mirrored file at http://SaturnianCosmology.Org/ 
For complete access to all the files of this collection
	see http://SaturnianCosmology.org/search.php 
==========================================================
[1]contents [INLINE] [INLINE]

|by [2]Jonathan Mark Kenoyer|

| Introduction |
Archaeologists studying the emergence of early civilizations often
focus on finely crafted art objects in order to understand aspects of
economic, socio-political and religious organization. The importance
of such objects is increased when studying early societies for which
there are no written records, such as the Indus Valley civilization.
Although some of the communities living in the Indus cities did use a
formal writing system, it has not yet been deciphered and the detailed
study of material culture provides one of the few sources of
information for determining the nature of the society and for
comparing it to other early cultures.

Over time, as questions about the past have changed, the approaches
used by archaeologists to study finely crafted objects have also
changed dramatically. One category of artifacts that provides an
example of how scholars have changed their perspectives and
interpretations over time are the intaglio stamp seals of the ancient
Indus cities. When they were first discovered in 1873, the exquisite
carved steatite seals from Harappa gained world attention because of
their unique style and enigmatic script. Essentially they were
compared stylistically and linguistically to the cylinder seals of
Mesopotamia (Marshall 1924). After many years of excavation and study,
scholars such as Ernest Mackay had the opportunity to study the
materials that the seals were made from and the general techniques of
carving and manufacture (Mackay 1938). These studies revealed that
there were in fact many different types of seals, and inscribed
objects, some of which were not used for sealing at all. The
interpretive implications of these variations were not at first
realized, but it was clear that the techniques of manufacture and
variations were the result of indigenous cultural developments and not
due to diffusion of ideas from other early civilizations.

As the study of Indus cities shifted to more theoretical issues of
social, economic and political organization, the production and use of
artistic objects such as seals came to take on a very different light
(Rissman 1989). Questions about the symbolic or socio-political
meaning of these seals required more rigorous studies of the
production, use and discard of the artifacts (Kenoyer 1997a). This
stimulated new studies and interpretive models that would require
totally new methods of data collection and analysis. The seals of the
Indus cities were shown to be more than simple art objects, to be
compared to seals in other civilizations, but were seen as symbols of
power and authority that had been created through complex technologies
(Kenoyer and Meadow 1997; Kenoyer and Meadow 1999).

While seals may be one of the more spectacular types of objects found
in the Indus cities, this same progression of changing studies and
perspectives has been going on with most aspects of the Indus
civilization. Scholars have begun to reexamine artifacts recovered
from earlier excavations and discover new finds through excavations in
both Pakistan and India. By studying the artistic elements, the
symbolic elements and the technological processes needed to create
such objects scholars have begun to shed new light on the
socio-economic, ideological and political developments that set the
foundation for the Indus civilization. A recent study of steatite bead
making technology has looked at the changes in Indus technical
virtuosity and social structure (Vidale and Miller 2001, in press). In
this paper I will focus on examples resulting from the recent
excavations of the Early Harappan (Ravi and Kot Diji Phases) at
Harappa, along with comparisons from the important sites of Mehrgarh
and Nausharo.

| Geography and Chronology |                     

Important Geographical Regions and Sites of the Indus Valley Tradition
Figure 1. Important Geographical Regions and Sites of the Indus Valley
Tradition

The term Indus Valley Tradition is used to incorporate the long term
cultural trajectory that characterizes the large geographical region
of the Indus and Ghaggar-Hakra river valleys (Kenoyer 1998) (Figure
1). This area extends from the highlands of Baluchistan, Pakistan on
the west across the vast Indus alluvial plains to the deserts of
Cholistan and Thar that form the border between Pakistan and India.
From north to south the region stretches from the foothills of the
Himalaya to the coastal regions of Makran, Pakistan and the islands
and mainland of Gujarat, India. This vast geographical area provides
numerous diverse resource areas for raw materials as well as
subsistence activities. The juxtaposition of these resources provides
a stimulus for the establishment of exchange networks that were
facilitated by numerous passes between the highlands and alluvial
plain, the presence of rivers and relatively accessible coastal
regions.

The chronology for the Indus Valley Tradition can be divided into four
Eras (Kenoyer 1991a; Shaffer 1992). The Early Food Producing Era (ca.
7000-5500 BC) is also commonly referred to as the Neolithic period,
and is a time when domestic plants and animals are first exploited in
the Indus Valley. The Regionalization Era, (5500-2600 BC) corresponds
to a period of regional cultural development that is subdivided into
various Phases defined by specific artifact styles and regional
cultural interaction. Recent excavations at the site of Harappa
provide evidence for the emergence of an Early Indus state around 2800
BC at the end of the Regionalization Era, but the major phase of
state-level development and urbanism does not begin until around 2600
BC (Kenoyer and Meadow 2001 in press).
The next Era is called the Integration Era (2600-1900 BC) and is the
time generally associated with the term "Indus Valley civilization".
This Era is characterized by the emergence of numerous urban centers
and smaller regional towns. At this time we see the common use of a
writing system found primarily on pottery or on inscribed seals and
tablets. Standardized cubical stone weights are found at all major
sites along with similar styles of pottery vessels and a wide range of
other objects. Various categories of evidence, some of which will be
discussed below indicate the presence of distinct social and economic
classes, both within the cities, as well as in the surrounding
hinterland. Perhaps even more important is the evidence for political
and ideological integration of major settlements and the emergence of
what may be termed "city states" (Kenoyer 1997a).

The final Era of the Indus Tradition is referred to as the
Localization Era (1900-1300 BC). During this time there is evidence
for major transformations the socio-economic and political
organization of cities and regional settlements. While there are some
important continuities that link this period with earlier cultures,
there are nevertheless significant changes in technology and
production that are in turn linked to changes in stylistic and
symbolic aspects of the material culture. The most significant changes
are seen in the disappearance of Indus writing, standardized weights,
and the breakdown of long distance trade. By the end of the
Localization Era, the socio-political and ideological aspects of the
Indus Tradition have been radically transformed and reflect the
emergence of a new cultural tradition that incorporates a much wider
geographical area extending from the Indus to the Ganga and Yamuna
alluvial plains (Kenoyer 1995a).

Table 1. General Chronology of the Indus Valley Tradition 
Integration Era
Harappan Phase 2600 to 1900 BC
Harappa: Period 3C, Final 2200-1900 BC
Localization Era
Late Harappan Phase ca. 1900 to 1300 BC
Harappa: Periods 4 and 5 1900-1700 BC
Harappa: Period 3B, Middle 2450-2200 BC
= Nausharo, Period III
Harappa: Period 3A, Initial 2600-2450 BC
= Nausharo, Period II
Regionalization Era
Early Harappan (several Phases) ca. 5500 to 2600 BC
Harappa: Period 2, Kot Diji Phase 2800-2600 BC
= Nausharo, Period I,
= Mehrgarh, Period VII (Kot Diji Phase)
Harappa: Period 1,A & B, Ravi Phase 3300-2800 BC
= Mehrgarh, Period IV to VI 3500-2800 BC
Mehrgarh, Period III 4800-3500 BC
Mehrgarh, Period II 5500-4800 BC
Early Food Producing Era
Neolithic ca. 7000 to 5500 BC
Mehrgarh, Period 1, Aceramic 7000-5500 BC

| Early Food Producing Era: Art and Symbol |

The early use of material objects as symbols to define social status
and power in the Indus valley can be documented at the site of
Mehrgarh, which is the major site for understanding the Neolithic
developments in the Indus valley (Jarrige et al. 1995) . The Neolithic
occupation reveals a rich assemblage of material culture from both
domestic and burial contexts. Of particular importance are the craft
technologies and the Neolithic burials which reflect the economic and
ideological patterns during this initial phase of settling down. The
types of artifacts that may have been used as symbolic objects are
relatively limited, but this may be due in part, to the fact that few
permanent materials, such as stone, shell and bone, were used for the
creation of decorative objects.

The semi-sedentary agro-pastoral communities living on the Kacchi
plain or on the Quetta Plateau had begun to exploit domestic plants,
such as wheat and barley, and animals such as sheep, goat and cattle
(Meadow 1996). At Mehrgarh there is evidence for simple mud walled
buildings with four internal subdivisions and numerous burials with
often quite elaborate burials offerings (Jarrige, Jarrige et al.
1995). In addition to occasional animal sacrifices, these offerings
included baskets, stone and bone tools, and a wide range of ornaments
such as beads and bangles (Barthélémy de Saizieu 1990). In the absence
of fired pottery, the most important types of containers were baskets
and presumably bags made with netting, woven fabrics or leather.
Bitumen coated baskets and intricately designed beaded ornaments
indicate considerable expertise in various types of weaving. The
combinations of different colors of stone or shell indicate a
preference for contrasting colors such as unfired black soapstone and
white limestone, shell or fired soapstone. Bright orange or purple
Spondylus shell disc beads were combined with beads made from
blue-green turquoise, deep blue lapis lazuli, banded sandstone and
even polished copper. Wide shell bangles were worn along with
bracelets and anklets made from tabular beads of white shell or white
limestone (Kenoyer 1995b). Natural shell beads from brown and white
striped Engina mendicaria were also used, often in combination with
large disc pendants made from the flat spire of the cone shell (Conus
sp.). Many of these same materials continued to be used in later times
and with the development of more complex technologies for production,
some came to be used as important symbolic and wealth objects during
the Harappan period (Kenoyer 2000).

| Technology |
The technologies used to create ornaments were not very complex during
this period and involved relatively simple procedures of chipping,
grinding and drilling (Vidale 1995). Since no evidence of manufacture
of exotic materials has been found from Mehrgarh during this early
period, it can be assumed that ornaments from non-local materials were
produced by craftsmen/women in distant resource areas and traded to
the settlement in finished form (Jarrige et al. 1995; Kenoyer 2000).
It is not unlikely that communities in the western Baluchistan
highlands may have been active in the manufacture or trading items
such as lapis and turquoise beads, marine shell beads and native
copper beads, all of which have been found in early burials at
Mehrgarh. In addition to this highland trade of exotic commodities
there is a possibility that some items, such as large shell bangles
made from the marine shell Turbinella pyrum were traded up the Indus
valley and reached the site from this other direction.

| Regionalization Era: Art and Symbol |

The virtual explosion in material culture during this Era makes it
impossible to discuss all of the relevant data and it is only possible
to focus on a few of the major types of artifacts in the core areas of
the Indus Valley. During the Regionalization Era, or Early Harappan
period (ca. 5500 to 2600 BC), scattered agro-pastoral settlements
became established on the alluvial plains of the Indus and
Ghaggar-Hakra river valleys. As these settlements grew from small
villages to large towns and market areas, they developed a higher
degree of regional and internal social differentiation (Kenoyer
1991b). This can be seen in the construction of walled settlements
with segregated domestic and public structures (Kenoyer 1991a) and is
also reflected in the greater varieties of material culture.

At Mehrgarh, there is a dramatic increase in the amount of finished
objects and manufacturing debris from all types of stone, shell, bone
and pottery objects during the Chalcolithic period (Periods II and
III, from around 5500 to 3300 BC.). In contrast, the number of burial
goods interred with the dead decreases over time such that the later
Chalcolithic burials have very few ornaments or utensils (Samzun and
Sellier 1985). The types of ornaments found in the burials include
steatite bead necklaces and bracelets, along with pendants of lapis
lazuli, carnelian and other semiprecious stones. The varieties of
stone beads increase, with new shapes and many different varieties of
rock being used to produce attractive ornaments. Female burials have
almost twice as many ornaments as male burials, while juveniles have
even less than the adult males. This pattern is quite the opposite of
what was noted for the Neolithic period burials. It is interesting to
note that there are no shell bangles found in the later burials and
over time, the numbers of shell bangles found at the site do not show
a marked increase as is the case at Harappa (see below).

A new technological development seen during this period at Mehrgarh
and Nausharo is the production of blue-green glazed faience beads. The
production of such ornaments required fairly high firing temperatures
as well as a specialized technology of frit and glaze preparation
(Barthélémy de Saizieu and Bouquillon 1997). In addition to many new
styles and shapes of pottery, one of the most important forms of
symbolic objects are terra-cotta figurines. It is interesting to note
that compared to the figurines of the Neolithic period, the later
Chalcolithic figurines have many ornaments and decorative features.
The decorative techniques include appliqué , modeling, and incising as
well as painting with red, black or yellow pigments (Jarrige 1988).
The diversity of hair styles and ornaments on the figurines
undoubtedly reflects the changing patterns of personal ornamentation
by the peoples living at the site of Mehrgarh and may indicate
increasing status differentiation and ethnic diversity.

Another important type of object that was being produced at Mehrgarh
are button seals with geometric designs made of terra cotta and bone
(Jarrige et al. 1995). The designs include stepped cross, concentric
circle and cross motifs, as well as various combinations of
complicated punctated or incised motifs. These designs are often
repeated in the painted pottery motifs or in shapes of stone inlay
that have been found in various parts of the site. The implications of
these repeated patterns is the emergence of a repertoire of graphic
symbols that have local meaning and were used to reinforce social
status or possibly ritual ideology.

While the site of Mehrgarh represents the early phase of the
Regionalization Era along the periphery of the Indus Valley, the
recent excavations at Harappa provide a unique opportunity to follow
the same sort of development in the core area of the Indus region. At
Harappa, no cemetery from the Early Harappan period has been
recovered, but it is possible to see the types of craft developments
from debris and finished objects found in domestic areas.
Ravi and Kot Diji Phase Beads
Figure 2. Harappa: Ravi and Kot Diji Phase Beads

The earliest levels of the site, dating to the Ravi Phase, circa 3500
BC, reveal the local production of numerous types of finely crafted
objects such as beads, pendants, bangles, button seals, painted
pottery and figurines. The versatility of the early craftsmen/women is
reflected in both the styles of objects created as well as the
technologies developed to make unique objects (Kenoyer and Meadow 2001
in press). Beginning with the earliest occupation at the site there is
a wide range of bead shapes (Figure 2) and manufacturing techniques.
Some of the soft steatite beads were unfired, leaving the natural tan
or grey-black color. Other beads were bleached and fired to a white
color. Finally some beads were glazed with a blue green glaze that was
applied to a roughened exterior. In addition to the steatite beads,
they produced short and long biconical beads of harder stones, such as
carnelian, banded agate, multicolored jaspers, lapis lazuli, and
amazonite. The color combinations resulting from these beads would
have been quite striking. Terracotta was also used to produce beads in
many of the same shapes as the stone beads as well as unique forms
that were only possible with clay. For example some of the small
terracotta lenticular beads were impressed with fabric on both sides
to create a patterned surface. Other terracotta beads were pinched
with the fingers or palms of the hands, leaving the patterned lines of
the maker's hands on the surface of the bead. Since many of the beads
were also carefully smoothed to remove fingerprints, we can assume
that the patterned surfaces were left intentionally.

During the Kot Diji phase there is evidence for faience bead
production to create microbeads as well as larger lenticular and
biconical shapes. The faience beads in the later part of the Kot Diji
phase are made from finely ground and refired frit that appears to be
similar to the compact faience documented from the following Harappan
Phase (Kenoyer 1994). This form of high quality faience is found only
in the Indus Valley and not in other contemporaneous cultures, such as
Mesopotamia or Egypt.

The manufacture of seals shows a dramatic change during the later part
of the Early Harappan or Kot Diji Phase. The early button seals made
of carved bone from the Ravi phase (Meadow, Kenoyer and Wright 1998)
are replaced with carved soapstone or steatite seals having geometric
incised designs (Meadow, Kenoyer and Wright 1996; Meadow, Kenoyer and
Wright 1998). Some of these seals are bleached white and glazed to
create a hard surface suitable for repeated stamping (Figure 3). The
discovery of a terracotta sealing of a square seal with script and a
geometric or plant motif indicates that they were in fact used for
such purposes. An unfinished seal with an elephant motif also provides
the earliest evidence for the local manufacture and use of large
symbolic animals on the steatite seals (Kenoyer and Meadow 2001 in
press).
Ravi and Kot Diji Phase Beads
Figure 3: Harappa: Ravi and Kot Diji Phase Seals

1. Button Seal, bone, Ravi Phase, H98-3503/8514-07.
2. Button Seal, glazed steatite, Kot Diji Phase, H96-2740/7469-01.
3. Button Seal, glazed steatite, Kot Diji Phase, H96/7458-01.
4. Button Seal, glazed steatite, Kot Diji Phase, H98-3453/8301-01.
5. Button Seal, glazed steatite, Kot Diji Phase, H98-3493/8314-01.
6. Button Seal, unfired steatite, Kot Diji Phase, H96-2743/7402-90.
7. Button Seal, glazed steatite, Kot Diji Phase, H2000-4495/9597-01.
8. Elephant Seal, glazed steatite, Kot Diji Phase, H2000-4474/8994-01.
9. Terracotta sealing, Kot Diji Phase, H98-3485/8437-01.
10. Limestone cubical weight, Kot Diji Phase, H98-3430/8499-16.

In conjunction with the use of seals there is also evidence for the
manufacture and use of cubical limestone weights, that would have been
used for weighing valuable commodities or for taxation (Meadow,
Kenoyer and Wright 1999). There is no concrete evidence for copper or
gold working at Harappa, but the diversity of copper tools, utensils
and ornaments and the presence of various types of gold beads and
pendants from the Early levels suggests that such crafts were also
being practiced at the site.

There is also evidence for various types of bangle manufacture using
exotic materials such as marine shell and local materials such as
terracotta (Figure 4). Both wide and narrow bangles were made from the
marine shell Turbinella pyrum using simple techniques of incising with
stone tools, grinding, and polishing. Shell bangles are relatively
rare during the Ravi Phase, but gradually become more common during
the Kot Diji and later Harappan Phase. Terracotta bangles were hand
formed and the exterior was pinched to create a raised ridge. In the
later levels of the Ravi Phase (circa 3000-2800 BC) and the subsequent
Kot Diji Phase (2800-2600 BC), the variety of terracotta bangles
increases dramatically to include flat painted bangles, rounded
bangles, and one having incised decorations. While at first most of
the bangles were made with red fired terracotta, in the later levels
there are grey-fired bangles with highly polished and incised
surfaces. In some cases, multiple bangles were joined together while
still unfired to form a single, wide bangle decorated with intricate
carved designs.
Ravi and Kot Diji Phase Beads
Figure 4. Harappa: Ravi and Kot Diji Phase Bangles

In this article it is not possible to discuss the many developments in
pottery making and decoration at Harappa during the Regionalization
Era, but it is important to note that the use of the potter's wheel
becomes dominant by the end of the Kot Diji Phase. Along with wheel
thrown pottery, mold made and hand formed pottery continue to be
produced for specific shapes and functional types.

At Harappa, terracotta animal and human figurines become more common
during the Kot Diji Phase and some of them have been found painted
black or red designs. Some of the bull figurines have painted bands
and stripes on their legs and hump (Figure 5).
Harappa: Ravi and Kot Diji Phase Animal Figurines.
Figure 5. Harappa: Ravi and Kot Diji Phase Animal Figurines.

1. Terracotta Bull Figurine: Kot Diji Phase, H96/7401-01
2. Terracotta Bull Figurine: Kot Diji Phase, H96/7467-41
3. Terracotta Bull Figurine with black paint: Kot Diji Phase,
H96/7431-03
4. Terracotta Bull Figurine with black and white paint: Kot Diji
Phase, H96/7402-65
5. Terracotta Bull Figurine: Kot Diji Phase, H96/7467-14
6. Terracotta Bull Figurine: Ravi Phase, H96/7490-05
7. Terracotta Bull Figurine: Ravi Phase, H96/7527-10

Ram figurines sometimes have holes to attach wheels so that they can
be pulled as a toy. One human female figurine has a necklace with
pendants painted around her neck and is wearing a skirt made with a
plaid or checkered design (Figure 6).
Harappa: Kot Diji Phase Human Figurines
Figure 6. Harappa: Kot Diji Phase Human Figurines.

1. Terracotta Female Figurine: Kot Diji Phase, H96/ 7423-1
2. Terracotta Female Figurine: Ravi/Kot Diji Pase, H98/8404-3
3. Terracotta Female Figurine: Ravi/Kot Diji Phase, H98/8439-3
4. Terracotta Female Figurine: Kot Diji Phase, H98-3456/8404-161
5. Terracotta Female Figurine: Kot Diji Phase, H98/8490-97
6. Terracotta Female Figurine: Kot Diji Phase, H98- 8532-5

It is important to note that there is much less variety in human
figurine styles found at Harappa compared to sites such as Mehrgarh
and Nausharo, where appliqué is an important technique used for
decoration. In Harappa it is possible that fugitive pigments may have
been used to decorate figurines. Such painting techniques are much
faster than appliqué modeling, but are not often preserved
archaeologically.

A detailed comparison of figurines and other finely crafted objects
from Harappa and sites such as Mehrgarh/Nausharo has not been
undertaken. However, it may provide important insights into the
differences in social and ideological aspects of small and large
settlements during this period of regional development.

| Technology |                         

At the site of Mehrgarh, production in the periods following the
Neolithic (after 5500 BC.) shows an increase in the importation and
processing of non-local raw materials. During the Ceramic Neolithic
and later Chalcolithic periods at Mehrgarh (Period III, around 4800 to
3300 BC.) there is evidence for local production of soft stone beads
such as steatite and limestone (Vidale 1989; Vidale 1995). Copper or
stone drills were probably used on the softer materials. During this
time we also see the earliest use of harder varieties of rock such as
agate and jasper that were being perforated using specialized stone
drills. Local manufacture of marine shell ornaments is also well
established (Kenoyer 1995b). Both bead making and shell working
involve non-local materials, several stages of production and more
complex technological processes that may indicate the presence of m[re
than one craft specialist. In addition to these exotic materials, the
local potters and modelers had developed many styles of pottery and
delicately modeled figurines of humans and animals (Jarrige 1988). The
pottery firing was undertaken in updraft kilns as well as in large pit
kilns for the production of large quantities of storage jars. At this
point there is no indication of the types of kilns used for faience
production at Mehrgarh/Nausharo or at Harappa. The presence of copper
melting crucibles at Mehrgarh (Jarrige, Jarrige et al. 1995) indicates
that this technology was being practiced at sites far from the
original source of the raw materials (Kenoyer and Miller 1997).

All of the basic technologies used at Mehrgarh and Nausharo appear to
be present at Harappa during the Early Harappan period. The major
difference between these sites is the fact that at Harappa there is a
long-term occupational continuity between the different periods, a
gradual increase in the diversity of crafts and an increase in the
overall scale of production. By the end of the Early Harappan period
the site of Harappa has grown to over 25 hectares and is clearly
divided into two mounds with massive mud brick perimeter walls around
both parts of the site. Craft activities have been found in both of
the mounds and include a wide variety of exotic materials and complex
technologies. Steatite was being brought from distant resource areas
and made into various types of beads, some of which were glazed.
Steatite seals with script and animal motifs were carved and fired at
the site. Numerous types of colored jasper, agate, carnelian and other
varieties of rock were being brought in their raw form and made into
beads and pendants. As mentioned above, the production of faience at
Harappa represents a highly specialized technology that required the
intensive processing of materials and firing at high temperatures to
achieve a glassy, compact substance with a shiny bluegreen glaze.
While faience is documented from Mehrgarh and also from Nausharo
during this period, it is not known if it was made using the same
techniques as found at Harappa. Finished copper tools and weapons have
been found at Harappa, and it is assumed that some copper working was
going on at the site, but so far no production areas have been
excavated for the Early Harappan Phase. However, recent excavations of
the Harappan Phase copper working areas (Meadow, Kenoyer and Wright
2000) and the large number of copper objects recovered from the
earlier excavations provide strong evidence for a long tradition of
copper and bronze working at the site (Kenoyer and Miller 1997).

| References |                          

Barthélémy de Saizieu, B. 1990 Le Cimetiere Neolithique de Mehrgarh
(Balouchistan Pakistanais) Apport de L'analyse Factorielle. Paléorient
16(1): 23-43.
Barthélémy de Saizieu, B. and A. Bouquillon 1997 Evolution of Glazed
Materials from the Chalcolithic to the Indus Period Based on the Data
of Mehrgarh and Nausharo. In South Asian Archaeology 1995, edited by
B. Allchin and R. Allchin, pp. 63-76. New Delhi, Oxford & IBH.
Helms, M. W. 1993 Craft and the Kingly Ideal: Art, Trade, and Power.
Austin, University of Texas Press.
Jarrige, C. 1988 Les figurines humaines au Baluchistan. In Les Cités
oubliées de l'Indus, edited by J.-F. Jarrige, pp. 65-70. Paris, Musée
National des Arts Asiatiques Guimet.
Jarrige, C., J.-F. Jarrige, R. H. Meadow and G. Quivron, Eds. 1995
Mehrgarh Field Reports 1975 to 1985 - From the Neolithic to the Indus
Civilization. Karachi, Dept. of Culture and Tourism, Govt. of Sindh
and the French Foreign Ministry.
Kenoyer, J. M. 1989 Socio-Economic Structures of the Indus
Civilization as reflected in Specialized Crafts and the Question of
Ritual Segregation. In Old Problems and New Perspectives in the
Archaeology of South Asia, edited by J. M. Kenoyer, pp. 183-192.
Madison, WI, Dept. of Anthropology, U.W.-Madison.
Kenoyer, J. M. 1991a The Indus Valley Tradition of Pakistan and
Western India. In Journal of World Prehistory 5(4): 331-385.
Kenoyer, J. M. 1991b Urban Process in the Indus Tradition: A
Preliminary Model from Harappa. In Harappa Excavations 1986-1990,
edited by R. H. Meadow, pp. 29-60. Madison, Prehistory Press.
Kenoyer, J. M. 1994 Faience Ornaments of Harappa and the Indus
Civilization. Ornament 17(3): 35-39, 95.
Kenoyer, J. M. 1995a Interaction Systems, Specialized Crafts and
Culture Change: The Indus Valley Tradition and the Indo-Gangetic
Tradition in South Asia. In The Indo-Aryans of Ancient South Asia:
Language, Material Culture and Ethnicity, edited by G. Erdosy, pp.
213-257. Berlin, W. DeGruyter.
Kenoyer, J. M. 1995b Shell Trade and Shell Working during the
Neolithic and Early Chalcolithic at Mehrgarh. In Mehrgarh Field
Reports 1975 to 1985 - From the Neolithic to the Indus Civilization,
edited by C. Jarrige, J.-F. Jarrige, R. H. Meadow and G. Quivron, pp.
566-581. Karachi, Dept. of Culture and Tourism, Govt. of Sindh and the
French Foreign Ministry.
Kenoyer, J. M. 1997a Early City-States in South Asia: Comparing the
Harappan Phase and the Early Historic Period. In The Archaeology of
City-States: Cross Cultural Approaches, edited by D. L. Nichols and T.
H. Charlton, pp. 51-70. Washington, D.C., Smithsonian Institution
Press.
Kenoyer, J. M. 1997b Trade and technology of the Indus Valley: new
insights from Harappa, Pakistan. In World Archaeology 29(2): 262-280.
Kenoyer, J. M. 1998 Ancient Cities of the Indus Valley Civilization.
Karachi, Oxford University Press.
Kenoyer, J. M. 2000 Wealth and Socio-Economic Hierarchies of the Indus
Valley Civilization. In Order, Legitimacy and Wealth in Early States,
edited by J. Richards and M. Van Buren, pp. 90-112. Cambridge,
Cambridge University Press.
Kenoyer, J. M. and R. H. Meadow 1997 New Inscribed Objects From
Harappa. Lahore Museum Bulletin IX(1 (1996)): 1-20.
Kenoyer, J. M. and R. H. Meadow 1999 Harappa: New Discoveries on its
origins and growth. Lahore Museum Bulletin XII(1): 1-12.
Kenoyer, J. M. and R. H. Meadow 2001 The Ravi Phase Craft Traditions
at Harappa, Pakistan. South Asian Archaeology 1997, edited by M.
Taddei, in press. Rome, Is. I. A. O. Kenoyer, J. M. and H. M.-L.
Miller
1997 Metal Technologies of the Indus Valley Tradition in Pakistan and
Western India. In The Emergence and Development of Metallurgy, edited
by V. C. Pigott, pp. Philadelphia, University Museum.
Mackay, E. J. H. 1938 Further Excavations at Mohenjodaro. New Delhi,
Government of India. Marshall, S. J.
1924 First Light on a Long-Forgotten Civilization. Illustrated London
News (20 September): 528-532, 548.
Meadow, R. H. 1996 The origins and spread of agriculture and
pastoralism in South Asia. In The origins and spread of agriculture
and pastoralism in Eurasia, edited by D. R. Harris, pp. 390-412.
Washington, D.C., Smithsonian Institution Press.
Meadow, R. H., J. M. Kenoyer and R. P. Wright 1996 Harappa
Archaeological Research Project: Harappa Excavations 1996, Report
submitted to the Director General of Archaeology and Museums,
Government of Pakistan, Karachi.
Meadow, R. H., J. M. Kenoyer and R. P. Wright 1998 Harappa
Archaeological Research Project: Harappa Excavations 1998, Report
submitted to the Director General of Archaeology and Museums,
Government of Pakistan, Karachi.
Meadow, R. H., J. M. Kenoyer and R. P. Wright 1999 Harappa
Archaeological Research Project: Harappa Excavations 1999, Report
submitted to the Director General of Archaeology and Museums,
Government of Pakistan, Karachi.
Meadow, R. H., J. M. Kenoyer and R. P. Wright 2000 Harappa
Archaeological Research Project: Harappa Excavations 2000, Report
submitted to the Director General of Archaeology and Museums,
Government of Pakistan, Karachi.
Possehl, G., L. 1997 The Transformation of the Indus Civilization.
Journal of World Prehistory 11(4): 425-472.
Rissman, P. C. 1989 The Organization of Seal Production in the
Harappan Civilization. In Old Problems and New Perspectives in the
Archaeology of South Asia, edited by J. M. Kenoyer, pp. 159-170.
Madison, WI, Wisconsin Archaeological Reports.
Samzun, A. and P. Sellier 1985 First Anthropological and Cultural
Evidence for the Funerary Practices of the Chalcolithic Population of
Mehrgarh, Pakistan. In South Asian Archaeology 1983, edited by J.
Shotsmans and M. Taddei, pp. 91-119. Naples, Istituto Universitario
Orientale.
Shaffer, J. G. 1992 The Indus Valley, Baluchistan and Helmand
Traditions: Neolithic Through Bronze Age. In Chronologies in Old World
Archaeology (3rd Edition), edited by R. Ehrich, pp. 441-464. Chicago,
University of Chicago Press.
Vidale, M. 1989 Early Harappan Steatite, Faience and Paste Beads in a
Necklace from Mehrgarh-Nausharo (Pakistan). East and West 39(1-4):
291-300.
Vidale, M. 1995 Early Beadmakers of the Indus Tradition: The
Manufacturing Sequence of Talc Beads at Mehrgarh in the 5th Millenium
B. C. In East and West 45 (1-4): 45-80. Vidale, M. and Heather M.-L.
Miller
2001 On the development of Indus technical virtuosity and its relation
to social structure. In South Asian Archaeology 1997, edited by
Giuseppe De Marco and Maurizio Taddei, In Press. Rome: Istituto
Italian per l'Africa e l'Oriente (IsIAO) and Istituto Universitario
Orientale, Naples.
[This article was first published in INDO-KOKO-KENKYU, Indian
Archaeological Studies 2000 Vol. 22 and is reprinted here with
permission.] 
| [3] 1  | [4] 2  | [5] 3  | [6] 4  | [7] 5  | [8] 6  | [9]SLIDE INDEX
| [10] CONTENTS  |
| [11] INDUS MAIN  | [12] HOME  |

[13]© Harappa 2002

References

1. http://www.harappa.com/indus3/index.html
2. http://www.harappa.com/indus3/kenoyer.html
3. http://www.harappa.com/indus3/e1.html
4. http://www.harappa.com/indus3/e2.html
5. http://www.harappa.com/indus3/e3.html
6. http://www.harappa.com/indus3/e4.html
7. http://www.harappa.com/indus3/e5.html
8. http://www.harappa.com/indus3/e6.html
9. http://www.harappa.com/indus3/slideindex.html
10. http://www.harappa.com/indus3/index.html
11. http://www.harappa.com/har/har0.html
12. http://www.harappa.com/welcome.html
13. http://www.harappa.com/welcome2.html