.R. Roy (1976-78) Bamni (39) (73 J/1, 22° 58'N; 86° 10'E) Bangaon Barapahar (2) (73
J/6, 22° 38'N; 86° 22'E) Barudih (36) (73 F/13) (Late Neolithic site with C 14 absolute date at
3000B.P.) Beniasole (11) (73 J/6) Bhalukhocha Bichhati-Dungri (13) (73 J/6) Chaibasa
Chakradharpur-1 (29) (73 F/10) Chakradharpur-2 (30) (73 F/10, 22° 40'N; 85 40'E)
Chakradharpur-3 (31) (73 F/10, 22° 39'N; 85 40'E) Chakuria (7) (73 J/6) Charakmara (16) (73
J/11, 22° 27'N; 86° 41'E) Dhalbhumgarh Dora (44) (73 F/13) Dugni (43)(73 F/13, 22° 45'N; 85°
59'E) Dungdungi (40) (73 F/13) Ful-Dungri (15) (73 J/6, 22° 35'N; 86° 30'E) Galudih Garra
Nadi Dam (4) (73 J/6) Ghatsila Ghuntia (27) (73 F/14) Hat Gamharia-1 (21) (73 F/14) Hat
Gamharia-2 (22) (73 F/11) Hat Gamharia-3 (23) (73 F/11) Hat Gamharia-4 (24) (73 F/11, 22°
17'N; 85° 45'E) Hat Gamharia-5 (41) (73 F/12) Hesadih (33) (73 F/5, 22° 47'N; 85° 21'E)
Jamshedpur Jojodih (35) (73 F/9, 22° 47'N; 85° 45'E) Kalikapur (19) (73 J/6, 22° 36'N; 86° 17'E)
Kamalpur (20) (73 J/6, 22° 36'N; 86° 15'E) Kandra (37) (73 J/1) Karalajuri (28) (73 F/14, 22°
35'N; 85° 46'E) Kendposi Kharkai Bridge (42) (73 F/13, 22° 35'N; 85° 52'E) Kharsati Bridge
Kitadi-Dungri (14) (73 J/6, 22° 36'N; 86° 26'E) Languish Lapso-Kyanite (34) (22° 47'N; 85°
44'E) Maheshpur (18) (73 J/11, 22° 18'N; 86° 41'E) Maubhandar Musabani-Maubhandar
crossing (10) (73 J/6) Patbera (17) (73 J/11, 22° 27'N; 86° 43'E) Pathardih Puaputul Purnapani
(38) (73 J/1, 22° 59'N; 86° 10'E) Rajdoha (6) (73 J/6, 22° 42'N; 86° 16'E) Rakha Copper Project
(3) (73 J/6, 22° 38'N; 86° 22'E) Rakha mines Ruam-Digri (1) (73 J/6, 22° 38'N; 86° 22'E)
Sansantand Sasaghati (25) (73 F/8, 22° 12'N; 85° 23'E) Serenga (8) (73 J/6) Sonua Swaspur (5)
(73 J/6) Tatibe (26) (73 F/8, 22° 10'N; 85° 21'E) Tebo (32) (73 F/5, 22° 46'N; 85° 27'E) Terga
(9) (73 J/6) Uldah (12) (73 J/6, 22° 40'N; 86° 25'E) Ulighutu ASUR SITES Barjo Chakradharpur
Dudukendi Dudur Indpiri Kamdela Khuntitoli Korankel Lotapahar Ruamgarh Srijang SITES
WITH CELTS Barudih (Burnt rice dated to 2nd Millenium BC) Bongara-Bhangat Borda
Chaibasa Chandil Dora Dugni (73 F/13, 22° 44'N; 85° 55'E) Ghatsila Jamda Jojo Nimdih
Ramchandra Pahar/ Chandra Buru Roro valley Sanjai bridge near Chakradharpur Sini Talsa-
Turamdih Ukri HISTORICAL SITESBenusagar Chandil Deultanr Dulmi Ichhagarh COPPER
HOARDS Andhari Borodanga/Bardugna Kera
Industries And Stages
Due to the wet, monsoonal climate in this zone, it is becoming apparent that perhaps no major
fossils of early man are to be found from this region. The Indian monsoons divide into two
branches when they hit the tip of the peninsula and these two branches circle around to enter the
country. Chotanagpur, due to its unique location and mountainous terrain, receives rainfall from

38
both these branches. This results in a substantial cooling down of the region. Earlier, the forests
and heavy rains ensured such a cool climate that the British shifted their capital to this region
from Calcutta, or substantial sections of it. At present, the cutting down of the forests has
degraded the ecosystem to such an extent that fans and coolers are now required for part of the
year (unlike earlier). Certainly no major fossil-rich zones are yet apparent which fall within the
range of human habitations in the region.
According to Jayaswal, who analyzed a number of sites in the Chotanagpur region in 1981 there
were basically three industries:
Industry I: This was associated with the boulders conglomerated in a lateritic matrix and was
taken to be a part of the Lower Palaeolithic tool tradition of the Indian subcontinent. It consisted
of chopping tools, handaxes, scrapers, flakes, prepared cores, levallois cores, cleavers, etc.
Industry II: This was associated with the deposition of lateritic soil and gravel; probably Upper
Palaeolithic in content. It contained side-scrapers, end-scrapers, knives, tranchets, backed blades,
flakes, blade cores, prepared cores, levallois cores, mousterian cores, irregular cores, etc.
Industry III: This was found in the surface humus above the red soil and consisted of a
microlithic industry of side-scrapers, retouched blades, backed blades, lunates, burins, knives,
end-scrapers, etc. There were also many fluted cores among the waste products (Chakrabarti;
1993: 52).
Ray (2004: 10) follows a different set of industries following Ghosh (1970), as follows:
Stage-I: Pebble-core element comparable to lower Palaeolithic stage marked by Acheulian
tradition and began around 0.3 myr ago in the lower gravel conglomerate, continued through the
lower silt bed upto the upper gravel bed. The tools collected include choppers, handaxes,
cleavers, scrapers and large unretouched flakes, with most being large, heavy, jagged profile and
having large and deep flake scars. Patches of cortex show the material used were pebble-based,
made on quartz or quartzite, the latter being dominant. Finished tools and debitage are abundant.
Tools evolve and show internal differentiation as the layers go up. From the lower gravel bed to
the lower silt bed there is a change in tool refinement and there is a diversification of subtypes.
In the upper silt bed, choppers become rare and disappear. Here, many tools are made on
Levalloisean flakes, although Acheulian still dominates. This divides this stage into the Lower
(lower gravel bed), Middle (lower silt) and Upper stages (upper silt).
Stage-II: Flake-element may be the middle Palaeolithic stage except that the true Mousterian
element is lacking. Besides some evidence of the Mousterian of Acheulian tradition, the
Levalloisean tradition dominated this stage. Earlier tool types continue but with lesser frequency,
except for scrapers. Scrapers were used for making tools and had many functional subtypes, with
retouchings becoming more developed and the appearance of denticulates. Handaxes may be
found but with lesser proportion while cleavers and choppers are absent. Knives, points, awls,
discoidal cores (both as debitage and as tools), unretouched flakes with marks of use are some of
the evidences found. All of it comes from the upper silt bed. The material used was fine-grained
cherty quartzite with less impurities.
Stage-III: Flake-blade element is hardly comparable to the European upper Palaeolithic since no
such blade and burin industry is found in the region. Rather, in place of true blades
morphologically similar blades made by prepared core technique are found called flake-blades.
Blades made by the punching technique are present but they are not dominant in their frequency
of occurrence. All of it comes from the upper part of the upper silt bed. There is not much
variation (apart from the flake-blades) with the so-called Indian middle Palaeolithic stage.
Levallois technique becomes more refined. The raw material was cryptocrystalline rock.

39
Vidula Jayaswal has divided the palaeoliths found in Ranchi district into two categories:
Industry I: An assemblage of 30 Lower palaeoliths collected from nine sites.
Industry II: An assemblage of 100 Lower palaeoliths collected from nine sites.
B.K. Saran carried out explorations in the Khunti region finding an industry which he called
transitional between the Middle and Late Stone Ages (Chakrabarti; 1993).
Palaeolithic Period
The tools from Bhimbandh (also see above, Singh; 1959, Singh; 1960) seem to be equivalent to
those found in many other surrounding areas of U.P., Mayurbhanj and the Singrauli basin. They
include Acheulian hand-axes, Levalloisean hand-axes, both Acheulian and Levalloisean scrapers
and end scrapers of the Middle Stone Age. The site was originally found by Bose, Gupta and
Bose (1960).
In 1988, Ratha and Bhattacharya reported a site called Kuchinda from Sambalpur district, Orissa.
Out of 394 items picked and analysed, 192 were finished types. Most are on quartzite but three
are on milky crystalline quartz. There is an emphasis on pebbles as the raw material. Handaxes
outnumber cleavers and have been formed both unifacially and bifacially, picks (alternate border
flaking to give a sharp pointed end), backed knife, side scrapers and end scraper. They seem to
be about 60-70 thousand years old. They match with a Middle Acheulian industry.
In 1990, S. Chakrabarti reported nine sites from the Khiching area. The author readily admits
that a quantitative analysis of the tools found would not be suitable since all the sites are in a
disturbed context. However, he does claim that the sites range from the Lower-Middle-Upper
Palaeolithic to the Mesolithic.
In 1994, H.C. Sharma reported three sites in the region of Burla of Sambalpur district of Orissa.
At Barapahar were found choppers, chopping tools, proto-handaxes, handaxes, cleavers,
scrapers, points, borers, blade flakes, burins, flakes, chunks and chips. They were made of
quartzite, quartz or milky quartz and jasper. The technique was stone hammer or cylinder
hammer with retouchings along the border, except with some choppers. Bulbs of percussion are
prominent. At Daridungri, he found Lower and Middle Palaeolithic artifacts like chopping tools,
proto-handaxes, handaxes, cleavers, discoids, scrapers, borers, points, burins, flakes, blade cores
and chunks/nodules. This was seen to be a factory site. At Hirakud, he found choppers, chopping
tools, cleavers, scrapers, points, borers, blades, flakes and chunks, all in fresh condition. Based
on the stratigraphy, Sharma divides his tools into Lower Palaeolithic, Middle Palaeolithic and
Upper Palaeolithic types. In the first category, he finds 79 tools. He sees this to be divided into a
chopper-chopping Soanian tradition and a handaxe-cleaver industry with tendencies to the
Madrasian tradition. The proto-handaxes form a link between these two traditions. In the Middle
Palaeolithic, he finds 89 artefacts. In the Upper Palaeolithic he finds a blade core at Daridungri
and a blade flake at Hirakud. Based on this he claims there to be a meeting point between the
pebble-based chopper-chopping tool industry with the Acheulian industry, both of which were
running simultaneously.
In the Kharagpur hills, tools seem to be discovered from 1944-45 and onwards till the excavation
of Paisra (Pant and Jayaswal; 1978). Recently, Bhattacharya and Singh have discovered a series
of such sites from the region. Sohdihwa, one of these, is close to the local River Man. The basal
rock is about 60-80 cm from the surface. Seasonal rainwater washes away the topsoil. The tools
were found lying exposed on the rock surface. The site is in a very disturbed context but spreads
for two km. Extremely hard and highly calcareous morrum deposits occur as mounds which have
a high concentration of quartz nodules and microlithic debitage. It was commented that the
microlithic assemblage might well have come into being immediately after or in continuation

40
with the late Palaeolithic stage, a possibility never entertained before. Some fragments of ring
stones and rubbing stones are also seen. It may be seen that late Palaeolithic types on fine-
grained quartzite could be seen upto as late as 4,000 to 3,000 B.C. By this time incipient farming
would also have started (Bhattacharya and Singh; 1997).
260 Late Palaeolithic tools (prepared on a grey or yellowish fine-grained quartzite), with 524
microliths (on milky as well as crystalline quartz) and 3 fragments of Neolithic types were found
and 1 rubbing stone. Both, though disturbed in context, could not have been separated very far in
time. About 20% cores are present and of these 80% are blade cores. Flakes and blades include
pseudo-levalloisean point, notched flake, levalloise flakes besides finished tool types on them.
The highest frequency of types include retouched blades and then a variety of burins. Sohdihwa
was thus found to be a factory site. Microlithic types from the site included burins, lunates,
retouched blades, thumb nail scrapers, corbiac burins and points made on flakes. Thus the site
could be said by the authors to be a late Palaeolithic industry emerging into a full-fledged
microlithic technology. It compares well as an Epi-Palaeolithic site. Burins might have been used
to cure tortoises, open fresh water shells and as drill-heads on bones and wood. It is also claimed
by the authors that the microlithic users and the late Palaeolithic tool-makers formed two
different groups of people. Perhaps they had expertise in two different economic activities. As a
result, a wider ecological base could have been exploited. This confusion relating to ‘types' or
‘stages' led Sankalia in 1974 to create a Neo-Chalcolithic stage and Chakrabarti in 1993 a Ferro-
Chalcolithic stage. A.K. Ghosh and R. Ray call it the Upper Palaeolithic industry a “blade and
bladelet” industry (Bhattacharya and Singh; 1997).
A radiocarbon date cited for the microlithic layer above the Acheulian one reads about 7420±110
B.P. (5470±110BC). The authors in 1999 discovered Pathalgarwa with 844 specimens from the
site representing a late Lower Palaeolithic culture. The area has a variety of raw material and it
seems that it was not only a factory site but may also have been a site from which raw material
may have been transported to other areas. The tools are extremely fresh and give the appearance
of having been made recently. Levalloise technique was very frequent, with unretouched blades
as wastes, and this may thus be a flake and blade tradition. The blades are broad and sturdy. The
handaxes and cleavers are thin and lenticular in shape and represent a late Acheulian type, but
the Vaal technique has often been used to get a thick butt end and compares well with a
Micoquian handaxe. Some handaxes are small in size, seeming to be made of exhausted cores.
Apart from this there are side scrapers, tortoise cores, notches, denticulates, one being made into
a Tayac point, hand points are also found and burins with some made in the Bec alternate
method. There is a denticulate made on the lateral border of a blade, end scrapers and retouched
blades. Thus the site is Upper Palaeolithic in character (Bhattacharya and Singh; 1997-98).
In 1998, another site called Jurpaniya was recorded from the Kharagpur Valley. Analyzing this
site, the authors claim the need for identifying a separate late Palaeolithic or Epi-Palaeolithic
stage within the Upper Palaeolithic. An alluvial layer, probably from the Pleistocene pluviations,
has a tool-bearing layer which was very extensive around a hot spring 15/20 cm – 30 cm in
thickness and extending to about two square kilometers. 344 tools were collected from the site
(292 flakes and 52 cores). They mostly prepared on fine-grained quartzite though a small
minority is prepared on milky quartz. The tool types include retouched blades, burins, points on
flakes, end scrapers, notches, borers, pen knives, gravettian points and side scrapers on levalloise
flakes. The cores, flakes and blades are smaller than an Upper Palaeolithic industry but are larger
than a Mesolithic industry. Such an industry may be seen also at Baghor dated at 26,000 B.C.
with the Epi-Palaeolithic at 12,000 to 10,000 B.C. It marked the first entry of forest dwellers into

41
open grasslands. R-selected or short-maturing species were hunted with fishing and collecting. In
course of time it could transform into a pure Mesolithic (Bhattacharya and Singh; 1998).
In 2000-2001, Bhattacharya and Singh again reported another site from the same region called
Adhwariya. This is again a surface site spread over a square km but if the top soil were to be
removed it might extend further. It seems that since there is little debris made by human beings
staying here, they must have come here to camp to collect wood and raw materials. The region
forms the habitat of Kora and Santhal tribes. Neo-tectonic movements have ensured that only
Quaternary period sediments are found here. The formation here may be dated provisionally to
be from Middle to Upper Pleistocene extending up to Early Holocene. 1160 specimens from this
site include cores, flakes, blades, elongated pebble with chisel edge, chopping tools, chopper,
side scrapers, end scrapers, retouched blades, handaxes (often with advanced cylinder hammer
flakings) and cleaver. According to the authors, the area shows a higher stage of working as
compared to other sites in the Orissa or West Bengal range. Hence, the group could be an earlier
migration from Santhal Parganas in Bihar and Bankura and Purulia in West Bengal. These are
areas where Acheulian tools with a pebble base are known. This area may form a distinct eco-
zone as compared with the rolling, undulating, lateritic plains of Chotanagpur plateau with
occasional groves of bamboo and sal forests. It also seems as if, after the Palaeolithic period,
there has been a population depletion up to the Holocene. Further, the authors clearly put in
words the lack of “evidence of a three fold Palaeolithic succession demonstrable in this region.”
(Bhattacharya and Singh; 2000-2001: 21).
In 2001, Manoj Kumar Singh reported yet another site from the Kharagpur hills region of Jamui
district called Rakatrohaniya Tad. A total of 1614 specimens were collected. There seemed to be
a preference for using large pebbles for making tools, and a tendency to finish large and massive
tools. Further, the tools are all in a weathered condition indicating their antiquity. It has a large
number of blades, flake cores, side choppers or backed knives with the original pebble cortex
forming the back, nucleated or exhausted cores, discoid cores, Levalloisean cores, retouched
cores, and just about all the finished types seem to be available along with the usual diminutive
handaxes.
In 2004, M.K. Singh again reported another site, Satbehariya, from the Kharagpur hills, on the
slope of Manithan hill in the vicinity of the sites of Paisra and Bhimbandh. The artifacts were
again found on the surface of thin laterite pellets. While the site is spread over 2 square
kilometers, the 4-5 metre deposited layer of soil as such yielded no tools. The tools become
lesser towards the slopes. All the tools look fresh and thus, this seems to be on a primary floor.
There are a large number of finished types. There seem to have been tectonic movements in the
Early Quaternary period as a result of which there are only Quaternary sediments from the
Middle Pleistocene or younger in the valley areas adjoining the Kharagpur hill tract. The oldest
continental Quaternary sediments cover the region and are known as ‘older alluvium' or ‘Jamui
formation'. There is a ferruginous residual soil above the bedrock below the Jamui formation
indicates a tropical climate at the beginning of the Quaternary period. This was replaced by the
relatively cold and dry climate during the aggradations of the basal boulder sands of the Jamui
formation. The Jamui formation may be provisionally considered to be of Middle to Upper
Pleistocene, extending up to Holocene in age. 300 specimens were picked from the site including
108 cores and 192 flakes. Only 10 levalloisean flakes are recorded. Tool types include handaxes
(finely executed but with remarkably little retouching at the borders), blades, cleavers (as with
handaxes, the shape is thin and laminar), side scrapers, convergent side scrapers, backed knives,
carinated end scrapers formed from exhausted blade cores and a notched borer with side scraper

42
retouching on its entire length. Hence, here lower Palaeolithic tools occur till very late in the
Pleistocene era. There appears to be no threefold Palaeolithic succession in this zone. It may
have been caused by a late appearance of human beings into the region.
It seems that in Hazaribagh district, the stone tools (127 from 11 sites) from surface collections
show an emphasis on stone hammer technique rather than a typical block-on-block technique,
probably due to the fact that the latter is more useful for working massive and spherical pebbles.
The latter methods seems to be more prevalent in the central part of India. The handaxes found
by the authors in this region fall between 8-15 cm by 4.5-9 cm and are called Amygdaloid by the
authors. There are secondary retouchings and the use of cylinder hammer techniques. A paucity
of flake cleavers exists. The borers are mostly on Levalloise flakes and some have Bec-alternate
retouchings. Of these sites it seems that Kusumdih had sustained human populations staying over
a long period, while the other areas only had temporary inhabitation. A further 21 specimens
from 4 sites represent the Middle Palaeolithic assemblage from the region. They are prepared on
fine-grained siliceous rock or quartzite or chert. Most finished types are on Levalloise flakes and
include, side scrapers, handaxes, borers, and a thumb-nail scraper. The handaxe is 6 cm long.
Upper Palaeolithic assemblages number 39 with 15 pieces being debitage. They include side
scrapers on Levalloise flakes, retouched blade point, borer and backed knife. Blades are prepared
on fine-grained quartzite, quartz and chert (Chattopadhyay and Saha; 2004).
In Singhbhum, the Lower palaeoliths (316 from 42 sites) are often on quartzite, both fine- and
coarse-grained. Most specimens are patinated. A type of Abbevillian handaxe was found at
Ulighutu and Kendposi. The biface component was seen to be Upper Acheulian in content. Also
scrapers, blades and knives were found, mostly adapted from the river pebble raw material.
Middle Palaeoliths number 63 specimens from 16 sites. The characteristic is again the diminutive
but extensively worked handaxes and cleavers of the region, side scrapers, mostly with bifacial
flaking, end scrapers and points. Upper Palaeoliths from this region include 10 pieces including
burins, points, retouched blades and a side scraper. The authors claim it does not match Upper
Palaeolithic types from anywhere in India (Chattopadhyay and Saha; 2004).
A solitary Lower Palaeolithic assemblage site with 2 side scrapers was found by the authors in
Palamau district. Middle Palaolithic 7 specimens from two sites, with Acheulian handaxe made
with cylinder hammer technique, retouched flake and Levalloise flake were found. Further, 18
points, tiny handaxes and cleavers with shallow flake scars are also found (Chattopadhyay and
Saha; 2004).
In Ranchi district 12 specimens were found from one site made of fine-grained quartzite or milky
quartz and are Late Acheulian in character, with handaxes, chopper-chopping tool, cleavers, side
scrapers and discoid cores. Vidula Jayaswal called the collection from Chainpur and Bishunpur
areas as Industry I. Jayaswal had also found 100 Middle Palaeoliths from the region in 9 sites
which she termed as Industry II including side scraper, end scraper, knife, tranchet and backed
blade. 56 Upper Palaeolithic tools were found including blades, backed blades, points and side
scrapers (Chattopadhyay and Saha; 2004).
In Santhal Parganas, 6 tools are recorded by the authors from 4 localities from the non-Damin
area, three being handaxes and three side scrapers. Their working is Late Acheulian in character
in the Lower Palaeolithic period. No Middle Palaeolithic artefact was found but the tools found
of Upper Palaeolithic types from the Damin region showed a stylistic preference for using
retouched tools, artifacts, retouched cores and flakes and side scrapers from predominantly
multiple platform cores as also retouched blades and bladelets, carinated end scrapers, micro
gravettes, burins, with signs of hafting as points and barbs on projectiles mark this period.

43
Palaeolithic usage with microlithic usage may have occurred at the same time (Chattopadhyay
and Saha; 2004).
It seems from the authors' data that the region cannot be definitely proved have a sustained
Palaeolithic occurrence of humans beyond the upper Pleistocene. In conclusion Chattopadhyay
and Saha (2004: 212-213) conclude that:
1. The major movement of Palaeolithic hunter-gatherers seem to have centred around
Singhbhum where it has the maximum spread.
2. Palaeolithic activities in Singhbhum may be as early as its adjoining part of Hazaribagh,
if not, even slightly earlier.
3. It is a distinct possibility that Mayurbhanj region of Orissa played an important role for
the initial spread of Palaeolithic activities in Singhbhum.
4. The distribution of artifacts of Singhbhum and Hazaribagh is not restricted to the hilly
region but extended to the undulated detrital lateritic tract. We may further assume that this
movement of Palaeolithic population gradually extended further towards east of Midnapur,
Bankura and Purulia districts of West Bengal.
5. Therefore, in course of time, the entire Chotanagpur plateau including its fringe areas of
West Bengal and highlands of Orissa formed a bigger zone of activities for Palaeolithic
peoples.
6. Middle Palaeolithic was an indigenous development and represented a continuation of an
earlier culture. Hence, change of raw material seems nominal. Further, the region as a whole
is characterized by the continuing use of handaxe and at least a few cleavers albeit in
diminutive form. It is not surprising therefore that these do not compare with the typical
Mousteroid types recorded from the Maharashtra-Karnataka region.
7. The Upper Palaeolithic, likewise, is very poorly represented. Further, more often than not
these occur overlapping in regions of microlithic occurrences. Yet, it would be illogical to
deny the existence of an Upper Palaeolithic stage in the present area of study especially in
view of the presence of retouched long blade recorded from Singhbhum. Incidentally, the
Damin area of Santhal Parganas have yielded an excellent assemblage of broad and
elongated blades types, retouched cores and flakes, besides different types of Upper
Palaeolithic assemblages. The raw material used here, mostly chert, is however quite
different from the materials of other parts of our study area.
8. A feature that is strikingly apparent in the occupational history of Damin area – the past
vis-à-vis the ethnographic present – is long-term continuity. The micro environmental zones
of the Damin regions are as varied as the upland forest, strips of river basin, woodland, shrub
and thorny areas besides game which attracts the users of the Damin industry are certainly
the source areas for the ethnographic present. The persistent character of the subsistence
economy of the Damin population geared by hunting, foraging and fishing has gradually
become a major force of seasonal daily wage labour labour for the neighbouring region. The
assemblages are devoid of organic remains which are the principal sources to trace the
adaptive pattern of the micro-environment. The reconstruction of the relationship between
the upper Palaeolithic industry (context) may not be possible for the pre-historic period but
settlement records and the present day situation offer scope to explain the dynamics of the
hunter-gatherer culture. The states of Damin industry including its ethno-archaeological
context also highlighted in the works of Chakrabarti where he rightly suggests by endorsing
M.L.K. Murthy's opinion “typical of industries in woodland ecosystem…they may represent
a regional facies of the Upper Palaeolithic.”

44
However, it seems that this region also has sites which are microlithic in their content. This
might seem to be contrary with the statements made above unless their horizons or industries are
separable entities.
Mesolithic Stage
Though the Indian Mesolithic is known as the microlithic stage, Ray (2004) refers to it as a
blade-bladelet element because both are the major tool blanks found. This comes from the lower
part of the uppermost silt bed. A majority of total tools found belong to this section. The material
used includes agate, chert, jasper, milky quartz, etc. Tools include scrapers, points, awls, burins,
borers and lunates with flakes, blades, bladelets, discoidal and fluted cores as debitage and tool
blanks. The tools range from 1cm to 6cm. Mohanty's study of Keonjhar in 1993 shows them to
be in association with heavy-duty tools, like cores, scrapers, choppers, thick knives and picks
made on altered basalt.
A.C. Carlyle seems to have coined the term Mesolithic from the soil of India as an intermediate
stage between the Palaeolithic and the Neolithic. While Pleistocene ends in 10,000 years B.P.,
Mesolithic in Europe starts around 9,500 years B.P., ending around 6,000 to 5,000 years B.P. In
India it has been included in the late Stone Age, the microlithic Age or the Mesolithic Age. The
Mesolithic in India, characterized by microlithic industry, has neither a fixed genesis or
continuity and is not fixed by absolute dating methods. The 900 tools collected from 8 sites in
West Bengal by the authors included scrapers, knives, lunates, triangles, trapezes, burins, points,
borers and denticulates. The types are similar but local ecologies and activities may be the cause
for change in the proportion of the types found. A differentiated Neolithic-Mesolithic boundary
with any site having these items clearly separable has yet to be found for any region in the
locality (Ray and Chakraborty; 2004).
The idea of a catch-all phrase of the Mesolithic as an in-between stage of degeneration from the
Palaeolithic to the Neolithic has to give way to newer concepts where larger groups may have
operated together and complex hunter-gatherer strategies may have existed. The main problem of
this stage has been the preservation of items that prove this (Price; 1991).
In 1966-67, Bhupendra Pal Singh reported a microlithic site from Karamchat in Shahabad
District, Bihar. This is in the Gupteshwar Dham region. The raw material was fine-grained
silicious element including glassy quartz, flint, jasper, agate, chalcedony, chert, etc. There were
84 finished implements including blades, points, scrapers on blade, a lunate and scrapers on core.
There were 56 by-products including 45 cores and 11 flakes indicating a factory site. The site
represented few geometric forms.
In 1980-81, Bhattacharya, Chakrabarti and Chakrabarti reported a preliminary microlithic
collection from four sites around Santiniketan in Birbhum district of West Bengal. 12 pieces
were collected from Shyambati, 63 from Taltorer Danga, 57 from Deer Park and 34 from
Paruldanga. At Paruldanga, it seems that an antiquity of 12,000 years BP or greater is estimated
(Chakrabarti; 2002-2003: 26). At the Deer Park a typical typological evolution may be seen from
backed flakes to backed blades. Fossil wood pieces are also found here. The first two sites are
basaltic in the use of raw material. The raw material in the latter two sites is cherty material and
fossil wood. Lacking a true Mesolithic tool kit collection, the authors conclude that the sites
might represent a habitation coeval with the chalcolithic of the region.
In 1980-81, Chakrabarti, Bhattacharya and Chattopadhyay reported a series of sites from
Bankura. In some sites there was an association of celts with microliths, and also at Dihar there
were found microliths made on glass. There is an association of Neolithic celts with microlithic
debitage, a few pieces of iron implements and medieval pottery at Shulgi and Namokechanda.

45
The Dwarakeswar, Gandheswari, Kumari-Kansavati and Silavati valleys contain lower
palaeoliths. Further, the microliths occur with Black-and-Red Ware at Kumardanga and Tulsipur.
It is presumed by the authors that in the period of temple construction in 11 th century Bankura,
there were still some pockets of microlith users. This may be true of Purulia as well.
In 1991 Datta reported five sites from the Midnapur district, around the Tarafeni river. The five
sites yielded 1,779 artefacts of different tool types. At Kattara I, Upper Palaeolithic types were
found including blades, scrapers, points, borers, lunates, etc. Blade and blade tools form the
major component. At Kattara II, there were Upper Palaeolithic blades, points, scrapers, etc. At
Laljal, there were Mesolithic tools including blades, points, lunates, scrapers, burins, borers, etc.
At Srinathpur, the Mesolithic tools included blades, points, lunates, burins, etc. At Asri, points,
lunates, scrapers and burins comprise the Mesolithic period collection. At Kattara I and II, blades
and blade-based tools comprised about 80% of the tools found. There seems to have been less
uniformity in sizes in this period. In the three Mesolithic sites there is a uniformity in the
distribution of length and breadth in the tool types. From the green quartzite of the Upper
Palaeolithic period, a cherty quartz becomes the dominant raw material of the Mesolithic people.
The three Mesolithic sites are close and also show similarities in their assemblages.
Basak (1997) analyzed 49 sites in the Tarafeni valley of Midnapur district, West Bengal. Many
of the raw materials used for making the tools are absent at these sites. A uniquely detailed
analysis is the hallmark of this analysis. The author has been most thorough in his analysis. 541
cores were present but only 22 raw material blocks. Only 417 cortical flakes were present out of
1699. Primary decortification flakes (with 100% cortex cover) and those with more than 50%
cortex cover (secondary decortification flakes) are only 14 (0.8%). The rest all have less than
50% cortex cover. It was assumed that partially decorticated cores of raw material were
transported here for tool-making. Perhaps they were normally transported with them as part of a
tool kit. Due to a shortage of raw material cores were extensively used. They were manufactured,
used and discarded at the time and place of their use. A blade scar/blade ratio as well as a
core/flake ratio has also been given for each site. The flakes discarded from the blade
manufacturing process often show use marks without any further retouching. Blades, once
hafted, are rarely discarded like other flakes at the place of their use and this shows a
characteristic clustering of blades at sites of manufacture. Further, blades get worn due to
transportation. Such loose blades may be discarded at the time of use. The rich and extensive use
of the valley could be due to the availability of water in a semi-arid period.
Tarafeni dating by palaeomagnetic method in Russia to the gravel layer yielding Lower
Palaeolithic tools has come to about 70,000 years BP. At Susunia it came to at least 40,000 years
BP by C-14 method at the limits of its sensitivity (Datta; 1982).
Singh (1999) discovered three new sites in the region near Simdega of Gumla district. It is
possible that it falls within the dates 7000 BC to 1000 BC for such tool types in the area. As
compared with temperate areas, the microlith users survived for a considerable period. As a
result, it must have been running in parallel with the Neolithic, Chalcolithic or even Iron Age.
The three areas found were within a 100 km of both Madhya Pradesh (Raigarh and Sarguja
districts) as well as Orissa (Sundergarh district).
At Islampur, there are fine gravel of chert lying over a km area. Calcareous concretions are found
all over the area. This could be due to the use of shells in the region. As these are discarded by
the microlithic users, they decompose into these calcareous depositions. Broken shells in large
number are also seen here. Yellowish chert, black chloride and quartz were quarried from local
outcrops as the raw material. 1563 tools were picked from these regions, consisting of flakes,

46
fluted blades, fluted cores (sometimes with double platforms), blades detached by punching
technique, three broken blades showing clear evidence of surface flaking done in the manner of
European Solutrean leafs (classed as leaf point fragments), retouched blades, backed blades,
burins (most prepared on fragments of fluted cores by delivering a truncation on the terminal end
and then removing the burin facet along the length), burinated cores (fragments of blades and
cores with one or two burin blows), macrolunates, many thick flakes and bladish flakes backed
to emphasize a pointed end, end scrapers, slender microlithic lunates and notches. It seems to the
author to be older than any of the other microlithic industries noted so far, representing a
transition of late Palaeolithic into microlithic (Singh; 1999).
At Purnapani 1466 tools were collected from the third terrace of the river Chhinda. A majority is
waste material. The others include micro Gravette point, carinated end scraper, burinated fluted
core, lunates, triangles, end scrapers, borers, penknife, retouched blades and burins. This shows a
continuity with Islampur and may be younger in age to the Islampur site (Singh; 1999).
Keraghagh is a site with 2515 tools found on the second terrace of the river Chhinda. Of this,
waste materials amount to 87.5% like flakes, blades (unretouched blades, flakes, crest guiding
blades and core rejuvenation) and cores. Blades are removed both by punching and fluting. Its
younger date is indicated by scalene triangles, points, truncated blades, high frequency of
lunates, obliquely blunted blades, macro lunates. These three sites match the radiocarbon dates
for Paisra (7420±110B.P.) (Pant and Jaiswal; 1991). The gradual adaptation of the population
here took a long duration, up to the third millennium B.C. Wheel made, well-fired glazed
potsherds of gritty clay were also found in association and the author could collect 9 celts from
the local farmers ploughing the fields. Thus classifying the various stages as consisting of certain
actual periods could be a mistaken version for the region (Singh; 1999).
The Deulga Hills of Sambalpur region yield rock art in its cave shelters. More than a hundred
rock shelters have been found here. Fifteen of these yielded signs of prehistoric habitation. The
walls of these shelters include a wide array of petroglyphs while microliths, heavy-duty pebble
tools, crudely made potsherds are found on the floors of most of the shelter. A number of conical
or cylindrical cupules, often in alignment are found on the rocky floors. The rock art is in the
form of petroglyphs, mostly engraved, or abraded/scratched, or rubbed on the front wall. Various
naturalistic as well as schematic representations of a variety of animal forms are found,
especially fish and birds (Walimbe, Behera and Mushrif; 2001).
In 2001, Walimbe, Behera and Mushrif dug a trial pit and found three broad layers of habitation.
Layer I: Reddish-coloured, loose, silty-sand, mixed with exfoliated sandstone fragments. This
contained lithic assemblages, both microlithic and non-microlithic, a few crudely made and
shapeless potsherds, freshwater mollusk shells of bivalve variety and a few fragments of animal
bones.
Layer II: Reddish-brown, loose, silty-sand, mixed with occasional sandstone fragments and
calcretes. Lithic assemblages here included microlithic and non-microlithic ones, the upper part
of a bone point, mollusk shells of bivalve and gastropod types, a few animal bone pieces and
human skeletal remains. The skeletal remains seemed to be of one individual and were disturbed.
Only on one small-sized cranial fragment is some charring evident. The rest of the bones show
no such sign. There is minimal weathering but parts of bones are also missing. Though the sex of
the specimen could not be definitely ascertained it had died between 25-30 years of age, was
short of stature (144.37”±4.05 cm (if male) and 138.61” ± 4.45 cm (if female)) and genetically
gracile in build. Hence, the people in this period subsisted on limited hunting of small to

47
medium-sized animals and aquatic as well as plant food resources. The human beings suffered
relatively heavy mechanical stress as compared to a pastoral economy.
Layer III: Brownish-grey, loose, silty-sand mixed with a few sandstone fragments and calcium
carbonate nodules. Lithic artifacts, mollusk shells, some pieces of animal bones and several
pieces of foliated mica were also found.
Conclusions And Preliminary Ideas
Though it seems to be apparent to some of the authors that Singhbhum (now divided into East
and West Singhbhum districts) was the centre of activity of hunter-gatherers during the
palaeolithic period, with subsequent spread to Hazaribagh (in Jharkhand), Midnapur (presently
divided into Purba and Paschim Medinipur districts), Bankura and Purulia districts of West
Bengal, as well as to the Mayurbhanj district of Orissa, this has been belied by successive finds
in almost all the districts of Jharkhand (for an example see Table 1). Hence, though probable
paths of human habitation may be speculated about, it has been impossible to state clearly that
Singhbhum district might be the centre of human habitation during this period. In fact, such a
notion might be mistaken.
The use of food resources of the humans living in this region at the time included plant food
resources, limited hunting of small animals, bears and some other animals as well as that kind of
food which was available near water resources like fish and mollusk. These are still part of the
diet of current day tribes of the region as are mushrooms and honey. Some of the tribes also eat
field rats, which may have been useful, especially since storage of grains and other foods was
begun.
Though food eating varies from tribe to tribe, many of the current tribes of the Chotanagpur
region bring their hunted animals, indigenous medicines, and food to the market for sale and
exchange with other communities. Such a practice of exchange of food may have existed in the
past also. As a result, though local food practices continued, there was a lot of borrowing and
sharing among the communities in the region, regarding ideas, food and many other things. It is
thus no wonder that today a clear distinction is no longer apparent between the use of religious
symbols, food and other items of material culture among the tribes of the region.
Over the years, as the numbers of large animals declined and animal husbandry increased, there
has been a shift to the hunting of small animals rather than larger ones. This has been seen in the
shift of the tool kit from heavy duty tools to the use of microliths in this region. However, in
other areas, other strategies have also been used. This has been the use of decreasing sizes of
heavy duty tools like miniature handaxes and cleavers in this entire region. As a result of this
unusual toolkit, a variety of possibilities open up. Often, the use of miniature ring stones remains
unexplained. One possibility has been that these may have been used as sinkers for fishing nets
made of bamboo, grasses, ropes and other materials. I am indebted to Prof. D.K. Bhattacharya
for proposing many of these ideas that open up these possibilities.
One of the most remarkable ideas floated by Prof. D.K. Bhattacharya is that of a root-crop
horticultural exploitation of natural sources. Such root crops, though not very systematically
grown, are present in the ‘food lore' of the tribal communities of the region. Such root-crop
cultivation coupled with the kind of tools available show us a remarkable spread of activities as
possibilities.
One would require, at this stage, to modify one's ideas of what a culture consists of. One would
have to consider it as a concept that does not mean a fixed and unwavering set of activities that
continue over time in a set of people, thus defining them as a community of its practitioners. One
would require to think of culture as a set of practices and possibilities, a tool-kit if you will, of

48
things that may be done in order to carry out survival activities. Such a culture would create,
recreate and reformulate itself on a daily basis, yet maintaining a strong ‘storage' and
transmission characteristics of its practices over generations.
Using this concept of culture, then, one sees the prehistoric hunter-gatherers and other
populations to mean those groups of people who use different mixes of these economic activities
in order to acquire food. Some would be more inclined towards hunting, while others less. Some
would be more inclined to stay on near lakes where they could use mollusks and fishes (as at
Deulga hills). Still others would have continued with preliminary domestication of plants and
animals. Such communities would have no imperative to change over long periods of time and
may have had settled habitations that continued well into the Chalcolithic period.
This is why there has been a new term suggested for such communities which has been
suggested as the Epi-Palaeolithic. It would seem to be much more than just a transitional
community between two academically defined archaeological stages. It would seem to be a way
of life, a strategy of survival, of many of the communities that used multiple economies as
strategies for making better use of available resources. It would mean a broader base of
environmental knowledge than found in most societies today.
This brings us to the concept of the time period of these habitations. To all intents and purposes
dates of 70,000 BP show that early habitations in the region were already existing during this
period with some of them continuing well into the proto-historic or historic period itself. Thus
habitations in the region could well include, even allowing for in- and out-migration, many of the
present tribal communities of the region as well as some of the integrated agricultural ones.
References
r-0. Basak, Bishnupriya. 1997. Microlithic sites in the Tarafeni Valley, Midnapur District, West
Bengal: A discussion, Man and Environment 22(2): 11-28.
r-1. Bhattacharya, D.K., Chakrabarti, Sima and Chakrabarti, Dilip K. 1979-80. Microliths around
Santiniketan, Puratattva Number 10, pp. 83-86.
r-2. Bhattacharya, D.K. and Singh, Manoj Kumar. 1997. Sohdihwa: A late Palaeolithic site from
Kharagpur Valley of Bihar, Indian Anthropologist 27(1): 29-55.
r-3. Bhattacharya, D.K. and Singh, Manoj Kumar. 1997-98. The Palaeolithic evidences from
Pathalgarwa in Bihar, Puratattva Number 28, pp. 12-25.
r-4. Bhattacharya, D.K. and Singh, Manoj Kumar. 1998. Jurpaniya: The Epi-Palaeolithic
tradition of Kharagpur Valley in Chotanagpur plateau, Man in India 78(3 & 4): 189-204.
r-5. Bhattacharya, D.K. and Singh, Manoj Kumar. 2000-2001. Adhwariya: A new Palaeolithic
site from Kharagpur Hills, South Bihar, Puratattva Number 31, pp. 16-24.
r-6. Bose, Nirmal Kumar, Gupta, Pabitra and Bose, Arabinda. 1960. Palaeoliths from Monghyr
District, Bihar, Man in India 40(1): 68-75.
r-7. Chakrabarti, Dilip K. 1993. Archaeology of Eastern India, Chotanagpur
Plateau and West Bengal. Munshiram Manoharlal, New Delhi.
r-8. Chakrabarti, Dilip K., Bhattacharya, D.K. and Chattopadhyay, R.K. 1981-1982. Lithic
industries of Bankura, Puratattva Number 11, pp. 39-48.
r-9. Chakrabarti, Subrata. 1990. The stone age prehistory of Khiching, Orissa, Man and
Environment 15(2): 13-21.
r-10. Chakrabarti, Subrata. 2002-2003. Archaeology of Birbhum: The past informs the present,
Puratattva Number 33, pp. 23-33.

49
r-11. Chattopadhyay, R.K. and Saha, Sharmila. 2004. Palaeolithic Jharkhand, Vinay Kumar
Srivastava and Manoj Kumar Singh (eds.) Issues and Themes in Anthropology: Felicitation
volume in honour of Prof. D.K. Bhattacharya, pp. 183-221. Palaka Prakashan, Delhi.
r-12. Datta, Asok Kumar. 1982. The palaeohistory of man and his culture. Delhi: Agam Kala
Prakashan, Delhi.
r-13. Ghosh, Abhik. 2008. The prehistory of the Chotanagpur Region part 1: Making sense of the
stratigraphy in Internet Journal of Biological Anthropology 1(2).
r-14. Ghosh, A.K. 1970. The Palaeolithic Cultures of Singhbhum, Transactions of the American
Philosophical Society 60: 1-68.
r-15. Jayaswal, Vidula. 1982. The chopper-chopping component of palaeolithic India. Agam
Kala Prakashan, Delhi.
r-16. Mohanty, Pradeep. 1993. Mesolithic hunter-gatherers of Keonjhar District, Orissa, Asian
Perspectives 33: 8-104.
r-17. Murthy, M.L.K. 1979. Recent research on the upper palaeolithic phase in India, Journal of
Field Archaeology 6(3): 301-320.
r-18. Pant, P.C. and Jayaswal, Vidula. 1991. Paisra: The Stone Age Settlement of Bihar. Delhi:
Agam Kala Prakashan, Delhi.
r-19. Price, T. Douglas. 1991. The mesolithic and hunter-gatherers: Myths and meanings, Man
and Environment 16(2): 101-107.
r-20. Ratha, S.N. and Bhattacharya, D.K. 1988. Lower palaeoliths from Kuchinda (Orissa), Man
and Environment 12: 23-27.
r-21. Ray, Ranjana. 2004. Man and Culture in Eastern India: An Anthropological Study on
Quality of Life Through Time. Sectional President's Address, 91st Session 2003-2004,
Anthropological and Behavioural Sciences, Chandigarh. The Indian Science Congress
Association, Kolkata.
r-22. Ray, Ranjana and Falguni Chakraborty. 2004. Mesolithic stage in West Bengal: An
appraisal in Vinay Kumar Srivastava and Manoj Kumar Singh (eds.) Issues and Themes in
Anthropology: Felicitation volume in honour of Prof. D.K. Bhattacharya, pp. 137-146. Palaka
Prakashan, Delhi.
r-23. Sankalia, H.D. 1974. Prehistory and proto history of India and Pakistan. Deccan College,
Pune.
r-24. Sharma, H.C. 1994. Palaeolithic finds around Burla, District Sambalpur, Orissa, Man and
Environment 19(1-2): 285-290.
r-25. Singh, Bhupendra Pal. 1966-67. A microlithic site from Shahabad (Bihar), Puratattva
Number 1, pp. 100-103.
r-26. Singh, Bhupendra Pal. 1968-1969. A middle stone age site on river Durgawati in District
Shahabad, Bihar, Puratattva Number 3, pp. 70-73.
r-27. Singh, Manoj Kumar. 1999. New microlithic evidences from District Gumla,
Chhotanagpur, Indian Anthropologist 29(1): 21-34.
r-28. Singh, R.C. Prasad. 1959. Paleoliths from Bhimbandh, Journal of the Bihar Research
Society 45(1-4): 297-299.
r-29. Singh, R.C. Prasad. 1960. Microliths from Bhimbandh, Journal of the Bihar Research
Society 46: 45-52.
r-30. Singh, R.C. Prasad. 1961. Microliths from Masanjore, Journal of the Bihar Research
Society 47: 105-107.

50
r-31. Walimbe, S.R., Behera, Pradeep K. and Mushrif, Veena. 2001. A human skeleton
discovered from the rock shelter site of Deulga Hills (District Sambalpur), Orissa, Man and
Environment 26(1): 99-107.

http://ispub.com/IJBA/2/1/9185

Prehistory Of The Chotanagpur Region Part 3: The Neolithic Problem And The Chalcolithic

Abhik Ghosh
Department of Anthropology, Panjab University
Chandigarh
Citation: A. Ghosh: Prehistory Of The Chotanagpur Region Part 3: The Neolithic Problem And
The Chalcolithic. The Internet Journal of Biological Anthropology. 2009 Volume 2 Number 2.
DOI: 10.5580/223e
Keywords: Neolithic, Chalcolithic, India, Chotanagpur, Prehistory
Abstract

The archaeology of the Chotanagpur region, as explained earlier, has been steadily giving new
surprises over the years. It is time now to rethink the whole issue thoroughly in the context of
influences from the entire region as well as indigenous growth and development of traditions and
ways of life. First, an attempt has been made to cobble together the very patchy Neolithic record
of the region and then the conclusions have been transferred to the Chalcolithic period in the
region as well. This work will attempt to take into account the major sites of this period in the
region. This data is analyzed through the lens of certain theoretical perspectives that may explain
them. This would lead to a better understanding of the continuity of the prehistoric sites found in
the Chotanagpur region. Finally, it might prove to be a means of further understanding the way
prehistoric cultures have been manifesting themselves during the early historic period.

Introduction

The Chotanagpur region is a plateau area which now covers the Indian states of Jharkhand,
Bihar, West Bengal, Orissa and Madhya Pradesh. It has an average elevation of about 2000 feet
above sea level. The soil and other stratigraphic conditions have been discussed earlier (see
Ghosh; 2008(a)).

The problem of this zone was always that the Neolithic celts found in this area were few and far
between. There did not seem to be any continuity with either the confusing Palaeolithic and
Mesolithic periods with its fairly large numbers of groups (see Ghosh; 2008(b)) or with the
scattered starting of state systems in the latter period. Hence, though there were celts found, there
was no area which had a large number of celts. Also, there was no evidence that there had been
trade or the association of celts with a large cultural assemblage which could be the precursor of
a state system or even that of a local chieftain.

Two possibilities could have emerged from this. Firstly, it could be that there was only a very
scattered Neolithic in the region. The few celts found could also have been obtained as part of
trade goods. Secondly, it was also possible that the Neolithic began in fertile areas which became

51
hubs of agricultural activity later. As a result, signs of previous occupations were wiped out,
leaving the scattered evidences found today. A look at the totality of the evidence throws out a
third possibility. This possibility is inherent when one looks closely at the data of the large
populations that existed in the previous periods. It seems that it might have been possible for
such early groups to adopt a multiple economic system where systematic agriculture may only
have been a fraction of the economy and other aspects of horticulture and other modes may have
occupied a significant proportion. Perhaps this is what Prof. D.K. Bhattacharya meant when he
jokingly talked of the great Neolithic scam in undivided Bihar.

Since such communities were following multiple economies earlier, it would come as no surprise
then to see them add on other abilities and economies in the Chalcolithic period. Hence,
eventually, one will have to do away with terms like Palaeolithic, Mesolithic, Neolithic,
Chalcolithic and Iron Age as far as communities in this region are concerned.

The Neolithic Problem In Chotanagpur

Neolithic tools are mostly found in the top layer of the soil. It is possible that these implements
have gradually worked their way to the top over the years. Such neolithic implements include
polished or unpolished celts, small arrowheads of leaf-shaped or chisel-edged patterns, cores,
flakes, stone beads, chisels, adzes, axeheads, etc.

The collections of Bodding in 1901 and 1904 were transported to Oslo by 1934 and were
analyzed by F.R. Allchin in 1962 (1979) who divided the entire collection into two – a Neolithic
assemblage (2149) and a Late Stone Age assemblage (38) of a total of 2620 pieces.

Mitra (1931) notes that a celt that he observed from S.C. Roy's collection from an Asura grave in
village Gora in the Khunti subdivision of Ranchi district in 1930 was called Ther-diri or
‘Thunder stone' by the Kolarian people of the region. It would be dated about 15,000 to 25,000
years old. The Kolarian people believe these to have rained down on the earth from the skies by
gods or semi-divine personages like Rama or Lakhshmana. These celts have a divine afflatus and
kept beside a parturient woman, it aids in easy and speedy deliveries.

Mitra (1931) also notes that such celts are also called ‘Thunder stones' among the Mongoloid
tribes of Assam. The Naga tribes in the Naga hills of Assam call them ‘thunderbolts', as
mentioned by Prof. Henry Balfour in an article in Folklore in June 1929. Some call it luck-
bringing, while the Lhota Nagas do not touch them. The Ao Nagas believe them to bring
thunderstorms and cause houses to be struck by lightning. Balfour, in an article on the issue in
Folklore of March 1930, describes such a case accurately, and the Ao Nagas believed it had been
caused by a celt with a reddish streak running through it. The celt was sent to the Pitt-Rivers
museum of Anthropology by J.H. Hutton and in the November gale of 1928 a large portion of
the museum roof was blown off. In another Naga case, mentioned by J.H. Hutton, it was seen
that there was some belief in its powers to reduce the intoxicating powers of alcohol and for
cooling the tongue by licking it. There is belief in other medicinal powers associated with celts
also, as mentioned by S.C. Roy, especially relating to headache, difficult urination, rheumatic or
other pain in any part of the body, affections of the lungs, etc. Water with which the stone has
been rubbed on another stone is an essential part of the remedy, being applied to the affected

52
part. Perforated rock-crystal beads called rati-jara (‘night fever') are dug out from the fields or
found in ancient cinerary urns are valued as a cure for certain fevers, especially those which
occur in the night.

One of the few Neolithic sites in the region has been found from Chirand which has been
excavated (Narain; 1970, Vishnu Mittre; 1972). It is in Saran district of Bihar, about 8 kms. East
from the district headquarters Chhapra. The flood plains of the Ganges were used for grain
cultivation by the broadcast method and microlithic blades hafted onto clay or wooden sickles
were used to cut the grain (Prasad; 1980). Carbonised wheat, rice, barley, lentils and legumes
(mung, masur and peas) have been found at the Neolithic level. Rarity of storage jars seem to
indicate that food was rarely stored and hence marginal. Hunting was seen to be the major
occupation and source of food. Bones of Bos indicus (domesticated humped cattle), Bubalus
bubalis (domesticated buffalo), Ovis aries (domesticated sheep), Capra hircus (domesticated
goat), Sus domesticus (domesticated pig), Canis familiaris (dog), Rhinoceros unicornis (Indian
one-horned rhinoceros), Elephas maximus (Indian elephant), Cervus duvauceli (swamp deer),
Axis axis (chital) and Sus scrofa (wild boar) were found, often with cut marks suggesting their
use as food. Fish bone has also been found in huge quantities, as well as turtle, snail, tortoise and
mollusk. Roasting or multiple ovens has indicated roasting of animals. There fish bones inside
the cooking vessels which bear soot marks. There are no plates or dishes but bowls, handis (pots)
and spouted vessels occur in large number indicating the liking for liquid food. A terracotta
serpent was also found at this site. The site is dated to between 4,000 – 3,000 B.C. or more
accurately to 1375 ±#177; 100 BC (Prasad; 1980, Bhattacharya; 1989).

Thapar (1973-74) pointed out that there appeared to be two kinds of Neolithic sites. One kind
showed varying levels of Neolithic economy without any preparatory processes. On the other
hand, another group of sites indicate a largely hunting and gathering economy which elaborated
at some stage of cultural evolution by the use of ground stone implements, and occasionally
attesting the presence of domestic animals. He claims that the problem is the obsession to look
for sites with a continuous sequence of events by many archaeologists. Some way has to be
found where the two meet.

In the neighboring areas of the Kaimur hills of district Rohtas, Bihar, a variety of such sites of
early farming communities has been studied by Birendra Pratap Singh in 1988-89. These
Neolithic settlements were overlaid by deposits of Chalcolithic and NBPW culture. Those in the
plains regions near the rivers seem to be more successful and the foothills were being used for
faunal and lithic resources. These foothills were not very far from sites like Senuwar.

Surface explorations in the Chotanagpur region have often unearthed Neolithic celts and other
tools. They have been found from Hazaribagh, Ranchi and Santhal Pargana districts, and in other
areas. Most have been surface finds. Some have been dug up by farmers while ploughing fields.
One such celt made on green-coloured jasper in a highly polished and symmetrical state was
displayed by Bulu Imam who had found more such celts in the region (Imam; 1996: personal
communication).

Sathe and Badam (1996) have commented about the animal remains found from Senuwar in
Rohtas District, Bihar. The Period IA is Neolithic (3rd millennium BC), Period IB is Neolithic-

53
Chalcolithic (1700±#177;120 BC, 1600±#177;120 BC, 1500±#177;110 BC and 1400±#177;110
BC), Period II is Chalcolithic and Period III is NBP and Kushana. Less domestic buffalo than
cattle, and after that sheep and goats are seen. Domestic buffalo and cattle were killed between 6
to 18 months while sheep/goats between 8 months to 1 year. Pigs were killed between 1-2 years
of age. One upper incisor of an equid was found at Chalcolithic level. Nilgai, blackbuck, four-
horned antelope, barking deer, chital or spotted deer, sambar/barasingha (Cervus sp.) show
occasional hunting. Along with this there are three genera of mollusks, abundant in Neolithic-
Chalcolithic period. Half of the meat eaten seems to have been cattle or buffalo. However, in
spite of the rivers Kudra and Son being nearby, there were no fish remains.

Kumar and Pant (1996-97) divide the era into three stages:

Stage I: (ca. 2300 BC – 1950 BC)

It is represented by the Senuwar sub-period IA and the entire Neolithic complex of Mahagara-
Koldihwa. It is based on the economy of the cultivation of only one cereal (rice) and the
domestication of various animals, partly supplemented by gathering, fishing and hunting. It is
compared with the tribal economy of Chotanagpur of the present day among the Santal, Munda,
Oraon and Ho. A study of faunal remains of Senuwar by Badam, shows scattered animal bones
(domestic/hunted or butchered), considered the property of the community with the flesh being
distributed. This may have been true also for the communal ownership of domesticated animals.
Cattle and sheep were domesticated at Mahagara and Senuwar. Senuwar also domesticated
buffaloes and pigs. Mahagara domesticated goats and horses also. Pigs are kept by the Santals,
Mundas and Oraons. A cattle pen was located at the centre of Mahagara. Eighteen huts were
found but none had cattle sheds. Whether rice was cultivated in the same pattern is unknown.
Contributing only marginally, rice was supplemented by the collection of wild rice, grasses (job's
tear and fox's tail), wild fruits (ber, etc.), hunting of big games, particularly big ungulates, and
exploitation of aquatic fauna (turtle and fish). Such egalitarian societies had no socio-economic
hierarchy. Thus, pastoralism with hunting-gathering economy and rice cultivation were all
present. Rice, barley, field pea, lentils and some millets were identified. There was also dwarf
wheat, grass pea, kodon and vetch. It contains Red Ware, Burnished Red Ware and Burnished
Grey Ware. Some Burnished Grey Ware contains post firing ochre painting on the rim. Bowls
show the same identification marks as the Vindhyan Koldihwa and Mahagara Neolithic.

Stage II: (ca. 1950 BC – 1650 BC)

It is marked by the cultivation of some new cereals and pulses, like barley (Hordeum vulgare),
dwarf-wheat (Triticum spaeorococcum), jowar-millet (Sorghum bicolor), finger-millet/Ragi
(Eleusine coracana), lentil (Lens culinaris), field pea (Pisum arvense) and Khasari (Lathyrus
sativus). It was reached by Senuwar middle level to the end of Sub Period A. Similar agricultural
carbonized grains were found from Chirand and Taradih. A two crop system exists but no further
changes occur in mode of habitation, pottery, stone objects, bone objects and other cultural
patterns. Wheat, barley and pulses found here are similar to the Indus Valley Civilization. It is
claimed here that after the decline of the Harappan cities around 2000 BC, the people moved
eastwards and hence this diffusion occurred. The Belan valley seems to have missed this change,
and it affected the Kaimur foot-hills of Bihar. As people settled they moved to places east and

54
north like Taradih, Chirand, Chechar-Kutubpur and Maner. Domestication of animals and
hunting and gathering continued, though agriculture became more dominant.

Stage III: (ca. 1650 BC – 1300 BC)

Copper was introduced but the economy remained Neolithic. This was seen at Senuwar Sub
Period B of the Neolithic. Though no copper was found in the other places it was also seen at
Chirand, Chechar-Kutubpur, Taradih and Maner. A two crop system of agriculture exists, with
domestication of animals, gathering of forest produce, big game hunting, and increased fishing.
New species of wheat, millet and pulses are seen here. Seeds of bhang, dhatur have been found
as well as a piece of iron wood (found in north Bengal and Assam). Bigger antler implements are
now used for cultivation. Though lifestyles remain the same at Senuwar after the introduction of
copper, marginal increase in number and types of all things occur including beads and there is
some refinement and modifications. It may also show a larger number of people and a higher
standard of living. New craft activities may also have begun due to copper. The copper was from
Rakha mines and the single lead rod could be from Phaga area of Bhagalpur in Bihar. Most
microliths are made on bladelets.

According to Ray (2004), this stage is very widespread and the major tool types are axes, adzes,
chisels, wedges, knives, choppers and heavy-duty scrapers made on altered basalt. Chipping,
pecking and grinding is the method of making these tools. Microlithic tools on cherts are
associated with Neoliths. There is also pot-making, with pots being crude, thick, handmade, grit
tempered and ill fired, orange and reddish buff in colour. Pottery types from different areas of
eastern India seem to be similar. Barudih, Chirand and Pandu Rajar Dhibi are three excavated
sites dating to the Neolithic. Burnt rice at Barudih was dated to about 1,000 B.C. Other dates
obtained for similar beds are in the Bangladesh formation dated to 7000-6000 years B.P.
Domestication of plants and animals occur, with village communities and craft specialization,
like pottery and textile.

Bhattacharya (2004) makes certain relevant comments about the Neolithic in Jharkhand from
2000-1000 BC. A Neolithic is where the human population has become sedentary, has ceramics,
ground and polished axes and domesticated cereals and livestock. However, he claims that in the
middle Ganga valley adjoining the Chotanagpur region, there might have been a multi-‘species'
farming community growing but having interactions with metal-producing and stone-material
exchanging communities in the Chotanagpur region. The Chotanagpur region, being hilly, had to
recourse to multiple economies for survival while those near the river valley plains did not need
to do so. As a result, over all these types of tools and metals a repeated celt-making activity
remains in the region. Further, due to trade and the area being rich in resources, it did not need to
shift from older economies to new ones since there was no pressure or stress upon it to do so. As
populations grew, they faced stress and sections would join a local agricultural community as a
slightly different ethnic group with an ability to do artisanal or other activity. Such hunting
groups number 215 in the Ganga valley. Many were sucked in as labour in about 1800 to 600
BC.

The earliest use of wheat and barley in India seem to be 2500-1800 BC in the Eastern Indian
region. For rice, it 1500-1800 BC in the Eastern region while it goes up to 2300 BC in the

55
Western region. For Jowar (Sorghum) millets it is found in Central India at about 4-5th century
BC to 3-6th century AD. In the Ganga plains, rice was seen at Koldihwa at 5440 ±#177; 240 BC.
In Bihar, rice has been found in early historic, Iron age and the Neolithic periods (earliest to
about 1300 BC). In West Bengal, it has been found up to about 1250 BC in the Chalcolithic
period. In Madhya Pradesh, though, all of the major agriculturally used species are found up to
2000 BC in the Chalcolithic period. In Orissa, rice has been found in about 1500 BC in the
Neolithic period (Vishnu-Mittre; 1989).

It would be useful, in this context to review the ethno-archaeological studies from the region that
have led to a contribution to our understanding of the region.

The Chalcolithic

While acknowledging that some parts of India did have the requisite metals, a large number of
methods for metal-working as well as the raw materials seem to have come from other areas
outside the present borders of India, according to Lamberg-Karlovsky (1967). The Bihar-Orissa
type of celts are the flat, shouldered types are also found in Uttar Pradesh. The Bihar-Orissa
types of harpoons, anthropomorphic figurines, antennae-hilted swords and spearheads seem to
have evolved from Bihar-Orissa types found from copper hoards. Tin was worked in India in
ancient times from Hazaribagh district, copper from Singhbhum district and copper ore
associated with nickel from Singhbhum district. Campbell, in his analysis of 27 axes from
Manbhum in 1916 claimed that they were produced in closed molds and then beaten to the
required thickness while still hot.

Surprisingly, V. Ball in 1869 attributes the older copper workings in Singhbhum to be done by
Seraks or Jaina lay worshippers. This seems to be partly true for many areas in India. If so, then
they may be dated to at least 10-13th centuries AD. A pot of money of the Puri-Kushana period
were found in association near the Rakha mines. The coins were not trimmed and it could be that
a mint was set up near the copper mine itself. These could thus be dated to about 6-7th centuries
AD. It seems as if the copper-iron age was coeval with the Neolithic and in this region, in some
way, the two were connected. It is thus probable that the copper-iron-gold mining in the region
could be around 1st-2nd millennium BC (Chakrabarti; 1993).

Beads of carnelian, agate, onyx, crystal and glass are also found in association with mining
localities of eastern Singhbhum. They seem to be dated to a general early historic date. Some
also have palaeoliths and neoliths in association. Further, the skill of these workers has been of a
very high order and they have been extremely efficient at removing copper, so much so that they
resemble present standards of copper mining and smelting (Chakrabarti; 1993).

Copper celts have been found in the past (Campbell; 1916) in the low hills from Paresnath to
Pokhuria in the north of Dhanbad Subdivision to the Barakar river in the North, especially from
Bisuadih and in a bundle dug up about a foot below the surface in Kolber. They were also found
by Cobden-Ramsay (1916) from Bhagra Pir in Mayurbhanj, where they were again about a foot
below the surface on the bank exposed by the river, a total of nine or ten pieces in all. Many
other celts, ornaments and other finds have been reported by Roy (1916(a), 1916(b)).

56
There seems to have been a preponderance of tin alloys in the Ranchi region though lead and
zinc mixtures are also found. However, all of the known copper and other metal-using sites had
been using scrap metal or old metal as part of their raw material. As a result, it may not be
ultimately possible to trace these metals to their original sources with such ease as has been
believed earlier. A variety of alloys and mixtures have been repeatedly used in various regions in
India (Lahiri; 1994-1995).

According to S.P. Gupta, the Copper Hoards found in the region began from Bihar about 2,000
BC and flourished in the Jamuna-Gangetic valley between 1800-1300 BC. He shows that there is
a link between the copper items found in the Bengal-Bihar zone and the U.P. zone and they
should be taken up together (Gupta; 1965).

Pandu Rajar Dhibi in Burdwan District, West Bengal is a Chalcolithic site excavated in 1962-64
under the leadership of late P.C. Dasgupta. It is the largest Black-and-Red Ware settlement in
West Bengal. A variety of painted pots, copper bangles, beads of semi-precious stones,
microliths along with a large number of bone and antler artifacts have been found from this site.
The bones belong to four periods: Period I (1600-1400 BC), Period II (1200-900 BC), Period III
(899-600 BC) and Period IV (599-300 BC). Recent bone fragments found include points, pins,
arrowheads, surma sticks, blow-pipes, lunates, points, awls, beads and knives. Antler was not
used as raw material in Bhaluksonda, Susunia and Dihar in Burdwan district and at Debpahar in
Midnapur district but was found at Mahisdal in Birbhum district, Tamluk in Midnapur district
and Mangalkot in Burdwan district (Banerjee; 2000).

At Mahisdal, Period I (1500/1600 BC) included various kinds of painted (black and white) as
well as plain Black-and-Red Ware pottery, some Black-painted Red Ware, Red Ware bearing
incised fillets, plain Red Ware, Black Ware sometimes with incised and pinhole decorations,
microliths, terracotta objects, a flat copper celt, bone objects, beads of semi-precious stones and
steatite, charred rice and a complete absence of iron. Iron appears only in Period II (about 800
BC) (Chakrabarti; 1993).

At Bahiri, the mound Chandra Hazar Danga in Birbhum district, had a Black-and-Red Ware
pottery as the predominant type. It was excavated by Chakrabarti in 1981. Period I dates were
1120 – 795 BC, Period II at 810 – 410 BC and Period III at 660 ±#177; 180 BC. Iron-smelting
was carried out in large amounts in the Period I and II (Chakrabarti; 1993).

One of the seven dates is Chalcolithic for Hatikra in Birbhum district (about 1000 BC). The other
six dates are between 325 and 990 AD (Chakrabarti; 1993).

In this stage both metal and stone elements for the making of tools are found. The metals include
copper, brass, bronze and iron. There are also chipped and ground celts, flake tools and metal
ornaments. Orissan sites include Pallahara, Kuanr and Kanjipani, Dhalbhumgarh, Maubhandar
and Rakha mines in Jharkhand and Porihati and Dhobakacha in West Bengal. Excavated by Ray
(1993) and Ray, Kundu and Bhattacharya (2000), it shows all tools made on metamorphosed
basalt, with heavy-duty tools being chipped celts, wedges, saddle querns, sickles and thick
knives. Flakes, blades and cores are found as blanks as well as utilized pieces, and long blades

57
are found with sharp lateral margins and marks of use. Levalloisean, punching and pressure-
flaking techniques dominated. Wastes outnumbered tools, the site being a factory site and
showed inhabitation. Potsherds (red and buff coloured but not very fine in texture), burnt clay
and brass ornaments were also present, with crucibles (thick, heavy and with embedded metal
slag), earthern pellets for slings, and rings and bangles made on brass. The ornaments analysed
showed that the alloy was prepared by simultaneous reduction of chalcopyrite and lead zinc
sulphide ore over a charcoal fire, perhaps a method used earlier in the Chalcolithic period. Ray
claims that the evolving of the state in the region is due to the monopoly of mining in the region
and the development of metallurgy.

S. Pradhan (2000) reported three sites from the Karandi valley in Orissa. From a trial excavation
in these sites Chalcolithic material was found. At Badibahal, slow wheel-turned Buff and Red
Ware were found which were ill-fired and fragmentary. Layer 2 had potsherds of both handmade
and wheel-made type, both grit tempered and ill-fired and also fragmentary. In Layer 1, in
association, a stone celt was found. At Bhejidihi, pottery, iron objects like chisels, nails and
spearheads, stone objects like celts, microlithic chert bladelets, beads of quartz, carnelian, agate
and jasper, terracotta objects like spindle whorls, toy cart wheels, hop scotches, copper ingot and
bangles were found. Two periods were recognized here. Period I was Chalcolithic with bone,
stone tools, copper and painted pottery. Period II was Early Iron Age represented by iron objects
with Red Ware, Black Polished ware and Black-and-Red Ware. At Kurmigudi, pottery was
found with fluted cores, bladelets, bone points, terracotta crucibles, hop scotch, a chopping tool,
a broken piece of ring stone and a piece of antler. The author claims that Bhejidihi conforms to
that of Golabai (painted pottery represented by post-firing painting in dark ochre) and
Kambeswaripalli (painted pottery represented by creamy white painting on Black-and-Red
Ware). At Bhejidihi, there is also black painting on Red Ware, similar to that of Period II at
Pandu Rajar Dhibi. At Pandu Rajar Dhibi the Black-and-Red Ware is painted while at Bhejidihi
it is unpainted.

The copper hoards seem to have a problematic relating to the difficulty of its assemblages and
their dating or their attribution to any particular cultural group (Yule; 2001).

Many sites in West Bengal have also shown graduated metal working over long periods like
Banesvar Danga, Bangarh, Bahiri, Bharatpur, Chandraketugarh, Dihor, Hatikra, Kankrajhor,
Kotasur, Laljal, Mahisdal, Mangalkot, Pakhanna, Pandu Rajar Dhibi, Sulgi, Tamluk and
Tulsipur. Chattopadhyay claims that the copper hoard objects were not always of the
Chalcolithic period but there is a possibility of it having continued to a later period. The Eastern
copper hoards differ typologically and technologically from the Western copper hoards. After
maturity, it is possible that copper hoards from this period migrated to the Gangetic Doab. Brass
articles were also exported to Thailand (Chattopadhyay; 2004).

Conclusions

An interlinking is thus seen with the Neolithic, Chalcolithic and the later and earlier periods in
the region though they cannot be readily observed in every region from the stratigraphic data.
Many of the sites were found near river areas though it is quite likely that these sites also existed
in interior areas also and whose signs were erased through later settlements.

58
There is also evidence that these goods were transferred to other areas like Thailand and also to
other areas within India. Further, the nature and behavior of the people who were storing copper
in hoards is not clear nor is there any clear idea of which period they might have belonged to. As
a result, it is quite possible that they might have been a behavioral characteristic of different
cultural groups in the same region over a period of time.

The evidence seen here is also showing clearly that the use of certain tools or metals or other
economic practices was not restricted to any one cultural group but was spread out over many
different culture-bearing populations. Perhaps the laws of pragmatism prevailed.

What of regional variations? It seems that the areas which were adjoining the plains areas
contributed most to the early farming settlements in the plains areas (see Maps). They became
like a sort of satellite to such developing areas. The sheer magnitude and variety of the sites
show that a great population grew and developed in this region over this period (see Appendices
I and II). Thus interior sites developed on their own though they all had trade relations with other
communities while those near the borders of the plateau region interacted most with the growing,
powerful states coming up through agriculture in the plains. There was a lot of trade and
interaction among these communities at this point, even to the extent of borrowing major
technologies relating to agriculture. Also horticultural and other produce may have been the
specialty of these ‘fringe' communities which the initial agriculturists lacked and found to be
delicacies.

One way of looking at large scale cultural borrowings of this kind would be see them as
happening in larger cultural clusters creating a mega-culture. Such mega-cultures could borrow
or use large-scale cultural commonalities for perhaps specific areas of social life like economy,
agriculture, trade, pottery, weaponry, metallurgy, etc. These might be related to the Alfred
Schutz's stock-knowledge-at-hand for a whole area or region. Though the idea of a stock-
knowledge-at hand was wrought by Alfred Schutz as referring to one cultural group, in this case
the idea needs to be modified to include sections of cultures or groups of culture-bearers who
combine ideas according to pragmatic reasons in order to follow a set group of practices that are
relevant to the entire group. Such mega-cultures may approximate or bridge the concept used by
many archaeologists as ‘traditions,’ since they are wary of using the term culture for such large-
scale activities that may possibly involve multiple culture-bearing groups. I shall develop on
these ideas in the next part of this exposition, where I shall show how different cultures in the
region actually had similar activities.

Thus, there is a direct continuity between the cultures and traditions that existed in the
Palaeolithic and Mesolithic to those that existed later. Unraveling the complexity of later
migrations of other populations that came in and of the alliances formed between these
communities should be the basis of any future archaeology of the region. This work is thus
preliminary in setting the outlines of such a research paradigm.

References

Allchin, F.R. 1979. Early cultivated plants in India and Pakistan, F. Raymond Allchin and Dilip

59
K. Chakrabarti (eds.) A Sourcebook of Indian Archaeology vol. I. New Delhi: Munshiram
Manoharlal Publishers Pvt. Ltd., pp. 275-280.
Banerjee, Tapas. 2000. Bone artefacts from Pandurajar Dhibi, Burdwan District, West Bengal,
Man and Environment 25(1): 97-98.
Bhattacharya, D. K. 1989. Terracotta worship in fringe Bengal, Ian Hodder (ed.) The Meaning of
Things. Material Culture and Symbolic Expression(One World Archaeology 6). London: Unwin
Hyman, pp. 12-22.
Bhattacharya, D.K. 2004. Neolithic in Jharkhand: A fresh appraisal, S.S. Ramachandra Murthy,
D. Bhaskara Murti and D. Kiran Kranth Choudary (eds.) Prasadam: Recent Researches on
Archaeology, Art, Architecture and Culture (Prof. B. Rajendra Prasad Festschrift). New Delhi:
Harman Publishing House, pp. 9-23.
Campbell, A. 1916. Note on the occurrence of Copper celts in Manbhum, Journal of the Bihar
and Orissa Research Society 2: 85-86.
Chakrabarti, Dilip K. 1993. Archaeology of Eastern India, Chotanagpur Plateau and West
Bengal. New Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal.
Chattopadhyay, Pranab K. 2004. The techniques and the forms of the use of metals in the
territory of West Bengal, Vinay Kumar Srivastava and Manoj Kumar Singh (eds.) Issues and
Themes in Anthropology. Felicitation volume in honour of Prof. D.K. Bhattacharya. Delhi:
Palaka Prakashan, pp. 229-240.
Cobden-Ramsay, L.E.B. 1916. Further relics of the Copper Age, Journal of the Bihar and Orissa
Research Society 2: 386-387.
Ghosh, Abhik. 2008(a). Prehistory of the Chotanagpur Region Part 1: Making sense of the
stratigraphy, The Internet Journal of Biological Anthropology 1(2).
Ghosh, Abhik. 2008(b). Prehistory of the Chotanagpur Region Part 2: Proposed stages,
Palaeolithic and the Mesolithic, The Internet Journal of Biological Anthropology 2(1).
Gupta, S.P. 1965. Further Copper Hoards: A reassessment in the light of new evidence, The
Journal of the Bihar Research Society 51: 1-7, January-December.
Kumar, Anil and P.C. Pant. 1996-97. Economy of the Neolithic cultures of Southern Uttar
Pradesh and Western Bihar, Puratattva Number 30: 25-29.
Lahiri, Nayanjot. 1994-1995. The alloying traditions of Protohistoric and Historic India: Some
general trends and their ethnographic dimensions, Puratattva Number 25: 64-73.
Lamberg-Karlovsky, C.C. 1967. Archeology and metallurgical technology in Prehistoric
Afghanistan, India, and Pakistan, American Anthropologist 69: 145-162.
Mitra, Sarat Chandra. 1931. Further notes on the Kolarian belief about the Neolithic celts,
Journal of the Bihar and Orissa Research Society 17(Part iv): 395-397.
Narain, L.A. 1970. The Neolithic settlement at Chirand, Journal of Bihar Research Society LXI:
16-35.
Pradhan, S. 2000. Archaeological investigations in the Karandi valley, Orissa, Man and
Environment 25(1): 99-103.
Prasad, Ajit Kumar. 1980. A note on the food habits of the Neolithic people of Bihar, V.D. Misra
and J.N. Pal (eds.) Indian Prehistory: 1980. Allahabad: Department of Ancient History, Culture
and Archaeology, pp. 161-162.
Ray, Ranjana. 1993. Discovery of a Chalcolithic site near the source of River Baitarani, Orissa,
Journal of Indian Anthropological Society 28: 97-101.

60
Ray, Ranjana. 2004. Man and culture in Eastern India: An anthropological study on quality of
life through time, Sectional President's Address, 91st Session 2003-2004, Anthropological and
Behavioural Sciences, Chandigarh. Kolkata: The Indian Science Congress Association.
Ray, Ranjana, Asok K. Kundu and Nandini Bhattacharya. 2000. Chalcolithic cultural remnants
from a site near Kanjipani, Orissa, Kishor K. Basa and Pradeep Mohanty (eds.) Archaeology of
Orissa, pp. 36-367.
Roy, Sarat Chandra. 1916(a). Relics of the Copper Age found in Chota Nagpur, Journal of the
Bihar and Orissa Research Society 2: 481-484.
Roy, Sarat Chandra. 1916(b). A find of ancient bronze articles in the Ranchi District, Journal of
the Bihar and Orissa Research Society 2: 485-487.
Sathe, Vijay and G.L. Badam. 1996. Animal remains from the Neolithic and Chalcolithic periods
at Senuwar, District Rohtas, Bihar, Man and Environment 21(2): 43-48.
Singh, Birendra Pratap. 1988-89. Early farming communities of Kaimur foot-hills. Puratattva
Number 19: 5-18.
Thapar, B.K. 1973-74. Problems of the Neolithic cultures in India: A retrospect, Puratattva
Number 7: 61-65.
Vishnu Mittre. 1972. Neolithic plant economy at Chirand, The Palaeobotanist 1: 18-22.
Vishnu Mittre. 1989. Forty years of Archaeobotanical research in South Asia, Man and
Environment 14(1): 1-16.
Yule, Paul. 2001. Addenda to the Copper Hoards of the Indian subcontinent: Preliminaries for an
interpretation http://crossasia-repository.ub.uni-
heidelberg.de/510/1/yule_man_envir_2001.pdf in: Man in Environment 26.2, 2001, 117-120.
This note supplements the author's book-length "The copper hoards of the Indian subcontinent:
Preliminaries for an interpretation" with appendices by Andreas Hauptmann and Michael J.
Hughes, published in the Jahrbuch des RomischGermanischen Zentralmuseums Mainz, 36, 1989
(1992).

http://ispub.com/IJBA/2/2/11792

Prehistory of Jharkhand and Singhbhum, some literature

August 3, 2015 at 2:19 pm

Prehistory of Jharkhand and Singhbhum, some literature

The earliest remains of mankind on the Chotanagpur plateau have received little attention to
date, although the first finds date from 1864. In 1868 Beeching described this discovery of stone
implements in the Chaibasa and Chakradharpur area.
 [Captain Beeching], ‘Notes on some stone implements in the district of Singhboom by
Captain Beeching’, communicated by V. Ball, Esq., PASB January to December 1868,
July 1868, p. 177;

61
  Sarat Chandra Roy, The Mundas and Their Country, Calcutta, 1912, reprint London:
Asia Publishing House, 1970, p. 10.
In 1874 Ball got ‘a remarkably fine stone adze’ from the Superintendent of Police in Chaibasa.
About his finds, see:
 Valentine Ball, Jungle Life in India, or the Journeys and Journals of an Indian
Geologist, London, 1880, also reprinted 1985 as Tribal and Peasant Life In Nineteenth
Century India, New Delhi: Usha, pp. 136; 140; 472-5; 675-83.
For further finds in Singhbhum, see:
 Dharani Sen and Uma Chaturvedi, ‘Further Finds of Stone Axes in Singhbhum’, MII,
Vol. 35, 1955, pp. 305-15.
D. Sen, G. S. Ray, and A. K. Ghosh, ‘Palaeoliths from Manbhum and Singhbhum’, MII,
Vol. 42, 1962, pp. 10-18.
For overview of the Jharkhand (Chotanagpur) area the remarkable series by Abhik Ghosh:
 Abhik Ghosh, Prehistory Of The Chotanagpur Region, India, Part 1: Making Sense Of
The Stratigraphy, The Internet Journal of Biological Anthropology, Vol. 1, no 2, 2008a.
Abhik Ghosh, ‘Prehistory of the Chotanagpur Region, part 2: Proposed Stages,
Paleaolithic and the Mesolithic’, IJBA, Vol. 2, no. 1, 2008b.
Abhik Ghosh, ‘Prehistory Of The Chotanagpur Region Part 3: The Neolithic Problem
And The Chalcolithic’, IJBA, Vol. 2, no. 2., 2009a.
Abhik Ghosh, ‘Prehistory Of The Chotanagpur Region Part 4: Ethnoarchaeology, Rock
Art, Iron And The Asuras‘, IJBA, Vol. 3, no. 1, 2009b.
Abhik Ghosh, ‘Prehistory of the Chotanagpur Region Part 5: State formation and general
conclusions’, IJBA, Vol. 3, no. 2, 2009c.
And, among other things, on the discovery of rock art in Chotanagpur:
Bulu Imam, Palaeothitic Man in Chotanagpur Plateau, 2012,
Joseph Van Troy connected some finds with the Mundas on the plateau:
 Joseph Van Troy, ‘The Pre-Historic Context of the Coming of the Mundas to the Ranchi
Plateau: A review’, Sevartham, Indian Culture in a Christian Context, Vol. 15, 1990, pp.
27-41.
Joseph Van Troy, ‘Prehistory and Early History of Chotanagpur’, in Sanjay Bosu
Mullick (ed.), Cultural Chota Nagpur, Unity in Diversity, published for William Carey
Study and Research Centre, New Delhi: Uppal Publishing House, 1991, pp. 23-41.
An exhaustive inventory of bronze age metalwork in India did not draw definite chronological
conclusions for the Chotanagpur plateau.
 Paul Yule, Metalwork of the Bronze Age in India, Series: Prähistorische Bronzefunde
Abteilung XX – Band 8, München: C. H. Beck’sche Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1985.

http://www.wakkaman.com/index.php/forums/reply/365/

www.indologica.com/volumes/.../vol23-24_art08_CHAKRABARTI.pdf Dilip K Chakrabarti,

Ancient settlements of the Ganga plain: West Bengal and Bihar
https://www.scribd.com/doc/283221745/Ancient-settlements-of-the-Ganga-plain-West-Bengal-
and-Bihar-Dilip-K-Chakrabarti

https://www.scribd.com/doc/283219128/Copper-hoards-of-northern-India-by-Paul-Yule-1997-
Expedition-Vol-39-No-1

62
Copper hoards of northern India by Paul Yule (1997), Expedition Vol. 39, No. 1
Ancient settlements of the Ganga plain: West Bengal and Bihar Dilip K Chakrabarti

S. Kalyanaraman, Sarasvati Research Center October 1, 2015

63