Gold Ivory and ivory objects Dates
Carnelian “Fish eyes” or pearls
Note: From Ratnagar (1981: 23).
INDUS MARITIME INTERESTS
One of the remarkable features of the Indus Civilization is its maritime orientation. It is only after the middle of the second millennium that objects of origin in the Indus Valley make an appearance in Oman and the gulf. While there was a modest presence of Early Harappans near the sea, as at Balakot, for example, the Mature Harappan marks a quantum increase in maritime activity for these ancient peoples. There are four representations of Harappan boats, three from Mohenjo-daro and one from Lothal.18
The Indus employment of maritime resources is also documented by their extensive use of shell for bangles, ladles, inlay, and the like.19 The Indus settlement at Balakot, just removed from Sonmiani Bay in southern Baluchistan, also reveal a surprising and unique dependence on fish for subsistence. The fish in question is a grunt, found in great quantity in the Indus levels.20 Large fish vertebrae have been found at some Mature Harappan sites in Kutch.21 During the Mature Harappan, fish were traded over large distances, probably in salted and/or dried form.22
Although it was not necessarily a port, there is evidence at Ras al-Junayz in Oman of Indus sailors. An abundance of Harappan ceramics there are mixed with indigenous wares. Among finds at this maritime way station are pieces of bitumen, which were interpreted as caulking for reed boats.23
THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL RECORD OF INDUS CONTACTS WITH MESOPOTAMIA, THE GULF, AND IRAN
The textual record in Mesopotamia is paralleled by a body of material culture that plays a role in the interpretation of Indus—Mesopotamian relations and the identification of Meluhha.
Seals
The most important objects are stamp seals, summarized in table 12.4 and shown in figures 12.7 through 12.23.24 There is a seal from Tell Brak that has a resemblance to the swastika and has interesting comparisons at Harappa, Lothal, and Tepe Sialk (figure 12.24). More seals have figured in this discussion, from both Iran and Mesopotamia, but they are of doubtful utility for a number of reasons.25
Table 12.4 Indus or Indus-like seals from the Near East
Figure 12.7 Unicorn seal impression from Umma(?) (see Table 12.4 for documentation)
A. Parpola has examined the writing on these seals and the others from the gulf and Altyn Depe.26 He found a mix of writing systems. Some of them are clearly pure Indus script, as in the two from Kish, and the one from Nippur in table 12.4. Others are probably not Indus writing.
Beads
Beads, especially those of etched carnelian, have been discussed in terms of Indus—Mesopotamian contact.27 Etched beads in India and the Near East have a long history, beginning with the Indus Civilization. The technique might have been lost at, or shortly after, the Indus transformation, but it is well documented in the mid— first millennium B.C., especially at Taxila. The concerns of this chapter deal only with the initial period of production in the Bronze Age.
Etched Carnelian Beads from Indus Sites
The principal sites of the Indus Civilization that have yielded etched carnelian beads are found in table 12.5.
Figure 12.8 Seal impression from Ur (Gadd No. 6) (see Table 12.4 for documentation)
Etched Carnelian Beads in Mesopotamia
The catalogue of etched carnelian beads from Mesopotamian sites is a substantial one, and there is no advantage to repeating what Reade has presented elsewhere (figure 12.25).28 The Royal Graves at Ur contained a large num-ber of beads of this general type. Others have been found at Kish and Tell Asmar in Akkadian contexts. There is one Early Dynastic etched bead from Tell Abu Salabikh and another from Nippur from Late Early Dynastic or Early Akkadian times. These occurrences, and others, are all documented.29
Figure 12.9 Seal from Ur (Gadd No. 1) (see Table 12.4 for documentation)
Table 12.5 Principal Mature Harappan sites with etched carnelian beads
Mohenjo-daro Marshall 1931 i: pl. CXLVI; Mackay 1937-38: pls. CXXXV—CXXXVIII
Harappa Vats 1940, pls. CXXVIII—CXXXII; Wheeler 1947
Chanhu-daro Mackay 1943; pl. LXXIX
Kalibangan Indian Archaeology, A Review 1960-61: 32: pl. XLIX B
Lothal Rao 1985: 601
Rojdi Possehl and Raval 1989: fig. 84, no. 6
Figure 12.10 Seal from Ur (Gadd No. 16) (see Table 12.4 for documentation)
Etched Carnelian Beads in Iran
There are also etched carnelian beads in Iran (table 12.6).
Other Bead Types
Long barrel-cylinder beads and segmented faience beads have also been found in both the Indus region and the west in the third millennium. Chakrabarti has discussed the occurrence of “long barrel-cylinder” beads in the Indus, Mesopotamia, and Iran.30 These beads, in a variety of materials (e.g., carnelian, lapis lazuli, terra-cotta) are long (in excess of 5 centimeters) and slender, sometimes with a slight thickening toward the center. Based on their high density at Indus sites and the fact that they have been found in various stages of manufacture at Chanhu-daro,31 there is little doubt that they are an Indus type. “It may be said that this is a distinct Indus bead type, as distinctive in its own way as etched carnelian beads. And unlike the latter, which are also known to occur in later Indian historic contexts, this bead type died with the Indus civilization.”32
Figure 12.11 Seal from Tepe Gawra (see Table 12.4 for documentation)
Sculpture of the Intercultural Style
Philip Kohl has conducted the most significant study of the so-called carved steatite materials from the early Near East and India that has already been noted.33
Figure 12.12 Elephant-rhino seal impression from Tell Asmar (see Table 12.4 for documentation)
In Mesopotamia, the gulf, and Iran there are a few pieces of the Intercultural style with the zebu. While the natural distribution of Bos indicus is not precisely known, it does seem to be indigenous to the Indian Subcontinent.34 Its occurrence as part of the Intercultural style seems to indicate that ancient India was one of the places within which the style itself was shaped.35
Table 12.6 Principal sites in Iran with etched carnelian beads
Site Period Citation
Tepe Hissar IIIC Second half of the third millennium Schmidt 1937: 229, pl. XXV
Tepe Hissar III Second half of the third millennium Schmidt 1937: 438; pl. XLIV, c
Shah Tepe IIA Arne 1945: pl. XCII, fig. 612, B II S7
Kalleh Nisar Akkadian cist grave van den Berghe 1970: 73
Susa Akkadian grave de Mecquenem 1943: fig. 84, 7
Tepe Yahya One surface find, another is in uncertain context, but probably later than 2000 B.C. During Caspers 1972: 92
Jalalabad Mid-third millennium Chakrabarti and Moghadam 1979: 167, fig. 10
Marlik Late second/early first millennium Chakrabarti and Moghadam 1979: fig. 10
Shahdad Late third millennium? Hakimi 1997: 655, no. Ha. 8
Figure 12.13 Geometric seal from Tell Asmar (see Table 12.4 for documentation)
Figurines
George Dales has brought attention to four male terracotta figurines, three from Nippur and one from Chanhu-daro, that share a number of important, interesting features.36 These were discussed earlier (see figure 6.13). They were puppets, with arms separately attached at the shoulders, which are well out of proportion to the rest of the body. They are also all fat nudes with prominent buttocks and traces of penises still visible. They may therefore have been ithyphallic. Most of the figurines have prominent holes at the naval and between the buttocks, and there is sometimes evidence for a tail. It has been demonstrated through neutron activation that one of the figurines from Nippur was made in Mesopotamia and the one from Chanhu-daro was made in the Indus Valley.37
Figure 12.15 Seal from Kish (see Table 12.4 for documentation)
Figure 12.14 Unicorn seal impression from Kish (see Table 12.4 for documentation)
Figurines of monkeys from Sumer and Elam are remarkably similar to t
hose of the ancient Indus Valley.38
Dice
Dales has discussed cubical dice and their relation to Indus—Mesopotamian interaction.39 Both cubical and oblong “stick dice” are known from Indus sites. The contemporary Indian games of chaupar and pachisi (or Parcheesi) seem to be developments out of much simpler games dating back to the third millennium.
Ceramics
Figure 12.16 Seal like the one from Kish in the Baghdad Museum (see Table 12.4 for documentation)
Indus ceramics circulated within the Middle Asian Interaction Sphere. “Feeding-cups” and knobbed ware are known from Mesopotamia, although in very small numbers. Significant amounts of Indus “common wares” are found at many, perhaps most, of the third millennium sites in the gulf (e.g., Baat, Hili 8, Maysar, Ras al-Junayz, Shimal 6, Tell Abrak, Umm an-Nar).40 Some sherds have graffiti of the Indus script on them, as at Ras al-Junayz. Sorath Harappan pottery from Gujarat is found in considerable quantity at the third millennium site of Saar on the Island of Bahrain (Dilmun), along with other Indus wares (figure 12.26).41
Figure 12.17 Cylinder seal impression from Tell Suleimeh with a unicorn (see Table 12.4 for documentation)
Specialized pottery was a part of the Third Millennium Middle Asian Interaction Sphere as well. Large, pointed-base, black-slipped jars have been found at many Indus sites (e.g., Mohenjo-daro, Harappa, Nausharo, Chanhu-daro, Balakot, Sotkah Koh, Miri Qalat, Dholavira; figure 12.27).42 Black-slipped jars are also common in the gulf, sometimes represented by hundreds of sherds from individual places (Amlah, Baat, Hili 8, Ras Ghanadha 1, Ras al-Hadd-1, Ras al-Junayz, RJ-2). Examples of this ware were found at Harappa in a potter’s workshop, so there is no doubt about their region of origin.43 The black-slipped jars inevitably have a short Indus inscription that was scratched on the shoulder of the pot after firing.
Figure 12.19 Seal from Hamma (see Table 12.4 for documentation)
Figure 12.18 Seal from Tello (see Table 12.4 for documentation)
These storage/shipping jars are formed with a deep, narrow base, which appears to be a sump for sediment, and look somewhat like a Mediterranean amphora. The constricted sump inhibited the remixing of sediment with the liquids in these jars when they were shipped and jostled about. Viniculture was a part of the Mature Harappan agricultural program, and it is entirely possible that the Indus peoples were shipping wine to the gulf in these interesting containers.
Metal Artifacts
Figure 12.20 Seal from Nippur (see Table 12.4 for documentation)
Indus metal implements in Mesopotamian contexts are rare. Copper—bronze blades without a midrib, often thought to have been of Indus affiliation, may have been found at Kish and Tepe Hissar. Spiral-headed pins occur in Mesopotamia, the Indus, and Iran.44
Figure 12.21 Impression of a circular seal from Susa (see Table 12.4 for documentation)
Material Miscellany
There is a list of other odds and ends of material culture from the Indus found in Mesopotamia and the gulf. It includes heart-shaped shell or bone inlay from Tell Asmar, a cubical stone weight dating to the Ur III Period found at Ur, shell ladles from Mohenjo-daro duplicated at both Kish and Ur, a limestone tetrahedron from Tell al’Ubaid very much like tetrahedrons from Mohenjo-daro, the Greek cross found in both regions, and well-modeled panther heads found at Mohenjo-daro and Ur. Mackay also notes similarities between a type of terra-cotta “mask” from Mohenjo-daro (a human head with the horns of a bull) and metal examples from Ur.
The copper—bronze mirror with a handle in the form of a human from the Babar Temple is not comparable to the mirror from Mehi in Baluchistan.45
Figure 12.23 Swastika seal from Shahdad (see Table 12.4 for documentation)
Harappan weights have been found in the gulf in some numbers and were one of the Dilmun weight “standards.” They were probably accepted there because the Harappans were reliable, high-volume trading partners for the Dilmun merchants.
The significance of the growing corpus of stamp seals from the Greater Gulf is still an area of active, productive research. The classic study of C. J. Gadd, written prior to the notion of the Persian Gulf—type seal, remains an important reference in this area.46 There is an excellent example of the combined Indus/gulf-style seal from a tomb at Madinat Hamad on Bahrain.47
WESTERN MATERIAL IN THE GREATER INDUS VALLEY
Figure 12.22 Impression of a cylinder seal from Susa (see Table 12.4 for documentation)
The material discussed previously documents the presence of a reasonably substantial amount of Indus material culture in the Arabian Gulf and Mesopotamia. One would think that a comparable amount of Mesopotamian and gulf material would be found in the Greater Indus Valley; but this is not the case. There is actually very little western material in this region, as discussed in the following summary.
Figure 12.24 Swastika-like seal from Tell Brak, seal impression from Harappa, seal impressions from Lothal, and seals from Tepe Sialk (see Possehl 1996a: 151 for full documentation)
Six Persian Gulf seals have been found at Indus sites.48 There are also six cylinder seals there.49 Mesopotamian-type “barrel weights” have been found at Mohenjo-daro and Harappa.50
There are a few western metal types that have been found in Indus contexts. The toilet set of copper implements comprising an earscoop, piercer, and tweezers from late levels at Harappa has a rather precise parallel at Ur and Kish, with eleven (or twelve) reported sets. 51 This set of implements seems to date to Early Dynastic III and is quite at home in Mesopotamia (figure 12.28).
Animal-headed pins with western parallels have been found at Harappa and Mohenjo-daro.52
The copper axe—adzes recovered from Mohenjo-daro some six feet below the surface and one other from Sibri (c. 2000 B.C.) are comparable to other examples from Hissar. Axes of this type are also found in the BMAC graves of northern Afghanistan and farther afield, in Early Minoan II and Troy II.53
Figure 12.26 A Late Sorath Harappan pot from Saar on Bahrain Island (after Carter in press)
Figure 12.25 Etched carnelian beads from Ur and Susa (various sources)
The stone bust of a male from the site of Dabar Kot has been compared to a head from Khafaje. Other parallels are said to exist at Tell Asmar, Lagash, and Al’Ubaid. There are now four more pieces of sculpture that seem to fit with the Dabar Kot example. Two terra-cotta figurines from Mehrgarh are remarkable for their baldness and the treatment of the eyebrow as a slit. There is an unusual quality to these pieces, which come from Period VII (c. 2800—2500 B.C.), and could recall Near Eastern comparisons. Finally, a terra-cotta head from Lothal with a square-cut beard has been suggested to be the representation of a Mesopotamian.54
Figure 12.27 An Indus black-slipped jar from Mohenjodaro, of the type found in the Arabian Gulf (after Mackay 1937—38)
The well-known Near Eastern “contest scene” between man and animal is also represented in the Indus (see figure 8.6).55 The Indus motif generally involves a human in combat with two tigers and is found on the stamp seals characteristic of Harappan culture. The motif is thought to be one characteristic of the Near East.
Figure 12.28 Toilet implements from Ur and Harappa (after Woolley 1934 and Vats 1941)
Further comparisons can be made between proto-Elamite glyptic portrayals of the lotus and painted designs on Early Harappan ceramics at Kalibangan dating to circa 3000—2500 B.C.
There is a very fine example of a recumbent bull from Lothal during the Mature Harappan there (figure 12.29).56 The look and scale of this piece is very much like those from Ur and other Mesopotamian sites.57 It is close enough to its Mesopotamian counterparts to qualify as one of the few “Mesopotamia” objects from an Harappan site.
B. M. Pande has described four ring-kernoi from Mohenjo-daro and Harappa.58 Three of these were published for the first time in his paper. This class of ceramic object consists of a ring with small cups attached to the top. The ring is hollow, and the cups have a perforated bottom connecting them to the interio
r tube of the supporting ring. They appear to be articles at home in the eastern Mediterranean and are found in third millennium contexts in Early Minoan (2500—2100 B.C.) and Pre-Mycenaean (2500—1800 B.C.) sites. Ring-kernoi also appear in much later contexts in the Mediterranean.59
This is the only distinctively Minoan or Mycenaean material culture in the Indus Age. The ring-kernoi were used in a festival called the Kernophoria, which was associated with the harvest. Their presence in Indus cities would seem to indicate that some residents there (probably Indus peoples) may have enjoyed this rite, which would have come to them as a part of the activity associated with the Third Millennium Middle Asian Interaction Sphere. There might be an association between the ring-kernoi, the Kernophoria festival, and the ideology of Intercultural style; however, this is not yet clear.
The Indus Civilization Page 39