Indian Pre Historic Period - Paleolithic. (Indian Stone Age)

 Classifying the Indian Stone Age

 

The three-age system—the idea that there was an age of stone tools, followed by  one dominated by those of bronze and then of iron—was first put forward in the  late 18th and early 19th centuries by the Danish scholars P. F. Suhm and  Christian Thomsen. The accuracy of this theory was proved by excavations by  another Danish scholar, Jacob Worsaae. The next important step was to identify  changes within the stone age. In 1863, John Lubbock divided the stone age into  two parts, the palaeolithic and neolithic. A few years later, Edouard Lartet  suggested the division of the palaeolithic into the lower, middle, and upper  palaeolithic, largely on the basis of changes in fauna associated with the  different tool types. Archaeologists gradually identified distinct tool-making  traditions within the palaeolithic and also recognized the significance of changes  in subsistence patterns within the stone age. The use of the term mesolithic is  relatively recent.   

 

   The Indian stone age is divided into the palaeolithic, mesolithic, and neolithic  on the basis of geological age, the type and technology of stone tools, and  subsistence base. The palaeolithic is further divided into the lower, middle, and  upper palaeolithic. A general time range for the lower palaeolithic is from about  2 mya to 100,000 years ago, the middle palaeolithic from about 100,000 to  40,000 years ago, and the upper palaeolithic from about 40,000 to 10,000 years  ago. However, there is a great deal of variation in the dates for different sites.  The palaeolithic cultures belong to the Pleistocene geological era, while the  mesolithic and neolithic cultures belong to the Holocene era.        

 

 Except for the dividing line of the Holocene, stone age cultures did not evolve  uniformly in a neat unilinear fashion all over the subcontinent. There are  regional variations in some of their features and their dates also vary  considerably. The ‘typical Indian tool types’ column in the table indicates the  tools that are considered characteristic of that particular phase. However, it does  not mean that there is complete uniformity in tools found at different sites, or  that tools typical of one phase were absent in another. For example, celts are  associated with the neolithic, but are known to occur as late as the historical  period in certain parts of eastern India. Similarly, with regard to the subsistence  base, it should be noted that hunting and gathering did not come to an end with  the beginnings of animal and plant domestication. Many agricultural  communities continued to hunt and forage for food. In fact, these subsistence  activities continue to be prevalent in certain niches of the subcontinent even  today.

The Palaeolithic Age

 

 

LOWER PALAEOLITHIC SITES

 

  Palaeolithic tools have been found in almost all parts of the subcontinent  (Chakrabarti, 1999: 54–75; Allchin and Allchin, 1997: 47–85). Although hardly  any sites have so far been discovered in the alluvial stretches of the Indus or  Ganga valleys (Kalpi in UP is an exception), they have been identified on rocky  areas within or on the margins of these valleys, e.g., in the Rohri hills in Sindh  and the northern fringes of the Vindhyas. Sites are prolific in other parts of the  subcontinent, especially in peninsular India, leaving aside the coastal plains.  Comparatively few palaeolithic habitation sites have been identified, but it can  be assumed that people lived close to sources of food, water, and stone in  different kinds of habitats—for instance, along the banks of rivers or streams and  in caves and rock shelters.      

 

 Excavated sites are comparatively few and most of the evidence comes from  surface finds of stone tools. Because of insufficient data from most sites, it is  necessary to focus on the published results of stone tools found in clearly  defined stratigraphic contexts. Some sites were inhabited over many stages of  the stone age.        

 

 Even in the absence of detailed studies, some broad inferences about  Pleistocene climate can be made on the basis of the deposits in which  palaeolithic tools are found. For instance, tools often get embedded in river  terraces. Although a number of other factors are also involved, the erosion and  deposition activity of rivers can be related to rainfall. Cemented gravel (a deposit  in which small pebbles are packed tightly together in soil) is generally taken to  represent a wet climatic phase. A boulder conglomerate (a deposit where larger  boulders are packed together) is interpreted as representing a drier phase, whileboulders are packed together) is interpreted as representing a drier phase, while  clay or silt deposits represent still drier conditions.     

 

   Early palaeolithic tools were fairly large core tools made of quartzite or other  hard rocks. They include chopping tools, handaxes, and cleavers. Apart from  directly breaking off pieces of stone from large boulders, which would have  required considerable strength, it is possible that people lit fires against rocks  and threw water over them so that large fragments broke off more easily. Within  the palaeolithic, there is a gradual increase in the range and variety of stone tools  and a shift in preference from coarse-grained to fine-grained stone.        

 

In recent years, important evidence of dates for lower palaeolithic contexts has  come from the Potwar plateau and the Siwaliks. At Dina and Jalalpur in the  Jhelum basin, members of a British archaeological team discovered 15 artefacts  including three handaxes in a boulder conglomerate deposit dated c. 700,000–  500,000 years ago by the palaeo-magnetic method. There are much earlier  dates from Riwat near Rawalpindi in Punjab province of Pakistan. Here, in 1983,  members of the British Archaeological Mission to Pakistan’s Potwar Project,  working with the Department of Archaeology and the Geological Survey of  Pakistan, discovered stone artefacts embedded in a stone conglomerate deposit  dated 2.01 mya by the palaeo-magnetic method. At the sites of Gurha Sahan and  PS-57, stone tools were found embedded in the Pinjor bed of the Siwaliks, dated  between 2.4 and 2 mya. Stone tools reported in the Jammu and Himachal  sections of the Siwalik hills seem to belong to about the same age. For instance,  at Uttarbaini in the Jammu area, early palaeolithic tools were found in a deposit  dated 2.8 ± 0.5 mya.        

 

Some absolute dates are now available for lower palaeolithic contexts in other  areas as well. Didwana in Rajasthan has been dated 390,000 BP (by the  uranium/thorium series dating method). In the Hiran valley in Gujarat, the lower  palaeolithic context is dated 190,000–69,000 BP (via the uranium/thorium series  dating method). For the Son valley (MP), there is a thermoluminescence date of  103,800 ± 19,800 BP. Nevasa (in Maharashtra) has given a date of 350,000 BP  (via uranium/thorium series dating). In Karnataka, the site of Yedurwadi has  been dated 350,000 BP.        Factory sites are generally located close to the sources of raw materials and  are marked by a profusion of stone tools in various stages of preparation. In  many instances, they were visited and used during several phases of the stone  age, sometimes even later. In Sindh, there are a number of such sites in theage, sometimes even later. In Sindh, there are a number of such sites in the  limestone hills capped by flint nodules. In lower Sindh, stone tools belonging to  the lower, middle, and upper palaeolithic were found at sites such as Jerruk and  Milestone 101. In upper Sindh, there are factory sites in the Sukkur and Rohri  hills        Many people tend to think of stone age sites as distant, isolated places. As a  matter of fact, stone age tools are often found in places that are today bustling  with activity. A good example are the many sites found in and around the  modern city of Delhi. Four lower palaeolithic stone tools were found in 1956 on  the Delhi Ridge, near the main gate of the University of Delhi, and more were  subsequently discovered on the northern Ridge. In 1983, a late Acheulian  handaxe was found on the campus of Jawaharlal Nehru University. A systematic  study of stone age sites in south Delhi and adjoining areas (Chakrabarti and  Lahiri, 1986) identified 43 sites ranging from the lower palaeolithic to the  microlithic. Excavations at Anangpur in the Badarpur hills to the south of the  city revealed thousands of early and late Acheulian tools along with traces of  several palaeo-channels of the Yamuna river. The evidence indicates that this  was a large lower palaeolithic habitation and factory site.

 

In Rajasthan, lower, middle, and upper palaeolithic tools have been found  around Ajmer and stray finds of lower palaeolithic tools occur in the Luni valley.  There is a detailed profile of the Didwana area of the Nagaur district in western  Rajasthan, with a sequence extending from the early to the middle palaeolithic.  The Mogara hill near Jodhpur seems to have been a factory site where lower,  middle, and upper palaeolithic as well as mesolithic tools were made.       

 

 In Gujarat, lower palaeolithic tools have been found in the valleys of the  Sabarmati, its Orsang and Karjan tributaries, and in the Bhadar valley in  Saurashtra. Lower palaeolithic and later artefacts have been found all along the  Konkan coast up to Goa. In Maharashtra, palaeolithic tools have been found in  many places along the coast and in the Wardha–Wainganga valleys.  Stratigraphic profiles of sections of the Mula-Mutha, Godavari, Pravara, and  Tapi rivers are available. Lower and middle palaeolithic tools have been found  in stratigraphic contexts in the Dattawadi area of the Mutha river in Pune. Lower  palaeolithic tools have been found in a stratigraphic context in the Gangawadi  area on the Godavari at Nasik.          

 

Prehistoric remains occur in various parts of central India in Damoh, Raisen,  and the Narmada, upper Son, and Mahanadi valleys. The Narmada valley is an  especially rich and well-researched area. Excavations at Adamgarh hill, not far  from Hoshangabad, revealed a sequence of lower and middle palaeolithic tools.  However, the most spectacular finds come from hundreds of rock shelters at  Bhimbetka (in Raisen district, MP), 30 km north of Hoshangabad, which have  given evidence of an enormously long sequence of occupation stretching from  the lower palaeolithic to the historic period.         

 

The Bhimbetka hillside is composed of sandstone and quartzite. There are  three perennial freshwater springs in the area, and several creeks filled with  water. A study of the present-day flora and fauna indicates the presence of at  least 30 plant types which yield edible fruits, tubers, and roots. There are fish in  the streams, and the hillside is home to many animals such as the deer, boar,  nilgai, leopard, wolf, hare, and fox. Of course, in prehistoric times, conditions  wouldn’t have been exactly like this. Nevertheless, it is clear that this site must  have been attractive for stone age people from the points of view of shelter,  food, and raw material for tools. Most of the stone tools at Bhimbetka were  made of a yellowish quartzite available in plenty in the area, but a grey quartzite  was also obtained from further away. Five floors paved with flat stone slabs  belonging to the lower palaeolithic were identified. No bones have been found  so far, perhaps because of the acidic soil.        

 

In the Belan valley in Uttar Pradesh, detailed studies have revealed a sequence  of stone age industries from the lower palaeolithic to neolithic to protohistoric.  In Bihar in eastern India, a lower palaeolithic living and working floor was  excavated at Paisra in the Kharagpur forests near Munger (Pant and Jayaswal,  1991). The whole area was rich in finished and unfinished artefacts, broken  pieces of stone, and anvils. Eight post-holes were found, marking places where  wooden posts had been dug into the ground to support thatched huts.         

 

 The river valleys and foothills of the Chhotanagpur plateau in Jharkhand and  the adjoining areas of West Bengal have yielded lower palaeolithic tools. In  Orissa, tools of all three phases of the palaeolithic have been found in many  places. A large number of lower and middle palaeolithic tools were found in  explorations at Dari-dungri in Sambalpur district, and lower palaeolithic tools  have also been found along the valleys of the Budhabalan and Brahmani rivers.        

 

 At one time, it was believed that the lower palaeolithic industry of the south  (which was given the name ‘Madrasian’) was different from that of other parts  of the country because of a supposed absence of pebble tools. The research of  the past few decades has proved that this is incorrect, and that pebble tools such  as choppers and chopping tools are found along with handaxes at several sites.  A stratigraphic sequence of lower and upper palaeolithic tools was identified  in the Malaprabha–Ghataprabha valleys in Karnataka. Lower palaeolithic tools  have also been found in the Hunsgi–Baichbal and Krishna valleys. Lower  palaeolithic tools occur at many places at Hunsgi (in the Gulbarga district of  Karnataka), on the banks of the Hunsgi, a tributary of the Krishna river  (Paddayya, 1982). Here, sites with very few types of artefacts may represent  places where certain specific activities such as making tools or killing game  were carried out. Sites where tools occur in larger number and variety, may have  been temporary camp sites. Still larger sites, where stone tools have been foundbeen temporary camp sites. Still larger sites, where stone tools have been found  in great profusion and variety, may have been places where groups of people  lived for longer periods of time. The Hunsgi tools were mostly made of various  kinds of stone including limestone, sandstone, quartzite, dolerite, and chert,  some of which were not locally available. In one of the excavated areas, huge  granite blocks were arranged around a 63 sq m area, perhaps used as a support  for temporary shelters made of branches, grass, and leaves. Today, the area  around Hunsgi supports about 40 types of wild edible plants as well as plenty of  small game.        

 

 In Andhra Pradesh, lower palaeolithic tools have been found in inland areas as  well as the coastal Visakhapatnam area, where they have been connected to a sea  level over 7 m above the present one. Nagarjunakonda, one of the sites that have  been studied extensively, has given palaeo-climatic evidence of three alternatingwet and dry cycles. Choppers and scrapers made of quartz have been found in  the Palghat district of Kerala.

 

 In Tamil Nadu, there is a stratigraphic sequence from the early palaeolithic to  the mesolithic from near Chennai. Gudiyam cave, not far from Chennai, has  yielded a sequence of lower, middle, and upper palaeolithic tools. The fewness  of the tools and the absence of other remains suggest that the site was occupied  for short periods of time.          

 

Attirampakkam, in the Kortallayar river basin, is one of the richest  palaeolithic sites in Tamil Nadu (Pappu et al., 2003). The site was discovered in  1863, and has been excavated, off and on, since then. The most recent  excavations revealed a sequence of lower, middle, and upper palaeolithic  cultures, with a break in occupation after the middle palaeolithic. Acheulian  tools were found in a 4 m thick deposit of clay. The artefacts, mostly handaxes,  were made of quartzite stones that were not available locally. Very little debitage  was discovered at the site, suggesting that the tools were made somewhere else  and then brought here. One of the most interesting discoveries was a set of  animal foot-prints found along with Acheulian tools. The 17 round impressions  (15–20 cm) of animal feet and a set of hoofprints are still being studied byexperts. This is the first discovery of its kind in South Asia. Another interesting  discovery was of three animal fossil teeth, possibly those of some kind of horse,  water buffalo, and nilgai, suggesting an open and wet landscape in early  palaeolithic times.           

 

 

 

MIDDLE PALAEOLITHIC SITES     

 

Within the palaeolithic, there were gradual changes in stone tools. Handaxes,  chopping tools, and cleavers did not altogether disappear, but the balance shifted  towards smaller, lighter flake tools, some of them made by prepared core  techniques, including the Levallois technique.         

 

Middle palaeolithic tools have been found in many parts of the subcontinent,  often in river gravels and deposits, which give clues about prevailing climatic  conditions. There are some dates for middle palaeolithic contexts. Didwana  (Rajasthan) has given two thermoluminescence dates of 150,000 BP and 144,000(Rajasthan) has given two thermoluminescence dates of 150,000 BP and 144,000  BP. The Hiran valley (Gujarat) has yielded a uranium–thorium series date of  56,800 BP.         

 

 In the north-west, lots of stone tools, mostly of the middle palaeolithic, have  been found in the Potwar plateau between the Indus and Jhelum rivers. The over  3 m thick deposit in the Sanghao cave in the North-West Frontier Province of  Pakistan revealed a sequence of middle and palaeolithic occupation. Thousands  of stone tools were found, along with bones (of animals, some perhaps of  humans) and hearths. All the tools are made of quartz, which is easily available  around the site. Many of the tools of Period I were made from flakes stuck from  prepared cores, and there were lots of burins.           

 

  In the Thar region, middle palaeolithic artefacts occur in reddish brown soil,  which indicates more abundant vegetation, more surface water, and a cooler,  wetter, and more humid climate compared to lower palaeolithic contexts. Small  factory sites and camp sites have been found in various parts of the Thar,  especially near rivers and lakes. A large number of stone age sites belonging to  the middle palaeolithic phase onwards are located around Budha Pushkar lake,  an area which offers advantages of the easy availability of water and stone.  Middle and upper palaeolithic tools are also found around Ajmer. There is  evidence of middle palaeolithic working floors at Hokra and Baridhani, close to  the now dried-up lakes. In the Jaisalmer area, upper palaeolithic material is not  as abundant as are artefacts of the middle palaeolithic. Middle palaeolithic sites  have also been located along the now virtually extinct Luni river system. The  term Luni industry is used for middle palaeolithic assemblages west of the  Aravallis, and can be contrasted with the industry of the regions lying east of the  Aravallis. Although certain forms are common to both areas, sites to the west of  the Aravallis display more variety in stone tool types and larger numbers of  reworked flakes. Middle and upper palaeolithic tools have also been found along  the eastern margin of the Gujarat plain.          

 

 The middle palaeolithic industry of central and peninsular India is sometimes  referred to as the Nevasan industry after the site of Nevasa, where the pioneering  archaeologist H. D. Sankalia first discovered middle palaeolithic artefacts in a  stratified context. The tools, which include a wide variety of scrapers, are made  of smooth, fine-grained stone such as agate, jasper, and chalcedony. Patne in the  Tapi valley revealed a stratigraphic sequence of middle and upper palaeolithic  and mesolithic tools. There is evidence of a middle palaeolithic living and  factory site at Chirki near Nevasa.                        

 

The earliest trace of human occupation in the Ganga plain is found embedded  in a 20 m thick cliff section at Kalpi (in Jalaun district, UP), on the southern  bank of the Yamuna. A number of vertebrate fossils—elephant tusk, shoulder  blade of elephant, molars of Equus and bovids—were found here. Middle  palaeolithic stone tools (including pebble tools, points, and side scrapers) and  bone tools (such as end scrapers, points, and burins) were found along withthem. The tool-bearing level at Kalpi has been dated about 45,000 years ago.  There are several middle and upper palaeolithic sites further east, especially in  the western part of West Bengal.                                

 

  In South India, the middle palaeolithic culture is marked by a flake tool  industry. On the Visakhapatnam coast, quartzite, chert, and quartz were  frequently used to make stone tools. There is evidence of tools made by the  Levallois technique at many places. In addition to smaller handaxes, cleavers,  and choppers, the middle palaeolithic tool kit included new tool types such as  scrapers of different shapes. A C-14 date for the middle palaeolithic context at  the coastal site of Nandipalli in Cuddapah district indicates that it is older than  23,000 years ago.                          

 

 

UPPER PALAEOLITHIC SITES

 

 The important technical advance of the upper palaeolithic was the making of  parallel-sided blades. There was also an increase in the number of burins. The  trend was towards smaller tools, and this must have been due to adaptations to  environmental changes. It is known, for instance, that the climate of northern  and western India seems to have become increasingly arid during the upperand western India seems to have become increasingly arid during the upper  palaeolithic. Older tool types continued to be made for activities that required  heavier tools.                            There are some dates for upper palaeolithic contexts. Site 55 at Riwat gives  the earliest date for the upper palaeolithic—c. 45,000 years ago. C-14 dates from  the Sanghao cave range from 41,825 ± 4,120 BCE to 20,660 ± 360 BCE. In  central India, the Son valley has given radiocarbon dates within the range of  12,000–10,000 BP, and a piece of ostrich eggshell at Mehtakheri has been dated  to over 41,900 BP. Two dates from the Kurnool caves (in Andhra Pradesh) are  19,224 BP and 16,686 BP (based on the electron spin resonance method).                           

 

 In the north-west, the Sanghao cave has given evidence of middle and upper  palaeolithic tools, hearths, animal bones, and what appear to be burials. Upper  palaeolithic tools have also been found in the Rohri hills in upper Sindh and  Milestone 101 in lower Sindh. In north India, the Kashmir upper palaeolithic has  been dated to about 18,000 BP and coincides with the onset of a milder climate.                                   

 

 In the Thar, the number of upper palaeolithic sites is fewer than those of the  preceding phase, due to increasing aridity. However, there was continuing  human occupation around the Budha Pushkar lake. In central India, upper  palaeolithic habitation sites have been found in caves and rock shelters of the  Vindhyas.                            

 

  The upper palaeolithic context in the Belan valley has been dated between  25,000 and 19,000 years ago, and that of the Son valley about 10,000 years ago.  Chopani Mando in the Belan valley seems to be a habitation site with a cultural  sequence from the upper palaeolithic to neolithic. The upper palaeolithic  assemblage consisted of tools made from chert, a stone available in the nearby  Vindhyas. The animal bones discovered in the Belan valley included those of  wild cattle, sheep, and goats. Since sheep and goats do not seem to be  indigenous to this area, they may have been brought here from the north-west. If  this was indeed the case, it could represent an early stage of animal  domestication.                                  In Siddhi district of Madhya Pradesh, in the valley of the Son river, an  archaeological team led by G. R. Sharma and J. D. Clark excavated the upper  palaeolithic site of Baghor I. A subsequent microwear study of the site Baghor  III (not far from Baghor I) (Sinha, 1989) has thrown light on the subsistence  activities of this phase. The study identified the different kinds of activities thatactivities of this phase. The study identified the different kinds of activities that  the stone tools found at the site were used for. Some of these activities, such as  boring, scraping, and whittling, were probably related to craft work. Others, such  as cutting, slicing, piercing, and chopping, could have been associated with food  processing, hunting, or craft work. Microwear analysis identified the proportion  of tools used on vegetal materials, those used for processing non-vegetal  material, and those used to work on wood or bamboo to make hunting and  gathering gear. Some tools showed a kind of wear and polish that indicated they  had been hafted onto handles.                             

 

 There are many upper palaeolithic sites in the Chhotanagpur region and the  Damin area of the Rajmahal hills. These include Paisra in Munger district. Upper  palaeolithic tools have been found in the various districts of West Bengal. There  is not enough evidence of the palaeolithic phase in Assam and other parts of the  northeast. But in the Lalmai hills of Bangladesh and in the Haora and Khowai  river valleys in western Tripura, a number of tools, including typical upper  palaeolithic types such as blades, burins, points, etc. made out of fossil woodhave been found. Similar tools have been found in the upper Irawaddy valley in  Myanmar.                               

 

 The upper palaeolithic cave sites of Kurnool and Muchchatla Chintamanu  Gavi in Andhra Pradesh are the only places in the subcontinent where tools  made of animal bones have been found in an upper palaeolithic context. In one  of the caves, as many as 90 per cent of the excavated tools were made of this  material. The faunal remains at the site included those of the bat, nilgai, four-  horned antelope, gazelle, chital, sambar deer, barking deer, mouse deer, wild  boar, tiger, leopard, jungle cat, rusty-spotted cat, spotted hyena, civet, freshwater  fish, mongoose, sloth bear, porcupine, bandicoot rat, gerbil (a rodent), mouse,  bush rat, black-naped hare, grey langur, baboon, horse, ass, rhinoceros, shrew,  and giant pangolin. Apart from giving valuable information about the animals  that upper palaeolithic people shared their landscape with, this list also suggests  that thick forests and more humid conditions prevailed in this area. Upper  palaeolithic artefacts were also found in a cave at Renigunta in Chittor district of  southern Andhra Pradesh. Stone tools of this phase occur at many places along  the east coast of peninsular India, and their antiquity ranges between 25,000 and  10,000 years ago.