Ancient Near East: Traditions of smelters, metallurgists validate the Bronze Age Linguistic Doctrine. 

Bull capital on Asoka pillar, Rampurva. This was set atop the pillar using an inscribed  copper bolt with Indus Writing. Altar, Pyrenees (South of France). I Century BC (The altar shows a svastika and a fish – both are Sarasvati hieroglyphs of Indus writing.)

This monograph seeks to dethrone the ruling linguistic paradigm of 'Aryan invasion' as a Linguistic doctrine and replaces this doctrine with Bronze Aze Linguistic Doctrine validating Indian sprachbund as a reality of ancient times. As we attempt to clear the mists of history and see through the dominant idiom which explains a language-speech-area described as a language union (foor e.g. Indian sprachbund), many lexemes of languages of thesprachbund demonstrate the essential features of the language union seen in many metalware/metallurgical terms, together with about 8000 cognate semantic clusters of Indian Lexicon -- a compendium of Munda, Dravidian and Indo-Aryan lexemes. The demonstration is a process involving rebus readings of hieroglhyphs of Indus Writing, a process which yields the core semantic features of Meluhha (mleccha), the lingua franca of the sprachbund.

The Bronze Age Linguistic Doctrine postulated in this monograph explains a sprachbund. Innovations of the Bronze Age, the processes of alloying minerals in particular, necessitated innovations of sememes to facilitate trade transactions and contacts among people, across many language-speaking zones including Tocharian, Kashmiri, Pushto, Elam, Sumer, Akkadian, Hebrew-speaking regions. The substratum lexical repertoire has been identified through rebus readings of Indus Writing hieroglyphs to outline the semantic structures of Meluhha (Mleccha) language used in the conversation between Vidura and Kanaka, the miner in the Great Epic, the Mahabharata. Surely, more language studies are needed, beyond this rudimentary listing of glosses, to unravel the morphology and syntactical structures of Meluhha (Mleccha). The area spanned is the area of the Ancient Near East of the Bronze Age, extending from Haifa in Israel to Rakhigarhi, near Delhi. Meluhhans and Meluhha-speaking settlers outside Meluhha authored thesprachbund, the speech union.

Surprising confirmation of Bronze Age Linguistic Doctrine comes from a copper alloy bolt which holds the Rampura Capital to the Asokan pillar.

The copper bolt is inscribed with hieroglyphs of Indus writing attesting to two facts: 1. hieroglyphic writing system as a continuum in Indian sprachbund; 2. hieroglyphs denote metallurgical processing.

Rampurva pillar edict text:

•          Thus saith king Priyadarsi, Beloved of the Gods. Twelve years after my coronation, records relating to Dharma were caused to be written by me for the first time for the welfare and happiness of the people, so that, without violation thereof, they might attain the growth of Dharma in various respects.

•          Thinking: “Only in this way the welfare and happiness of the people may be secured.” I scrutinize as to how I may bring happiness to the people, no matter whether they are my relatives or residents of the neighborhood of my capital or of distant localities. And I act accordingly. In the same manner, I scrutinize in respect of all classes of people. Moreover, all the religious sects have been honored by me with various kinds of honors. But what I consider my principal duty is meeting the people of different sects personally. This record relating to Dharma has been caused to be written by me twenty-six years after my coronation. 

Rampurva bull capital is a depiction of bos indicus comparable to the glyph on an Indus seal m1103. 

A solid copper bolt (24 ½” in length and a circumference of 14” at the center and 12” at the ends), was found in the Rampurva Asoka Pillar near Nepal border.

Some of the hieroglyphs seen on this list are also seen on the Sohgaura copper plate inscription.

It can be demonstrated that the four hieroglyphs inscribed on Rampurva copper bolt are hieroglyphs of Indus writing. See: http://www.docstoc.com/docs/4430996/Hieroglyphs-of-historical-periods-in-India

Four hieroglyphs inscribed on Rampurva copoper bolt are:

On some cast copper coins coming out of mints, in addition to these four hieroglyphs, two additional hieroglyphs are inscribed:

 

All these six hieroglyphs are a continuum of the legacy of Indus writing. The language is Meluhha (mleccha) of Indian sprachbund. The rebus readings of these six hieroglyphs evolved in the context of Bronze Age are as follows, the readings validate the Bronze Age Linguistic Doctrine which should replace the 'Aryan invasion' Linguistic Doctrine which is the ruling paradigm in language studies.

The Asur are found in the districts of Gumla, Lohardaga, Palamau and Latehar of Jharkhand state. They have been iron-smelters. The modern Asur vanavasi are divided into three sub-extended family divisions, namely Bir(Kol) Asur, Birjia Asur and Agaria Asur.

An unresolved problem in the study of Bronze Age civilizations has been the identification of sources of tin. Arsenical bronzes of the millennia earlier to the 5th millennium were replaced by tin-bronzes creating a veritable revolution in the march of civilization.

John Muhly has highlighted and contributed significantly to the resolution of this problem. Many cuneiform texts do point to Meluhha as the major source of tin, reaching through the transit points of Magan and Dilmun along the Persian Gulf region and west of Mehergarh.

A possible scenario is presented by a geologist, TM Babu (2003) in: Advent of the bronze age in the Indian subcontinent In Mining and metal production: through the ages, eds. P. Craddock and J. Lang, London, British Museum Press, pp175-180. In this article, Babu starts with the traditions in ancient India of making idols for worship using pancha-loha (lit. five metals), creating an alloy of copper, tin, lead, zinc, arsenic and less commonly, silver and gold. A word in Tamil denoting this alloy is kol which also means ‘working in iron’. This lexeme is denoted by the hieroglyphs: tiger (kola), woman (kola), rice-plant (kolom). Similar rebus readings of hundreds of hieroglyphs on Indus writing point to the Indian sprachbund, a linguistic union which explains the presence, for example, Munda words in ancient Sanskrit texts.

Bronze Age doctrine explains Indian sprachbund

This speech area indicates a linguistic doctrine. Just as ‘Aryan invasion’ theory was postulated as a linguistic doctrine to explain the Indo-European languages, advent of Bronze Age can be presented as a linguistic doctrine to explain the Indian sprachbund. Bronze Age dawned with the inventions of tin and zinc as alloying minerals, alloyed with copper to create tin-bronze or brass. An extraordinary search for the sources of tin and zinc resulted in the creation of an extended interaction area involving what are referred to as Meluhha, Magan, Dilmun, Elam, Sumer, Bactria-Margiana Archaeological Complex, Tocharian-speaking regions of Kyrgystan and the Mediterranean. The interactions among various language-speakers led to the formation and evolution of Indian sprachbund with evidences of metallurgy-related lexemes in Munda, Dravidian and Indo-Aryan language groups.

Papagudem boy wearing a bangle of tin

“Bronze articles such as ornamental mirrors, arrowheads, pins, bangles and chisels, of both low tin and high tin content, have been recovered from Lothal, the Harappn port on the Gujarat coast, which has been dated earlier than 2200 BCE. The tin content in these articles range from 2.27% to 11.82%; however, some of the articles contain no tin. Tin is said to have been brought as tablets from Babylon and mixed with copper to make an alloy of more pleasing colour and luster, a bright golden yellow. The utilization of bronze is essential only for certain articles and tools, requiring sharp cutting edges, such as axes, arrowheads or chisels. The selection of bronze for these items indicates the presence of tin was intentional…Recent discoveries of tin occurrences in India are shown in…Fig. 11.2. However, none of these occurrences shows evidences of ancient mining activity. This is because, unlike copper ores, the mining and metallurgy of the tin ore cassiterite is simple, and leaves little permanent trace…tin ore is usually recovered by simple panning of surface deposits, often contained in gravel, which soon collapse, leaving little evidence of having once been worked. Cassiterite is highly resistant to weathering, and with its high specific gravity, it can be easily separated from the waste minerals. The simple mining and metallurgical methods followed even now by Bastar and Koraput tribals in Chattisgarh and Orissa, central India, could be an indication of the methods used in the past. These tribal people produce considerable quantities of tin without any external help, electric power or chemical agents, enough to make a modern metallurgist, used to high technology, wonder almost in disbelief. Clearly though, the technology practiced has a considerable importance for those studying early smelting practices. The history of this process is poorly known. Back in the 1880s Ball (1881) related the story of a Bastar tribal from the village of Papagudem, who was observed to be wearing a bangle of tin. When questioned as to where the metal had come from, he replied that black sands, resembling gunpowder were dug in his village and smelted there. Thus it is very likely that the present industry is indigenous, and may have a long history. That being said, neither the industry or its products appear in any historical document of any period, and thus is unlikey to have been a significant supplier of metal…The tin content of cassiterite ranges from 74.94% (mean 64.2%), showing that pebbles contain about 70% to 90% of the tin oxide, cassiterite…The ore is localized in gravel beds of the black pebbles of cassiterite which outcrop in stream beds etc. and there are other indicators, in the vegetation. The leaves of the Sarai tree (Shoria robusta) growing on tin-rich ground are often covered in yellow spots, as if suffering from a disease. (The leaves were found to contain 700 ppm of tin on analysis!) Wherever the tribals find concentrations of ore in the top soil, the ground all around the area is dug up and transported to nearby streams, rivers or ponts…The loose gravelly soil containing the tin ore is dug with pick and shovel, and carried to the washing sites in large, shoulder-strung bamboo baskets. The panning or washing of the ore is carrie out using round shallow pans of bamboo. The soil is washed out, leaving the dense casiterite ore at the bottom of the pan…The ore is smelted in small clay shaft furnaces, heating and reducing the ore using charcoal as the fuel…The shft furnaces are square at the base and of brick surmounted by a clay cylindrical shaft…The charcoal acts as both the heating and reducing agent, reducing the black cassiterite mineral into bright, white tin metal…a crude refining is carried out by remelting the metal in an iron pan at about 250 degrees C. The molten tin is then poured into the stone-carved moulds to make square- or rectangular-shaped tin ingots for easy transportation.” (Babu, TM, opcit., pp.176-179)

two late bronze age tin ingots from the harbor of Haifa, Israel contain glyphs used in epigraphs with Indus Writing of Sarasvati civilization!See:http://bharatkalyan97.blogspot.in/2011/11/archaeological-mystery-solved-site-of.htmlThe inscriptions on two pure tin ingots found in a shipwreck in Haifa have been discussed in: Journal of Indo-Judaic Studies, Vol. 1, Number 11 (2010) -- The Bronze Age Writing System of Sarasvati Hieroglyphics as Evidenced by Two “Rosetta Stones” By S. Kalyanaraman (Editor of JIJS: Prof. Nathan Katz)http://www.indojudaic.com/index.php?option=com_contact&view=contact&id=1&Itemid=8 (See embedded document).

Here is a pictorial gallery:

Panning for cassiterite using bamboo pans in a pond in Orissa. The ore is carried to the water pond or stream for washing in bamboo baskets.

People panning for cassiterite mineral in the remote jungles of central India.

The ore is washed to concentrate the cassiterite mineral using bamboo pans. Base of small brick and mud furnace for smelting tin.

The tin is refined by remelting the pieces recovered from the furnace in an iron pan. The molten tin is poured into stone-carved moulds to make square- or rectangular-ingots.

As the pictorial gallery demonstrates, the entire tin processing industry is a family-based or extended-family-based industry. The historical traditions point to the formation of artisan guilds to exchange surplus cassiterite in trade transactions of the type evidenced by the seals and tablets, tokens and bullae found in the civilization-interaction area of the Bronze Age.

Illustrated London News 1936 - November 21st. A 'Sheffield of Ancient India: Chanhu-Daro's metal working industry 10 X photos of copper knives, spears, razors, axes and dishes.

The words used in the lingua franca of such tin-processing families constitute the words invented to denote the Bronze Age products and artifacts such as tin or zinc or the array of metalware discovered in the Sheffied of the Ancient East, Chanhu-daro as reported in the London News Illustrated by Ernest Mackay.

Validating the Bronze Age Linguistic Doctrine

Hence, the search for the identification of the language Meluhha (mleccha) of Indian sprachbundhas to be carried out in documenting the practices of the types shown in the pictorial gallery of tin processing and from within the cluster of over 8000 semantic clusters of the languages of the Indiansprachbund. This will be a first step in reiterating the Bronze Age Linguistic Doctrine. The directions of borrowings of lexemes from one language to another are secondary features. The fact that such common lexemes related to metallurgy and metalware exist in Indian sprachbund is enough to validate the Bronze Age Linguistic Doctrine.

Four women composing a svastika. Samarra. 5th millennium BCE. Pottery from Samarra. 5th millennium BCE. Four antelopes composing a svastika.Samarra artiface. Thesea re hieroglyphs denoting working with zinc and other alloys in Bronze Age.

Shipwreck Greek pottery. Ischia museum. 8th century BCE.Bee-divinity goddess and svastika (Beotia). 700 BCE.

Sources of tin and the beginnings of bronze metallurgy (James Muhly, Journal of Archaeology 89 (1985), pp. 275 to 291.
http://www.docstoc.com/docs/document-preview.aspx?doc_id=159597663

Sources-of-Tin-and-the-Beginnings-of-Bronze-Metallurgy

Iron smelting by Asur-A thing of Past BY DR. NITISH PRIYADARSHI The word Asur occurs in a number of places in the Rigveda, Brahamanas, Aranyakas, Upanishadas and Epics which comprise the sacred literature of the Hindus. The Asur have been identified as primitive tribe in Jharkhand State of India. Their original occupation was iron smelting but now very few live by this profession. When the Asurs came to their present area of habitation is not known, but according to legend they lived with their kinsmen the Mundas, who in course in time drove them away. Driven by their kinsmen, the Asurs took shelter in the Netarhat Plateau, where they have been living for centuries unknown. According to other thoughts Asur had settled in Jharkhand before one thousand B.C. There are references to the asurs in the Rigveda describing them as great builders. Centuries of isolation coupled with exploitation and subjugation by one or the other alien element, have driven the Asur into comparatively inaccessible tract of the land amidst hills and mountains, forests and undulating slopes. The Asur locality is known as the Netharhat group of plateaus within Chotanagpur Plateau of Jharkhand State of India. The Netarhat plateau hills are of a nearly uniform height of about 3,600 feet above the sea level. The Plateau is formed of LATERITE rocks. It is from these rocks, the Asur used to extract iron ore for iron smelting. Iron-smelting used to be the principal occupation of the Asurs, but now it has ceased to be so. Few years ago only one furnace was found working at village Ramgaria in Bishunpur thana where only two families worked and earned a very meager living. IRON SMELTING BY ASURS:- Three varities of iron ore are recognized by the Asur at the Netharhat Plateau. One is magnetite which is called POLA by the Asur. The other one is Haematite from coal measures known as BICHI and third one is Haematites from Laterite known as GOTA. The Asur were able to locate a site for the ores by observation and experience. On the basis of their family labour iron smelting was carried on by them. Green sal trees were cut by them in the neighbourhood of their furnace for preparing char coal as char coal of green sal was capable of generating sufficient heat for smelting iron ore in their furnaces which were usually located in the neighbourhood of water sources like Dari, Chua or rivulet. The Asur family engaged in iron smelting perform SANSIKUTASI worship which may be called productive magic, as it is aimed at securing good iron while smelting. All the implements required for smelting and black smithy are collected in the front of the house. A cock and hen both of red colours are sacrificed during the worship. The ritual is followed by dance and drinks and merry-making. The peculiar feature of this festival is that musical instruments which are so essential for all social and festive occasions among the Asur are not played on this occasion when the youths and girls are engaged in dancing. Every head of a family has to don himself with a new piece of cloth on this occasion which is considered important in the annual cycle of festivals of the Asur. During the last several decades due to the introduction of improved metallurgy and the forest conservation policy of the Government imposing restriction on wanton cutting of forest gave a final death blow to the industry of iron smelting in this plateau. Iron-smelting has now practically become a thing of the past. References: • Gupta, S.P. 1976. The Asur, Ethno-Biological Profile. Bihar Tribal Welfare Research Institute, Ranchi. • Gupta, S.P. 1974. Tribes of Chotanagpur Plateau. Bihar Tribal Welfare Research Institute, Ranchi. • Ranchi District Gazetteer, 1970. Government of Bihar. • S.K.Singh, 2005. Inside Jharkhand. Crown Publications, Ranchi.http://newsjharkhand.com/Special.asp?Details=15 http://www.docstoc.com/docs/document-preview.aspx?doc_id=159598058 Prakash_ B._ 1991_ Metallurgy of iron and steel making and blacksmithy in ancient India  

Rise and Fall of Ancient India’s Iron and Steel Metallurgy SATURDAY, 27 JUNE 2009 00:00 Two new books on the history and products of ancient Indian iron and steel technology Infinity Foundation Series – Contributions to History of Indian Science and Technology Rupa and Co. • Marvels of Indian Iron through the Ages -by R. Balasubramanian (2008) • History of Iron Technology in India – From Beginning to Premodern Times -by Vibha Tripathi (2008.) {Republished on Medha Journal from: Pp 24 Ghadar Jari Hai, Vol 3, Issue 1&2, 2009} It is a well acknowledged fact that the level of societal development is closely linked to the development of iron and steel industry. It is no wonder therefore that the world production of steel today is around 1.4 billion tons per year, also emphasising the importance of this technology to us in India. The production of iron ore (iron oxide), the basic natural raw material required to produce steel is more than two billions tons per year. Today, India is the fourth largest producer of iron ore (after China, Brazil, Australia) and the third largest consumer of steel (but consuming only 60 million tons of steel as compared to China which is consuming close to 500 million tons with a comparable population). India is exporting around 50% of its iron ore production currently. Despite India being a large producer and consumer of steel, it is not considered the source of new technologies today. It is therefore important to note that this was not the case until the advent of British East India Company. Two books published recently on the iron and steel technology in ancient India up to pre-British times are an important contribution to documenting the rise and decline of this technology in India. While the modern iron and steel technology was patented and commercialized in Europe in the mid nineteenth century, our Indian craftsmen, more than two thousand years back, had mastered this technology of making excellent iron and steel. It is this fascinating saga of world class technological products being manufactured and exported to other parts of the world which is captured in the two recent volumes published as a part of the Infinity Foundation Series. 

History of Iron Technology in India (From Beginning to Pre-modern Times), authored by Vibha Tripathi, an eminent historian from Banaras Hindu University, covers the long span of Indian history stretching over three and a half millennia from the first half of the second millennium BCE to pre-modern times. It traces the development of iron technology from the humble beginning when Indian artisans melting relatively low temperature metals like copper, copper – zinc (brass) and copper – tin (bronze). They hit upon the process of producing iron and also evolved it into an advanced technology and a flourishing industry, thereby becoming a supplier of the best iron and steel, on a tonnage scale, to all parts of the world. With a systematic review of the recorded evidence, Vibha Tripathi demolishes the myth that iron reached India through diffusion from the West as late as the sixth-fi fth century BCE. She argues that there was an independent origin and development of iron ore mining, extraction and manufacturing technology rooted in the raw materials available in India. Well recognized occurrence of iron is reported around 1500 to 1000 BCE in all parts of India. Tripathi refers to Arthashastra, a treatise on statecraft composed in the 4th-3rd century BCE, authored by Chanakya during Mauryan times. It mentions iron as “Kalyasa”. There is even a discussion of mines as an important source of income for the Mauryan state. It mentions the post of superintendent of mines to supervise and manage the mines. It lays down the duties of the director of mines in detail. In the sixth-fi fth century BCE, Sushruta began surgery using surgical tools made of iron requiring precision and quality of the highest order. Varahamitra in his “khadga lakshanam” dated 550 AD, elaborated on the carburization and hardening processes of iron swords. Classification of different kinds of irons is included in the famous Ras Ratna Samuchhaya, a tenth-twelfth century text on alchemy. For example, Kanta Loha, Tikshna Loha and Munda having distinct properties are well documented in the text. Iron production was suffi ciently developed in India by the 4th-5th century CE. There was a flourishing trade between India and Iran, Iraq (Mesopotamia), Indonesia, China and Africa. There are references to rich Indian traders living in Mesopotamia. India received gold in return for export of copper, tin, lead and solid steel ingots, spices, drugs, cotton cloth, leather goods, precious stones and timber. The Indian metallurgical industry was one of the most advanced industries in the world at that time, according to Vibha Tripathi. Iron technology reached new heights of excellence during the Gupta period (3rd-to-6th centuries CE). 

Massive iron based artifacts such as the Delhi iron pillar testify to the level of metallurgical skills mastered by Indians. The processes such as rapid cooling, carbon alloying, quenching, tempering, hardening and forge welding were known to them. Large lead baths were being used to achieve uniform heating of a bundle of wrought iron bars to the forging temperature. India is endowed with rich iron deposits and hence iron ore mining was being carried out in different parts of India for more than two thousand years. According to Dharmapal there were several important centres of iron ore mining, smelting and manufacture spread over from Kumaon-Garwhal to Assam, Hyderabad, Karnataka, Orissa, Bengal, Tamil Nadu and Madhya Pradesh. Vibha Tripathi has referred to the documented evidence about the flourishing iron and steel industry in the late nineteenth and early twentieth century. Wages for workers were paid in kind. For example ordinary workers received 2-3% of the produce. The persons in charge of smelting house and forging house on the other hand received six and eight percent of the produce respectively. 

Professor Balasubramaniam (Bala), a well known metallurgist from IIT Kanpur, in his book Marvels of Indian Iron Throughthe Ages, has documented the marvelous creations of the Indian craftsmen, the massive iron pillars, beams and cannons produced in different parts of India by forge welding the lumps of heated iron. The most famous example of the status of Indian technological excellence in the past is the magnificent Delhi iron pillar weighing seven tons, which remains an object of technological curiosity even today. The fact that these massive iron objects have not corroded even after more than two thousand years has also been explained in terms of contemporary scientific understanding by Bala in this book. Furthermore, the book also contains a section on the world renowned Wootz steel technology invented by Indians. Forge-welded and non-corroding iron pillars and beams As illustrated by Bala in the book, Indian artisans in the early days had not found a way to attain a temperature of 1540 degrees centigrade (the temperature at which iron melts) and hence they could not cast iron (as they had done for copper, brass and bronze, for example by the famous lost wax process invented in India). Hence they practiced forge welding. The lumps of iron (containing traces of slag) were heated and fused together by a process known as forge welding. This process to produce iron objects of a large diameter and weighing several tons is very well illustrated by Bala in the book. Documentary evidence is provided to substantiate the way these pillars, beams and cannons were manufactured and transported. The famous iron pillar in Delhi was set up by the iron smiths in India in the Gupta period in a place called Udaygiri near Vidisha and Sanchi around 400 CE. It was later moved to Delhi by Iltumish in 1233 CE. The excellent corrosion resistance of the iron pillar is attributed to the presence of phosphorous (using high phosphorous containing iron ores) in the reduced iron. Similar technology was used to produce an even longer pillar (13 meters) lying in three broken pieces in front of the Lal Masjid in Dhar, situated near Indore in Madhya Pradesh. Dhar was the capital of Malwa founded by King Bhoja (1010 -1053 CE). Archaeological study indicates that the Dhar pillar was also erected during the Gupta period. Another famous iron pillar at the Mookambika temple in Kodachari hill, located in a town near Mangalore, also belongs to the same era. The iron beams lying in the Surya temple at Konark are of even larger dimensions. These iron beams were used to support the roof stones of the famous temples at Bhubaneswar as well as Puri. In fact non-corroding iron beams were being used extensively in building temples in Orissa dating back to the sixth and thirteenth centuries CE. Forge-welded iron cannons of India According to Bala, the forge welded cannons truly represent the mastery of iron ore mining, extraction and manufacturing technology of Indian blacksmiths. As opposed to cast iron cannon technology developed in Europe, Indians practiced forge welding technology and produced large cannons from direct reduced wrought iron. Bala has described in detail the technology as well as the history of some of the most massive forge-welded iron cannons in the world which are scattered all over the Indian subcontinent– Thanjavur, Dhaka, Murshidabad, Bishnupur, Jhansi, Assam, Tripura, Gulbarga, Bijapur, Bidar, Golconda, Hyderabad, and many Deccan forts. The cannon technology was a crucial element in the rise and fall of several dynasties in India such as the Mughals, Marathas, Sikhs and Rajputs. It is certain that the latest technologies prevalent in Europe were also known to Indians. For example when the British defeated Tipu Sultan in 1799, they were astonished by the quality of his cannon. Nine hundred and twenty seven cannon were captured after the fall of Srirangapatnam in 1799. European colonizers used superior cast iron cannons and also systematically destroyed the forge-welded cannons from the Indian forts, according to Bala. 

Agarias, a tribe in Madhya Pradesh, are traditional iron smelters The above-mentioned examples illustrate the level of technological maturity achieved by Indian artisans and suggest the existence of a flourishing industry capable of producing iron and steel in hundreds of tons. It may be interesting to note that the British rated Indian iron highly and used it in preference to the iron produced by their own industry in making the famous “tubular bridge” in early nineteenth century across the Menai Straits in UK. It has also been recorded that 50 tons of Indian steel were used in the construction of the famous London Bridge in UK. Wootz Steel One of the greatest technological achievements to originate from the Indian subcontinent is Deccan Wootz Steel, often referred to as “the wonder material of the orient”. The world famous Damascus swords were made of Wootz steel and these were considered to be the most prized possessions and gift items (certainly more precious than gold and silver) by the aristocracy. There is no evidence to show that any of the nations of antiquity besides the Indians were acquainted with the art of making steel. The word Wootz is a distortion of the Kannada-Telugu word Ukku, for steel. 

Asur tribesmen from Bihar are experts in iron smelting Quintus Curtis records for example that a present of steel cakes was made to Alexander of Macedonia by Porus after his defeat in 326 BCE. Sir Robert Hadfield, a metallurgist, has reported on the possibility of the use of the chisels made of Indian steel and Indian craftsmen in the construction of the massive Egyptian pyramids. 

Massive forge welded cannon, Bhavani Shankar, at Rani Lakshmi Bai's fort in Jhansi Wootz steel is an iron carbon alloy containing 1 to 1.8% carbon produced by the crucible melting process invented in India. The basic process, even though not fully understood, consisted of heating direct reduced iron with other ingredients including charcoal contained in a closed clay crucible. The crucibles containing steel were carefully cooled so that the metal solidified at the bottom of the crucible. The Wootz steel cake was of high quality. That the cooling of the crucible was crucial was well known to Indian metallurgists of that era since different ways of cooling in the furnace itself, in dry sand heaps, in moist clay, or by quenching with water are all well documented. Carburization of iron to controlled levels of carbon is thus the key to manufacturing Wootz steel. This technology was mastered by Indians quite early in the history of civilization, as early as 810 BCE. Studies indicate that the crucibles excavated in Tamilnadu date back to 250 BCE. The blades made of Wootz steel showed an intricate wavy pattern on the surface. A judicious combination of high strength and excellent formability in steels to be able to make sharp blades remains a technological challenge to this day. In fact the rigorous research conducted to understand and master the Wootz steel technology in Europe laid the foundations of modern metallurgy. Decline of Indian iron and steel industry in Pre-British era Both Vibha Tripathi and Balasubramaniam also discuss the possible reasons of the decline of the iron and steel industry in India. Tripathi has a separate section in her book where she brings out the possible reasons of the decline and death of the indigenous iron and steel industry in India with the advent of the British colonialists. It is interesting that the steel plants which were commissioned in the late nineteenth and early twentieth century in India were based on imported European technology and had no connection with traditional Indian technology perfected over centuries. According to Vibha Tripathi “With industrialization and imperial designs of foreign rule a decline set in…….. The iron industry could not withstand the onslaught of the colonial forces working against its interests in a planned way. Once the blast furnaces came into existence in Britain, production started at a much cheaper rate…It could hardly compete with the cheap British pig iron being imported. …. The laws enforcing non-felling of trees in the forest deprived the charcoal based indigenous iron industry of its very basic raw material. It made production of iron impossible. The powerful lobby in Britain succeeded.” The colonizers succeeded in enslaving the Indian sub-continent in every sense of the word by systematically destroying the manufacturing capacity of India. Both the authors also ascribe the decline to the reluctance of master craftsmen to document the technological secrets and to share the knowledge with others except with their favored apprentices. Hence some of the technologies could not be developed further and declined with the decline of the fortunes of the select group of families who knew the process secrets. Tripathi and Bala passionately plead for supporting research into and revival of the ancient Indian method of making high strength, non-corroding, crucible steel and converting them to sharp cutting objects requiring high levels of formability. It is hoped that research on these topics by Indian professionals will unravel not only the technological mysteries of steel making but also the socio-economic and political circumstances which led to the decline of the Indian manufacturing industry. This analysis of the historical facts may also equip us to compete today in a world facing challenges of technology denial by big powers to those who need it. Both the books have high production values with good visuals, and the series editor Dr D P Agrawal, Infinity Foundation and Rupa Books need to be complimented for providing such valuable books on the history of Indian science and technology. (Dr Pradip is a well known Metallurgist and Material Scientist and a Fellow of Indian National Academy of Engineering, Pune http://www.medhajournal.com/articles/science/786-rise-and-fall-of-ancient-indias-iron-and-steel-metallurgy.html Ramachandra Rao, 1997, Iron and steel heritage of India -- contributions from the National Metallurgical Laboratory, in: Ranganathan, S. (ed.), ATM 97, Iron & Steel heritage of India, Jamshedpur, pp. 95-108 http://www.docstoc.com/docs/document-preview.aspx?doc_id=159598633 Iron and steel heritage of India -- contributions from the National Metallurgical Laboratory (P. Ramachandra Rao, 1997)  Srinivasan, S. and S. Ranganathan, 1997, Wootz steel: an advanced material of the ancient world, in: Ranganathan, S. (ed.), Iron & Steel heritage of India, ATM 97, Jamshedpur, pp. 69-82. http://www.docstoc.com/docs/document-preview.aspx?doc_id=159598806 wootzsteel  Juleff, G., S. Srinivasan & S. Ranganathan, 2011, Pioneering metallurgy. The origins of iron and steel making in the southern Indian subcontinent, Telangana Field Survey, Interim Report 2011, Bengaluru, National Institute of Advanced Studies, Indian Inst. of Science. http://freepdfdb.org/pdf/the-origins-of-iron-and-steel-making-in-the-southern-indian-40180761.html 

Zinc and Brass in Archaeological Perspective J. S. KHARAKWAL1 AND L. K. GURJAR2 1JRN Rajasthan Vidyapeeth, Udaipur, 2Hindustan Zinc Limited, Udaipur Abstract Brass has a much longer history than zinc. There has been a bit of confusion about the early beginning of zinc as several claims are made out side of India. Both literary as well as archaeological records reveal that production of pure zinc had begun in the second half of the first millennium BC, though production on commercial scale begun in the early Medieval times. This paper attempts to examine the archaeological record and literary evidence to understand the actual beginning of brass and zinc in India. Introduction Zinc (Zn) is a non ferrous base metal, which is generally found in bluish-white, yellow, brown or in black colour. Its chief and important minerals are sphalerite or zinc blende, smithsonite, calamine, zincite, willemite and franklinite. As it boils at around 900° C, which is lower than the temperature it can be smelted at, therefore it is difficult to smelt this metal. Hence zinc technology was mastered later than that of copper and iron. For pure zinc production, therefore distillation technology was developed, in which India has the distinction of being the first. Zinc is used for galvanising iron and steel, brass making, alloying, manufacture of white pigment in chemicals and medicines. But in ancient times it was mainly used for brass making. In fact brass has a much longer history than zinc. Brass can be produced either by smelting copper ores containing zinc or copper and zinc ore in reduced condition or by mixing copper and zinc metals. Early evidence of zinc has been claimed from several parts of Europe and Middle East e.g., Switzerland, Greece, Cyprus and Palestine. But all these claims, except for the evidence of the sheet of zinc from the Athenian Agora (300 BC) are doubtful (Craddock et al., 1998: IS). Recent studies have shown that such small percentages of zinc may occur due to accidental use of copper ore associated with zinc or its ore. Brasses containing up to 25 percent zinc have been reported from the fifth and third millennium BC contexts from China, but it seems that they did not play any role in the development of zinc production technology in the Far East. It is generally held that the Chinese started using zinc and brass from the last quarter of the third century BC when the Han Dynasty flourished in China. Craddock and Zhou have suggested that zinc was introduced in China through Buddhism around 2000 years ago. However, Weirong and Xiangxi (1994: 16-17) inform that the earliest literary record about brass mentioned as tutty is known from the Buddhist literature belonging to the Tan dynasty (619-917 AD). Brass (thou-shih) was not a common commodity in the early centuries of the Christian Era at least prior to 3rd century AD in China. Bowman et al. (1989) have analysed 550 coins ranging from 3rd century BC (Zhao dynasty) to the late 19th century (Ch'ing dynasty). They have found that the percentage of zinc suddenly increased by 20% or even up to 28% in brasses of the early 17th century AD. It is also supported by the well known textual evidence of T'ien Kung K'ai Wu, written in 1637 (Sung and Sun 1966). It is the first definite evidence of metallic zinc in China, which also mentions details of alloys used for coins. Weirong (1993) has examined ancient Chinese literature and archaeological record and claims that metallic zinc was not used in China prior to the 16th century AD. As far as India is concerned the firm evidence of zinc smelting is known only from Rajasthan. The antiquity of mining various types of ores in Rajasthan goes back to Bronze Age (mid-fourth millennium BC) as the evidence of Ganeshwar-Jodhpura cultural complex in north Rajasthan and Ahar culture in southern Rajasthan would indicate (Agrawal and Kharakwal, 2003; Misra et al. 1995; Shinde et al. 2001-02). Both these cultural complexes have yielded over 5000 copper-bronze objects (Hooja and Kumar, 1995) ranging from 4th to 1st millennium BC. Apart from these, the Mesolithic site of Bagor in Bhilwara district also yielded a few copper arrowheads (Misra, 1973). There are large number of ancient copper, iron, lead working and smelting sites across Rajasthan in the Aravallis, indicating a long tradition of metallurgy. Besides metal tools, a variety of pottery, beads of semi precious stones, terracotta, paste and other antiquarian material is known from such early settlements. These early farmers were practicing diverse crafts using pyrotechnologies. It appears that large scale production of different metals e.g., copper at Singhana, Toda Dariba, Banera, Suras, Bhagal, Kotri, lead-silver at Ajmer, Agucha and Dariba, zinc at Zawar and iron at Dokan, Iswal, Karanpur, Loharia, Parsola, Bigod, Jhikari-Amargarh, belonging to the medieval times (Kharakwal, 2005) was the result of such long experience of metal technology involving pyrotechniques. In fact the Aravallis are a polymetallic zone like Anatolia. This paper is an attempt to present an overview of the archaeometallurgical researches on zinc and the position of zinc and brass in archaeological perspective in India. Zawar: The Oldest Production Center of Zinc Zawar (24°21'N; 73°43'E) is located on the bank of the River Tiri, about 38 km south of Udaipur town in the Aravalli hills in Rajasthan (Fig. 1). It is the only known ancient zinc smelting site in India (Craddock et al., 1985). The entire valley of Tiri at Zawar is marked by immense heaps of slag and retorts, which indicate a long tradition of zinc smelting at Zawar. On some slag-mounds are found remains of houses made of used retorts (Fig. 2) and stones, perhaps belonging to the smelters/smiths. 

Fig. 1: Map showing location of Zawar (after Craddock et al 1985) 

Fig. 2: Residential structures made of discarded retorts Though archaeometallurgical activity at Zawar was casually recorded by several Indian and British scholars between 17th and 20th century, the credit of highlighting the importance of the ancient remains however goes to Crookshank (1947), Carsus (1960), Morgan (1976), Strackzeck et al. (1967) and Werner (1976 see in Gurjar et al., 2001). Perhaps these reports encouraged P.T. Craddock of British Museum and K.T.M. Hegde of M.S. University of Baroda to initiate archaeometallurgical study at Zawar jointly with Hindustan Zinc Limited, Udaipur in 1983 (Craddock et al., 1983, 1985; Gurjar et al., 2001; Hegde, 1989; Paliwal et al., 1986; Willies, 1984). This team carried out extensive investigations both for ancient mining as well as smelting of zinc at Zawar. They discovered incredible evidence for mining and furnaces used for zinc smelting, besides primitive smelting retorts from the dam fill at Zawar. Besides Zawar, the evidence of early zinc mining and smelting has also been found 2 km south east of village Kaya in form of a small retort heap and ancient mine workings in the adjacent hills. It is the northwestern continuation of Zawar mineralization. These remains have not been studied in detail but considering the shape of retorts it can be safely concluded that they are of the same period. Kaya is located 6 km north of Zawar, and about 15 km south of Udaipur town. Mining Zinc ores are widely distributed in the country, but major deposits are found in the Aravallis. In recent years one of the largest lead-zinc deposits have been discovered at Agucha in Bhilwara district (Tewari and Kavadia 1984), though the well known ancient lead-zinc workings are located in the Zawar area of Udaipur district. Zinc (Zn) is generally found in veins in association with galena, chalcopyrite, ironpyrite, silver and cadmium and other sulphide ores (Raghunandan et al., 1981). The Aravalli range in southern Rajasthan is composed of rugged and gorgeous hills of pre-Cambrian metamorphic rocks with narrow valleys. These rocks are rich in zinc ore in the form of sphalerite veins in association with galena and copper bearing deposits. This mineralized belt of Zawar extends for about 25 km. The major mineralization of sphalerite and galena with varying quantities of pyrite have been found in the form of sheeted zones, veins, stringers and lenticular bodies (Raghunandan et al., 1981). Since these minerals are quite distinct from each other it was possible to separate them manually and this explains why zinc mining and smelting developed only at Zawar. There are extensive remains of old workings in Zawarmala, Mochia Magra, Balaria, and at Hiran Magra in Zawar area in the form of deep trenches, shafts, open stopes, long serpentine galleries and inclines. These mines are narrow and vary from 10 to 300 m in length. There is extensive evidence of underground mining too (Fig. 3). It appears that this mining continued for several hundred years as indicated by the enormous mound of slag and smelting debris. 

Fig. 3: The ancient mine in Zawar Once the ore was located on ground, based on the presence of gossan or mineralized veins, the miners followed the down ward extension along dip and pitch of the ore-shoot and developed huge inclined stopes and chambers underground. These stopes and branched chambers were supported by finger like inclines further down. Arch shaped pillars (about 4XSm) were left to support the roof while developing such stopes and chambers (Gurjar et al., 2001). Mining was carried out by fire setting as evidenced by the rounded profile of galleries and stope chambers, the supporting pillars, smooth surface of rock faces with sooty deposits and the floors are buried deep in charcoal, ashes and calcined rocks (HindZinc Tech 1989). After dousing the fire the rocks were broken with chisels, pick axe, hoes and other iron implements. A few such objects have been discovered from Mochia mines (Craddock et al., 1989: 62, p13). Extensive use of wood in the form of ladders, roof support, haulage scaffold (14C date: 2350±120 BP) have been found in the mines. Extensive open pit mining followed by underground method was carried out at Rajpura Dariba. An opencast mine of lead-zinc (300 m long and 100 m wide) developed over east lode at Dariba, (Raghunandan et al. 1981 :86-87) is a remarkable evidence of ancient mining technology practiced in southern Rajasthan. Excavation carried out by Hindustan Zinc Limited in 1986 has brought out the presence of massive timber revetment in the hanging wall of the open pit. This consists of three or probably four benches each 4m high with closely placed vertical posts, held back by three pairs of horizontal timbers and are pinned by long timbers to provide support to weak hanging wall. Here, in one of the underground mines of the East Load the miners reached up to a depth of 263 m, in the 3rd 4th century BC (Craddock et al. 1989:59; Willies et al. 1984). Such mines are rarely known in the ancient world. A 14C date from Dariba indicates that deep underground mining had begun in the second half of the second millennium BC. At Agucha also extensive evidence of mining of rich galena pockets datable to the Mauryan times has been discovered (Tiwari and Kavdia, 1984: 84-85). The smelting debris and mining clearly indicates that it was carried out for lead and silver. For dewatering mines launders of hollowed timber (3 m long and 20 cm wide) were used, which have been dated back to 2nd century BC (Bhatnagar and Gurjar, 1989: 6). It is likely that some kind of buckets may have also been used for pulling out water from such deep mines. The possibility of shallow depressions at certain interval in the slanting wall of the mines for collection of water can not be ruled out. A few shallow conical and U shaped pits have been reported in hard rocks at Baroi and Dariba. They may have been used for crushing/ breaking rock fragments in order to separate and beneficiate the ore before smelting. At Dariba such pits having a diameter of 27-30 cm and 60-70 cm deep were found close to a large opencast in calc-silicate rock. While at Baroi in Zawar these were 8-12 cm in diameter and 10-18 cm deep and found on the surface next to ancient mine workings. It is interesting to note that mining of such non-ferrous metals was also recorded in the contemporary literature like Kautilya's Arthasastra (2.12.23, 2.17.14 & 4.1.35), which mentions that there was a superintendent of mines in the Mauryan Empire (Kangle, 1972). His duty was to identify metals and establish factories. While describing silver ores the text clearly mentions that it occurs with nag (lead) and anjan (zinc). Since there is extensive evidence of mining and smelting of lead, zinc and silver at Zawar, Dariba and Aguchha in Rajasthan, it is quite likely that Kautilya was aware of this activity. Harry (1991) points out that the imperial Maurya series of coins, particularly silver ones, containing one fourth of copper, strongly indicates the mining of silver and zinc from southern Rajasthan. Mining of such ores had surely begun in Rajasthan by the middle of the first millennium BC, if not earlier. Some scholars have argued that Zawar should be identified as Aranyakupgiri of the Samoli inscription (Halder, 1929-30) belonging to seventh century AD. The word Aranyakupgiri of the inscription perhaps stands for deep well like mines. Of course such mines were there in Zawar during this time, but the inscription may refer to the mines of Basantgarh located near Samoli in Sirohi district rather than Zawar. The underground mining of ores at Agucha, Dariba and at Zawar may have been the result of a gradual development of mining technology in Southern Rajasthan going way back to the middle of the fourth millennium BC when Bronze Age cultures had just appeared on the scene in the region. What is interesting is the fact that no evidence of smelting of zinc has been found so far prior to 9th century BC. Craddock et al. have pointed out that mining of zinc ore was surely done in Zawarmala in 3rd-4th century BC. Perhaps the evidence of smelting ranging from 4th century BC to 9th century is buried under the massive dumping of retorts and smelting debris and temple complexes. The evidence of a large stone structure and Early Historic pottery shapes exposed near the Jain temple in old Zawar also confirms the same. 

The consistency of these radiocarbon dates clearly suggest that mining activity was carried out during the Early Historic period and medieval times (Craddock et al., 1989:48). Traditionally Maharana Lakha or Laksha Singh (14th century), who was ruling in the last quarter of the 14th century, is believed to have re-opened these mines. He might have opened several new mines rather than reopening the old ones. Besides, Maharana Pratap (16th century) is also credited for opening new mines at Zawar. One of the major mines at Zawarmala is known after him. It seems that large scale production of zinc continued despite political instability in southern Rajasthan during the late medieval times. It was Abul Fazl who for the first time in 1596 in his well known Ain-i-Akbari recorded the zinc mines of Zawar (Blochmann, 1989: 41-43). The mining and smelting activity was not only registered in the contemporary local records and literature (e.g., Nainsi ri Khyat in 1657; Bakshikhana Bahi 91, Rajasthan State Archives records of Udaipur and Bikaner and others) but also in the writings of several scholars of the 19th and 20th century, mostly British (Anon, 1872; Brooke, 1850; Carsus, 1960; Erskine, 1908; Shyamal Das, 1986 I (originally published in 1886): 305; Tod, 1950: 221-222). Mining of several ores for example iron, copper, lead was being done as late as the 19th century in several parts of Rajasthan. Unfortunately the Zawar zinc operation came to a halt around 1812 AD, unlike the Chinese traditional zinc smelting. A few British officers attempted to restart these mines in the middle and late nineteenth century with the financial support of Maharana Sarup Singh (1842-61), Shambhu Singh (1861-1874 AD) and Sajjan Singh (1874-1884 AD), but failed. It is believed that due to political instability in Mewar, frequent attacks of the Mughals, Pindaris and the Marathas and recurrent famines in the 18th century these mines were abandoned. Smelting and Production The entire valley of the Tiri in Zawar is dotted by massive dumpings of slag and earthen retorts indicating a long tradition and commercial production of zinc. Several radiocarbon dates (see table 1) bracketed between 12th and 18th century also conform this activity. Gurjar et al. (2001: 633) write, "the earliest evidence of zinc smelting on industrial scale is the carbon date of 840±110 AD for one of the heaps of white ash removed from zinc smelting furnace. The fragment of relatively small, primitive retorts and perforated plates found in the earth fill of dam across the Tidi (Tiri) river may belong to the period or they must at least predate the dam itself. It appears that the main expansion of the industrial phase of zinc production began at Zawar sometime from 11th or 12th century". At Zawarmala a bank of seven distillation furnaces (Fig. 4), roughly squarish on plan (66x69 cm), were discovered by Craddock et al. Each furnace had two chambers, upper and lower, separated by a thick perforated plate of clay. It is presumed by the excavators that the furnaces may have looked like truncated pyramids and their height may have been about 60 cm. Brinjal shaped earthen retorts, filled with charge, were placed on the perforated plate in inverted position in the upper chamber. As many as 36 retorts were placed in each furnace for smelting and they were heated for three to five hours. The retorts were made in two parts and luted together after filling the charge. To prepare the charge the ore was subjected to crushing and grinding and mixed with some organic material and cow dung! rolled into tiny balls and left in the sun for drying. These balls then were placed in retorts after drying. A thin wooden stick was placed in the narrow opening of retort, which perhaps prevented falling of charge in the lower chamber before heating when they are initially inverted in the furnace, and at the same time would facilitate the escape of zinc vapour formed during heating. Such special retorts, ranging from 20 to 35 cm in length and 8 to 12cm in diameter, were developed by the metallurgists at Zawar for zinc distillation. Identification of different size of retorts is sure indication of different shape and size of furnaces at Zawar, as the evidence of a bigger furnace (base 110 cm square) from old Zawar would also indicate. After heating, zinc vapor was collected and condensed in the lower chamber in small earthen pots. It was surely an ingenious method that was devised for downward distillation of zinc vapour by the Zawar metallurgists. Thus, it was for the first time anywhere in the world that pure zinc was produced by distillation process on a commercial scale at Zawar. Gangopadhyay et al. (1984) and Freestone et al. (1985) have carried out technical studies of ore and retorts. Craddock (1995 :309- 321) compares these furnaces with koshthi type furnaces illustrated in Rasaratnasamuchchaya, an alchemical text datable to 13th century, and other earlier texts on the same subject. Thanks to the joint efforts of the Hindustan Zinc, British Museum and M.S. University Baroda for such wonderful discovery that is possibly the ancestor of all high temperature pyrotechnical industries of the world. 

Fig. 4: Zinc smelting furnaces at Zawar It has been estimated that each retort may have been filled with one kilogram of charge out of which 400 gram of zinc may have been produced. Thus each furnace produced around 25 to 30 kg of zinc in one activity of smelting. It has been estimated that 600,000 tons of smelting debris at Zawar, produced about 32,000 tones of metallic zinc in four hundred years (between 1400 and 1800 AD). If we estimate this production from 12th century to 18th century the quantity of metal would certainly be more than 50,000 tonnes. Colonel Tod in his well known work, Annals and Antiquities of Rajasthan, has reported that the mines of Mewar were very productive during the eighteenth century, and in the year of 1759 alone the mines earned Rs. 2,22,000 (Tod, 1950: 222, 399). Tod writes that about haifa century ago these mines were earning Rs. three lakhs annually. Dariba mines yielded Rs. 80,000. He has recorded these mines as Tin mines of Zawar. Since we do not have any evidence of ancient tin working in Mewar region his tin mines must be nothing but zinc mines of Zawar. Moreover the Imperial Gazetteer of India Provincial Series Rajputana (1908: 52) clearly mention that these mines were famous for silver and zinc and were worked on a large scale until 1812-13 when the worst famine took place (Kachhawaha, 1992: 26-27; Malu, 1987; Singh, 1947). The production of zinc was perhaps very high under the rule of Maharana Jagat Singh and Maharana Raj Singh during 17th century as the local records of AD 1634-35 and 1657 reveal that annual revenue of Zawar was rupees 2,50,000 and 1,75,002 respectively. It is also clearly indicated in the record that per day income of these mines was Rs. 700; this estimate was confirmed by Muhnot Nainsi in his famous work Nainsi ri Khyat (1657) (Ranawat, 1987). Another record belonging to the reign of Maharana Raj Singh, reads that the revenue earned in a year from Zawar was Rs. 17,96,944 (Bhati, 1995: 1, 2, 11, 12, 14). Gurjar et al. (2001: 634) have examined a record of the same king dated to 1655 AD, preserved in the State Archives, Udaipur which mentions an income of Rs. 1,70,967 in a single month from Zawar! We are however, not sure whether this income was obtained only from mining and smelting. As the entire area of Zawar is gorgeous and agriculture may not have been enough to generate revenue, therefore it is likely that the entire revenue was earned from mining and production of zinc. Erskine (1908) also informs that these mines were certainly an important source of income right from fourteenth to early nineteenth century as they yielded more than two lakh rupees annual revenue for Maharana's treasury at least until 1766. Thus the annual income from Zawar was quite handsome and it is likely that due to large scale production of zinc Zawar may have become one of the main sources of state revenue and an important trade centre between the 12th and early 19th century AD. The discovery of an earthen pot containing a coin hoard datable to 16th century by L.K. Gurjar in 1984 (Gurjar et al. 2001) at old Zawar also suggests that this area was an important commercial center. There are remains of few structures on top of a hillock at Zawar, which, according to knowledgeable villagers, belong to Vela Vania (a trader known as Vela). Perhaps Vela Vania was involved in zinc trade. It is worth mentioning here that most of the existing forts, huge water reservoirs, temple complexes, water structures, and other monuments in Mewar were built between 10th and 18th centuries AD. It is likely that the revenue earned due to brisk trade of zinc at Zawar was utilized for construction of these large monuments. Zinc and Brass in Archaeological Perspective Only a few Harappan bronzes have yielded a small percentage of zinc. For example Lothal, a Harappan sites in Gujarat (2200-1500 BC) (Rao, 1985), has yielded around haifa dozen copper based objects containing zinc, which varies from 0.15 to 6.04 % (Nautiyal, et al. 1981). One of the objects (antiquity No. 4189), though not identified, contains 70.7% of copper, 6.04 % of zinc and 0.9% Fe, which could be termed as the earliest evidence of brass in India. From Kalibangan, another Harappan site in north Rajasthan, a long spear head of copper was found containing 3.4% of zinc (Lal et al. 2003: 266). There is some evidence of brass from the early Iron Age when we come across two examples from Atranjikhera (1200- 600 BC), a Painted Grey Ware culture site in the Ganga doab. One of the objects leaded bronze contains 1.68% tin, 9.0% lead and 6.28% of zinc whereas the other one assayed 20.72% of tin and 16.20% of zinc (Gaur 1983: 483-90). Unless we have more examples of bronzes containing appreciable percentage of zinc replacing tin, arsenic or other elements we can not infer that the Bronze or Early Iron Age cultures were aware of the nature and property of zinc. Nevertheless these examples perhaps represent the early or experimental stage of zinc in India. The archaeological record indicates that in the second half of the first millennium BC the percentage of zinc started increasing and intentional use of brass appears on the scene. Such evidence has been found from Taxila, Timargarh and Senuwar. Taxila, located about 30 km north of Rawalpindi in Pakistan, has yielded a large variety of metal objects including those of copper, bronze, brass and iron (Marshall, 1951 :567 -69). Several brass objects datable from the 4th century BC to 1st century AD have been discovered. One of them was a vase from Bhir mound, which predates the arrival of the Greeks at Taxila (Biswas, 1993) and has assayed 34.34 % of zinc, 4.25% of tin and small quantity of lead (3.0%), iron (1.77%) and nickel (0.4%). Another evidence of real brass was discovered recently at Senuwar in the Ganga Valley from the Northern Black Polished Ware (NBP) levels (Singh, 2004: 594). It has 64.324% of copper and 35.52% of zinc. Brasses made by cementation method generally contain less than 28% of zinc and rarely could go up to 33% (Werner, 1970). Since the examples of Taxila and Senuwar have yielded more than 33 % of zinc, therefore these are the earliest definite examples of real brasses. They must have been made by mixing metallic zinc with copper. Zinc is a volatile metal and due to its low boiling point (907° C), which is lower than the temperature it could be smelted, it is difficult to smelt. Unlike other metals, it comes out in the vapour form from the furnace and gets reoxidised, if it is not condensed. Craddock et al. have pointed out that zinc ore was mined way back from 5th century BC (PRL 932 430±100 BC; BM 2381 380±5O BC) at Zawar and metallic or pure zinc was produced here by distillation process for the first time in the world. The production of metallic zinc has been traced back to 9th century AD at Zawar, but there is a strong possibility that the older evidence is buried under the immense heaps. Though Taxila folks were aware of the distillation process (Habib, 2000), yet in the absence of definitive evidence we cannot claim that they employed this process for obtaining zinc. It is possible, though not proven that metallic zinc was produced at Zawar way back from the 6th century BC, from here it reached at Taxila and Senuwar. The other possibility is that zinc was scrapped from the cooler parts of the furnaces at both sites! Besides these, Prakash (Athavale and Thapar, 1967: 132 table IV) and Mahurjhari in Mahararashtra (Deo, 1973; Joshi 1973:77), Asura sites in Chhotanagpur region (Caldwell, 1920: 409-411; Roy, 1920: 404- 405) have yielded brasses, which have been dated to the second half of the first millennium BC. Most of these brasses have more than 15% of zinc and some of them contain between 22 to 28 percent of zinc. This kind of evidence clearly points out they were made by cementation process. Several circular or rectangular punch-marked and other coins of brass, . bracketed between the 2nd century BC and 4th century AD (Smith, 1906) (see Table 2), are known mostly from northern India. Since none of them is analysed we do not know if they are real brasses (objects containing more 28% zinc are called real brasses) or made by cementation process. What is interesting is that most of these coins belong to the regional kings, indicating popularity of brass in India. This kind of evidence goes against the assumption that the Greeks introduced brass in India. The archaeological record clearly points out that the Indians knew brass prior to the arrival of the Greeks. 

Table 2: Early brass coins of lndia (After Smith 1906) Beside coins, several other brass antiquities have also been reported from the Early Historic sites in Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh and Gujarat, which include lids, caskets, bangles, finger rings, utensils, icons, chariot and religious object and utensil (Biswas, 1993, .1994: 360; Biswas and Biswas, 1996: 132). Since zinc could change the colour of copper and impart it a golden glitter, it was preferred for making Hindu, Buddhist and Jain icons throughout the historical period. For example among the brass icons of the Himalayan region (from Tibet to Gandhar) lead is present in appreciable amount and the percentage of zinc varies from 4 to 35 (Chakrabarti, and Lahiri, 1996: 108-109; Reedy, 1988). Obviously these brasses were made by selection of ore, cementation process and mixing metallic zinc with copper. In the absence of a source of zinc in the Himalayan region it may be suggested that metallic zinc may have been supplied from Zawar. The higher percentage of lead in these brasses clearly suggests that it was deliberately added to increase the casting ability of the metal. Such leaded brasses were called kakatundi in ancient India. Craddock (1981 :20-31) has reported analysis of 121 Tibetan and Himalayan icons/metal works by atomic absorption spectrophotometer for 13 elements in each sample down to 10ppm level. He has shown that as many as 45 artifacts have more than 28% of zinc, which might have been made by mixing copper and zinc. The percentage of zinc in such artifacts ranges from 28 to 54. It seems that most of the brasses of his list belong to Medieval and later Medieval times. From Phopnarkala and East Nimar, in Madhya Pradesh, several standing brass images of Buddha have been discovered (Sharma and Sharma, 2000) assigned to the Gupta-Vakataka period (5th-6th centuries AD). These brasses contain high percentage of zinc ranging from 21 to 30%, which means that they were made by cementation process (Tondan, 1983). In the first half of the seventh century AD (AD 629-645) Hiuen Tsiang, a Chinese scholar of Buddhism, extensively traveled in India. He saw a magnificent vihara (residential complex of Buddhist monks) of brass near Nalanda under construction during the reign of Raja Siladitya (Harshavardhan AD 606-647). It would have been more than 100 feet long when completed (Beal, 2000 vol. ii: 174). He also noticed brass images (teou-shih) of Buddhist and Brahmanic deities at several places in northern India (Beal, 2000 vol. i: 51, 89, 166, 177,197, 198, vol. ii: 45, 46,174). The metal art of Eastern Indian complex, mainly coming from Bihar, West Bengal and Bangladesh, is also fairly well known. A large number of ancient bronzes, belonging to Pala and Sena School of art datable between 8th to 12th centuries AD contain considerable amount of zinc (Leoshko and Reedy, 1994; Pal, 1988; Reedy, 1991a, b). A large number of bronzes and brasses mostly icons of Jain and Hindu deities, containing appreciable amount of zinc, have been reported from various parts of Gujarat, and are datable to 6th to 14th centuries AD (Swarnakamal, 1978). Most of the late medieval brasses were made by mixing metallic zinc with copper as the percentage of zinc has been found to exceed more than 28%. In some cases lead is present up to 9.5%, which must have been useful rending fluidity to the metal. It is likely that all these brasses were made of using metallic zinc from Zawar. Biswas (1993) writes that the icon of seated Tirthankara dated AD 1752 from Gujarat is one the finest example of the late medieval brasses in India, which was made a few years before the Maratha invasion of Mewar. Table 3: Elemental percentage of brasses datable to 14th to 18th centuries AD (after Biswas, 1993 and Swarnakamal, 1978) 

Table 3 contains a few brasses from medieval and late medieval period of India, most of which have a high percentage of zinc. All those examples containing more than 33% were certainly made of metallic zinc. In some cases lead is present up to 9.5%, which must have been useful rending fluidity to the metal. The metallurgists were obviously skilful to produce high quality of brass. It is quite likely that all these brasses were made by using metallic zinc from Zawar. The Mughals, who ruled over India between 12th and 16th centuries, had metal karkhanas (factories), in which a large number of brasses for example utensil, decorative pieces, guns, mortars and so on were produced perhaps employing zinc from Zawar (Neogi, 1979: 40-42). It is held that the artillery made of iron, bronze and brass was introduced in India during the Mughal period. Large cannons and guns made of brass have been reported from Agra, Bengal and other places (Neogi, 1979). There are a few brass cannons at Udaipur too, which might have been made by zinc obtained from Zawar. Bidri Ware The Bidri Ware of Bidar in South India, belonging to medieval period, is well known for its glossy black surface decorated with exquisite silver inlay art (Gairola, 1956). It is a zinc alloy decorated with silver or gold inlay. La Niece and Martin (1987) have done detailed technical study of27 vessels of this ware from the Victoria and Albert Museum's collection. Their results show that the content of zinc varies from 76 to 98%, copper 2 to 10% and lead 0.4 to 19%. Lead isotope studies have indicated that the zinc was not obtained from Zawar for Bidri ware (Craddock et al. 1989: 52-53). This kind of result has brought about a challenge to look for other zinc production sites in India, if this metal was not imported from outside! Literary Evidence Ayurvedic treatises such as Susrut Samhita (5th century BC) and Charak Samhita (2nd century BC) record the use of essence of various minerals and metals e.g., gold, silver, copper, tin, bronze and brass for preparation of medicine. These texts also mention that the instruments used for curing delicate parts of the body were made of gold, silver, copper, iron, brass, tooth, horn, jewels and of special variety of wood (Datt Ram, 1900: 12; Sharma, 2001 II: 444). Both these texts record brass as riti or ritika. It is interesting that both Charak Samhita and Susruta Samhita refer to pushpanjan, which was prepared by heating a metal in air and was used for curing eyes and wounds (Chikitsasthanam 26.250) (Shukla and Tripathai, 2002: 661; Ray, 1956: 60). This could be identified as zinc oxide as Craddock (1989: 27) points out that "no other metal would react in the air to produce an oxide suitable for medicinal purpose". Therefore, these Ayurvedic texts are perhaps the earliest literary evidence of zinc in India. Kautilya's Arthasastra is one of the earliest firm datable (4th century BC) textual evidence for mining and smelting of metals, which reveals that the director of metals was responsible for establishing factories of various metals such as copper (tamra), lead (sisa), tin (trapu), brass (arakuta), bronze (kamsa or kamsya), tala and iron (Kangle, 1960 vol I: 59 and vol II: 124; Kangle, 1972 vol II: 108). Brass has also been frequently mentioned in ancient Sanskrit and Buddhist literature and was popularly known as harita, riti, ritika, arkuta or arkutah, pitala and so on (Chakrabarti and Lahiri, 1996: 149; Neogi, 1979: 41; Sastri, 1997:208). The term kamsakuta of Digha-nikaya and Dhammapada Atthakatha has been interpreted as brass coins by Chatterjee (1957: 104-111). He strongly argues that brass currency was in vogue between 6th and 4th century BC in India, though we don't have chemical analysis of known coins of this period. Darius I, a Persian king, had a few Indian cups, which were indistinguishable in appearance from gold except for their smell (Hett, 1993: 257). This may only be the Indian brass. Strabo quotes the explanation of Nearchus about India, who traveled the north-western part of this country with the Macedonian army in 4th century BC, and writes that "they use brass that is cast, and not the kind that is forged; and he does not state the reason, although he mentions the strange result that follows the use of the vessels made of cast brass. that when they fall to the ground they break into pieces like pottery" (Jones, 1954: 117). This kind of evidence indicates that Indians were making brass way back in 4th century BC. But we do not know whether it happened due to absence of lead or high percentage of zinc? The alchemist Nagarjuna is well known for his treatise on alchemy titled Rasaratnakara, which was perhaps originally written, as Biswas (1993: 317, 1994: 361-362; Ray, 1956: 116-118) argues, between 2nd and 4th century AD and compiled around 7th or 8th centuries AD. Nagatjuna was certainly a great scientist, who, for the first time, not only described cementation process but also zinc production by distillation technique (Biswas, 1993: 317; 1994: 361-362; Ray 1956: 129). This is therefore the earliest literary evidence, which records that brass is an alloy of copper and zinc. Rasarnavam Rastantram, an alchemical text datable to 12th century AD, is an important alchemical text, in which both brass and zinc have been recorded. This text clearly records zinc making process (Craddock et al, 1989: 31; Ray, 1956: 118), besides different kinds of zinc ores e.g., mratica rasak, gud rasak and pashan rasak. Apart from these there are a few other alchemical texts such as Rasakalpa, Rasarnavatantra, Rasprakash Sudhakar of Yasodhara, Rasendrachudamani of Somadeva and Rasachintamani of Madanantadeva (all datable from 10th to 12th centuries AD), also explain different kind of brasses and zinc- making by distillation process (Ray, 1956: 171-191). The description by Yasodhara for extraction of zinc appears to be the best one as Craddock et al.'s (1989) work has shown that it fits well with the process used at Zawar. These texts reveal that koshthi type furnaces were used for smelting and had an arrangement of two chambers separated by a perforated plate. For distillation tiryakpatana yantra were used. The Rasaratnasamuchchaya, a late 13th or early 14th century work of iatro chemistry, is the best available literary evidence of zinc production process. In fact the zinc smelting process described by Yasodhara earlier has more or less been repeated in this text besides the illustrations of apparatus by Somadeva. Bhavamisra in the 16th century in his well known work, Bhavaprakasanighantu, recorded as many as seven different kinds of alloys (upadhatus) including bronze and brass (Chunekar and Pandey, 2002: 609). He has recorded two different kinds of brasses such as Rajariti and Brahmariti. Besides, two other types of brasses (pittala) i.e., ritika and kaktundi have also been recorded (Neogi, 1979: 41). Besides these, Allan (1979: 43-45) cites the work of Abu Dulaf, Al-risalat al-thqniya, datable to 9th-10th centuries AD, who described production of a variety of tutiya in Iran. He recorded that the Indian tutiya was preferred in Persia (Allan, 1979: 43-45), which obviously might have been better than the Persian one. It is likely that the Persians imported Indian tutiya. The Persians also recorded Indian tutiya as the vapour of tin (Allan, 1979: 44), which might be zinc (Craddock et al. 1989: 74) from Zawar. Thus the Persian literary source also supports production of zinc in India in 9th-10th centuries AD. And brass has surely longer history than zinc. All the aforesaid literary references clearly suggest that metallic zinc was known in India several centuries before the actual dated evidence of commercial production at Zawar. Thus the aforesaid archaeological and literary evidence indicates that Indians had started using zinc rich ores from second millennium BC, though we can not claim that it was intentional. Of course stray discoveries of brasses have been made from Bronze and Early Iron Age sites, but we can not conclude that it was a common metal. The discovery of coins and other objects indicates that it became popular only in the second half of the first millennium BC. Zinc in Europe William Champion established a zinc-smelting furnace in 1738 AD at Bristol in England and started commercial production in 1743. His furnace was quite similar to the Zawar example with downward distillation (Day, 1973:75-76). What is interesting is that Champion used exactly the same technique of distillation per descensum that was used at Zawar and even used 1.5% (weight) common salt in the zinc smelting charge (Biswas, 1993: 327). Thus his arrangement of retorts and technique was identical to Zawar. Dr. Lane is believed to have smelted zinc ore at his copper work in Swansea in 1720 (Porter, 1991: 60) around 20 years before Champion started zinc production in England. Was it Lane who came to Zawar and learnt zinc smelting technique and attempted it at Swansea, from where Champion, Henkel and 'others copied the Indian process! Craddock gives credit to the Portuguese ships for transporting zinc from India to China and eventually introduction of zinc technology. He emphatically states that the Zawar process is the ancestor of all known zinc smelting techniques in the world. Conclusion Though, early evidence of metallic zinc is known from Athenian Agora and Taxila (datable 4th to 2nd centuries BC), there is no evidence of regular production of metallic zinc at these sites. However, recent discovery of brasses from Senuwar has now strongly indicated that metallic zinc was surely being produced during the Early Historic phase in India. It can be suggested that zinc was no more a rare metal. To date the oldest evidence of pure zinc comes from Zawar as early as 9th century AD, when distilration process was employed to make pure zinc. The Bhils of Southern Rajasthan are held to be the aborigines of this region (Hooja 1994) and prepare alcohol by traditional down-word distillation method. Interestingly zinc was also produced Zawar by using same principle of distillation. Moreover, Brooke (1850) has recorded that until 1840 the Bhils of Zawar knew distillation process of pure zinc. Therefore the credit of innovating special retorts and furnaces for distillation of zinc surely goes to the Bhil tribe of Southern Rajasthan. It was surely this local knowledge which they could successfully employ for distillation of zinc. Thus the Zawar metallurgists brought about a break through in non-ferrous metal extraction around 12th century, if not earlier, by producing it on commercial scale. On the other hand in China commercial production of zinc started almost three hundred years later than India. It appears that brass was introduced in China in the early centuries of the Christian Era through Buddhism, though the idea of zinc distillation process may have traveled in 16th century via international trade to China. From China it was exported to Europe in the middle of the 17th century AD under the name totamu or tutenag, which was derived from Tutthanaga - a name of zinc in South Indian languages (Bonnin, 1924; Deshpande, 1996). However, Indian zinc had already reached Europe prior to this and had created great curiosity about this metal. Thus the commercial production of zinc at Zawar had begun almost three hundred years earlier than China, if not earlier. Therefore, Zawar has globally stolen the march by becoming the oldest commercial center of zinc in the world. William Champion's furnace in the 18th century at Bristol was based on Indian downward distillation process, the idea of which may have reached there through the Portuguese or East India Company or by some European traveler. Hence Zawar, in the words of Craddock, is the· ancestor of all zinc production techniques of the world. It was an industrial activity, which laid the basis of various modern chemical and extractive industries. Acknowledgements We would like to record our sincere thanks to Prof. D. P. Agrawal and Rajiv Malhotra for constant encouragement to work on archaeometallurgy in Rajasthan. We are grateful to Profs. P. T. Craddock, V. H. Sonawane, K. K. Bhan, Toshiki Osada, G. L Possehl, V. S. Shinde, K. S. Gupta, S. Balasubramaniam, Michael Witzel, Meena Gaur and Drs Piyush Bhatt, S. Aruni, Shahida Ansari, P. Dobal, J. Meena, R. Barhat, B. M. Jawalia, S. K. Sharma, Vishnu Mali, H. Chaudhary and Mr. P. Goyal, L. C. Patel and Miss Noriko Hase for helping us at various stages while collecting data for this paper. References Agrawal, D. P. and J. S. Kharakwal 2003. Bronze and Iron Ages in South Asia, Delhi: Aryan Books International. Allan. J. W. 1979, Persian Metal Technology 700-1300 AD. London: Ithaca Press. Anon. 1872. The Mines of Mewar, The Journal of Indian Antiquary (see under Miscellany section) (Ed. J. A. S. Burgess) 1: 63-4. Athavale, V. T. 1967. Chemical Analysis and Metallographic Examination of Metal Objects, in B. K. Thapar ed. Prakash 1955: A Chalcolithic site in the Tapti Valley, Ancient India 20-21: 135-39 (see table IV) Beal, S. 2000 (1884). Buddhist Records o!the Western World vol 2. Trans, From the Chinese of Hiuen Tsiang, Trubner, London. Bhati, H. S. 1995 (Ed.). Maharana Rajsingh Patta Bahi Pattedaran ri Vigat (in Hindi), Himanshu Publication, Udaipur. Bhatnagar, S. N. & L. K. Gurjar 1989. Zinc - A Heritage, Hind Zinc Tech, Jan. 1989 Vol. 1. Biswas, Arun Kumar 1993. The primacy of India in ancient brass and zinc metallurgy, Indian Journal of History of Science 28(4): 309-330. Biswas, Arun Kumar 1994. Minerals and Metals in Ancient India Vol. 1 Archaeological Evidence, D. K. Printworld (P) Ltd., New Delhi. Biswas, A. K. and S. Biswas 1996. Minerals and Metals in Ancient India vol II, D.K. Printworld, Delhi. Blochmann, H. (trans and ed.) 1989. The A-in-IAkbari of Abul Fazl Allami, Low Price Pub, New Delhi (originally pub in 1927). Bonnin, A. 1924. Tutenag and Paktong, Oxford University Press, Milford. Bowman, S. G. E, M. R. Cowell and J. Cribb 1989. Two thousand years of coinage in China: an analytical survey, Journal of Historical Metallurgy Society 23 (1):25-30. Brooke, J. C. 1850. Notes on the zinc mines of Jawar, Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal XIX (1-7): 212-215. Caldwell. K. S. 1920. The result of analyses of certain ornaments found in Asura sites, Journal of Bihar and Orissa Research Society 6: 390-423. Carsus, H. D. 1960. Historical background, In C. H. Mathewson (Ed.). Zinc, New York: American Chemical Society. Pp 1-8. Chakrabarti, D. K. & Nayanjyot Lahiri. 1996. Copper and Its Alloys in Ancient India, Munshiram Manoharlal, Delhi. Chatterjee, C. D. 1957. Gold and Brass coins of the Imperial Guptas, Journal of the UP Historical Society (New Series) 5 (2): 100-116. Craddock, P. T. 1981. The Copper alloys of Tibet and their background, In Eds. W. A. Oddy and W. Zwalf. Aspect of Tibetan Metallurgy, British Museum Occasional Paper no 15, London Pp. 1-31, 125-137. Craddock, P. T. 1995. Early Mining and Metal Production, Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh. Craddock, P. T., L. K. Gurjar and K. T. M. Hegde 1983. Zinc Production in Medieval India. World Archaeology 15: 211-21,http://www.jstor.org/stable/124653. Craddock, P. T., I. C. Freestone, L. K. Gurjar A. Middleton & L. Willies 1989. The Production of Lead, Silver and Zinc in Early India, In A. Hauptmann, E. Pernicka and G. Wagner (Eds.) Old World Archaeometallurgy, Selbstverlag des Deutschen Bergbau-Museums, Bochum Pp. 51-69. Crookshank, H. 1947. Zawar silver-lead-zinc mines, Indian Minerals 1 :22-27. Datt, Ram (commentary) 1900. Charak Samhita, Pt. Ram Datt Narayan Chaube Anath Chikitsalaya aur Pustakalaya Manik Chauk, Mathura. Day, Joan 1973. Bristol Brass A History of the Industry, David and Charles: Newton Abbot, England. Deo, S. B. 1973. Mahurjhari Excavation 1970-72, Nagpur University, Nagpur. Deshpande, Vijay 1996. A note on Ancient zinc smelting on India and China, Indian Journal of History of Science 31 (3): 275-279 Erskine, K. D. 1908. Rajputana Gazetteers Vol II The Mewar Residency, Ajmer. pp.53 Freestone, I. C., P. T. Craddock, K. T. M. Hegde, M. J. Hughes and H. V. Paliwal. 1985. Zinc production at Zawar, Rajasthan. In P. T. Craddock and M. J. Hughes (Eds.). Furnaces and Smelting Technology in Antiquity, British Museum, London. Pp. 229-41. Gairola, T. R. 1956. Bidri Ware, Ancient India 12: 16-18. Gangopadhyay, A., T. R. Ramchandran and A. K. Biswas 1984. Phase studies on zinc residues of Ancient Indian origin, Transactions of the Indian Institute of Metals 37 (3): 234-241. Gaur, R. C. 1983. Excavations at Atranjikhera: Early Civilizations of the Upper Ganga Basin, Aligarh Muslim University/Motilal Banarasidas, New Delhi. Gurjar, L. K., P. T. Craddock, L. Willies and H. V. Paliwal. 2001. Zinc in In K. V. Mittal (Ed.) History of Technology in India vol III, Indian National Science Academy, Delhi. Pp. 621-38. Habib, Irfan 2000. Joseph Needham and the history of Indian technology, Indian Journal of History of Science 35 (2): 245-274. Halder, R. R. 1929-30. Samoli Inscription of the time of Siladitya (Vikram Sllmvat 703), Epigraphia Indica 20: 97-99. Hary Falk 1991. Silver, Lead and Zinc in Early Indian Literature, South Asian Studies 7: 111-120. Hegde, K. T. M. 1989. Zinc and Brass Production in Ancient India, Interdisciplinary Science Reviews 14(1): 86-96. Hett, W. S. 1993 (Trans.). Aristotle on Marvellous Things Heard, Harvard University Press, Cambridge. Hooja, R. 1994. Contacts, conflicts and coexistence: Bhils and non-Bhils in Southeastern Rajasthan, In B. Allchin (Ed.) Living Traditions, Oxford & IBH Pub., New Delhi, pp 125-140. Hooja, R. and Vijay Kumar 1995. Aspects of the Early Copper Age in Rajasthan. In Raymond and Bridget Allchin (Eds.) South Asian Archaeology (pub. in 1997). Oxford and IBH, New Delhi. Pp. 323-339. Jones, H. L. 1954 (translation). The Geography of Strabo (books XV and XVI) vol. VII, Harvard University Press, Cambridge. Joshi, A. P. 1973. Analysis of copper and iron objects. In S. B. Deo Ed. Mahurjhari Excavation 1970-72, Nagpur University, Napur:. Pp 77. Kachhawaha, O. P. 1992. History of Famines in Rajasthan (1900-1990 AD), Research Publishers, Jodhpur. Kangle, R. P. 1960. The Kautilya Arthasastra vol I, Motilal Banarasidas, Delhi. Kangle, R. P. 1972. The Kautilya Arthasastra vol II , Motilal Banarasidas, Delhi. Kharakwal, J. S. 2005. Indus Civilization: an overview, In Toshiki Osada (Ed.) Occasional Paper 1 Linguistics, Archaeology and the Human Past, Research Institute for Humanity and Nature, Kyoto, Japan, Pp 41-86. La Niece, S. and G. Martin 1987. The technical examination of Bidri Ware, Studies in Conservation 32: 97-101. Lal, B. B., J. P. Joshi, B. K. Thapar and Madhubala 2003. Excavations at Kalibangan the Early Harappans, Archaeological Survey of India, Delhi. Leoshko, Janice and Chandra L. Reedy 1994. Interdisciplinary Research on the Provenance of Eastern Indian Bronzes: Preliminary Findings, South Asian Studies 10: 25-35. Malu, Kamala 1987. The History of Famines in Rajputana (1858-1900 AD), Himanshu Publication, Udaipur. Marshall, Sir John 1951. Taxila An Illustrate Account of Archaeological Excavations (Vol. II. Minor Antiquities), University Press, Cambridge. pp 564- 571 . Misra, V. N. 1973. Bagor: a late Mesolithic settlement in northwest India, World Archaeology 5 (1): 92-110, http://www.jstor.org/stable/124156. Misra, V. N., V. S. Shinde, R. K. Mohanty, Lalit Pandey and Jeewan S. Kharakwal. 1997. Excavations at Balathal, District Udaipur, Rajasthan (1995-97), with special reference to Chalcolithic architecture, Man and Environment 22(2): 35-59. Morgan, S. W. K. 1976. Zinc. Ellis Horwood, Chichester. Nautiyal, V., D. P. Agrawal and R. V. Krishnamurthy 1981. Some new analysis on the protohistorical copper artifacts, Man and Environment 5: 48-51. Neogi, P. 1979. Copper in Ancient India, Jananki Prakashan, Patna. Ojha, G. S. H 1996-97. Udaipur Rajya ka Itihas, Rajasthani Granthagar vol. I (first published 1928 VS 1985) from Government Press Ajmer, Jodhpur, Rajasthan. Pal, P. 1988 (Ed.). A Pot-Pourri of Indian Art, Marg Publications, Bombay. Paliwal, H. V., L. K. Gurjar, and P. T. Craddock 1986. Zinc and brass in ancient India. Bulletin of Canadian Institute of Metals 885: 75-79. Porter, Frank 1991. Zinc Hand Book Properties, Processing, and Use in Design, Marcel Dekker, Inc New York. Raghunandan, R. K., B. K. Dhruva Rao and M. L. Singhal. 1981. Exploration for copper, Lead and Zinc ore in India, Bulletin of the Geological Survey of India Series A-Eeconomic Geology, no 47, Calcutta. Ranawat, M. S. 1987 (Ed. And trans.). Muhnot Nainsi ki Khyat, Natnagar Sodh Sansthan, Sitamau (M. P., India). (description of mewar 1-81). Rao, S. R. 1985. Lothal. Archaeological Survey of India, Delhi. Ray, P. C. 1956. History of Hindu Chemistry. Indian Chemical Society, Calcutta. Reedy, C. L. 1988. Determining the region of origin of Himalayan copper alloys status through technical analysis. In P. Pal (Ed.). A Pot-Pourri of Indian Art. Marg Publication, Bombay, Pp 75-98. Reedy, C. L.1991a, Medieval Bronzes of the Himalayan Mountain Kingdoms, Journal of the Minerals, Metals & Materials Society 43 (12): 6-9. Reedy, C. L., 1991b, Petrographic Analysis of Casting Core Materials for Provenance Studies of Copper Alloy Sculptures, Archaeomaterials 6 (2): 121-163. Roy, S. C. 1920. Distribution and nature of Asur sites in Chota Nagpur, Journal of Bihar and Orissa Research Society 6: 390-423. Sharma, Anant Ram (commentary) 2001. Susruta Samhita 2 vols, Chaukhambha Prakashan, Varanasi. Sharma, D. P. and Madhuri Sharma 2000. Early Buddhist Metal Images of South Asia, Bharatiya Kala Prakashan, Delhi Sastri, R. V. (commentary) 1997. Manusmriti, Vidya Vihar, Delhi. Shinde, V. S., G. L. Possehl and S. S. Deshpande. 2001- 02. The ceramic assemblage in Protohistoric Mewar (Rajashtan), with special reference to Gilund and Balathal, Puratattva 32:5-24. Shyamal Das, Kaviraj 1886. Veer Vinod. Vol I. (reprinted 1986), Moti Lal Banarasi Das, Delhi. Shukla, A. V and R. D. Tripathi 2002. Carakasamhita of Agnivesa vol 2, Chaukhamba Sanskrit Prathishthan, Delhi. Singh, R. P. 1947. Agricultural distress and insecurity in Rajputana during the 18th and 19th Centuries. Journal of Indian History 15 (2): 205-215. Singh, R. N. 2004. Analyses of Metal Objects. In R. S. Bisht (Ed.) Early Farming Communities of the Kaimur, Publication Scheme, Jaipur, Pp 591-603. Smith, V. A. 1906. Catalogue of the Coins in the Indian Museum Calcutta vol I, Clarendon Press, Oxford. Sung, E-Tu Zen and Shiou-Chuan Sun 1966 (trans.). Chinese Technology in the Seventh Century (T'ien Kung K'ai-wu by Sung Ying-Hsing). Pennsylvania State University Press, Pennsylvania. Strackzkk, J. A. and B. Srikantan 1967. Geology of Zawar lead-zinc area, Rajasthan, India. Memoirs of the GSI 92: 47-83. Swarnakamal 1978. Metallic Art and Technology of Gujarat. Museum and Picture Gallery, Baroda. Tewari, R. K. and N. K. Kavida 1984. Ancient mining activity around Aguncha village, Bhilwara district, Rajasthan, Man and Environment 8: 81-87. Tondan, B. N. 1983. Phopnar Bronzes - a scientific study by atomic absorption, emission spectrographic analysis and their metallography, National Museum Bulletin, New Delhi 4, 5 and 6: 150-151. Werner, O. 1970. Uber das Vorkommen von Zinc, Erzmetall 23: 259-269. Weirong, Zhou 1993. A new study on the history of the use of zinc in China, Bulletin of the Metals and Museum 19: 49-53. Weirong, Zhou and Fan Xiangxi 1994. Application of Zinc and Cadmium for the dating and authenticating of metal relics in ancient China, Bulletin of the Metals and Museum 22: 16-21. Willies, L., P. T. Craddock, L. K. Gurjar and K. T. M. Hegde 1984. Ancient lead and zinc mining in Rajasthan, India, World Archaeology 16(2): 222- 233, http://www.jstor.org/stable/124574. How to cite: Gurjar, L.K. and Kharakwal, J.S. 2006. Zinc and Brass in Archaeological Perspective. Ancient Asia 1:139-159, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5334/aa.06112 http://www.ancient-asia-journal.com/article/view/aa.06112/23 Notes on Vedic references: "Spencer gives details from Malcom's "History of Ancient Persia" and states that for 2598 years some four dynasties ruled over Persia from Yama Vivanghao (Yama Vaivaswat in Sanskrit) in whose time the Deluge commenced, i.e., in 9844 B.C. The rule of these four dynasties ended therefore in approximately 7200 B.C. By this time, Kai Vishtaspa became ruler of Persia. Sage Kaksivan (RV 1-122-13) speaks of one Istasva who is identified with Vishtaspa by E.S.Bharuca (quoted by Hodivala). This king is supposed to have ruled for 120 years, and so his period can be fixed to about 7100 B.C. Iranian Zarathustra was a contemporary of king Vishtaspa, and therefore his date can be worked out to be around 7100 B.C. On the basis of astronomy, Spencer determines Zarathustra's date to be in between 7388 to 7052 B.C., coinciding with the dates determined above." http://www.hknet.org.nz/aryaninvasion-page.htm Prasad Gokhale, Antiquity and Continuity of Indian History. Hodivala S.K., Zarathustra and His Contemporaries in the Rg Veda, 1913. Spencer H.S., Are the Gathas pre-Vedic? 1965. Asur (anthropological perspectives): ASSYRIA [ISBE]"...In bronze work the Assyrians excelled, much of the work being cast. But in general it was hammered, and the scenes hammered in relief on the bronze gates discovered by Mr. Rassam at Balawat near Nineveh are among the best examples of ancient oriental metallurgy at present known. Gold and silver were also worked into artistic forms; iron was reserved for more utilitarian purposes. The beautiful ivory carvings found at Nineveh were probably the work of foreign artificers, but gems and seal cylinders were engraved by native artists in imitation of those of Babylonia, and the Babylonian art of painting and glazing tiles was also practiced. The terra-cotta figures which can be assigned to the Assyrian period are poor. Glass was also manufactured. (A. H. Sayce) ASSYRIANS - a-sir'-i-ans ('ashshur): The inhabitants of Assyria." http://classic.net.bible.org/dictionary.php?word=ASSHUR [quote]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... Data From Ethno-Archaeology...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 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... 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 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-4th centuries 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]. 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 Ashur absorbed 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]. 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 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 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 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. 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. [unquote] http://archive.ispub.com/journal/the-internet-journal-of-biological-anthropology/volume-3-number-1/prehistory-of-the-chotanagpur-region-part-4-ethnoarchaeology-rock-art-iron-and-the-asuras.html#sthash.C8Ap5UTw.dpbs Prehistory Of The Chotanagpur Region Part 4: Ethnoarchaeology, Rock Art, Iron And The Asuras Abhik Ghosh PhD Department of Anthropology, Panjab University Chandigarh Citation: A. Ghosh: Prehistory Of The Chotanagpur Region Part 4: Ethnoarchaeology, Rock Art, Iron And The Asuras. The Internet Journal of Biological Anthropology. 2009 Volume 3 Number 1. DOI: 10.5580/83bhttp://bharatkalyan97.blogspot.in/2011/11/decoding-longest-inscription-of-indus.html 

NOV

12

Decoding two long inscriptions of Indus Script (Kalyanarman, 2011) 

"Indus inscriptions resemble the Egyptian hieroglyphs...": John Marshall "A good many important facts can be determined, however, to clear the ground for more satisfactory research. In the first place this script is in no way even remotely connected with either the Sumerian or Proto-Elamitic signs. I have compared some of the signs with the signs of these scripts. For the references to the Sumerian pictographs, or the earliest forms of the Sumerian signs, I have referred the reader to the numbers of REC. (Thureau-Dangin, "Recherches sur l'Origine de l'Ecriture Cuneiforme") and for the Proto-Elamitic signs to Professor Scheil's "Textes de Comptabilite Proto-Elamites", in vol. xvii of Memoires de la Mission Archeologique de Perse, pp. 31-66. This series is commonly cited as Del. Per. (Delegation en Perse). The Indus inscriptions resemble the Egyptian hieroglyphs far more than they do the Sumerian linear and cuneiform system." [John Marshall, 1996 (Repr.), Mohenjo-Daro and the Indus Civilization: Being an official account of Archaeological Excavations at Mohenjo-Daro carried out by the Government of India between the years 1922 and 1927,Asian Educational Services, pp. 423-424] http://books.google.com/books?id=SZWE7O-5vusC&dq=elam+indus&source=gbs_navlinks_s 

Mohenjodro 0304 Seal impression. Identical impression on m0494/0495 two prism-shaped tablets. This is an update on Nov. 13, 2011 of a note posted on Nov. 12, 2011. An annex is added, decoding another long inscription. (The blog post was originally titled: 'Decoding the longest inscription of Indus Script'). Now it has been retitled to cover another long inscription. This note decodes the longest inscription --on one side of a tablet -- of Indus Script. There are two prism tablets (m0494 and m0495) with an identical inscription of three lines on three sides (of the two tablets). The three lines of m0494/m0495 read together, may constitute an inscription longer than the one on m-0304 seal impression. The inscription on m-0494/m-0495 which contains 23 glyphs (adding all the glyphs on three sides of a prism) is decoded in the annex -- treating the three lines of inscriptions on the prisms as one composite inscription with a composite message. There can only be a congecture as to why the prism tablets were mass produced with identical three lines of impression: it is likely that the tablets were used by artisans of a guild performing identical metal work for transporting packages with identical contents and hence, identical messages conveyed through the inscription. Executive summary The indus script inscription is a detailed account of the metal work engaged in by the Indus artisans. It is a professional calling card of the metalsmiths' guild of Mohenjodaro used to affix a sealing on packages of metal artefacts traded by Meluhha (mleccha)speakers. 

Text. Reading of glyphs on m0314 Seal impression. A notable featue of the sequencing of glyphs is the use of three variants of 'fish' glyphs on line 1 of the inscription. Each variant 'fish' glyph has been distinctively decoded as working with ore, metalwork (forging, turning) and casting. Rebus decoding of glyphs on the seal impression: Three lines of the inscription with glyphs can be read rebus from right to left -- listing the metallurgical competence of the artisans' guild: Line 1: Turner workshop; forge, stone ore, ingot; excellent cast metal Line 2: Metal workshop, ingot furnace, casting, riveting smithy,forge; Furnace scribe Line 3: Smithy, lump of silver (forging metal); Mint, gold furnace; Smithy/forge; Turner small workshop Details: Line 1 1.1. Turner workshop 

kund opening in the nave or hub of a wheel to admit the axle (Santali) Rebus: kundam, kund a sacrificial fire-pit (Skt.) kunda ‘turner’ kundār turner (A.) sal ‘splinter’; rebus: sal ‘workshop’ (Santali) 1.2. Forge, stone ore, ingot Fish + corner, aya koṇḍa, ‘metal turned, i.e. forged’ Fish + scales aya ãs (amśu) ‘metllic stalks of stone ore Fish + sloping stroke, aya dhāḷ ‘metal ingot’ (Vikalpa: ḍhāḷ = a slope; the inclination of a plane (G.) Rebus: : ḍhāḷako = a large metal ingot (G.) 1.3. Excellent cast metal ḍol ‘the shaft of an arrow, an arrow’ (Santali) Vikalpa: dul ‘casting’ (Santali) Vikalpa: kaṇḍa ‘arrow’ (Skt.) ayaskāṇḍa ‘a quantity of iron, excellent iron’ Line 2 2.1 Iron workshop मेंढा [ mēṇḍhā ] A crook or curved end (of a stick, horn &c.) and attrib. such a stick, horn, bullock. मेढा [ mēḍhā ] m A stake, esp. as forked. Vikalpa: kottaṉ a mason (Ta.) kotti pick-axe, stone-digger, carver (Ma.) Rebus: mẽṛhẽt, meḍ ‘iron’ (Mu.Ho.) 2.2 Ingot furnace S. baṭhu m. ‘large pot in which grain is parched, Rebus; bhaṭṭhā m. ‘kiln’ (P.) baṭa = a kind of iron (G.) Vikalpa: meṛgo = rimless vessels (Santali) bhaṭa ‘furnace’ (G.) baṭa = kiln (Santali); baṭa = a kind of iron (G.) bhaṭṭha -- m.n. ʻ gridiron (Pkt.) baṭhu large cooking fire’ baṭhī f. ‘distilling furnace’; L. bhaṭṭh m. ‘grain—parcher's oven’, bhaṭṭhī f. ‘kiln, distillery’, awāṇ. bhaṭh; P. bhaṭṭh m., ṭhī f. ‘furnace’, bhaṭṭhā m. ‘kiln’; S. bhaṭṭhī keṇī ‘distil (spirits)’. (CDIAL 9656)Rebus: meḍ iron (Ho.) ḍabu ‘an iron spoon’ (Santali) Rebus: ḍab, ḍhimba, ḍhompo ‘lump (ingot?)’, clot, make a lump or clot, coagulate, fuse, melt together (Santali) 2.3 Casting, iron (riveting smithy), forge kolmo ‘rice plant’ (Mu.) Rebus: kolami ‘furnace,smithy’ (Te.) Vikalpa: M. meḍ(h), meḍhī f., meḍhā m. ʻ post, forked stake ʼ(CDIAL 10317). Rebus: meḍ, mẽṛhẽt 'iron'(Mu.Ho.) mēthí m. ʻ pillar in threshing floor to which oxen are fastened, prop for supporting carriage shafts ʼ AV., °thī -- f. KātyŚr.com., mēdhī -- f. Divyāv. 2. mēṭhī -- f. PañcavBr.com., mēḍhī -- , mēṭī -- f. BhP. 1. Pa. mēdhi -- f. ʻ post to tie cattle to, pillar, part of a stūpa ʼ; Pk. mēhi -- m. ʻ post on threshing floor ʼ, N. meh(e), miho, miyo, B. mei, Or. maï -- dāṇḍi, Bi. mẽh, mẽhā ʻ the post ʼ, (SMunger) mehā ʻ the bullock next the post ʼ, Mth. meh, mehā ʻ the post ʼ, (SBhagalpur) mīhã̄ ʻ the bullock next the post ʼ, (SETirhut) mẽhi bāṭi ʻ vessel with a projecting base ʼ. 2. Pk. mēḍhi -- m. ʻ post on threshing floor ʼ, mēḍhaka<-> ʻ small stick ʼ; K. mīr, mīrü f. ʻ larger hole in ground which serves as a mark in pitching walnuts ʼ (for semantic relation of ʻ post -- hole ʼ see kūpa -- 2); L. meṛh f. ʻ rope tying oxen to each other and to post on threshing floor ʼ; P. mehṛ f., mehaṛ m. ʻ oxen on threshing floor, crowd ʼ; OA meṛha, mehra ʻ a circular construction, mound ʼ; Or. meṛhī, meri ʻ post on threshing floor ʼ; Bi. mẽṛ ʻ raised bank between irrigated beds ʼ, (Camparam) mẽṛhā ʻ bullock next the post ʼ, Mth. (SETirhut) mẽṛhā ʻ id. ʼ; M. meḍ(h), meḍhī f., meḍhā m. ʻ post, forked stake ʼ. (CDIAL 10317) Vikalpa: pajhaṛ = to sprout from a root (Santali); Rebus: pasra ‘smithy, forge’ (Santali) Vikalpa: *jāḍyadhānya ʻ winter rice ʼ. [jāˊḍya -- , dhānyà -- ] Bhoj. jaṛahan ʻ winter rice ʼ; H. jaṛhan m. ʻ rice reaped at the end of the Rains ʼ.(CDIAL 5181) *jāḍa -- ʻ joining, pair ʼ. [← Drav. LM 333]; 2. S. jāṛo m. ʻ twin ʼ, L. P. jāṛā m.; M. j̈āḍī f. ʻ a double yoke ʼ. (CDIAL 5091) Rebus: *jaḍati ʻ joins, sets ʼ. 1. Pk. jaḍia -- ʻ set (of jewels), joined ʼ; K. jarun ʻ to set jewels ʼ (← Ind.); S. jaṛaṇu ʻ to join, rivet, set ʼ, jaṛa f. ʻ rivet, boundary between two fields ʼ; P.jaṛāuṇā ʻ to have fastened or set ʼ; A. zarāiba ʻ to collect ʼ; B. jaṛāna ʻ to set jewels, wrap round, entangle ʼ, jaṛ ʻ heaped together ʼ; Or. jaṛibā ʻ to unite ʼ; OAw.jaraï ʻ sets jewels, bedecks ʼ; H. jaṛnā ʻ to join, stick in, set ʼ (→ N. jaṛnu ʻ to set, be set ʼ); OMarw. jaṛāū ʻ inlaid ʼ; G. jaṛvũ ʻ to join, meet with, set jewels ʼ; M.j̈aḍṇẽ ʻ to join, connect, inlay, be firmly established ʼ, j̈aṭṇẽ ʻ to combine, confederate ʼ. (CDIAL 5091) Vikalpa: dula दुल । युग्मम् m. a pair, a couple, esp. of two similar things (Rām. 966) (Kashmiri); dol ‘likeness, picture, form’ (Santali) Rebus: dul ‘to cast metal in a mould’ (Santali) dul meṛeḍ cast iron (Mundari. Santali) 2.4 Furnace scribe kaṇḍ kanka ‘rim of jar’; Rebus: karṇaka ‘scribe’; kaṇḍ ‘furnace, fire-altar’. Thus the ligatured sign is decoded: kaṇḍ karṇaka ‘furnace scribe Line 3 3.1 Smithy kolmo ‘three’ (Mu.); rebus: kolami ‘smithy’ (Te.) 3.2 Lump of silver (forging metal) guḍá—1. — In sense ‘fruit, kernel’ cert. ← Drav., cf. Tam. koṭṭai ‘nut, kernel’; A. goṭ ‘a fruit, whole piece’, °ṭā ‘globular, solid’, guṭi ‘small ball, seed, kernel’; B. goṭā ‘seed, bean, whole’; Or. goṭā ‘whole, undivided’, goṭi ‘small ball, cocoon’, goṭāli ‘small round piece of chalk’; Bi. goṭā ‘seed’; Mth. goṭa ‘numerative particle’ (CDIAL 4271) Rebus: koṭe ‘forging (metal)(Mu.) Rebus: goṭī f. ʻlump of silver' (G.) Fish signs (and variants) seem to be differentiated from, perhaps a loop of threads formed on a loom or loose fringes of a garment. This may be seen from the seal M-9 which contains the sign: 

Sign 180 Signs 180, 181 have variants. Warp-pegs kor.i = pegs in the ground in two rooms on which the thread is passed back and forth in preparing the warp (S.) Edging, trimming (cf. orthography of glyph in the middle of the epigraph) K. goṭh f., dat. °ṭi f. ʻ chequer or chess or dice board ʼ; S. g̠oṭu m. ʻ large ball of tobacco ready for hookah ʼ, °ṭī f. ʻ small do. ʼ; P. goṭ f. ʻ spool on which gold or silver wire is wound, piece on a chequer board ʼ; N. goṭo ʻ piece ʼ, goṭi ʻ chess piece ʼ; A. goṭ ʻ a fruit, whole piece ʼ, °ṭā ʻ globular, solid ʼ, guṭi ʻ small ball, seed, kernel ʼ; B. goṭā ʻ seed, bean, whole ʼ; Or. goṭā ʻ whole, undivided ʼ, goṭi ʻ small ball, cocoon ʼ, goṭāli ʻ small round piece of chalk ʼ; Bi. goṭā ʻ seed ʼ; Mth. goṭa ʻ numerative particle ʼ; H. goṭ f. ʻ piece (at chess &c.) ʼ; G. goṭ m. ʻ cloud of smoke ʼ, °ṭɔ m. ʻ kernel of coconut, nosegay ʼ, goṭī f. ʻ lump of silver, clot of blood ʼ, °ṭilɔm. ʻ hard ball of cloth ʼ; M. goṭā m. ʻ roundish stone ʼ, °ṭī f. ʻ a marble ʼ, goṭuḷā ʻ spherical ʼ; Si. guṭiya ʻ lump, ball ʼ; -- prob. also P. goṭṭā ʻ gold or silver lace ʼ, H.goṭā m. ʻ edging of such ʼ (→ K. goṭa m. ʻ edging of gold braid ʼ, S. goṭo m. ʻ gold or silver lace ʼ); M. goṭ ʻ hem of a garment, metal wristlet ʼ. Ko. gōṭu ʻ silver or gold braid ʼ.(CDIAL 4271) Rebus: goṭī f. ʻlump of silver' (G.) 3.3 Mint, gold furnace kamāṭhiyo = archer; kāmaṭhum = a bow; kāmaḍ, kāmaḍum = a chip of bamboo (G.) kāmaṭhiyo a bowman; an archer (Skt.lex.) Rebus: kammaṭi a coiner (Ka.); kampaṭṭam coinage, coin, mint (Ta.) kammaṭa = mint, gold furnace (Te.) 3.4 Smithy, forge kolmo ‘rice plant’ (Mu.) Rebus: kolami ‘furnace,smithy’ (Te.) Vikalpa: pajhaṛ = to sprout from a root (Santali); Rebus: pasra ‘smithy, forge’ (Santali) 3.5 Turner S. kuṇḍa f. ʻcornerʼ; P. kū̃ṭ f. ʻcorner, sideʼ (← H.). (CDIAL 3898) Rebus: kundār turner (A.) kũdār, kũdāri (B.); kundāru (Or.); kundau to turn on a lathe, to carve, to chase; kundau dhiri = a hewn stone; kundau murhut = a graven image (Santali) kunda a turner's lathe (Skt.)(CDIAL 3295). 3.6 Small Workshop tsāni, tsānye ‘squirrel’ (Kon.) caṇila squirrel (To.); Vikalpa: sega ‘a species of squirrel’ (Santali) rebus: śannī a small workshop (WPah) śannī f. ʻ small room in a house to keep sheep in ‘ (WPah.) Bshk. šan, Phal.šān ‘roof’ (Bshk.)(CDIAL 12326). seṇi (f.) [Class. Sk. śreṇi in meaning "guild"; Vedic= row] Woṭ. šen ʻ roof ʼ, Bshk. šan, Phal. šān(AO xviii 251, followed by Buddruss Woṭ 126, < śar(a)ṇa -- ); WPah. (Joshi) śannī f. ʻ small room in a house to keep sheep in ʼ. Addenda: śaraṇá -- 2. 2. *śarṇa --WPah. kṭg.śɔ́nni f. ʻ bottom storey of a house in which young of cattle are kept ʼ. śaraṇá ʻ protecting ʼ, n. ʻ shelter, home ʼ RV. 2. *śarṇa -- . [√śar] 1. Pa. Pk. saraṇa -- n. ʻ protection, shelter, house ʼ; Ḍ. šərṓn m. ʻ roof ʼ (← Sh.?), Dm. šaran; P. saraṇ m. ʻ protection, asylum ʼ, H. saran f.; G. sarṇũ n. ʻ help ʼ; Si.saraṇa ʻ defence, village, town ʼ; -- < *śarāṇa -- or poss. *śāraṇa -- : Kho. šarān ʻ courtyard of a house ʼ, Sh. šarāṇŭ m. ʻ fence ʼ. (CDIAL 12326) Vikalpa: Other lexemes (for rebus readings of variant readings of glyphs): meṇḍa A twist or tangle arising in thread or cord, a curl or snarl. (Marathi) (CDIAL 10312). Rebus: meḍ ‘iron’ (Ho.) salae sapae = untangled, combed out, hair hanging loose (Santali.lex.) Rebus: sal workshop (Santali) Vikalpa: ḍhompo = knot on a string (Santali) ḍhompo = ingot (Santali) kana, kanac = corner (Santali); kañcu = bronze (Te.) kan- copper work (Ta.) kōḍel bandicoot (Pa.) [koḍel = rat (Go.)] Rebus: kole.l = smithy, temple in Kota village (Ko.) Vikalpa: mũhã̄ = the quantity of iron produced at one time in a native smelting furnace of the Kolhes; iron produced by the Kolhes and formed like a four-cornered piece a little pointed at each end; mūhā mẽṛhẽt = iron smelted by the Kolhes and formed into an equilateral lump a little pointed at each end; kolhe tehen me~ṛhe~t mūhā akata = the Kolhes have to-day produced pig iron (Santali.lex.) The superscript ligatures can be read as suffixes: - kāra ‘artisan’. kāruvu = mechanic, artisan, Vis'vakarma, the celestial artisan (Te.); kāruvu. [Skt.] n. An artist, artificer. An agent . One is a loha-kāra (metalsmith). the other is a cunda-kāra (ivory turner). kōṭṭa1 m. (n. lex.) ʻ fort ʼ Kathās., kōṭa -- 1 m. Vāstuv. Aś. sn. koṭa -- ʻ fort, fortified town ʼ, Pk. koṭṭa -- , kuṭ° n.; Kt. kuṭ ʻ tower (?) ʼ NTS xii 174; Dm. kōṭ ʻ tower ʼ, Kal. kōṭ; Sh. gil. kōṭ m. ʻ fort ʼ (→ Ḍ. kōṭ m.), koh. pales. kōṭ m. ʻ village ʼ; K. kūṭh, dat. kūṭas m. ʻ fort ʼ, S. koṭu m., L. koṭ m.; P. koṭ m. ʻ fort, mud bank round a village or field ʼ; A. kõṭh ʻ stockade, palisade ʼ; B. koṭ, kuṭ ʻ fort ʼ, Or. koṭa, kuṭa, H. Marw. koṭ m.; G. koṭ m. ʻ fort, rampart ʼ; M. koṭ, koṭh m. ʻ fort ʼ(CDIAL 3500). Cloak, trefoil glyph: got.a_ a garment with clusters of flowers woven in it; got.a_kor [+ kor a border] a border of a garment having clusters of flowers woven in it; got.iyum a piece of cloth made use of in making up a turban to give it a round shape (G.) go_t.u embroidery, lace (Tu.); go~_t.u an ornamental appendage to the border of a cloth, fringe, hem, edging (Te.); got. Hem of garment; got.a_ edging of gold lace (H.)(DEDR 2201). go_t.u = an ornamental appendage to the border of a cloth, fringe, hem, edging (Te.); embroidery (Tu.) kont.l.= pocket in outside edge of cloak (Ko.); got. = hem of garment (M.); got.a_ = edging of gold lace (H.) got. hem of a garment, metal wristlet (M.); got.t.a_ gold or silver lace (P.)(CDIAL 4271). Gu {N} ``^cloth''. Rebus: (Z),,(Z) {N} ``^worker, ^assistant, ^serf, ^slave; ^serfdom''. #11620. Annex Decoding Indus script inscription on two prism tablets There are two tablets with identical seal impressions which contain a long Indus inscription composed of 23 glyphs. Reported in Marshall 1931 (Vol. II, p.402); repeated in Vol. III, Pl. CXVI.23. 

m0494A,BGt Prism Tablet in bas-relief. (BGt is a side view of two sides – B and G -- the prism tablet). 

m0495A,B,Gt Prism Tablet in bas-relief 

A reading of m0495G shown and discussed in http://indusscriptmore.blogspot.com/2011/09/indus-signs-of-17-and-18-strokes.html with particular reference to the first sign read as 'X'. If the glyph is a composite glyphic of four forked sticks, a vikalpa (alternative) reading is: मेंढा [ mēṇḍhā ] A crook or curved end (of a stick, horn &c.) and attrib. such a stick, horn, bullock. मेढा [ mēḍhā ] m A stake, esp. as forked. meḍ(h), meḍhī f., meḍhā m. ʻ post, forked stake ʼ.(Marathi)(CDIAL 10317) Rebus: mẽṛhẽt, meḍ ‘iron’ (Mu.Ho.) gaṇḍa 'four'; rebus: kaṇḍa 'furnace, altar'. Thus, the composite glyphis is read rebus: iron (metal) furnace, meḍ kaṇḍa. Inscription on tablet m0495 serves as a reinforcement of the reading of inscription on tablet m0494 (see the side shot of sides B and G reproduced above). The organizer of the photographic corpus, Asko Parpola, should be complimented for a painstaking effort to produce a high resolution reading of 3 lines of the text on the prism tablets (which almost look like five- sided object as may be seen from the photograph M-494F). Sharper resolution images of the two tablets (3.6 cm. long) with three sides of a prism are as follows: m-0495A m-0495B m-0495G The reading of the text of the inscription on the two prism tablets provided in Mahadevan concordance is as follows: 

Text 1623/Text 2847 Decoding the identical inscription on Prism tablets m0494 and m0495 Line 1 Turner, mint, brass-work, furnace scribe, smelter, gridiron smithy, smithy/forge Line 2 Mineral (ore), furnace/altar, furnace scribe workshop; metal (a kind of iron), casting furnace; cast metal ingot; casting workshop Line 3 Furnace scribe workshop; cast bronze; kiln; gridiron; casting workshop; smithy (with) furnace; cast bronze; native metal; metal turner; furnace scribe. Thus, line 1 is a description of the repertoire of a smithy/forge including mint and brass-work; line 2 is a smelting, casting workshop for ingots; line 3 is furnace scribe workshop for caste bronze, with kiln, furnace and native metal turning. Line 1 1.1 Corner (of a room) glyph. S. kuṇḍa f. ʻcornerʼ; P. kū̃ṭ f. ʻcorner, sideʼ (← H.). (CDIAL 3898) Rebus: kundār turner (A.) kũdār, kũdāri (B.); kundāru (Or.); kundau to turn on a lathe, to carve, to chase; kundau dhiri = a hewn stone; kundau murhut = a graven image (Santali) kunda a turner's lathe (Skt.)(CDIAL 3295). 1.2 Crab glyph 

Sign 57. Crab or claws of crab. kamaṭha crab (Skt.) Rebus: kammaṭa = portable furnace (Te.) kampaṭṭam coiner, mint (Ta.) Vikalpa: ḍato ‘claws or pincers (chelae) of crabs’; ḍaṭom, ḍiṭom to seize with the claws or pincers, as crabs, scorpions; ḍaṭkop = to pinch, nip (only of crabs) (Santali) Rebus: dhātu ‘mineral’ (Vedic); dhatu ‘a mineral, metal’ (Santali) Vikalpa: erā ‘claws’; Rebus: era ‘copper’. 

Argument: Allographs of a leaf sign, ligature with crab sign [After Parpola, 1994, fig. 13.15] The archer shown on one copper tablet seems to be equivalent to a glyph on another copper plate -- that of ligatured U (rimless wide-mouthed pot) with leaves and crab’s claws. The archer has been decoded: kamāṭhiyo = archer; kāmaṭhum = a bow; kāmaḍ, kāmaḍum = a chip of bamboo (G.) kāmaṭhiyo a bowman; an archer (Skt.lex.) Rebus: kammaṭi a coiner (Ka.); kampaṭṭam coinage, coin, mint (Ta.) kammaṭa = mint, gold furnace (Te.) 1.3 Backbone, rib cage 

Sign 48. kaśēru ‘the backbone’ (Bengali. Skt.); kaśēruka id. (Skt.) Rebus: kasērā ʻmetal workerʼ (Lahnda)(CDIAL 2988, 2989) Spine, rib-cage: A comparable glyptic representation is on a seal published by Omananda Saraswati. In Pl. 275: Omananda Saraswati 1975. Ancient Seals of Haryana (in Hindi). Rohtak.” (I. Mahadevan, 'Murukan' in the Indus Script, The Journal of the Institute of Asian Studies, March 1999). B.B. Lal, 1960. From Megalithic to the Harappa: Tracing back the graffiti on pottery. Ancient India, No.16, pp. 4-24. 1.4 Rim of jar glyph kaṇḍa kanka (Santali); Rebus: kaṇḍa kanka ‘furnace scribe’. kaṇḍa ‘fire-altar, furnace’ (Santali); kan ‘copper’ (Ta.) karṇaka 'scribe, accountant' (Skt.) Vikalpa: kaṇḍ kanaka ‘gold furnace’. kánaka n. ʻ gold ʼ (Skt.) கன் kaṉ ,n. perh. கன்மம். 1. workmanship; வேலைப்பாடு. கன்னார் மதில்சூழ் குடந்தை (திவ். திருவாய். 5, 8, 3). 2. copper work; கன்னார் தொழில். (W.) 3. copper; செம்பு. (ஈடு, 5, 8, 3.) MBh. Pa. kanaka -- n., Pk. kaṇaya -- n., MB. kanayā ODBL 659, Si. kanā EGS 36.(CDIAL 2717) కనకము [ kanakamu ] kanakamu. [Skt.] n. Gold. (Telugu) கனகம் kaṉakam, n. < kanaka. 1. Gold; பொன். காரார்வண்ணன் கனகமனையானும் (தேவா. 502, 9 (Tamil) kanaka (nt.) [cp. Sk. kanaka; Gr. knh_kos yellow; Ags. hunig=E. honey. See also kañcana] gold, usually as uttatta˚ molten gold; said of the colour of the skin Bu i.59; Pv iii.32; J v.416; PvA 10 suvaṇṇa).-- agga gold -- crested J v.156; -- chavin of golden complexion J vi.13; -- taca (adj.) id. J v.393; -- pabhā golden splendour Bu xxiii.23; -- vimāna a fairy palace of gold VvA 6; PvA 47, 53; -- sikharī a golden peak, in ˚rājā king of the golden peaks (i. e. Himālayas): Dāvs iv.30. (Pali) Vikalpa: kaṉ ‘copper work’ (Ta.) The sequence of two glyphs discussed in 1.3 and 1.4 above occur with high frequency on copper tablets. The pair of glyphs is read rebus as: metal work, furnace scribe -- kasērā kaṇḍa kanka.  The following examples are of 8 copper tablets recovered in Harappa by HARP project. A third glyph on these tablets is an oval sign -- like a metal ingot -- and is ligatured with an infixed sloping stroke: ḍhāḷiyum = adj. sloping, inclining (G.) The ligatured glyph is read rebus as: ḍhālako = a large metal ingot (G.) ḍhālakī = a metal heated and poured into a mould; a solid piece of metal; an ingot (G.) The inscription on these tablets is in bas-relief:

Copper tablet (H2000-4498/9889-01) with raised script found in Trench 43. Slide 351 harappa.com Copper tablets with Indus script in bas-relief, Harappa. The three glyphs on the ingots are read in sequence: ḍhālako kasērā kaṇḍa kanka 'metal ingot, metal work, furnace scribe'. This is a professional calling card of the artisan engaged in metal work. 

1.5 Water-carrier glyph kuṭi ‘water-carrier’ (Telugu); Rebus: kuṭhi ‘smelter furnace’ (Santali) kuṛī f. ‘fireplace’ (H.); krvṛI f. ‘granary (WPah.); kuṛī, kuṛo house, building’(Ku.)(CDIAL 3232) kuṭi ‘hut made of boughs’ (Skt.) guḍi temple (Telugu) A comparable glyptic representation is provided in a Gadd seal found in an interaction area of the Persian Gulf. Gadd notes that the ‘water-carrier’ seal is is an unmistakable example of an 'hieroglyphic' seal. Seal impression, Ur (Upenn; U.16747); [After Edith Porada, 1971, Remarks on seals found in the Gulf States. Artibus Asiae 33 (4): 331-7: pl.9, fig.5]; water carrier with a skin (or pot?) hung on each end of the yoke across his shoulders and another one below the crook of his left arm; the vessel on the right end of his yoke is over a receptacle for the water; a star on either side of the head (denoting supernatural?). The whole object is enclosed by 'parenthesis' marks. The parenthesis is perhaps a way of splitting of the ellipse (Hunter, G.R., JRAS, 1932, 476). 1.6 Three (rimless) pots kolmo ‘three’ (Mu.); rebus: kolami ‘smithy’ (Te.) S. baṭhu m. ‘large pot in which grain is parched, Rebus; bhaṭṭhā m. ‘kiln’ (P.) baṭa = a kind of iron (G.) Vikalpa: meṛgo = rimless vessels (Santali) bhaṭa ‘furnace’ (G.) baṭa = kiln (Santali); baṭa = a kind of iron (G.) bhaṭṭha -- m.n. ʻ gridiron (Pkt.) baṭhu large cooking fire’ baṭhī f. ‘distilling furnace’; L. bhaṭṭh m. ‘grain—parcher's oven’, bhaṭṭhī f. ‘kiln, distillery’, awāṇ. bhaṭh; P. bhaṭṭh m., ṭhī f. ‘furnace’, bhaṭṭhā m. ‘kiln’; S. bhaṭṭhī keṇī ‘distil (spirits)’. (CDIAL 9656)Rebus: meḍ iron (Ho.) kolmo ‘rice plant’ (Mu.) Rebus: kolami ‘furnace,smithy’ (Te.) Vikalpa: pajhaṛ = to sprout from a root (Santali); Rebus: pasra ‘smithy, forge’ (Santali) Line 2 2.1 Cross dāṭu = cross (Te.); Rebus: dhatu = mineral (ore)(Santali) dhātu ‘mineral (Pali) dhātu ‘mineral’ (Vedic); a mineral, metal (Santali); dhāta id. (G.) 2.2 Arrow kaṇḍa ‘arrow’; Rebus: kaṇḍ = a furnace, altar (Santali) 2.3 Rim of jar + infixed short stroke Rim of jar is decoded as: kaṇḍa kanka ‘furnace scribe’. (See line 1.4) sal stake, spike, splinter, thorn, difficulty (H.); sal ‘workshop’ (Santali) Vikalpa: aṭar ‘a splinter’ (Ma.) aṭaruka ‘to burst, crack, sli off,fly open; aṭarcca ’ splitting, a crack’; aṭarttuka ‘to split, tear off, open (an oyster) (Ma.); a ḍ aruni ‘to crack’ (Tu.) (DEDR 66) Rebus: aduru ‘native, unsmelted metal’ Rebus: adaru = native metal (Ka.) aduru = gan.iyinda tegadu karagade iruva aduru = ore taken from the mine and not subjected to melting in a furnace (Ka. Siddha_nti Subrahman.ya’ S’astri’s new interpretation of the Amarakos’a, Bangalore, Vicaradarpana Press, 1872, p. 330) Thus, the ligatured glyph is read rebus as: scribe (of) native,unsmelted metal furnace. 

2.4 Body mēd ‘body’ (Kur.)(DEDR 5099); meḍ ‘iron’ (Ho.) 2.5 Bird (circumscribed in bracket) Decoding: Furnace for riveting metal (a kind of iron) baṭa= quail (Santali) Rebus: baṭa = a kind of iron (G.) bhaṭa ‘furnace’ (G.) baṭa = kiln (Santali) Vikalpa: pota ‘pigeon’; pot ‘beads’ (H.G.M.)(CDIAL 8403). Vikalpa: baṭṭai quail (N.) vartaka = a duck (Skt.)(CDIAL 11361). batak = a duck (G.) vartikā = quail (RV.); wuwrc partridge (Ash.); barti = quail, partridge (Kho.); vaṭṭaka_ quail (Pali); vaṭṭaya (Pkt.) (CDIAL 11361). Rebus: vartaka ‘merchant’ (Skt.) ( ) A pair of enclosures: *jāḍa -- ʻ joining, pair ʼ. [← Drav. LM 333]; 2. S. jāṛo m. ʻ twin ʼ, L. P. jāṛā m.; M. j̈āḍī f. ʻ a double yoke ʼ. (CDIAL 5091) Rebus: *jaḍati ʻ joins, sets ʼ. 1. Pk. jaḍia -- ʻ set (of jewels), joined ʼ; K. jarun ʻ to set jewels ʼ (← Ind.); S. jaṛaṇu ʻ to join, rivet, set ʼ, jaṛa f. ʻ rivet, boundary between two fields ʼ; P.jaṛāuṇā ʻ to have fastened or set ʼ; A. zarāiba ʻ to collect ʼ; B. jaṛāna ʻ to set jewels, wrap round, entangle ʼ, jaṛ ʻ heaped together ʼ; Or. jaṛibā ʻ to unite ʼ; OAw.jaraï ʻ sets jewels, bedecks ʼ; H. jaṛnā ʻ to join, stick in, set ʼ (→ N. jaṛnu ʻ to set, be set ʼ); OMarw. jaṛāū ʻ inlaid ʼ; G. jaṛvũ ʻ to join, meet with, set jewels ʼ; M.j̈aḍṇẽ ʻ to join, connect, inlay, be firmly established ʼ, j̈aṭṇẽ ʻ to combine, confederate ʼ. (CDIAL 5091) Vikalpa: dula दुल । युग्मम् m. a pair, a couple, esp. of two similar things (Rām. 966) (Kashmiri); dol ‘likeness, picture, form’ (Santali) Rebus: dul ‘to cast metal in a mould’ (Santali) dul meṛeḍ cast iron (Mundari. Santali) ‘cast bronze’; it is a glyptic formed of a pair of brackets (): kuṭila ‘bent’; rebus: kuṭila, katthīl = bronze (8 parts copper and 2 parts tin) 2.6 Two over-lapping (or pair of) ovals: Oval is the shape of an ingot (of metal). Paired ovals (ingots) are decoded as ‘cast’ ‘metal ingots’. mũh metal ingot (shaped like an oval) (Santali) mũhã̄ = the quantity of iron produced at one time in a native smelting furnace of the Kolhes; iron produced by the Kolhes and formed like a four-cornered piece a little pointed at each end; mūhā me~r.he~t = iron smelted by the Kolhes and formed into an equilateral lump a little pointed at each end; kolhe tehen me~r.he~tko mūhā akata = the Kolhes have to-day produced pig iron (Santali.lex.) kaula mengro ‘blacksmith’ (Gypsy) paired: dul ‘likeness’; dul ‘cast (metal)’] 2.7 A pair of linear strokes (two long linear strokes) Decoded as casting workshop dula ‘pair’; rebus: dul ‘cast (metal)(Santali) goṭ = one (Santali); goṭi = silver (G.) koḍa ‘one’ (Santali); koḍ ‘workshop’ (G.) Line 3 3.1 Rim of jar + infixed short stroke as in Line 2.3 above. Decoded as: furnace scribe workshop. 3.2 Two bent (curved) lines. Decoded as ‘cast bronze’. kuṭila ‘bent’; rebus: kuṭila, katthīl = bronze (8 parts copper and 2 parts tin) dula ‘pair’; rebus: dul ‘cast (metal)(Santali) 3.3 Rimless pot. Decoded as: gridiron. See 1.6 above (for three rimless pots). S. baṭhu m. ‘large pot in which grain is parched, Rebus; bhaṭṭhā m. ‘kiln’ (P.) baṭa = a kind of iron (G.) Vikalpa: meṛgo = rimless vessels (Santali) bhaṭa ‘furnace’ (G.) baṭa = kiln (Santali); baṭa = a kind of iron (G.) bhaṭṭha -- m.n. ʻ gridiron (Pkt.) baṭhu large cooking fire’ baṭhī f. ‘distilling furnace’; L. bhaṭṭh m. ‘grain—parcher's oven’, bhaṭṭhī f. ‘kiln, distillery’, awāṇ. bhaṭh; P. bhaṭṭh m., ṭhī f. ‘furnace’, bhaṭṭhā m. ‘kiln’; S. bhaṭṭhī keṇī ‘distil (spirits)’. (CDIAL 9656)Rebus: meḍ iron (Ho.) 

3.4 Nave of spoked wheel. Decoded as (molten cast copper) turner, kundār ‘turner’. era = knave of wheel; rebus: era = copper; erako = molten cast (G.) eraka, (copper) ‘metal infusion’; āra ‘spokes’; rebus: āra ‘brass’ as in ārakūṭa (Skt.) kund opening in the nave or hub of a wheel to admit the axle (Santali) Rebus: kundam, kund a sacrificial fire-pit (Skt.) kunda ‘turner’ kundār turner (A.); kũdār, kũdāri (B.); kundāru (Or.); kundau to turn on a lathe, to carve, to chase; kundau dhiri = a hewn stone; kundau murhut = a graven image (Santali) kunda a turner's lathe (Skt.)(CDIAL 3295) Vikalpa: era, er-a = eraka = ?nave; erako_lu = the iron axle of a carriage (Ka.M.); cf. irasu (Ka.lex.) [Note Sign 391 and its ligatures Signs 392 and 393 may connote a spoked-wheel, nave of the wheel through which the axle passes; cf. ara_, spoke] ஆரம்² āram , n. < āra. 1. Spoke of a wheel. See ஆரக்கால். ஆரஞ்சூழ்ந்த வயில்வாய் நேமியொடு (சிறுபாண். 253) (Tamil) 3.5 As in 2.7 above. A pair of linear strokes (two long linear strokes) Decoded as ‘casting workshop’. dula ‘pair’; rebus: dul ‘cast (metal)(Santali) goṭ = one (Santali); goṭi = silver (G.) koḍa ‘one’ (Santali); koḍ ‘workshop’ (G.) 3.6 Four + Three short strokes. Decoded as smithy (with) furnace. Four + three strokes are read (since the strokes are shown on two lines one below the other) : gaṇḍa ‘four’ (Santali); Rebus: kaṇḍa ‘furnace’ (Santali); kolmo ‘three’ (Mu.); rebus: kolami ‘smithy’ (Te.) Vikalpa: ?ea ‘seven’ (Santali); rebus: ?eh-ku ‘steel’ (Te.) Vikalpa: pon ‘four’ (Santali) rebus: pon ‘gold’ (Ta.) 3.7 As in 3.2 above. Two bent (curved) lines. Decoded as ‘cast bronze’. kuṭila ‘bent’; rebus: kuṭila, katthīl = bronze (8 parts copper and 2 parts tin) dula ‘pair’; rebus: dul ‘cast (metal)(Santali) 3.8 Harrow aḍar ‘harrow’; rebus: aduru ‘native metal’ 3.9 Horned body (Body as in 2.4 above.) Decoded as ‘metal (iron) turner’. mēd ‘body’ (Kur.)(DEDR 5099); meḍ ‘iron’ (Ho.) kōḍ, kōṇḍa ‘horn’. Pa. kōḍ (pl. kōḍul) horn; Ka. kōḍu horn, tusk, branch of a tree; kōr̤ horn Tu. kōḍů, kōḍu horn Ko. kṛ (obl. kṭ-)( (DEDR 2200) Paš. kōṇḍā́‘bald’, Kal. rumb. kōṇḍa ‘hornless’.(CDIAL 3508). Kal. rumb.khōṇḍ a‘ half’ (CDIAL 3792). Rebus: कोंडण [kōṇḍaṇa] f A fold or pen. (Marathi) kõdā ‘to turn in a lathe’ (Bengali) कोंद kōnda ‘engraver, lapidary setting or infixing gems’ (Marathi) कोंदण [ kōndaṇa ] n (कोंदणें) Setting or infixing of gems.(Marathi) খোদকার [ khōdakāra ] n an engraver; a carver. খোদকারি n. engraving; carving; interference in other's work. খোদাই [ khōdāi ] n engraving; carving. খোদাই করা v. to engrave; to carve. খোদানো v. & n. en graving; carving. খোদিত [ khōdita ] a engraved. (Bengali) खोदकाम [ khōdakāma ] n Sculpture; carved work or work for the carver. खोदगिरी [ khōdagirī ] f Sculpture, carving, engraving: also sculptured or carved work. खोदणावळ [ khōdaṇāvaḷa ] f (खोदणें) The price or cost of sculpture or carving. खोदणी [ khōdaṇī ] f (Verbal of खोदणें) Digging, engraving &c. 2 fig. An exacting of money by importunity. v लाव, मांड. 3 An instrument to scoop out and cut flowers and figures from paper. 4 A goldsmith's die. खोदणें [ khōdaṇēṃ ] v c & i ( H) To dig. 2 To engrave. खोद खोदून विचारणें or -पुसणें To question minutely and searchingly, to probe. खोदाई [ khōdāī ] f ( H) Price or cost of digging or of sculpture or carving. खोदींव [ khōdīṃva ] p of खोदणें Dug. 2 Engraved, carved, sculptured. (Marathi) 3.10 Rim of jar. As in 1.4 above. Decoded as: kaṇḍa kanka ‘furnace scribe’.

 Sit Shamshi. Model of a place of worship, known as the Sit Shamshi, or "Sunrise (ceremony)" Middle-Elamite period, toward the 12th century BC Acropolis mound, Susa, Iran; Bronze; H. 60 cm; W. 40 cm Excavations led by Jacques de Morgan, 1904-5; Sb 2743; Near Eastern Antiquities, Musée du Louvre/C. Larrieu. Two nude figures squat on the bronze slab, one knee bent to the ground. One of the figures holds out open hands to his companion who prepares to pour the contents of a lipped vase onto them.The scene takes place in a stylized urban landscape, with reduced-scale architectural features: a tiered tower or ziggurat flanked with pillars, a temple on a high terrace. There is also a large jar resembling the ceramic pithoi decorated with rope motifs that were used to store water and liquid foodstuffs. An arched stele stands by some rectangular basins. Rows of 8 dots in relief flank the ziggurat; jagged sticks represent trees.An inscription tells us the name of the piece's royal dedicator and its meaning in part: "I Shilhak-Inshushinak, son of Shutruk-Nahhunte, beloved servant of Inshushinak, king of Anshan and Susa [...], I made a bronze sunrise." 

Three jagged sticks on the Sit Shamshi bronze, in front of the water tank (Great Bath replica?) If the sticks are orthographic representations of 'forked sticks' and if the underlying language is Meluhha (mleccha), the borrowed or substratum lexemes which may provide a rebus reading are: kolmo 'three'; rebus; kolami 'smithy' (Telugu) मेंढा [ mēṇḍhā ] A crook or curved end (of a stick, horn &c.) and attrib. such a stick, horn, bullock. मेढा [ mēḍhā ] m A stake, esp. as forked. meḍ(h), meḍhī f., meḍhā m. ʻ post, forked stake ʼ.(Marathi)(CDIAL 10317) Rebus: mẽṛhẽt, meḍ ‘iron’ (Mu.Ho.) Thus, three jagged sticks on the Sit Shamshi bronze may be decoded as meḍ kolami 'iron (metal) smithy'. 'Iron' in such lexical entries may refer to 'metal'. Sit Shamshi bronze illustrates the complex technique of casting separate elements joined together with rivets, the excavations at Susa have produced one of the largest bronze statues of Antiquity: dating from the 14th century BC, the effigy of "Napirasu, wife of Untash-Napirisha," the head of which is missing, is 1.29 m high and weighs 1,750 kg. It was made using the solid-core casting method. These metallurgical techniques find an expression on Indus script inscriptions as seen on this longest inscription on a seal impression found in Mohenjodaro (m-314)-- all glyphs of the inscription relate to the repertoire of artisans engaged in metal work. See related links:http://bharatkalyan97.blogspot.com/2011/11/mohenjo-daro-stupa-great-bath-modeled.htmlhttp://bharatkalyan97.blogspot.com/2011/11/decoding-indus-scipt-susa-cylinder-seal.htmlhttp://bharatkalyan97.blogspot.com/2011/11/decoding-indus-scipt-susa-cylinder-seal.html 

Ancient Anatolian Metallurgy by Hadi Ozbal, Bogazici University, Istanbul (Slide show) Origins of iron-working in India, Rakesh Tiwari 

Damaged circular clay furnace, comprising iron slag and tuyeres and other waste materials stuck with its body, exposed at Lohsanwa mount, Period II, Malhar, Dist. Chandauli, India. 

This report is significant because recent excavations have produced clear evidence of iron-working at Malhar, Dist. Chandali -- Lat. 24deg.-59'-16"N; Long. 83deg.-15'-46" where a damaged circular clay furnace, comprising iron slag and tuyeres and other waste materials stuck with its body in a stratigraphically dated location. (See Figure 6, page 542). "As discussed elsewhere (Tewari et al. 2000) the sites at Malhar, the Baba Wali Pahari, and the Valley are archaeologically linked to the area of Geruwarwa Pahar which appears to have been a major source of iron ore. The Geruwarwa Pahar situated to the southeast of the Baba Wali Pahari, is full of hematite. Villagers reported (as a tradition passed down from several generations), that the agarias (a particular tribe known for their iron smelting skills) from Robertsganj side, used to come in this area to procure iron by smelting the hematite...The presence of tuyeres, slags, finished iron artefacts, above-mentioned clay structures with burnt internal surface and arms, revealed at Malhar, suggest a large scale activity related to manufacture of iron tools." (p. 542). Malhar is located on river Karamnasa which joins River Ganga at Varanasi. Two radiocarbon dates recorded at this site range around 1800 cal. BCE (Table 2, p. 540) -- precise dates are: 1882 and 2012 BCE. Rakesh Tewari provides the following summary of the evidence from Malhar and other Central Ganga Plain and Eastern Vindhya sites: [Quote]Discussion These results indicate that iron using and iron working was prevalent in the Central Ganga Plain and the Eastern Vindhyas from the early second millennium BC. The dates obtained so far group into three: three dates between c. 1200-900 cal BC, three between c. 1400-1200 cal BC, and five between c. 1800-1500 cal BC. The types and shapes of the associated pottery are comparable to those to be generally considered as the characteristics of the Chalcolithic Period and placed in early to late second millennium BC. Taking all this evidence together it may be concluded that knowledge of iron smelting and manufacturing of iron artefacts was well known in the Eastern Vindhyas and iron had been in use in the Central Ganga Plain, at least from the early second millennium BC. The quantity and types of iron artefacts, and the level of technical advancement indicate that the introduction of iron working took place even earlier. The beginning of the use of iron has been traditionally associated with the eastward migration of the later Vedic people, who are also considered as an agency which revolutionised material culture particularly in eastern Uttar Pradesh and Bihar (Sharma 1983: 117-131). The new finds and their dates suggest that a fresh review is needed. Further, the evidence corroborates the early use of iron in other areas of the country, and attests that India was indeed an independent centre for the development of the working of iron. [unquote](pp. 543-544). Thus, both the Gufkral evidence evaluated by Possehl and Gullapalli and the evidence from Malhar and other Central Ganga Plain and Eastern Vindhya sites discussed by Rakesh Tewari point to an indigenous evolution of iron-working in India dated to early 2nd millennium BCE. The evidence leads to a reasonable hypothesis that the metal-workers of the chalcolithic periods of Sarasvati Civilization moved into the Ganga and Eastern Vindhya iron-age sites to continue the tradition of metal-working, exemplified by the asur-s of Mundarica tradition. No wonder, the Sarasvati hieroglyphs have a significant number of homonyms from the Mundarica tradition to represent metal-working artefacts such as furnaces and minerals used to produce metal products. The cultural continuity and the indigenous origins of metal-working are areas for further research as excavations proceed on over 2000 Sarasvati River basin sites.  Bronze statue of a woman holding a small bowl, Mohenjodaro; copper alloy made using cire perdue method (DK 12728; Mackay 1938: 274, Pl. LXXIII, 9-11)

Foot with anklet; copper alloy. Mohenjodaro (After Fig. 5.11 in Agrawal. D.P. 2000. Ancient Metal Technology & Archaeology of South Asia. Delhi: Aryan Books International.) Examples of metallurgical skills of Indus artisans: Possehl, Gregory L. and Gullampalli, Praveena, 1999, The early iron age in South Asia. In Vincent Piggott, ed., The Archaeometallurgy of the Asian Old World. University Museum Monograph 89, MASCA research papers in science and archaeology Vol. 16, Philadephia: The Univrsity Museum, UPenn, pp. 153-175 

Gold pendant with Indus script inscription. The pendant is needle-like with cylindrical body. It is made from a hollow cylinder with soldered ends and perforated oint. Museum No. MM 1374.50.271; Marshall 1931: 521, pl. CLI, B3 (After Fig. 4.17 a,b in: JM Kenoyer, 1998, p. 196) 

Illustrated London News 1936 - November 21st 

http://www.iln.org.uk/iln_years/year/1936a.htm A 'Sheffield of Ancient India: Chanhu-Daro's metal working industry 10 X photos of copper knives, spears, razors, axes and dishes. 

Copper model of a passsenger box on a cart. Chanhudaro, 'a Sheffield of ancient India'. 

Inscribed metal tools, copper tablets: Mohenjodaro, Harappa. 

Axe with inscription and other tools, Chanhudaro, Kalibangan 

Copper tablets m0438; m1449; m1452; m1486; m1493; m1498; m1501; m0582 (123 copper tablets) 

Copper plate, Mohenjodaro with Indus script glyph. 

Silver seals with Indus script inscriptions, Mohenjodaro 

Inscribed lead celt, Harappa.(Slide 209 Harappa.com HARP) 

Two pure tin ingots with Indus script inscription. Shipwreck in Haifa. More examples in embedded document (attached at the end). Chanhudaro was called Sheffield of the east (See embedded document decoding smith guild tokens) 

Indus script cipher: Hieroglyphs of Indian linguistic area (2010) Kalyanaraman, November 12, 2011 kalyan97@gmail.com Indus writing on utensils and metal tools Decoded smith guild tokens Bhirrana artefacts (See the dancing step glyph shown on a potsherd, decoded as 'iron'). 

 

Copper celts, Bhirrana. 

Bronze statue, Mohenjodaro. 'Dance step' glyph on Bhirran potsherd. meḍ ‘body’, ‘dance’ (Santali) மெட்டு¹-தல் meṭṭu-, v. tr. cf. நெட்டு-. [K. meṭṭu.] To spurn or push with the foot; காலால் தாக்குதல். நிகளத்தை மெட்டி மெட்டிப் பொடிபடுத்தி (பழனிப்பிள்ளைத். 12). (Tamil) meṭṭu ‘to put or place down the foot or feet; to step, to pace, to walk (Ka.); meṭṭisu ‘to cause to step or walk, to cause to tread on’ (Ka.) meḍ ‘dance’ (Santali); Rebus: meḍ, mẽṛhẽt 'iron'(Mu.Ho.) 

Daimabad bronze chariot. c. 1500 BCE. 22X52X17.5 cm. 

Buffalo. Daimabad bronze. Prince of Wales Museum, Mumbai. 

Daimabad bronzes. Buffalo on four-legged platform attached to four solid wheels 31X25 cm.; elephanton four-legged platform with axles 25 cm.; rhinoceros on axles of four solid wheels 25X19 cm. (MK Dhavalikar, 'Daimabad bronzes' in: Harappan civilization, ed. by GL Possehl, New Delhi, 1982, pp. 361-6; SA Sali, Daimabad 1976-1979, New Delhi, 1986). 

The three animals: buffalo, rhinoceros, elephant occur together with a leaping tiger on a seal. cf. Decoding of animal glyphs and other glyphs on the seal as related to lapidaries/metalsmith/metalwork artisan guild/mint Indus script cipher: Hieroglyphs of Indian linguistic area (2010) Mleccha rebus decoding: ibha 'elephant' (Skt.) Rebus: ib 'iron'; ibbho 'merchant' (cf.Hemacandra, Desinamamala, vaṇika); badhia 'rhino'; Rebus: baḍhoe ‘a carpenter, worker in wood’; badhoria ‘expert in working in wood’(Santali); kol 'tiger'; kolla 'smith'; sal 'bos gaurus'; rebus: sal 'workshop'.]kamaḍha ‘penance’ (Pkt.); Rebus: kammaṭa = mint, gold furnace (Te.) tāttāru 'buffalo horns' (Munda); Rebus: ṭhaṭhero 'brassworker'(Ku.)cūḍā, cūlā, cūliyā tiger’s mane (Pkt.)(CDIAL 4883)sodo bodo, sodro bodro adj. adv. rough, hairy, shoggy, hirsute, uneven; Rebus: sodo [Persian. sodā, dealing] trade; traffic; merchandise; marketing; a bargain; the purchase or sale of goods; buying and selling; mercantile dealings (G.lex.) sodagor = a merchant, trader; sodāgor (P.B.) (Santali) A jackal (Marathi) Rebus: Ta. kol working in iron, blacksmith; kollaṉ blacksmith. Ma. kollan blacksmith, artificer. Ko. kole·l smithy, temple in Kota village; kolhali to forge (DEDR 2133)(Kuwi). kūrda m. ʻ jump ʼ, gūrda -- m. ʻ jump ʼ Kāṭh. [√kūrd] S. kuḍ̠u m. ʻ leap ʼ, N. kud, Or. kuda, °dā, kudā -- kudi ʻ jumping about ʼ.kūˊrdati ʻ leaps, jumps ʼ MBh. [gūˊrdati, khūˊrdatē Dhātup.: prob. ← Drav. (Tam. kuti, Kan. gudi ʻ to spring ʼ) T. Burrow BSOAS xii 375]S. kuḍ̠aṇu ʻ to leap ʼ; L. kuḍ̠aṇ ʻ to leap, frisk, play ʼ; P. kuddṇā ʻ to leap ʼ, Ku. kudṇo, N. kudnu, B. kũdā, kõdā; Or. kudibā ʻ to jump, dance ʼ; Mth. kūdab ʻ to jump ʼ, Aw. lakh. kūdab, H. kūdnā, OMarw. kūdaï, G. (CDIAL 3411, 3412) Rebus: kunda ‘turner’ kundār turner (A.) Vikalpa: ஏறு ēṟu Pouncing upon, as an eagle; பருந்தின் கவர்ச்சி. பரிந்தி னேறுகுறித் தொரீஇ (புறநா. 43, 5). Rebus: eruvai ‘copper’ (Ta.); ere dark red (Ka.)(DEDR 446). कोल्हा [ kōlhā ] कोल्हें [ kōlhēṃ ] Pouncing tiger glyph is read rebus: kũdā kol 'turner smith'. The four animal glyphs surrounding the seated person thus connote: merchant (ibbho), carpenter (baḍhoe), turner-smith (kũdā kol), workshop (sal). Addendum with glyphs and inscriptions consistent with the themes depicting repertoire of artisan-smiths of the civilization: A lexeme which may explain the 'mountain' or 'haystack' glyphs; Rebus: Rebus: mẽṛhẽt, meḍ ‘iron’ (Mu.Ho.): kunda 'hayrick'; rebus: kundār turner (A.) 

Indus script seal impression. Mohenjodaro. Symmetrically flanking goats with feet on central tree and mountin (ASI) 

Sumerian cylinder seal showing flanking goats with hooves on tree and/or mountain. Uruk period. (After Joyce Burstein in: Katherine Anne Harper, Robert L. Brown, 2002, The roots of tantra, SUNY Press, p.100)Hence, two goats + mountain glyph reads rebus: meḍ kundār 'iron turner'. Leaf on mountain: kamaṛkom 'petiole of leaf'; rebus: kampaṭṭam 'mint'. loa = a species of fig tree, ficus glomerata, the fruit of ficus glomerata (Santali) Rebus: lo ‘iron’ (Assamese, Bengali); loa ‘iron’ (Gypsy). The glyphic composition is read rebus: meḍ loa kundār 'iron turner mint'. kundavum = manger, a hayrick (G.) Rebus: kundār turner (A.); kũdār, kũdāri (B.); kundāru (Or.); kundau to turn on a lathe, to carve, to chase; kundau dhiri = a hewn stone; kundau murhut = a graven image (Santali) kunda a turner's lathe (Skt.)(CDIAL 3295) This rebus reading may explain the hayrick glyph shown on the sodagor 'merchant, trader' seal surrounded by four animals.Two antelopes are put next to the hayrick on the platform of the seal on which the horned person is seated. mlekh 'goat' (Br.); rebus: milakku 'copper' (Pali); mleccha 'copper' (Skt.) Thus, the composition of glyphs on the platform: pair of antelopes + pair of hayricks read rebus: milakku kundār 'copper turner'. Thus the seal is a framework of glyphic compositions to describe the repertoire of a brazier-mint, 'one who works in brass or makes brass articles' and 'a mint'. 

Ta. meṭṭu mound, heap of earth; mēṭu height, eminence, hillock; muṭṭu rising ground, high ground, heap. Ma. mēṭu rising ground, hillock; māṭu hillock, raised ground; miṭṭāl rising ground, an alluvial bank; (Tiyya) maṭṭa hill. Ka. mēḍu height, rising ground, hillock; miṭṭu rising or high ground, hill; miṭṭe state of being high, rising ground, hill, mass, a large number; (Hav.) muṭṭe heap (as of straw). Tu. miṭṭè prominent, protruding; muṭṭe heap. Te. meṭṭa raised or high ground, hill; (K.) meṭṭu mound; miṭṭa high ground, hillock, mound; high, elevated, raised, projecting; (VPK) mēṭu, mēṭa, mēṭi stack of hay; (Inscr.) meṇṭa-cēnu dry field (cf. meṭṭu-nēla, meṭṭu-vari). Kol. (SR.) meṭṭā hill; (Kin.) meṭṭ, (Hislop) met mountain. Nk. meṭṭ hill, mountain. Ga. (S.3, LSB 20.3) meṭṭa high land. Go. (Tr. W. Ph.) maṭṭā, (Mu.) maṭṭa mountain; (M. L.) meṭā id., hill; (A. D. Ko.) meṭṭa, (Y. Ma. M.) meṭa hill; (SR.) meṭṭā hillock (Voc. 2949). Konḍa meṭa id. Kuwi (S.) metta hill; (Isr.) meṭa sand hill. (DEDR 5058) kamaṛkom = fig leaf (Santali.lex.) kamarmaṛā (Has.), kamaṛkom (Nag.); the petiole or stalk of a leaf (Mundari.lex.)Rebus: kampaṭṭam coinage, coin (Ta.)(DEDR 1236) kampaṭṭa- muḷai die, coining stamp (Ta.) Vikalpa: lo ‘iron’ (Assamese, Bengali); loa ‘iron’ (Gypsy)

In same measures: Harappa to Taj

K. S. Jayaraman

Balasubramaniam in front of the Sun Temple in Konark, Orissa.

A researcher analysing designs of historical buildings and monuments of India has made a profound discovery. He has shown that the unit of length used by the builders through the ages surprisingly remained the same for over 3900 years. This reveals a new dimension in metrology — the science of measurement — in the Indian subcontinent.

From the Harappan settlements of 2000 B. C. and the Delhi Iron Pillar of Gupta period (320–600 AD) to the 17th century Taj Mahal, the unit 'angulam' had remained the standard of measurement in engineering plans, says Ramamurthy Balasubramaniam from the Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) in Kanpur.

Angulam and its multiples vitasti (12 angulams) and dhanus (108 angulams) find mention in the Indian treatise Arthasastra by Kautilya who codified the metrology that was prevalent around 300 B.C. But the exact value of angulam was derived only in 2008 by Michel Danino, the French author who made India his home.

Danino who studied the Dolavira settlement — the largest Harappan civilization site in India — found¹ that the dimensions used were exact multiples of 1.904 metre, a unit that he assumed to be the dhanus mentioned in Arthasastra. Further, takingdhanus to be 108 angulams, Danino derived the value of angulam to be 1.763 cm.

Balasubramaniam, a professor of materials and metallurgical engineering, says he got interested in metrology after Danino's derivation of the value of angulam and his own observation² that a terracotta scale of Harappan civilisation from Kalibangan, that was given to him for analysis, indicated markings of 1.75 cm.

"Seeing 1.75 cm markings on the Harappan scale and Danino's derived value of 1.763 cm for angulam no doubt excited me," Balasubramaniam told Nature India."That prompted me to carry out dimensional analysis of some of India's historical structures to see if their builders used a standardised unit of measurement," he said.

Balasubramaniam who studied the 1600 year old Delhi Iron Pillar³ found that its dimensions "matched remarkably well" with the units of angulam and dhanus of the Harappan civilization. "For example, the total height of the pillar is precisely fourdhanus and several measures come out as whole numbers of vitasti, " he said.

The IIT professor had also carried out dimensional analysis of the earliest engineered caves at Barabar and Nagarjuni Hills in Bihar (Ashokan period, 300 B. C.), the Gupta Temple at Deogarh in Uttar Pradesh (6th century AD) and very recently⁴ the Taj Mahal in Agra.

"All these studies confirm the use of a constant basic measurement unit ofangulam, " the IIT professor said. "What is surprising is the fact that the constant of 1.763 cm, when matched for the angulam, leads to the realisation of the other multiples," Balasubramaniam said, "and surprisingly, important historical structures of the Indian subcontinent show a more than good match with these multiples."

For instance he found⁴ that the modular plan of the Taj Mahal complex is based on use of grids of sides measuring 60 and 90 vitasti. The mausoleum was designed on a master square of 270 vitasti to the side – a number that allows the area to be divided into nine smaller squares of side 90 vitasti.

"Further subdivision of the 90 vitasti length in thirds is evident in the length of the large arched doors (60 vitasti) and the small arched doors (30 vitasti) on each (outer) face of the mausoleum," Balasubramaniam explained. "We now know that the modular design and architecture of the Taj is based on Indian principles and there is nothing foreign in the design plan," Balasubramaniam said.

According to Balasubramaniam, the important outcome of his research is that it has establishes the continuity of metrological tradition from the Harappan civilisation down to pre-modern India indicated by the fact that the unit of angulam matches so well the dimensions of important monuments.

"This implies an unbroken engineering tradition in the use of the angulam over a period of more than 3900 years which is really amazing," he said. The tradition was broken with the adoption of British units in early twentieth century. "With the new knowledge we can now analyse all the important ancient structures in India, using 1.763 cm as the standard with different multiplying units. This work will open a new chapter in metrological studies," he said.

But how did the angulam knowledge get transmitted through the ages to maintain continuity? "It is reasonable to propose that the workers were following some kind of scale that was handed over through generations," says Balasubramaniam. "Otherwise, such a good match of the dimensions cannot be due to chance."

• References

  1. Danino, M. New insights into Harappan town-planning, proportions, and units, with special reference to Dholavira. Man Environ. 33, 66-79 (2008)
  2. Balasubramaniam, R. et al. Analysis of terracotta scale of Harappan civilization from Kalibangan. Curr. Sci. 95, 588-589 (2008)
  3. Balasubramaniam, R. On the mathematical significance of the dimensions of the Delhi Iron Pillar. Curr. Sci. 95, 766-770 (2008)
  4. Balasubramaniam, R. New insights on the modular planning of the Taj Mahal. Curr. Sci. 97, 42-49 (2009)
• http://www.nature.com/nindia/2009/090708/full/nindia.2009.227.html

Dravidian languages have a word for steel: uruku, ukku, karugu, urku, ukku many of which mean either ‘melt’ or ‘dissolve’.

R. Balasubramanian underlines the continuity of tradition for example in the use of linear measures for artifacts since the days of Indus-Sarasvati civilization to the historical periods.

DP Agrawal and Manikant Shah point to iron processing in Kumaun in first millennium BCE and note words like lo, lu, loha directly related to iron; agar related to mines and mining activities; place names such as Lohaghat, Loharkhet, Lob, Lukhani and Assurchula; Asur tradition associating King Banasur with old iron site of Lohaghat.

B. Prakash notes the categories of kanta loha (wrought iron), tiksna loha (carbon steel) and munda loha (cast iron which evolved in refining techniques into ukku or wootz steel)

Smelters and blacksmiths were the same people. Viswakarma caste in Telengana region consists of five distinct craft communities: blacksmiths, goldsmiths, bronze-smiths, carpenters and stonemasons or sculptors. They wear sacred threads like the Brahmins.

Agaria smelters use bundles of reeds of straw plastered with clay as furnace walls.

Forging  realized the desired grain structure and plasticity.

Diagram showing the formation of alluvial tin deposits (From JB Richardson, Metal Mining, London, 1974, 60, fig. 7) Noting this method of sourcing tin near granite sources as placer deposits, James Muhly discusses the possibility of such fluvial deposits from, for e.g., Afghanistan, as constituting sources for tin to replace arsenical bronzes with tin-bronzes, a process which was revolutionary in the Bronze Age.

Inscription on Rampurva copper bolt:

Rebus readings L: to R. are:

1. kōṭai mountain (Tamil) Rebus: kōṭṭam = temple (Tamil) koṭe ‘forging (metal)(Mu.) koḍ ‘workshop’ (G.) खोट [ khōṭa ] f ‘A mass of metal (unwrought or of old metal melted down); an ingot or wedge’ (Kashmiri) baṭa = rimless pot (Kannada) Rebus:  baṭa = furnace (Santali) 

2. Glyph: dulo ‘hole’ (N.); rebus: dul ‘to cast metal in a mould’ (Santali) baṭa = rimless pot (Kannada) Rebus:  baṭa = furnace (Santali) 

3. gaṇḍa ‘four’ (Santali) Rebus: kaṇḍ = fire-altar (Santali); kan = copper (Tamil)

4. Pali. kuṭila— ‘bent’, n. ‘bend’; Prakrit. kuḍila— ‘crooked’ Rebus: kuṭila, katthīl = bronze (8 parts copper and 2 parts tin) 

Thus, the inscription on Rampurva copper bolt describes the metallurgical processes of makiing the bolt:

1. a mass of khōṭa metal melted down in furnace; koṭe ‘forged'

2. the metal cast (dul) in a mould 

3. ingot subjected to fire-altar (kaṇḍ) furnace

4. Bronze (8 parts copper and 2 parts tin) used in casting the alloy, kuṭila

Rimless-pot glyph is ligatured to two glyphs: 1. mountain; 2. circle

baṭa = rimless pot (Kannada) Rebus:  baṭa = furnace (Santali) bhrāṣṭra = furnace (Skt.) 

 

kōṭu summit of a hill, peak, mountain; kōṭai mountain (Tamil) kūṭa = peak 

(Telugu)

kūṭam = workshop (Tamil); 

koṭṭamu, koṭṭama. [Tel.] n. A pent roofed chamber or house as distinguished from ‘midde' which is flat-roofed. Pounding in a mortar. A stable for elephants or horses, or cattle  A. i. 43. [ koṭṭāmu ] koṭṭāmu. [Tel.] n. A pent roofed house. [ koṭṭaruvu ] koṭṭaruvu. [Tel.] n. A barn, a grain store.  [koṭāru],  [Tel.] n. A store, a granary. A place to keep grain, salt, &c. కొఠారు [ koṭhāru ] Same as [ koṭhī ] koṭhī. [H.] n. A bank. A mercantile house or firm (Telugu) kṓṣṭha2 n. ʻ pot ʼ Kauś., ʻ granary, storeroom ʼ MBh., ʻ inner apartment ʼ lex., aka -- n. ʻ treasury ʼ, ikā f. ʻ pan ʼ Bhpr. [Cf. *kōttha -- , *kōtthala -- : same as prec.?] Pa. koṭṭha -- n. ʻ monk's cell, storeroom ʼ, aka<-> n. ʻ storeroom ʼ; Pk. koṭṭha -- , kuṭ, koṭṭhaya -- m. ʻ granary, storeroom ʼ; Sv. dāntar -- kuṭha ʻ fire -- place ʼ; Sh. (Lor.) kōti (ṭh?) ʻ wooden vessel for mixing yeast ʼ; K. kōṭha m. ʻ granary ʼ, kuṭhu m. ʻ room ʼ, kuṭhü f. ʻ granary, storehouse ʼ; S. koṭho m. ʻ large room ʼ, ṭhī f. ʻ storeroom ʼ; L. koṭhā m. ʻ hut, room, house ʼ, ṭhī f. ʻ shop, brothel ʼ, awāṇ. koṭhā ʻ house ʼ; P. koṭṭhā, koṭhā m. ʻ house with mud roof and walls, granary ʼ, koṭṭhī, koṭhī f. ʻ big well -- built house, house for married women to prostitute themselves in ʼ; WPah. pāḍ. kuṭhī ʻ house ʼ; Ku. koṭho ʻ large square house ʼ, gng. kōṭhi ʻ room, building ʼ; N. koṭho ʻ chamber ʼ, ṭhi ʻ shop ʼ; A. koṭhā, kõṭhā ʻ room ʼ,kuṭhī ʻ factory ʼ; B. koṭhā ʻ brick -- built house ʼ, kuṭhī ʻ bank, granary ʼ; Or. koṭhā ʻ brick -- built house ʼ, ṭhīʻ factory, granary ʼ; Bi. koṭhī ʻ granary of straw or brushwood in the open ʼ; Mth. koṭhīʻ grain -- chest ʼ; OAw. koṭha ʻstoreroom ʼ; H. koṭhā m. ʻ granary ʼ, ṭhī f. ʻ granary, large house ʼ, Marw. koṭho m. ʻ room ʼ; G.koṭhɔ m. ʻ jar in which indigo is stored, warehouse ʼ, ṭhī f. ʻ large earthen jar, factory ʼ; M. koṭhā m. ʻ large granary ʼ, ṭhī f. ʻ granary, factory ʼ; Si. koṭa ʻ storehouse ʼ. -- Ext. with -- ḍa -- : K. kūṭhürü f. ʻ small room ʼ; L. koṭhṛī f. ʻ small side room ʼ; P. koṭhṛī f. ʻ room, house ʼ; Ku. koṭheṛī ʻ small room ʼ; H. koṭhrī f. ʻ room, granary ʼ; M. koṭhḍī f. ʻ room ʼ; -- with -- ra -- : A. kuṭharī ʻ chamber ʼ, B. kuṭhrī, Or. koṭhari; -- with -- lla -- : Sh. (Lor.) kotul (ṭh?) ʻ wattle and mud erection for storing grain ʼ; H. koṭhlā m., lī f. ʻ room, granary ʼ; G. koṭhlɔ m. ʻ wooden box ʼ kōṣṭhapāla -- ,  *kōṣṭharūpa -- , *kōṣṭhāṁśa -- , kōṣṭhāgāra -- ; *kajjalakōṣṭha -- , *duvārakōṣṭha-, *dēvakōṣṭha -- , dvārakōṣṭhaka -- .Addenda: kṓṣṭha -- 2: WPah.kṭg.kóṭṭhi f. ʻ house, quarters, temple treasury, name of a partic. temple ʼ, J. koṭhā m. ʻ granary ʼ, koṭhī f. ʻ granary, bungalow ʼ; Garh. koṭhu ʻ house surrounded by a wall ʼ; Md. koḍi ʻ frame ʼ, <-> koři ʻ cage ʼ (Xkōṭṭa -- ). -- with ext.: OP. koṭhārī f. ʻ crucible ʼ, P. kuṭhālī f., H.kuṭhārī f.; -- Md. koṭari ʻ room ʼ.(CDIAL 3546) kōṣṭhapāla m. ʻ storekeeper ʼ W. [kṓṣṭha -- 2, pāla -- ] M. koṭhvaḷā m. (CDIAL 3547) 3550 kōṣṭhāgāra n. ʻ storeroom, store ʼ Mn. [kṓṣṭha -- 2, agāra -- ] Pa. koṭṭhāgāra -- n. ʻ storehouse, granary ʼ; Pk. koṭṭhāgāra -- , koṭṭhāra -- n. ʻ storehouse ʼ; K. kuṭhār m. ʻ wooden granary ʼ, WPah. bhal. kóṭhār m.; A. B. kuṭharī ʻ apartment ʼ, Or. koṭhari; Aw. lakh. koṭhār ʻ zemindar's residence ʼ; H. kuṭhiyār ʻ granary ʼ; G. koṭhār m. ʻ granary, storehouse ʼ, koṭhāriyũ n. ʻ small do. ʼ; M. koṭhār n., koṭhārẽ n. ʻ large granary ʼ, -- rī f. ʻ small one ʼ; Si. koṭāra ʻ granary, store ʼ.kōṣṭhāgārika -- .Addenda:  kōṣṭhāgāra -- : WPah.kṭg. kəṭhāˊr, kc. kuṭhār m. ʻ granary, storeroom ʼ, J. kuṭhār, kṭhār m.; -- Md. kořāru ʻ storehouse ʼ ← Ind. (CDIAL 3550). kōṣṭhāgārika m. ʻ storekeeper ʼ BHSk. [Cf. kōṣṭhā- gārin -- m. ʻ wasp ʼ Suśr.: kōṣṭhāgāra -- ] Pa. koṭṭhāgārika -- m. ʻ storekeeper ʼ; S. koṭhārī m. ʻ one who in a body of faqirs looks after the provision store ʼ; Or. koṭhārī ʻ treasurer ʼ; Bhoj. koṭhārī ʻ storekeeper ʼ, H. kuṭhiyārī m. Addenda: kōṣṭhāgārika -- : G. koṭhārī m. ʻ storekeeper ʼ. kōṣṭhin -- see kuṣṭhin -- Add2. (CDIAL 3552) Ta. koṭṭakai shed with sloping roofs, cow-stall; marriage pandal; koṭṭam cattle-shed; koṭṭil cow-stall, shed, hut; (STD) koṭambefeeding place for cattle. Ma. koṭṭil cowhouse, shed, workshop, house. Ka. koṭṭage, koṭige, koṭṭige stall or outhouse (esp. for cattle), barn, room.  Koḍ.  koṭṭï shed.  Tu.koṭṭa hut or dwelling of Koragars; koṭyashed, stall. Te. koṭṭā̆mu stable for cattle or horses; koṭṭāyi thatched shed. Kol. (Kin.) koṛka, (SR.)korkācowshed; (Pat., p. 59) konṭoḍi henhouse. Nk. khoṭa cowshed. Nk. (Ch.)  koṛka id.  Go. (Y.) koṭa, (Ko.) koṭam (pl. koṭak) id. (Voc. 880); (SR.) koṭka shed; (W. G. Mu. Ma.) koṛka, (Ph.) korka, kurkacowshed (Voc. 886); (Mu.) koṭorla, koṭorli shed for goats (Voc. 884). Malt. koṭa hamlet. / Influenced by Skt. goṣṭha-.  (DEDR 2058) கொட்டகை koṭṭakai, n. < gōṣṭhaka. [T. koṭṭamu, K. koṭṭage, Tu. koṭya.] Shed with sloping roofs, cow-stall, marriage-pandal; பந்தல் விசேடம். கொட்டகைத் தூண்போற் காலிலங்க(குற்றா. குற. 84, 4). கொட்டம் koṭṭam, n. House; வீடு. ஒரு கொட்டம் ஒழிச்சுக் குடுத்துருங்கோ(எங்களூர், 47). கோட்டம்² kōṭṭam, n. < kōṣṭha. 1. Room, enclosure; அறை. சுடும ணோங்கிய நெடுநிலைக் கோட்டமும் (மணி. 6, 59). 2. Temple; கோயில். கோழிச் சேவற் கொடியோன் கோட்டமும்(சிலப். 14, 10).

Glyph: dulo ‘hole’ (N.); rebus: dul ‘to cast metal in a mould’ (Santali) 

kuṭila ‘bent’;  kuṭi— in cmpd. ‘curve’ (Skt.)(CDIAL 3231); rebus: kuṭhi ‘smelter’ (Santali) CDIAL 3231 kuṭilá— ‘bent, crooked’ KātyŚr., aka— Pañcat., n. ‘a partic. plant’ lex. [√kuṭ 1] Pa. kuṭila— ‘bent’, n. ‘bend’; Pk. kuḍila— ‘crooked’ rebus: kuṭila, katthīl = bronze (8 parts copper and 2 parts tin) [cf. āra-kūṭa, ‘brass’ (Skt.) (CDIAL 3230)

खांडा [khāṇḍā] m  a jag, notch, or indentation (as upon the edge of a tool or weapon). khāṇḍā ‘tools, pots and pans, metal-ware’.

Glyph: ‘piece’: kōḍ कोड् m. a kernel (Kashmiri) खोट [khōṭa] A lump or solid bit (as of phlegm, gore, curds, inspissated milk); any concretion or clot. (Marathi) guḍá—1. — In sense ‘fruit, kernel’ cert. ← Drav., cf. Tam. koṭṭai ‘nut, kernel’; A. goṭ ‘a fruit, whole piece’, °ṭā ‘globular, solid’, guṭi ‘small ball, seed, kernel’; B. goṭā ‘seed, bean, whole’; Or. goṭā ‘whole, undivided’, goṭi ‘small ball, cocoon’, goṭāli ‘small round piece of chalk’; Bi. goṭā ‘seed’; Mth. goṭa ‘numerative particle’ (CDIAL 4271) Rebus: koṭe ‘forging (metal)(Mu.) koḍ ‘workshop’ (G.).Sa. gOta? `to scrape, scratch'.Mu. gOta? `to scrape, scratch'.KW gOta?@(M087)  Rebus: खोट [ khōṭa ] f ‘A mass of metal (unwrought or of old metal melted down); an ingot or wedge’ (Kashmiri) L. khoṭ f. ʻalloy, impurityʼ, °ṭā  ʻalloyedʼ, awāṇ. khoṭā  ʻforgedʼ; P. khoṭ m. ʻbase, alloyʼ M.khoṭā  ʻalloyedʼ, (CDIAL 3931)

gaṇḍa ‘four’ (Santali) Rebus: kaṇḍ = fire-altar (Santali); kan = copper (Tamil)

sangaḍa ‘lathe, portable furnace’. Rebus: jaṅgaḍ ‘entrusment articles’. jangaḍiyo ‘military guard who accompanies treasure into the treasury’ (G.) sangaḍa ‘association, guild’. sangatarāsu ‘stone cutter’ (Telugu) sãghāḍiyo a worker on a  lathe (G.)

Vikalpa: meḍhi ‘pillar’. meḍ ‘iron’ : mẽṛhẽt, meḍ ‘iron’ (Mu.Ho.)

Glyph:kuṭi ‘tree’; kuṭi, kuṭhi, kuṭa, kuṭha a tree (Kaus'.); kud.a tree (Pkt.); kuṛā tree; kaṛek tree, oak (Pas;.)(CDIAL 3228). kuṭha, kuṭa (Ka.), kudal (Go.)     kudar. (Go.)  kuṭha_ra, kuṭha, kuṭaka = a tree (Skt.lex.) kuṭ, kurun: = stump of a tree (Bond.a); khut. = id. (Or.) kuṭamu = a tree (Te.lex.) Glyph: tree, rebus: smelting furnace

kuṭhi kuṭa, kuṭi, kuṭha a tree (Kaus’.); kuḍa tree (Pkt.); kuṛā tree; kaṛek tree, oak (Pas;.)(CDIAL 3228). Kuṭha, kuṭa (Ka.), kudal (Go.) kudar. (Go.) kuṭhāra, kuṭha, kuṭaka = a tree (Skt.lex.) kuṭ, kurun: = stump of a tree (Bond.a); khuṭ = id. (Or.) kuṭa, kuṭha = a tree (Ka.lex.) guṇḍra = a stump; khuṇṭut = a stump of a tree left in the ground (Santali.lex.) kuṭamu = a tree (Te.lex.) কুঁদ² [ kun̐da² ] n a stock or butt (of a gun); a stump or trunk (of a tree); a log (of wood); a lump (of sugar etc.). (Bengali) Rebus: kũdār ‘turner’ (B.)

কুঁদন, কোঁদন [ kun̐dana, kōn̐dana ] n act of turning (a thing) on a lathe; act of carving; act of rushing forward to attack or beat; act of skip ping or frisking; act of bragging. (Bengali)কুঁদ [ kun̐da ] n a (turner's) lathe; a variety of multi-petalled jasmine.কুঁদ¹ [ kun̐da¹ ] v to turn (a thing) on a lathe, to shape by turning on a lathe; to carve; to rush forward to attack or beat; to skip, to frisk; to brag.

kuṭi, ‘smelting furnace’ (Mundari.lex.).kuṭhi, kuṭi (Or.; Sad. Koṭhi) (1) the smelting furnace of the blacksmith; kuṭire bica duljaḍko talkena, they were feeding the furnace with ore; (2) the name of ēkuṭi has been given to the fire which, in lac factories, warms the water bath for softening the lac so that it can be spread into sheets; to make a smelting furnace; kut.hi-o of a smelting furnace, to be made; the smelting furnace of the blacksmith is made of mud, cone-shaped, 2’ 6” dia. At the base and 1’ 6” at the top. The hole in the center, into which the mixture of charcoal and iron ore is poured, is about 6” to 7” in dia. At the base it has two holes, a smaller one into which the nozzle of the bellow is inserted, and a larger one on the opposite side through which the molten iron flows out into a cavity.

Vikalpa: M. ḍāhaḷ m. ʻloppings of treesʼ, ḍāhḷā m. ʻleafy branchʼ, °ḷī f. ʻtwigʼ, ḍhāḷā m. ʻsprigʼ, °ḷī f. ʻbranchʼ. (CDIAL 5546).ḍhāḷako = a large metal ingot (G.) ḍhālakī = a metal heated and poured into a mould; a solid piece of metal; an ingot (Gujarati)

Close-up of cassiterite crystals