Mathura Settlement Archaeology and Trade

Human and Heritage: An Archaeological
Spectrum of Asiatic Countries

(Felicitation to Professor Ajit Kumar)
Volume – II
Human and Heritage: An Archaeological
Spectrum of Asiatic Countries
(Felicitation to Professor Ajit Kumar)
Volume – II
Editors
Rajesh S. V.
Abhayan G. S.
Preeta Nayar
Ehsan Rahmath Ilahi
NEW BHARATIYA BOOK CORPORATION

DELHI INDIA
Publisher
NEW BHARATIYA BOOK CORPORATION
208, IInd Floor, Prakash Deep Building
4735/22, Ansari Road, Daryaganj
New Delhi, India – 110002
Ph: 011 – 23280214, 011 – 23280209
E-mail: [email protected]
All rights reserved. No part of the work may be reproduced, stored in retrieval
system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical,
photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior written permission of
the publisher.
The editors and publisher are not responsible for the views and opinions
expressed by contributors in their article.
© Publisher
First Edition: 2019
ISBN: 978-81-8315-361-4
Price: Rs. 15000/-
Type Setting and Cover Design: Dr. Rajesh S. V.
Front Cover: Rock Art, Hathitol Shelter, Raisen

Back Cover: Tile Mosaic, Mosqueé of Paris
Printed at: Jain Amar Printing Press, Delhi - 110007

Editorial
We are happy to bring out Human and Heritage: An Archaeological Spectrum of Asiatic Countries
(Felicitation to Professor Ajit Kumar) as a symbol of appreciation for the commendable work Prof.
Ajit Kumar carried out in the field of archaeological research for the last 36 years. His
contributions have covered areas like Buddhist Art, Kerala Archaeology, Ethnography, Rock art,
Indian art and Iconography. The role he played in imparting archaeological knowledge to the
younger generation and inspiring them to take archaeological research as a profession has been
remarkable. There were occasions, especially at its inception stage when the Department of
Archaeology started admitting students for Post Graduate courses, he shouldered the
responsibility of running a University Department single handedly to the satisfaction of students
as well as the authorities of the University.
When we started working on this volume, the response we received from scholars in India and
abroad was impressive, and indicative of the respect Prof. Ajit Kumar widely enjoyed in the field
of Archaeology. We received 71 articles from established archaeologists and budding scholars,
especially the youngsters who pursue Archaeology as a profession, for this volume. These articles
dealt with a wide variety of aspects in Archaeology like Prehistory, Protohistory, Iron Age,
Historic Period, Art History, Museology, Tourism Studies, Architecture, Ethno archaeology,
Numismatics and Iconography.
We, as editors, take this opportunity to thank all the contributors of this volume, who spared their
valuable findings with us for the enrichment of this felicitation. We are grateful, in particular, to
authors from abroad, who made this publication a remarkable one with their scholarly articles.
We hope that this volume will be useful as an important reference work for all those who are
interested and conducting research in Archaeology.
Rajesh S. V., Abhayan G. S., Preeta Nayar and Ehsan Rahmath Ilahi
Editors
Dr. Rajesh S. V. (born 1981) is an Assistant Professor in the
Department of Archaeology, University of Kerala. He received his
doctoral degree from the Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda,
Gujarat in the topic of ‘A Comprehensive Study of the Regional
Chalcolithic Cultures of Gujarat’. His fields of research interests
include Indus Civilization, field archaeology, artefact analysis, ancient
technology, origin and development of urbanism in South Asia, inter
regional interaction networks and Megalithc/Iron Age archaeology.
He is serving as the co-editor of the journal ‘Heritage: Journal of
Multidisciplinary Studies in Archaeology’. He has published more
than 50 research articles in journals and edited books and co-edited the book ‘Kailashnath Hetu’.
He has participated in several excavations and explorations in India and abroad. He is
currently directing a multidisciplinary archaeological research project entitled “Archaeological
Excavations at Juna Khatiya and Explorations in Gujarat’.
Dr. Abhayan G. S. (born 1983) is an Assistant Professor in the

Department of Archaeology, University of Kerala. His doctoral
research from Deccan College, Pune was in the specialization of
zooarchaeology, specifically ichthyoarchaeology (studies in fish
bones) of Harappan contexts in Gujarat. He has played a vital role in
the establishment of Zooarchaeology Laboratory at University of
Kerala. He has conducted faunal analyses of several excavated sites
representing various time periods across the country. He has keen
interest in the Megalithic-Iron Age archaeology of Kerala. He is
currently directing a multidisciplinary archaeological research project
entitled ‘Kerala Megalithic Gazetteer Project’. He has participated in various exploration and
excavation works across the country. He has been part of the excavations of archaeological sites
in Kerala such as Pattanam, Marayur, Vizhinjam, Arikkadi fort, Kuttikol, Nannangadikkunnu
and Enadimangalam; and elsewhere in the country such as Adichanallur (Tamil Nadu),
Chaturbhuj Nath Nallah (Madhya Pradesh), Juaffardi (Bihar), Karsola, Lohat (Haryana),
Navinal, Madi and Juna Khatiya (Gujarat). He is also serving as the co-editor of the journal
‘Heritage: Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies in Archaeology’. He has published 23 research
papers in journals, 6 articles in edited books and edited a book ‘Kailashnath Hetu’.
Human and Heritage: An Archaeological Spectrum of Asiatic Countries
Dr. Preeta Nayar (born 1965) graduated in Archaeology from M. S.

University of Baroda, Vadodara, India. She received her Ph.D. degree
from the same University in the subject of Indian Iconography. Her
main area of research interest, besides Iconography, is the beads of
Early Historic Period. A recipient of fellowships from Indian Council
for Historical Research, New Delhi and the Ministry of Culture,
Government of India, she has handled different aspects of
Archaeology in the Department of Archaeology and Ancient History,
M S University of Baroda, Department of Archaeology, Kerala
University and Kerala Council for Historical Research,
Thiruvananthapuram for the last 23 years. She functioned as the Antiquity Registrar and Co
director for Pattanam Archaeological Excavation conducted by Kerala Council for Historical
Research for six years. A member of the Board of Studies in Archaeology, Kerala University,
she is associated with many academic bodies in India and abroad. Extensively travelled in
India and abroad with Museums and temple icons in focus, she publishes and lectures on
Indian Iconography and beads of Early Historic Period. She edits ‘The Proceedings of Indian
Art History Congress,’ and is one of the editors of the archaeological journal ‘The Heritage’.
Presently, she functions as a Faculty in the Department of Archaeology, Kerala University,
Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala, India.
Ms. Ehsan Rahmath Ilahi (born 1995) has a bachelor’s degree in

English: Language and Literature and a master’s degree in
Archaeology. She is currently pursuing MPhil degree at the
Department of Archaeology in University of Kerala. Her areas of
interests reside in Ancient Civilizations, Linguistic studies and
Academic Writings. She has been part of the excavations of Juna
Khatiya, an Early Harappan cemetery in Kachchh District, Gujarat.
She has worked on Indus Script and Graffiti from Gujarat during her
Master’s days and currently she is researching on Shells and Shell
Industry of the Indus Age from Gujarat.
iv
Contents
Page No.
Editorial i-ii
Editors iii-iv
Contents v-xii
Professor Ajit Kumar: A Narrative Account xiii-xlviii
Ehsan Rahmath Ilahi
Volume - I
1 Stone Beads from Megalithic Burial at Niramakulam, Kerala 1-22

Akinori Uesugi, Ambily C. S., Ajit Kumar, Abhayan G. S. and
Rajesh S. V.
2 The Moorish Mosque of Kapurthala, Punjab 23-41

Vrinda Agrawal
3 Pillayar Ratha of Kalkulam Neelakanda Swami Temple, Tamil 42-57

Nadu
Arya P. N. and Preeta Nayar
4 New Light on the Perumals of Kerala: An Analysis of the 58-69

Tirumalai Jain Inscription of Vidugadalagiya Chera Perumal
M. S. Dhiraj
5 Ethnohistory as a Conjunctive Approach in New Archaeology: 70-77

A Dialogue with the Annales School
Samseer R. H. and Bushra Beegom R. K.
6 Acheulian Thar: A Case Study on Didwana and Jayal in 78-86

Rajasthan
Gargi Chatterjee
7 Marici in Buddhism: Notes and Discussion with Reference to 87-93

Images from Ratnagiri, Odisha
Sindhu M. J.
8 The Reflection of Carpet Designs on the Mughal Miniature 94-123

Paintings; As a Folio or Individual Work
Somayye Keighobadi Lemjiri
9 Shells and Shell Objects from Moti Chher in Lakhpat Taluka, 124-145
Kachchh District, Gujarat
Soorya P., Rajesh S. V., Abhayan G. S., Subhash Bhandari and
Bhanu Prakash Sharma
10 The Depiction of Narasimha Panels in the Temple Murals of 146-153

Kerala
Sheena V. R.
11 Kalhora Dynasty in Pakistan and Its Impact on Local 154-161

Architecture
Syed Shakir Ali Shah and Qasid Hussain Mallah
12 Traditional Vanchi (Boat) Making in Kerala 162-169

Vishnu Surendran and Ajit Kumar
13 Royal Titles, Epithets and Kingship: An Archaeological 170-183

Analysis into the Epigraphical Records of Venad Kings
Vinuraj B., Ajit Kumar, Aswani O. K. and Mohammed Muhaseen
B. S.
14 Beginning of Pre Harappan Forts 184-195

Umesh Kumar Singh
15 Megalithic Vestiges in Udumbanchola Taluk, Idukki District, 196-223

Kerala
Sandra M. S., Rajesh S. V., Abhayan G. S., Sheena V. R. and
Renjeshlal S. R.
16 Painted Narratives in Temples at Vira Wah and Nagar Parkar 224-229

in Pakistan
Zaheer Uddin Shar and Qasid Hussain Mallah
17 Evidence in Pieces: Osteological Analysis of Stray Findings 230-246

from Kottapuram Human Remains
Veena Mushrif-Tripathy
18 Rock Art and Archaeology of Phulsari: A Revisit to a Forgotten 247-256

Multicultural Rock Art Site in Raisen District, Madhya Pradesh
Shaik Saleem
vi
Contents v-xii
19 Indus Graffiti from Gujarat 257-269

Ehsan Rahmath Ilahi, Rajesh S. V. and Abhayan G. S.
20 Soanian Assemblages from the Bam Locality of Siwalik Frontal 270-295

Range of Himachal Pradesh: A Preliminary Study
Worrel Kumar Bain
21 Bronze Casting at Mannar in Alappuzha, Kerala - An 296-317

Ethnographic Study
Akhil K. N., Preeta Nayar and Kumbodharan S.
22 New Interpretation on Prehistoric Rock Art at Pha Taem, 318-327

Klong Jeam District, Ubon Ratchathani Province, Thailand
Wilasinee Chamsaard
23 Terracotta Roof Tiles from Vizhinjam, Kerala 328-340

Ananthu V. Dev, Rajesh S. V., Ajit Kmar and Abhayan G. S.
24 Tracing the Origins of Aksha Krida (Chaturanga) Game: Study 341-350

of Selected Sculptures and Painting
R. H. Kulkarni
25 Tourist Satisfaction towards Archaeological Heritage Sites in 351-354

Sri Lanka with Special Reference to World Heritage Site Galle
Dutch Fort
Indrachapa Gunasekara
26 Historiography of the Megaliths of Kerala 355-366

K. P. Rajesh
27 Śrīvatsa: Journey of an Auspicious Symbol Crossing All 367-373

Boundaries
Arati B. Kulkarni
28 Reminiscing the “Iron Man of India” through Biographical 374-381

Museums: Reflections on the National Memorial, House
Museum and the Smruti Kendra
Ambika Patel
29 Interfaces of Asian Art in the Art Forms of Karnataka: A Few 382-396

Case Studies
M. S. Krishna Murthy
vii
30 A Comparative Study of Material Culture Found from 397-403

Excavations at Bhokardan and Paunar in Maharashtra
K. S. Chandra
31 Kerala’s Mediaeval Society and Trade as Gleaned from 404-413

Literary Works Like Sandesha Kavyas, Achicharithams and
Ananthapuravarnanam
Mohammed Muhaseen B. S., Ajit Kumar and Vinuraj B.
32 Role of Fairs and Festivals in Facilitating Indigenous Trade 414-422

Network in Early Medieval Kerala
N. Sudarsana Kumar
33 Arethipura in Karnataka and Its Surroundings 423-442

R. N. Kumaran and B. Janardhana
34 Glazed Ceramics and Indicators of Glazed Ceramic Production 443-462

from Lashkarshah, Khambhat, Gujarat
Arun Kumar K. S., Rajesh S. V. and Abhayan G. S.
35 Tamraparni - Perennial River of Pandya Kingdom: Gleanings 463-470

from Literature, Epigraphy and Numismatics
K. R. Ramasundaram
36 Buddhism in Uttarakhand: Monuments from Past and Present 471-480

Alka Barthwal
Volume - II
37 Small Water Crafts of the Lower Chaliyar Basin, Kerala: An 481-496

Ethnographic Approach
Jaseera C. M. and Sreelatha Damodaran
38 In Search of a Mythical Artisan: Tracking the Jakanachari 497-524

Legend of Karnataka
Apoorva G. and Srikumar M. Menon
39 Analysis of Faunal Remains from Navinal, Gujarat 525-540

Ajith M., Abhayan G. S., Rajesh S. V. and Shad Matthias
Gobinsingh
40 Preliminary Report on Documentation and Study of Rock Art 541-565

Sites in Raisen District, Madhya Pradesh, India
Shaik Saleem and Parth R. Chauhan
viii
Contents v-xii
41 Survey and Documentation of the Built Heritage of District 566-579

Chakwal, Punjab, Pakistan
Hadiqa Imtiaz
42 An Interesting Form of Nataraja in the Wooden Panel of 580-587

Ernakulam Shiva Temple in Kerala
Kumbhodaran S. and Preeta Nayar
43 Jainism in Kerala: Iconographical Considerations and Identity 588-600

Formations
Jenee Peter and Krishnanjali A. R.
44 Gori Jain Temple Icon and Painting Narratives: A Case Study 601-608
of Nagar Parkar, Sindh, Pakistan
Zaheer Uddin Shar and Qasid Hussain Mallah
45 An Ethnographic Study of Rock Art of Upper Damodar Valley: 609-621

Jharkhand
Himanshu Shekhar, Bulu Imam and Justin Imam
46 Conserving Nature as Cultural Landscape Reflects in the 622-633

Sacred Grove Cult of Hill Tribes of Kerala: A Glance
Rohinikrishnan R.
47 Harappan Graffiti from Dholavira 634-645

Vinod V.
48 Art and Architectural Grandeur of Muṇḍeśvarī Temple in 646-653

Bihar: An Overview
Vinay Kumar and Umesh Kumar Singh
49 Tomb of Adam Shah Kalhoro, Sukkur, Pakistan 654-657

Syed Shakir Ali Shah and Qasid Hussain Mallah
50 Some Aspects of Deccan History: Based on Foreign 658-671

Travelogues
Shaikh Musak Rajjak
51 “Early Medieval” in the History of Kerala 672-680

Arya Nair V. S.
52 Religious Architecture of Bishnupur, Bankura District, West 681-699

Bengal
Worrel Kumar Bain
ix
53 Archaeological Investigation into Microlithic Assemblage of 700-716

Bhorgiri - Bhimashankar Region of the Upper Bhima Basin in
Pune District of Maharashtra
Amit Sopan Bhagat
54 Archaeological Monuments in Ponnani Taluk, Kerala: An 717-745

Overview
Muhammed Fasalu K., Rajesh S. V., Abhayan G. S., Sheena V. R.
and Renjeshlal S. R.
55 The Temple in the Sea, that Never Forgets Indian Indentured 746-756
Workers
Shad Matthias Gobinsingh
56 Mathura: Settlement Archaeology and Trade Routes 757-771

Vinay Kumar Gupta
57 A Brief History of Incense and Incense Burners 772-782

Anjana S. Nair and Preeta Nayar
58 A Study of Lithic Assemblages in Tali and Lalpur Villages of 783-793

IGNTU from a Typo-technological Approach
B. Janardhana and Lalita Lahari
59 A Brief Analysis of Kilimanoor Record and Vellalur Inscription 794-808

Renjeshlal S. R. and Aswathy V. Nair
60 Mural Legacy of St. Mary’s Church at Kalloorkkad, 809-828

Alappuzha, Kerala
Reni P. Joseph, Abhayan G. S., Rajesh S. V., Sheena V. R. and
Renjeshlal S. R.
61 Archaeo-Tourism in Kurnool District, Andhra Pradesh: 829-832

Transformation of the Rock Art Site Lanja Banda into Future
Tourist Destination
Yadava Raghu
62 Archaeology of Kottayam Taluk, Kerala 833-853

Renjinimol M. N., Rajesh S. V., Abhayan G. S., Sheena V. R. and
Renjeshlal S. R.
63 A Bifacial Image of Surya-Narayana from Bihar in National 854-857

Museum, New Delhi
Jalaj Kumar Tiwari
x
Contents v-xii
64 Heritage Tourist Attractions in Fort Kochi, Kerala 858-868

Raj K. Varman
65 The Fading Murals of Travancore: A Retrospect 869-900

Vysakh A. S.
66 Technology of Temple Building in Medieval South India, with 901-910

Special Reference to Viswakarma Community
V. Ramabrahmam
67 An Appraisal of Megalithic Religion, Beliefs and Practices with 911-921

Special Reference to Kerala
Aswani O. K., Ajit Kumar and Vinuraj B.
68 Decoding the Language of Sculptures at Rameshwar; Cave No. 922-925

21 - Ellora: The Search for the Unseen
Rahul Deshpande
69 A Unique Prehistoric Painted Panel of Ranganatha Gudda 926-935

(Badami) in Peninsular India: Cultural Ecology
Mohana R.
70 Pre and Protohistoric Archaeology of Kerala: Issues and 936-939

Challenges
Saravanan R.
71 A Note on the Bharata and Bahubali Wrestling (Grappling) 940-942

Panel at the Jabareshvara Temple at Phaltan, Maharashtra
Kush Dhebar
Contributors xlix-lvi
xi
Contributors
Abhayan G. S.
Department of Archaeology, University of Kerala, Kariavattom Campus, Thiruvananthapuram,
Kerala – 695581, India, Email: [email protected]
Ajit Kumar
Ajith M.
Akhil K. N.
Akinori Uesugi
Kansai University, 3-3-35 Yamate-cho, Suita, Osaka 564 – 8680, Japan, Email:
[email protected]
Alka Barthwal
B - 804, Unique Tower, Near NRI colony, Jagatpura, Jaipur, Rajasthan – 302 033, India, Email:
[email protected]
Ambika Patel
Department of Museology, Faculty of Fine Arts, The Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda,
Vadodara, Gujarat – 390 002, India, Email: [email protected]
Ambily C. S.
Excavation Branch II, Archaeological Survey of India, Pt. Deen Dayal Upadhyaya Institute of
Archaeology, Plot No. 2, Zero Point, Greater Noida, Uttar Pradesh – 201 308, India, Email:
[email protected]
Amit Sopan Bhagat

1402, J - Wing 11, Casa Fresco, Lodha Amara, Near Airforce Station, Kolshet, Thane (W),
Maharashtra – 400607, India, Email: [email protected]
Ananthu V. Dev
Anjana S. Nair
Apoorva G.
The Indian National Trust for Art and Cultural Heritage (INTACH) - Bengaluru Chapter, 3rd
block Jayanagar, Bangalore, Karnataka – 560011, India, Email: [email protected]
Arati B. Kulkarni
5, Manikarnika Society, Chintamani nagar, Sahakar Nagar No.2., Pune, Maharashtra – 411 009,
India, Email: [email protected]
Arun Kumar K. S.
Arya Nair V. S.
Department of History, University of Calicut, Thenhipallam, Malappuram, Kerala – 673 635,
Arya P. N.
Aswani O. K.
Aswathy V. Nair
B. Janardhana
Department of Ancient Indian History Culture and Archaeology, Faculty of Social Sciences,
Indira Gandhi National Tribal University (IGNTU), Lalpur, Amarkantak, Madhya Pradesh –
484 886, India, Email: [email protected]
Bhanu Prakash Sharma

H. No. 9. Savita Bhavan, Darpan Apartments, Near Rail Nagar, Priya Lakshmi Mill Road,
Vadodara, Gujarat - 390 003, India, Email: [email protected]
Bulu Imam
The Indian National Trust for Art and Cultural Heritage (INTACH), Sanskriti Centre,
Dipugarha, Hazaribagh, Jharkhand – 825301, India, Email: [email protected]
l
Bushra Beegom R. K.
Department of Sociology, University of Kerala, Kariavattom Campus, Thiruvananthapuram,
Ehsan Rahmath Ilahi

Gargi Chatterjee
Department of Ancient Indian History, Culture and Archaeology, Banaras Hindu University,
Ajagara, Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh – 221 005, India, Email: [email protected]
Hadiqa Imtiaz
Taxila Institute of Asian Civilizations, Quaid-i-Azam University, Islamabad, Islamabad Capital
Territory – 45320, Pakistan, Email: [email protected]
Himanshu Shekhar
Department of A.I.H.C. and Archaeology, Deccan College Postgraduate and Research Institute,
Pune, Maharashtra– 411 006, India, Email: [email protected]
Indrachapa Gunasekara
University of Vocational Technology, 100 Kandawala Road, Ratmalana – 10370, Sri Lanka,
Email: [email protected]
Jalaj Kumar Tiwari

Archaeological Survey of India, Archaeological Museum, Chak Ramdas, Vaishali, Bihar –
844128, India, Email: [email protected]
Jaseera C. M.
Department of Epigraphy and Archaeology, Tamil University, Tamil University Road,
Thanjavoor, Tamil Nadu – 613 010, Email: [email protected]
Jenee Peter
Department of History, Union Christian College, Aluva – Paravoor Road, Aluva, Ernakulam
Kerala – 683 102, India, Email: [email protected]
Justin Imam
Virasat Trust, Tourist Information Centre, NH 33, Behind Kargil Petrol Pump, Hazaribagh,
Jharkhand – 825301, India, Email: [email protected]
K. P. Rajesh
Department of History, NSS College Manjeri, College Road, Manjeri, Malappuram, Kerala – 676
122, India, Email: [email protected]
K. R. Ramasundaram
16 Devan Colony, Muthalamman Koil Street, West Mambalam, Chennai, Tamil Nadu – 600 033,
li
K. S. Chandra
Department of Ancient Indian History Culture and Archaeology, Rashtrasant Tukadoji Maharaj
Nagpur University, Mahatma Jyotiba Phuley Educational Campus, Amravati Road, Nagpur,
Maharashtra - 440 033, India, Email: [email protected]
Krishnanjali A. R.
Department of History, Sacred Heart College, Pandit Karuppan Road, Thevara, Ernakulam
Kumbhodaran S.
Kush Dhebar
505 Technology Apartments, 24 I. P. Extension, Patparganj, Delhi – 110092, India, Email:
[email protected]
Lalita Lahari
Department of Ancient Indian History, Culture and Archaeology, Faculty of Social Sciences,
Indira Gandhi National Tribal University (IGNTU), Lalpur, Amarkantak, Madhya Pradesh –
M. S. Dhiraj
Department of History, Pondicherry Central University, Kalapet, Puducherry – 605 014, India,
M. S. Krishna Murthy
Department of Ancient History and Archaeology, University of Mysore, Nobel Laureate Ave,
Manasa Gangothiri, Mysuru, Karnataka – 570 006, India, Email: [email protected]
Mohammed Muhaseen B. S.
Mohana R.
Muhammed Fasalu K.
N. Sudarsana Kumar
Parth R. Chauhan
Department of Humanities and Social Sciences, Indian Institute of Science Education and
Research, Mohali, Punjab – 140 306, India, Email: [email protected]
lii
Preeta Nayar
Qasid Hussain Mallah

Department of Archaeology, Shah Abdul Latif University Khairpur, Old National Highway,
Khairpur Mir’s, Sindh – 66020, Pakistan, Email: [email protected]
R. H. Kulkarni
Department of Art History, College of Fine Arts, Karnataka Chitrakala Parishath, Kumara
Krupa Road, Bangalore, Karnataka – 560 001, India, Email: [email protected]
R. N. Kumaran
Archaeological Survey of India, Bangalore Circle, Kendriya Sadan, 5th Floor, F – Wing,
Koramangala, Bengaluru, Karnataka – 560 034, India, Email: [email protected]
Rahul Deshpande
56, Patwardhan Baug, Kondana, Erandavne, Pune, Maharashtra – 411 004, India, Email:
[email protected]
Raj K. Varman
Kerala Holiday Mart, Chiramel Building, Sreekandath Road, Ravipuram, Cochin, Ernakulam,
Rajesh S. V.
Reni P. Joseph
Renjeshlal S. R.
Renjinimol M. N.
Rohinikrishnan R.
Samseer R. H.
Department of Sociology, University of Kerala, Kariavattom Campus, Thiruvananthapuram,
liii
Sandra M. S.
Saravanan R.
Department of History, University of Hyderabad, Prof. C. R. Rao Road, Hyderabad, Telangana–
Shad Matthias Gobinsingh

Shaik Saleem
Department of Humanities and Social Sciences, Indian Institute of Science Education and
Research, Mohali, Punjab – 140 306, India, Email: [email protected]
Shaikh Musak Rajjak

Department of History, Maulana Azad College, Dr. Rafiq Zakaria Campus I, Rozabagh,
Aurangabad, Maharashtra – 431 001, India, Email: [email protected]
Sheena V. R.
Sindhu M. J.
Ushodaya Residency, Rock Town Residents Colony, Sai Nagar, Chanakyapuri, Hyderabad
Telangana – 500 068, India, Email: [email protected]
Somayye Keighobadi Lemjiri

Soorya P.
Sreelatha Damodaran
Department of History, University of Calicut, Thenhipallam, Malappuram, Kerala – 673 635,
Srikumar M. Menon
School of Humanities, National Institute of Advanced Studies, Bangalore, Karnataka – 560012,
Subhash Bhandari
Department of Earth and Environmental Science, Krantiguru Shyamji Krishna Verma Kachchh
University, Near Changleshwar Mahadev Temple, Mundra Road, Bhuj, Gujarat - 370 001, India,
liv
Syed Shakir Ali Shah

Directorate of Conservation Office, Mohenjo Daro Museum, Dokri, Larkana, Sindh - 77060,
Pakistan, Email: Email: [email protected]
Umesh Kumar Singh

History of Art Department, Patna University, College of Arts and Crafts, Vidyapati Marg,
Behind Patna Museum, Patna, Bihar – 800 001, India, Email: [email protected]
V. Ramabrahmam
Department of History and Archaeology, Yogi Vemana University, Vemana Puram,
Ganganapalle, Kadapa, Andhra Pradesh - 516 005, India, Email: [email protected]
Veena Mushrif-Tripathy
Vinay Kumar
Centre of Advanced Study, Department of Ancient Indian History, Culture and Archaeology,
Banaras Hindu University, Ajagara, Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh – 221 005, India, Email:
[email protected]
Vinay Kumar Gupta

Archaeological Survey of India, Dharohar Bhawan, 24 Tilak Marg, New Delhi, Delhi – 110 001,
Vinod V.
Department of History and Archaeology, Marthoma College for Women, Perumbavoor,
Ernakulam, Kerala – 683 542, India, Email: [email protected]
Vinuraj B.
Archaeological Survey of India, Thrissur Circle, Puratattva Bhavan, FF /19A - K. S. H. B Flats,
Pullazhi, Thrissur, Kerala – 680 012, India, Email: [email protected]
Vishnu Surendran
Vrinda Agrawal
326, The Foothills Colony, SAS Nagar, Mullanpur, Punjab – 140 901, India, Email:
[email protected]
Vysakh A. S.
Post Graduate Department of History and Research Centre, Sree Narayana College,
Chempazhanthy, Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala – 695 587, India, Email:
[email protected]
Wilasinee Chamsaard
Phimai Historical Park, Ananthachinda Rd, Tambon Nai Mueang, Amphoe Phimai, Chang Wat
Nakhon Ratchasima - 30110, Thailand, Email: [email protected]
lv
Worrel Kumar Bain

Anthropological Survey of India, Ministry of Culture, Government of India, Eastern Regional
Centre, Kolkata, West Bengal – 700 091, India, Email: [email protected]
Yadava Raghu
Department of History and Archaeology, Yogi Vemana University, Vemana Puram,
Ganganapalle, Kadapa, Andhra Pradesh - 516 005, India, Email: raghuyadav.
[email protected]
Zaheer Uddin Shar

Department of Archaeology, Shah Abdul Latif University Khairpur, Old National Highway,
Khairpur Mir’s, Sindh – 66020, Pakistan, Email: [email protected]
lvi
Mathura: Settlement Archaeology and Trade Routes
Vinay Kumar Gupta
Introduction
For the study of settlement pattern in the Mathura region, the data collected by the author
through his extensive field explorations (Gupta 2013: 16-104) is going to improve our existing
knowledge. Firstly, we take the issue of the settlement pattern of the Mathura district, size of
which has been quite reduced due to the merger of tehsil Sadabad in the recently created district
of Hathras. Earlier the river Yamuna almost bisected the district of Mathura in terms of the total
area and population but now-a-days, the area and population of western part of Mathura
district is much higher than the eastern trans-Yamuna tract. We can presume that roughly, two-
third of the total area of the district lies in the western cis-Yamuna tract. The earliest cultural
horizon of this region starts during the proto-historic period, though, from Govardhan hill,
which is an outcrop of Aravalli, few Palaeolithic tools comprising choppers, flakes and
handaxes were reported (IAR 1974-75: 48).
Potsherds belonging to Ochre Coloured Pottery (hereinafter O.C.P.) cultural tradition have been
observed at the sites of Aring and Gantholi in the cis-Yamuna tract and at Gosna and Nohjhil in
trans-Yamuna tract. The potsherds had incised zigzag designs on the surface (sometimes on the
interior also). Some black-and-red ware sherds were also part of early cultural tradition, similar
to sherds observed at the sites of Atranjikhera and Jakhera in Etah district. In the region of
Mathura, varieties of Black-and-red ware of different fabrics and finish can be observed at
different sites. From the site of Chaubara Tila, a copper celt, possibly belonging to Copper
hoard tradition was found by Cunningham (1871-72: 16, Pl. II). In the year 1993, Mathura
Museum purchased a Lot comprising Copper hoard implements (Acc. Nos. 93.5, 93.6, 93.51,
93.65 etc.) from a person of Mahavan tehsil who found these implements while digging
somewhere near Baldev (Sharma Pers. Comm.).
When we consider the archaeology of old Mathura district (until 1995), there were certain
evidence of copper hoard findings from a site near Sadabad, possibly Rasgawan. In the records
of Mathura Museum some Copper hoard objects (acc. Nos. 75.33, 75.34 etc.) are said to have
been recovered from the digging of Rasganwan drain in Sadabad tehsil which came to Mathura
Museum in the year 1975. It is clear from the above discussion that the area of Mathura was
well in habitation by the people of Copper hoard cultural tradition. In this study, if we associate
the finding of O.C.P. from Noh, Fatehpur Sikri in excavations and from Rasulpur (near
Fatehpur Sikri) and many sites in Bharatpur district like Sewar, Pengora, etc. in south of
Mathura and sites of Aligarh district to the east of Mathura, in explorations, it becomes very
clear that Mathura region was an important area for the development of O.C.P.-Copper hoard
cultural tradition.
Except for the excavations at Sonkh and at some peripheral sites of Mathura city, no major
excavation has taken place in the district. As far as the excavations at Sonkh are concerned these
were definitely done meticulously by Herbert Hartel and his German team and according to
them the earliest culture at the site started with P.G.W. using people. As their area of the
excavation was quite limited (about 1/3rd of the total site and this total area was even less than
half of the actual area of the ancient site), there are chances that the few spots where O.C.P.
related potsherds might have been present, were not excavated. Otherwise, it has to be accepted
that at the majority of archaeological sites the significant cultural sequence starts with P.G.W.
period. Another important point about the excavations of Sonkh is the finding of P.G.W.
cultural horizon in all the trenches in different parts of the mound where the lowest levels could
be reached. It makes it clear that during P.G.W. period the settlement of Sonkh was quite
extensive and on the basis of archaeological data and the present condition of the mound it can
be considered to be about 300 x 250 m in area at least. It makes the case more powerful for
supporting the area of P.G.W. using cultural tradition at most of the sites as equal to the
archaeological mound present at the site.
Although, I firmly believe that the sites of Ambarish Tila, Hathi Tila and the part of Katra
mound were the later extensions of P.G.W. using people, the dating proposed by Joshi and
Sinha (1978-79: 39-44) needs a re-analysis. The main disadvantage of their dating is that Joshi
was biased towards a particular theory as he wrote “the origin of NBPW is regarded by most of
scholars to be somewhere in the 6th century B.C. in the mid-eastern India; its transportation to
Mathura (from eastern India) might have taken considerable time in those days. Therefore, we
dated Period IB around 500 B.C.” It was the reason that he discarded a number of early dates.
Some of these early dates were:
PRL-333 (Late Level of Period II, N.B.P.W.) - 610 + (-) 150 B.C., uncalibrated.
PRL-336 (Mid Level of Period II, N.B.P.W.) - 660 + (-) 100 B.C., uncalibrated.
Besides these dates, some other dates indicated that the average date of Period II at Mathura
would have been about 650-700 B.C. after calibration. Keeping it in mind, it is obvious to
consider a date of about 1000 B.C. for the early phase of P.G.W., but it has to be kept in mind
that it is for the single site of Ambarish Tila, not the heartland of ancient Mathura city. B.B. Lal
(1985: 109-112) also tried to prove that the date of P.G.W. horizon at Mathura would date back
to circa 9th-10th century B.C. This exercise was presumably done for fitting Mathura in his theory
of associating P.G.W. culture with Mahābhārata age.
In recent years, archaeology of north India has got enriched with the excavations of a few
important sites and it indicates towards the fact that two cultural traditions of P.G.W. and
N.B.P.W. might have co-existed in different parts and it’s not always necessary to focus on a
particular direction of cultural migration. The radiocarbon date of N.B.P.W. horizon of about
1000 B.C. from the site of Ayodhya and even earlier dates from Juafardih (near Nalanda) and
Gotihawa (Nepal) indicate that P.G.W. cultural tradition might have been an earlier
contemporary of N.B.P.W. at many sites in north India. Possibly the largest P.G.W. settlement of
758
Gupta 757-771
India- Mathura would provide at least the same cultural sequence as obtained at the sites of
Noh, Atranjikhera and Jakhera in the Greater Braj region, if excavated in the heart of the city.
Figure 1: Map of Mathura marked with P.G.W. settlements
Analysis of Settlement Data

Details of the sites in old Mathura district are based on exploratory results given in Gupta 2013:
16-104.
Painted Grey Ware Culture Sites in Old Mathura District

P.G.W. sites in cis-Yamuna tract =138. P.G.W. sites in trans-Yamuna tract = 67. Total no. of
P.G.W. sites in Mathura district = 205 (Figure 1)
Considering the total area of old district of Mathura to be 3625 square km and dividing it with
the total number of P.G.W. sites, we roughly get the presence of a P.G.W. site in an area of
about 17.7 square km. For the western sector, if we consider its area to be about 2200 square km,
we come at the figure of about 16 square km for the presence of a P.G.W. site. For the eastern
759
sector, if we consider its area to be about 1400 square km, we come at the figure of about 21
square km for the presence of a P.G.W. site.
In the area west of Yamuna in the toposheet no. 54 E/9, the total no. of P.G.W. settlements in an
area of about 540 square km is 37 including the largest site of Mathura city which also has some
isolated mounds as well. Hence in this area if we derive the minimum area required for the
presence of a single P.G.W. site, it comes out to be 14.5 square km. This is the least area required
for the presence of a P.G.W. settlement throughout the country as per the information available
till now. Even in this area if we calculate the minimum area required per P.G.W. site in south,
east and west sides of Chhata town, it comes out to be about 9 or 10 square kilometre for the
presence of a P.G.W. site. This area shows the highest distribution of ancient sites in the country
and it continued in the similar manner during the succeeding periods of possibly Mauryan age,
Śuṅga period and definitely during early centuries of the Christian era. The trend of occupation
of the sites has been quite similar until the recent years. Only an increase of 10-20% can be
observed in the number of present day settlements in this area.
In the toposheet no. 54 E/7 in the region of Kumher and Dig, the total no. of P.G.W. sites is
about 40. In the area of roughly 700 square km, total no. of P.G.W. sites = 40. So, the area
required for the presence of a single P.G.W. site = 17.5 square km. Total number of P.G.W. sites
near Hathras and Sasni in the toposheet no. 54 I/2 ranges between 30-35 (35 or more Mauryan
sites). The minimum area required in this region for the presence of a single P.G.W. site = 700/
30 = 23.3 square km. For a single Mauryan site this minimum area would come out to be lesser
than 20 sq. km.
Mauryan Archaeological Sites in the Old Mathura District

During the survey of Mathura district, more than 98% of ancient sites were found to be
occupied by the modern villages. At all the sites which are lying in major parts as abandoned
mounds like Gosna, Sonoth, Bhadravan, Bhagosa, Barnauli ki Dhai, Sankhi, Sehi Garh, Tarauli,
Karnawal etc., all the early phases were identifiable in the form of P.G.W., N.B.P.W., B.S.W.,
B.R.W. and coarse grey ware. It is clear from such sites that there was certain degeneration in
the fabric of grey ware from P.G.W. period to Mauryan period in which the place of deluxe
pottery was taken by N.B.P.W. and the continuing tradition of B.S.W. up to some extent. At
almost all the sites from where I have reported the finding of P.G.W., associated coarse grey
ware was also found. Black-and-red ware pottery as well as black slipped ware pottery are the
pottery types which were found associated with both P.G.W. and N.B.P.W. cultural traditions.
At most of the sites these pottery types were observed. But it is quite difficult to ascertain the
period of such potsherds which were generally found without any particular shape except for
the findings of N.B.P.W. pottery. I must accept that except for the above mentioned few
mounds and few other sites; at a number of the sites N.B.P.W. potsherds were not observed.
Even at these sites the quantity of these sherds was very less in comparison to other pottery
types. I strongly feel that the typical pottery of Mauryan period in this region is the coarse grey
ware along with B.S.W., B.R.W. and red ware. The grey ware which was observed from
majority of P.G.W. sites was of both fabrics- finer and coarser. Finer sherds were definitely part
of P.G.W. tradition but the coarse grey ware sherds may belong to any of the two periods. The
pieces found at the sites occupied by the modern villages were too small to differentiate as to
which cultural tradition these belonged to. But to me it did not appear at any of the sites that
the site got abandoned after the P.G.W. period. The sites continued to inhabit during Mauryan,
760
Gupta 757-771
Śuṅga, Kushan and later periods without any major break. All the cultural periods were present
at most of these sites. I am not aware of any site which actually got discontinued after any of
these early periods. There might have been some small intervals during various cultural periods
but these were not long enough to deprive a site of the cultural deposit belonging to any of
these major periods. It is highly probable that many of the sites which have been described as
new Kushan settlements might have come into existence during the Mauryan or Śuṅga period,
but in the present condition of knowledge this point can neither be proved nor discarded. We
can safely assume that the total number of Mauryan sites would have exceeded the total
number of P.G.W. sites and it would have been in excess of 225.
Figure 2: Map of Mathura Marked with Kushan Settlements
Kushan Archaeological Sites in the Old Mathura District

No. of Kushan sites in cis-Yamuna tract = 235 (Figure 2). Hence if we derive the minimum area
required for the presence of a Kushan sites (Early centuries of the Christian era), it comes out to
be, Total area of cis-Yamuna region / Total no. of Kushan sites = 2200 / 235 = 9.36 square km.
Total no. of Kushan sites in trans-Yamuna region = 110. So, the minimum area required per site
= Total area of trans-Yamuna region / No. of Kushan sites in the trans-Yamuna region = 1400/
761
110 = 12.7 square km. Total number of Kushan sites in Mathura district = 345. So the minimum
area required per site in the district of Mathura = 3625 / 345 = 10.5 square km. Total number of
Kushan sites near Hathras and Sasni in the toposheet no. 54 I/2 = 60. The minimum area
required in this region for the presence of a single Kushan site = 700/ 60 = 11.66 square km.
From P.G.W. culture settlements to early historical settlements, a certain increase in the number
of sites can be observed. The total number of P.G.W. sites which is about 205 in Mathura district
might be higher than this number with an approximate fluctuation of + 10%. In this way, the
total number of the sites might be more than 225. There is strong possibility of the presence of
an earlier cultural horizon like P.G.W. at the sites of Sakna, Fenchri. Ganeshra, Maraura,
Junhedi, Barauli, etc., so this higher number is quite a possibility. If we take the number of total
P.G.W. settlements about 225 in the Mathura district, then considering the total number of early
historical settlements at around 345, we derive at the conclusion that there was an increase of
about 50% from P.G.W. period to early historical period. For the number of Kushan
archaeological sites, we can again assume an approximate fluctuation of + 10%. In this way the
total number of Kushan sites might increase to about 380. So, we may safely arrive at the
conclusion that during the period between P.G.W. (circa 10th century B.C.) and early centuries of
the Christian era, there was an increase of about 50-60% in the number of archaeological sites.
Many of the sites which have been dated to Kushan period might have actually come into
existence during Mauryan or Śuṅga periods (4th-2nd century B.C.).
The grey ware which is generally associated with Mauryan period of the late N.B.P.W. phase
had continued during the Śuṅga period up to some extent, so there are possibilities of many
Kushan sites actually dating back to this period. Even during the Kushan period itself, we do
not mean only Kushan period but the Śaka-Kushan period which actually starts in 1st century
B.C. and there is evidence that many of important Kushan sites (many even dating back to
P.G.W. period) got their name from Indo-Greeks and Parthians. Examples of some of these sites
are Mandrak near Aligarh, Maryak near Hodal, Helak and Halena near Bharatpur, Amokhri,
Tikari, Mursan, Tuksan and Lutsan in Hathras district, etc. This number of early historical sites
again gets around 50% additions in the form of new settlements during the early medieval
period and medieval period (9th -13th century A.D. and 17th century A.D.). Many of these sites
might have come into existence during Gupta period and late Gupta period (4th-7th century
A.D.), but in the present state of our knowledge, we can not say much about it. Another
important point about this late period is that even as the number of total sites increased to about
540, we cannot say that their economic and social condition had improved. Many of the already
existing sites might have been occupied for a brief period and might have had lesser
population. This period is quite long for any specific data but there are some evidence
indicating a wave of new arrivals of Thakurs and Jats during this period especially from
Rajasthan side about 10th century A.D.
Except for the villages named as Naglas (with a very few exceptions) most of the village and
town sites of Mathura district were occupied by the late medieval period (till about 16th-17th
century) either for longer periods or shorter ones. At more than 90% of modern villages in the
region, I observed sculptures of medieval period but most of these sites have not been described
by me either in the detailed description of the sites of Mathura district or the tables. It was not
felt necessary to include all the sites because the focus of the research was more on the ancient
period. This occupation of almost all the habitation settlements in Braj is further corroborated
after looking at Growse’s (1883) data as almost all the sites before 1880 had been in occupation
762
Gupta 757-771
for many generations. A large number of these sites had majority of the population following
the Hindu religion and it was only during the 14th-15th century onwards when some of the
villages became dominated by Muslim population. It was basically due to many locals
converting to Islam like in many of the villages of Mevs. Very few villages came into existence
as new sites with majority population being the followers of Islam in this period.
Figure 3: Map showing ancient trade routes from Mathura connecting nearby cities
Analysis of Various Ancient Routes

Here an analysis of various alignments of ancient period (Figure 3) is being done which would
have formed part of trade networks up to some extent even during that period. These analyses
are based on the location of ancient sites and the shortest route possible based on their locations.
It should be kept in mind that these are only tentative.
Mathura to Palwal: It would have been one of the most important routes of ancient times and is
now-a-days part of N.H. 2, going from Delhi to Kolkata. The stretch of the route between
Mathura and Palwal was more important for the number of ancient sites than the remainder of
route ahead, possibly after Ballabhgarh.
Sites lying on this stretch during P.G.W. period: Mathura - Jaint - Ajhai khurd - Chaumuha -
Akbarpur ( Sanpli Khera) - Senmari - Chhata - Dautana/ Tumola - Kosikalan - Kotvan - Hodal -
Banchari - Bamni Khera - Palwal.
763
During the Kushan period some smaller settlements mostly religious in nature came into
existence near this route. The new sites were- Sarai Azampur, Kota, Allahpur, Chhatikara. Of
these sites Mathura would always be a city site while Jaint, Chaumuha, Kotvan, Banchari were
large village sites. Palwal would have been a city site and Chhata, Kosikalan, Hodal, Bamni
Khera would have been small to large town sites.
Considering the distance between Mathura and Hodal to be about 52 km, we get total of 11
P.G.W. sites on this stretch. We come at an average distance of about 4.7 km. between two sites.
Interestingly the distance between Mathura and Jaint is much higher than this average length
and is about 13 km. It is not possible to identify the exact reason for this anomaly as the distance
between the ancient sites around Mathura city should have been much lesser. It is in complete
disagreement with the view of the majority of scholars who consider that the nearby settlements
of Mathura grew as such because of these being the feeder settlements to the booming economy
and cosmopolitan nature of Mathura city during ancient times, especially Kushan period. This
data would not change much for the Kushan period as well because the new sites which came
into existence in this stretch were not regular habitation sites. In my opinion these new sites
would have been religious structural sites.
Route following Yamuna: Besides this important route, another route went to Palwal region
following the sites close to Yamuna. This route passed via Vrindavan, Parkham Gujar, Sehi,
Nandghat, Shergarh, Majhoi to sites in the Hodal region. During Kushan period many other
sites came into existence on this route like Jaisinghpura, Kankor Tila, Ahalyaganj, Akrur Tila
between Mathura and Vrindavan, then Sunrakh, Gond and Badi Atas, Sakraya between
Vrindavan and Sehi, then Mai, Basai, Jaitpur, Bhogaon, Ogaha between Sehi and Shergarh. Of
all these sites, the site of Sehi was a small-town site while Vrindavan would have been an
important town site (might have been a city site), Shergarh would also have been a town site.
Mathura to Agra: This route more or less followed the river Yamuna and went via Karnawal,
Jhandipur, Runakta, Agra. Another route which is almost same as the N.H. 2 went via Baad,
Mahuan, Farah (possibly a P.G.W. settlement), Pingri, Kitham, Arsena, Runakta and Agra. Of
these sites Kitham is a large village site, Runakta is a town site and Agra obviously a large city
settlement. During the Kushan period on both the routes many new sites came into existence
like Sarai Azamabad, Aurangabad, Ronchi, Ladpur, Baburi Khera, Shahpur, Khairat along
Yamuna in the khadars. On the N.H. 2, the important sites which came into existence are
Aganpur Khera, Farah and Kurkanda. The distance between Mathura and Agra is 54 km and in
this stretch the total number of P.G.W. sites range from 8-10. So, the average distance between
two sites comes out to be 6.75 – 5.5 km. Even in this stretch the maximum distance between two
sites is between Mathura and Baad and is about 10 km.
Alternate Route from Mathura to Agra: It appears that this route would have been much
popular during the ancient times in spite of its being slightly lengthier. This route would have
passed from Mathura via Aruki, Bhainsa, Chhargaon, Bhahai, Mahwan and then would have
followed N.H. 2. Another option for the ancient travellers would have been via Dhauli Piyau
(Chandrapuri) crossing - Aruki - Bhainsa - Chhargaon - Beri - Parkham - Pingri - Kitham -
Arsena - Runakta - Agra. Following this route, the total number of P.G.W. sites on a stretch of
about 66 km would have been 12 and so the average distance between two sites on the route
would have been about 5.5 km. This average distance between two sites is almost in line with
the average distance between two sites on the Mathura-Palwal stretch. Among the sites on this
764
Gupta 757-771
stretch most of villages are large ancient villages and some of them might fall in the category of
small towns like Parkham and Runakta.
Mathura to Bharatpur and Uchchen: This route is going towards Bayana and Karauli via
Bharatpur and Uchchen. The ancient route (P.G.W. period) from Mathura to Uchchen passed
via Dhauli Piyau (Chandrapuri) crossing – Narhauli - Tarsi - Murhesi - Kosi Khurd - Sonoth -
Rasulpur – Rarah - Jaghina - Bharatpur - Sewar - Uchchen.
The distance between Mathura and Bharatpur is 36 km. So, the average distance between two
sites on this route comes out to be less than 4 km. From Bharatpur the route to Bayana passes
via Sewar, Uchchen, etc. Of all these sites Kosi is a large village site while Rarah, Jaghina and
Sewar are major town sites of some importance. Bharatpur and Uchchen are city sites. Uchchen
has been mentioned as a city site in some of the inscriptions from Kankali Tila belonging to
Kushan period. During the Kushan period two other sites came into existence on this route-
Narhauli and Tyonga. Both of these sites might be earlier in date but it could not be confirmed.
So, the average distance between two sites between Mathura and Bharatpur during Kushan
period comes to be about 3.3 km. This average distance is much lesser than the Mathura-Palwal
route indicating the importance of Mathura-Bharatpur route during ancient times.
Mathura to Kumher and Nadbai: The route to Nadbai and then towards Dausa and Jaipur
region was very important route of the region. The sites which lie on this route are: Pali Khera –
Naugama – Jansuti – Sonsa – Sonkh. Another alternate route to Sonkh was Maholi –
Mukundpur – Usphar – Unchagaon – Sonsa – Sonkh. During Kushan period two new sites
came into existence on this route – Shahpur between Unchagaon and Sonsa and Borpa between
Sonsa and Sonkh. From Sonkh the ancient route to Kumher would have passed via Bachhagaon
– Talphara – Pengor – Kumher.
For the distance of 24 between Mathura and Sonkh, we come at an average distance of about 3.5
– 4 km. The distance between Mathura and Kumher is about 36 km and the average distance
between two sites on this route comes to be about 3.5 km. Up to Nadbai the distribution of the
P.G.W. sites is in the same fashion. Some important facts about this area is that for a large area
between Sonkh, Sonsa and Paintha, there is not a single P.G.W. site and only one Kushan site of
Borpa (not very important). To the south, south-east and west of Sonkh the distribution of
ancient sites is in the same fashion as is found in the rich site distribution areas of Braj. Why
there is such a dearth of ancient sites in this small area is not clear. This is possibly because of
the unsuitability of the soil and the brackish nature of water in the area.
Mathura to Alwar and Sikar via Govardhan, Dig and Nagar: This route is very important one
as far as the distribution of ancient sites is concerned. During P.G.W. period the route to Dig
from Mathura for which complete archaeological data is available passes via Satoha – Khamni –
Jachonda – Aring – Jamunata – Govardhan – Gantholi – Bahaj – Deeg. So, for a distance of about
35 km there are 10 P.G.W. sites, so the average distance between two sites on this route comes
out to be 3.5 km. During the Kushan period some new sites came into existence but these were
small settlements more of religious nature than regular habitation sites. These sites were
Chaubara mounds, Girdharpur, Asgarpur (two sites) and Palai (most probably dating back to
P.G.W. period). This development of new sites has not much to do with the settlement pattern
based on trade route but just a normal extension because of increase in population and their
activities. Among all these sites Aring and Dig would have been important town settlements,
765
Dig might even qualify to be a city settlement. Govardhan site as visible now is not a very large
site but I consider that because of too much human activity, evidence of a larger settlement has
been lost by now. There is no denying that Govardhan enjoys a peculiar location on the
alignment and distribution pattern of ancient sites and must have been a larger settlement,
possibly qualifying for a town site.
From Dig to Nagar the route passes via ancient sites of Panhori – Rasiya – Siswar – Nagar. The
distance of Nagar from Mathura is about 60 km and from Nagar the distance of Alwar is about
50 km. The distribution of ancient sites on this route is not much different than in the area of
Mathura district but it appears that the density of ancient sites in the area situated ahead of
Nagar is lesser than Mathura and Dig area. That might be because of the comparatively poorer
soil quality and the paucity of water sources as the Aravali hills are more visible in this area.
Nagar is certainly a city (nagara) site. Panhori can be included among small town sites. From
Nagar the route goes to Alwar via Govindgarh, an important ancient site and from Alwar to
Kotputli where it crosses the Delhi-Jaipur N.H. 8 and from Kotputli it reaches the sites in the
area of Neem Ka Thana like Khetri, Ganeshwar, Jodhpura. The evidence of ancient route is
found in the form of Shakambhari Devi near Udaipur Bhati which is a popular deity (kuladevi)
of many Mathura brahmanas (Vaśiṣṭha gotra) and certain other castes. But surprisingly instead
of following the ancient route, the pilgrims go via Jaipur making their journey longer in terms
of distance. The ancient route must have continued to be important till the medieval period.
This route appears to be a major route for the migration of a large population during 8th-12th
century A.D. from Rajasthan (Jodhpur, Bikaner, Sikar region to Braj). A number of Sūrya
temples and Sūrya-kuṇḍas on this route are supportive of it. Another point which needs to be
mentioned here is that, that Shakambhari devi was known by elder people in Braj region as
Shakhraya-Shyama. There is an ancient site between Vrindavan and Sehi called as Sakhraya
which dates back to Mauryan period with strong possibility for the presence of earlier cultural
horizon and in all probability appears to have derived its name from this goddess of Sikar
region. Besides, there is a tradition among many important castes in Sehi region that derive its
origin from Sikar, Jodhpur region of Rajasthan. I think this tradition is based on some ancient
cultural interconnection between the regions of Rajasthan and Braj. It is slightly difficult to
believe that all the people of Thakur clan came from Rajasthan during early medieval period to
settle at Braj and there were no early settlers of this clan in the area.
Mathura to Fatehpur Sikri, Jagner and further south: It is another very important route which
had become more prominent during and after Śuṅga and Kushan period as it was one of the
major sources for the supply of the raw material of red sandstone for which Mathura school of
art is so famous. From Fatehpur Sikri the route went southward to Jagner and Tantpur and Bari
in the hilly tracts and the distribution of sites is less frequent in that area.
There would have been different routes for reaching Sikri from Mathura. During P.G.W. period
one would have been via Tarsi – Murhesi – Kosi – Sonoth/ Mal – Santruk – Ol – Pipla – Ikran/
Hansela – Undra/ Chiksana ) – Mahadau – Churyari – Sikri. Among all these sites only Pipla is a
site which I could not confirm as a P.G.W. settlement but on the basis of analysis of various
ancient alignments it should have been a P.G.W. site. Following this route, the distance of Sikri
quarries would have been around 46 km. On the basis of it the average distance between two
sites would have been about 3.6 km. Another stone query very near to Sikri is at Santha and that
would have followed the route Chiksana – Daulatabad – Sikri/ Santha. Anyhow Santha, in spite
of being a very important ancient quarry, cannot be compared with Sikri as Sikri would have
766
Gupta 757-771
been a much more important site, a town site, on the important alignment from Agra to Rupbas
and Bayana. Of these sites, Ol might be put in the bracket of smaller town while Kosi,
Dhangaon, Chiksana would have been larger village sites. During Kushan period a new site
Pura came into existence on this route which is possibly an extension of Sonoth site.
There is another route which might have been used to reach Sikri. This route goes via Aruki –
Bhainsa – Chhargaon – Pilua Sadakpur – Beri – Jhurawai – Sandhan – Arua Khas – Biyara –
Daulatabad – Sikri/ Santha. Following this route, the distance between Mathura and Sikri
would be about 45 km and dividing it by 12 (total number of sites) we get an average distance
of about 3.75 km between two sites. Only a new Kushan site came into existence on this
alignment and that is Banmauli which is an extension of Beri site. Besides, at Pilua Sadakpur
P.G.W. horizon could not be confirmed though it is highly probable.
Mathura to Dholpur and Gwalior region via Achhnera: One route to Gwalior region would
have gone through the city of Agra but it appears that from Mathura or from northern India the
route would have gone via Achhnera, Kagaraul to Dholpur region and from there to Morena,
Gwalior and then to central India especially Bharhut and Vidisha. During the P.G.W. period,
the Mathura-Achhnera route would have passed via sites of Aruki – Bhainsa – Chhargaon –
Sersa – Pilwa Sadakpur – Beri – Parkham – Baroda – Kachaura – Achhnera. In a distance of
about 35 km the total number of sites would have been 11 and hence we arrive at an average
distance of about 3.1 km between two sites. Of these Parkham and Achhnera would have been
town sites while Bhainsa, Beri and Kachaura must have been large village sites.
From Achhnera the route to Gwalior region would have gone via Puramana/ Muriapura –
Nahchani – Akhwai – Gahera Khurd and then towards Saiyan-Dholpur region. Another route
would have gone via Raibha – Mahuar – Khalua and then towards Saiyan region of Agra. As
my explorations in this area were incomplete as well as were not as exhaustive as were in the
area up to Achhnera, I am not going to interpret the data. Only one thing can be said with
certainty about this region, that this area was quite important for the journey from greater part
of Alwar and Mathura region to Gwalior region and central India and the distribution of sites
was in the same way as is throughout the Braj region but the minimum area required for the
presence of a P.G.W. site would be slightly higher than the normal average in most parts of
Mathura district.
Mathura to Firozpur Jhirka and Punahna via Kaman: This important route from Mathura goes
to Kaman and then from Kaman to Firozpur Jhirka and then towards Kotputli and the other
route from Kaman goes to Nuh, Tijara, Rewari and then Rohtak via Punahna. The route from
Mathura to Kaman which dates back to P.G.W. period is as follows: (a) Mathura – Arahra – Bati
– Ral – Bhadal – Pelkhu – Sahar – Kamai/ Mandoi and Karahla – Barsana – Unchagaon – Akata
– Kaman. From Pelkhu another route with slight variations would have passed via (b) Bharna
Khurd – Bharna Kalan – Dahrauli/ Seeh & Palson – Hathiya – Dhabhala– Sunhera – Bhajera –
Kanwara/ Kaman. Among the latter route, identification of Dhabhal and Sunhera as P.G.W. site
is a bit difficult as these are situated in hilly area.
Another route to Kaman from Mathura is via Govardhan and then via Barsana and Sanket. This
route is more popular in the modern times. From Govardhan the P.G.W. period route passed
via (c) Nimgaon – Palson -Seeh – Dahrauli – Barsana – Sanket – Rithaura – Dhilawati – Akata –
Kaman. Another popular route which is quite longer passes via Govardhan – Dig – Parmandra
767
– Khera – Kaman. The average distance between two sites comes out to be less than 3.5 km and
the shortest distance between Mathura and Kaman to be about 40 km.
On the a) route, the sites of Ral, Sahar, Barsana and Akata would have been town sites between
the largest city of Mathura and a large city of Kaman. On the b) route the sites of Palson and
Hathiya would have been town sites. Hathiya is definitely a lesser known but quite important
town site. Most of other sites on these routes are medium to large villages. From Kaman one
route goes to Firozpur Jhirka, an important town site via Lohasar, Balkhera, Satwari and Pahari.
Of these Pahari is an important town site on this route. Another route from Kaman goes to
Rewari via Pai, Jurahra, Punahna, Nuh etc. and all these sites are large village and town sites.
Ancient Alignments of Braj Going to trans-Yamuna Region

Mathura to Kasganj, Soron and trans-Ganga region via Hathras: It would have been a very
significant ancient route linking Mathura and Rajasthan site with mid-Gangetic doab region.
The ancient route passes via Isapur – Lohvan – Gosna – Raya – Sonai – Mursan – Hathras Qila.
The average distance between two sites on this route comes out to be slightly higher than 5 km
but in most part of trans-Yamuna region, the situation is same. The distance between Raya and
Sonai (about 10 km) is much higher than the average distance between two sites. Among these
sites Raya, Sonai would have been town sites, Gosna and Mursan large village sites. Gosna is an
interesting case because of being abandoned during late medieval period and might be clubbed
as a small-town site if the total area of the site extending far beyond the railway track is taken
into account along with the archaeological findings from the site. Hathras was one of the larger
mounds of the whole Braj region and definitely an important city settlement. About the P.G.W.
level at Isapur site, we are not sure but there is strong possibility of it.
From Hathras the ancient route might not have followed the present road to Sikandararao and
Soron because on this stretch of about 35 km, I could locate only two P.G.W. sites. One of these
two sites, Maidhu is also a part of another important ancient alignment while another site of Jau
Inayatpur is about 9 km distant from Sikandararao. Some new Kushan sites came into existence
on this route like Kanchana near Sonai and Thulai, Salempur and Jaitpur between Maindhu and
Sikandararao. During ancient times the route from Hathras to Sikandararao would have passed
via Hathras – Maidhu – Rajpur – Paharpur – Punnair – Todh – Khitauli – Pichhaunti – Jau
Inayatpur – Sikandararao.
There are two possible ancient routes to Kasganj and Soron. One would be: Mathura – Hathras
– Maidhu – Daryapur – Tikari – Gangraul – Khera Sultanpur and then after crossing G.T. road
towards Kasganj and Soron. From Soron the ancient route goes to Ahichchhatra (Anwla) near
Bareilly. The second altered route would have been via Mathura – Mursan – Asroi/ Khera –
Tuksan – Ahbaranpur – Ruheri – Lutsan – Daryapur – Tikari – Barhad – Bijaigarh and then to
Kasganj, Soron and trans-Ganga sites. A very important river from archaeological point of view,
Kali Nadi is crossed near the important city site of Kasganj and the Ganga at Soron. From
Sikandararao another important route goes towards Sahawar town via Bargawan, Naglakhera,
Kapretha, Qazikhera, Akhtauli, SinSh and Atranjikhera.
Atranjikhera is one of the largest abandoned mounds and was excavated by A.M.U. under the
leadership of R.C. Gaur. It has provided evidence of O.C.P., B.R.W. phase, P.G.W. and onwards
cultural sequence. The distance of this site from Mathura is about 105 km and it serves as an
768
Gupta 757-771
important crossing point at river Kali Nadi to go towards Sahawar town and Patiali/
Ganjdundwara. The actual importance of the site Atranjikhera might be understood from its
important location on the Mathura – Kampil and Mathura – Sankisa routes. Besides it also
played an important role on the route linking Kasganj with Sakita and sites south of it. Another
alternate route from Sikandararao to Atranjikhera goes via Marahra, Jinhaira and Jarthai.
Mathura to Nidhauli Kalan and Etah via Hathras: The important route to Etah from Mathura
goes via Hathras. Up to Hathras the route is similar as discussed in the previous route. From
Hathras the route would have gone via Ladpur – Chaturbhuj Khera – Maho – Band
Abdullahpur – Hasayan – Andauli – Kanau – Maqsudpur – Pilkhatra – Gadri/ Mitraul –
Margayn – Nidhauli Kalan. From Pilkhatra, Nidhauli Kalan can also be reached going via
Khera Nuh but it would be slightly longer. From Nidhauli Kalan which is definitely an
important town site, Etah can be reached via Dholeshwar – Songra – Baragaon and Mukharna.
Mathura to Kampil, Sankisa and towards Sravasti via Jalesar: Kampil near Kayamganj in
district Farukkhabad and Sankisa in the same district are two of the important ancient cities and
during P.G.W. period, these must be considered important settlements at par with other large
sites like Hathras, Aligarh, etc. The major sites on this route are Mathura, Raya, Hathras/
Sadabad, Maho/ Sahpau, Jalesar, Awagarh and then the sites towards Ganga plain like Sankisa
and Kampil. After crossing Ganga somewhere in that zone, the ancient route goes towards
Sitapur district sites, Sravasti and then sites situated south of Sravasti. The site of Jalesar can be
reached following three different routes.
One of the important routes would be from Mathura to Hathras and then Hathras – Parsara –
Lakhnu – Aihan – Gwarau (Kushan site) – Simrao – Jalesar. Another route would have been
Hathras – Ladpur – Jalalpur – Khera Chaturbhuj – Shahpur – Maho – Gwarau – Simrao –
Jalesar. The latter route would have gained popularity during Kushan period, though most of
the sites date back to P.G.W. period. The average distance between two sites on the route to
Jalesar from Mathura comes out to be about 4.5 km or more. The second important route would
have gone via Mathura – Lohvan – Sihora – Karab – Pachawar – Jugsana – Unchagaon –
Sadabad – Sahpau – Isonda – Berni – Jamaun – Jalsear. The third route to Jalesar would have
gone via Mathura – Gokul – Mahavan – Baldev – Sadabad. This route does not appear to be
quite significant during the early times but after Kushan period it became the more popular
route and still is. The number of ancient sites is much lesser on this route and at none of the
sites Gokul, Raskhan Samadhi, and Baldev I could find any pre-Kushan evidence.
Another important route, most probably dating back to P.G.W. period passed along river
Yamuna from Baldev to Akos and other important sites and continued further to Barhan,
Devkhera, Narkhi, Fariha and then joined the Uttarāpatha. The average distance between two
nearby sites on either of these routes is more than 5 or 6 km. This average distance is much
higher than any of the less important route in cis-Yamuna tract. From Jalesar, the route passed
via Punhera, Pondri, Gadsera to reach Awagarh. From Awagarh, the road to Kampil and
Sankisa had more than one option to reach. The royal highways and other important routes
would have been more popular during the ancient times for long distance trade and travel.
Mathura to Aligarh: A lot of change has taken place on the alignment of road to Aligarh from
the ancient times to modern days. The ancient route to Aligarh, an extensive ancient city site,
goes in this manner: Mathura – Isapur – Lohvan – Gosna – Raya – Aiyera Khera – Nimgaon –
769
Gorai -Kaimawali – Hastpur – Mahua – Aligarh. The average distance between two sites is
about 4.5 km. Many new sites came into existence on this route during the Kushan period like
Tamotiya, Harota, Bisahuli, etc.
Another alternate route to Aligarh would have passed via Mathura – Aiyera Khera – Beswan –
Kanka – Sasni - Aligarh. The present-day route to Aligarh from Mathura is not an ancient one.
The whole stretch between Raya and Hastpur is devoid of any ancient site except for Beswan,
which was definitely an ancient town but not part of Mathura–Aligarh alignment as such but of
Khair-Sadabad and Mathura-Sasni and Ganga valley sites alignments. From Aligarh the ancient
route went towards Harduaganj, Atrauli, Morra, Karnawas (crossing point at Ganga), Bahjoi,
Sambhal/ Chandausi, Moradabad and Himalayan region sites. Another route went towards
Jawan and further north.
Mathura to Nohjhil and Jewar: This important route went towards north after crossing river
Yamuna. The route would have been via Mathura – Vrindavan – Chamar Nagla – Barnauli Ki
Dhai – Manth – Bhadravan – Irauli – Samauli – Ohawa – Bhidauni – Surir – Mirpur – Khera
Barauth – Nohjhil – Bajna – Awakhera – Gairaula – Jattari - Tappal – Jewar. From Jewar the
route goes towards Dhankaur, Ghaziabad and Meerut region. From Mathura to Nohjhil and
Bajna, the average distance between two sites comes out to be less than 3.5 km. From Bhadravan
to Nohjhil and Bajna, the distribution of ancient sites is much closer than the rest of the stretch.
During Kushan period some new sites came into existence on this alignment especially in the
Nohjhil and northward region. From Mirpur to Bajna and northward sites an alternate route
goes via Palkhera and Parsauli to Bajna. From Bajna the route goes towards Jattari, Pisawa and
Khurja.
Mathura to Khair: This is another important route and goes towards Chandaus, Khurja,
Bulandshahr, Hapur and Garh Mukteshwar and then towards Saharanpur region. The Mathura
to Khair route passes via Mathura – Vrindavan – Nagla Chamaran – Barnauli Ki Dhai – Arua –
Jabra – Jaiswan – Nasiti – Harnaul – Karahari – Lohi – Khayara – Arni – Khair. Another route
from Mathura to Khair would have been via Arua – Nimgaon – Gorai – Deta – Rajawal – Arni –
Khair. Another route can be traced as Mathura – Vrindavan – Manth – Bhadravan – Eroli Gujar
– Samauli – Ohawa – Bhidauni – Surir – Hasanpur – Jarara – Khayara – Arni – Khair. On all the
three routes the distribution of sites is quite close and the average distance between two sites on
any of these routes ranges between 3–3.5 km. Most of these sites date back to P.G.W. period
except for a few where possibility of its presence is strong. During Kushan period many more
sites came into existence (quite significant in number) indicating towards its importance as an
important link route to reach various important regions. The distribution of ancient sites after
the Mathura district is much lesser than inside Mathura district.
Other Important Link Routes of the Region

Kaman to Khair: This route passes via Kaman – Akata – Rithaura – Sanket – Anjnokh –
Khayara – Bhadawal – Chhata – Ladpur – Ranhera – Shergarh – Nohjhil – Parsauli – Shall –
Pachahra – Khera Kasison – Khair. The total distance between Kaman and Khair is about 58 km
on this route and hence the distance between two nearby sites comes out to be 3.3 km. Some
new sites came into existence on this route during Kushan period like Khursi, Sajnan, etc. From
Nohjhil the more popular route to Khair seems to be via the important town site of Bajna which
passed from Bajna to Khair via Edalgarhi, Kaulahar, Shiwal Kalan and Gomat.
770
Gupta 757-771
Kumher to Khair: This is the route coming from Vairāṭa region and going towards upper
Ganga plains especially Bulandshahr and nearby regions. The route would have been as such:
Kumher – Pengor – Kasot – Krenwa – Konder – Dehiya – Govardhan – Radhakund – Kaunhi –
Pelkhu – Siwal – Sihana – Akbarpur (Sanpli Khera) – Pelhora – Tarauli – Sainwa – Ranhera –
Shergarh - Nohjhil – Parsauli – Shall – Pachahra – Khera Kasison – Khair. Considering the
distance between Kumher and Khair to be about 84 km, the average distance between two
nearby sites on this route comes out to be about 3.5 km.
Aligarh to Jalesar: There are two possible routes to reach Jalesar from Aligarh. One goes via
Aligarh – Bijaigarh – Hasayan – Jalesar. Many ancient sites lie on this route with these four sites
being the major towns or cities. Another important route which might have been more popular
goes via Sasni. This route definitely became more popular during and after Kushan period.
From Aligarh the route goes via Mandrak – Sasni – Lutsan – Daryapur – Punnair – Heta
Raghunathpur – Maho – Chirgawan – Jalesar. The route from north-west region via the sites
like Rohtak, Rewari would have reached the region of Jalesar via Palwal and then Jewar-Tappal
after crossing Yamuna and then would have reached Jalesar and other sites in the region via
Khair – Hasangarh – Khera Gailow – Gursena – Hastpur – Kanka – Sasni. From Khair, Jalesar
could also be reached via Hathras. The name of site Tuksan on the road linking Iglas with
Hathras is quite interesting. The route from Aligarh to Jalesar is full of sites which are in all
possibility related with people who entered India from northwestern region. The examples of
such sites are Mandrak, Sasni (most probably derived from word Sassanian), Lutsan, etc. Many
other sites in the nearby region, but part of some other routes, must also possibly derive their
name from north-western region of India.
Etah to Rewari: This route would have been an alternate route from the side of Kosam and
Patna towards Rewari and then the sites of Hansi, Agroha, Sirsa up to Taxila region. From Etah
one of the routes would have gone to either Hathras or Sasni. From Hathras the route would
have gone via Rohai – Tuksan – Kaimawali – Gorai – Khair – Gomat – Jattari – Tappal. From
Tappal after crossing Yamuna, the route would have passed via Palwal, Dhatir, Sohna towards
Rewari. From Sohna one important route goes towards Gurgaon, Bahadurgarh and Rohtak.
One could also reach Palwal following the Grant Trunk Road up to Aligrah and then moving
from Aligarh via Lodha, Andla and Khair to Palwal and Rewari. This link route would have
been quite important joining the main Uttarāpatha route with the other areas of Mathura-
Taxila trade route.
References
Cunningham, A. 1874. Archaeological Survey Report 1871-72. Kolkata: Archaeological Survey of
India.
Growse, F. S. 1883. Mathura: A District Memoir. Delhi: Asian Educational Services.
Gupta, V. K. 2013. Mathura: An Art and Archaeological Study. Delhi.
Indian Archaeology 1974-75 A Review.
Joshi, M. C. and A. K. Sinha 1978-79. Chronology of Mathura-An Assessment, Puratattva 10: 39-
44.
Lal, B. B. 1985. Mathura: A Re-assessment of the Chronology of the Crucial N.B.P.W. Horizons
Man and Environment 9: 109-112.
Sharma, S. 2018. Personal Communication.
771

Mathura Settlement Archaeology and Trade

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Mathura Settlement Archaeology and Trade

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Mathura Settlement Archaeology and Trade

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Human and Heritage: An Archaeological

Spectrum of Asiatic Countries

NEW BHARATIYA BOOK CORPORATION

First Edition: 2019

Price: Rs. 15000/-

Type Setting and Cover Design: Dr. Rajesh S. V.

Front Cover: Rock Art, Hathitol Shelter, Raisen

Printed at: Jain Amar Printing Press, Delhi - 110007

Dr. Abhayan G. S. (born 1983) is an Assistant Professor in the

Dr. Preeta Nayar (born 1965) graduated in Archaeology from M. S.

Ms. Ehsan Rahmath Ilahi (born 1995) has a bachelor’s degree in

1 Stone Beads from Megalithic Burial at Niramakulam, Kerala 1-22

2 The Moorish Mosque of Kapurthala, Punjab 23-41

3 Pillayar Ratha of Kalkulam Neelakanda Swami Temple, Tamil 42-57

4 New Light on the Perumals of Kerala: An Analysis of the 58-69

5 Ethnohistory as a Conjunctive Approach in New Archaeology: 70-77

6 Acheulian Thar: A Case Study on Didwana and Jayal in 78-86

7 Marici in Buddhism: Notes and Discussion with Reference to 87-93

8 The Reflection of Carpet Designs on the Mughal Miniature 94-123

10 The Depiction of Narasimha Panels in the Temple Murals of 146-153

11 Kalhora Dynasty in Pakistan and Its Impact on Local 154-161

12 Traditional Vanchi (Boat) Making in Kerala 162-169

13 Royal Titles, Epithets and Kingship: An Archaeological 170-183

14 Beginning of Pre Harappan Forts 184-195

15 Megalithic Vestiges in Udumbanchola Taluk, Idukki District, 196-223

16 Painted Narratives in Temples at Vira Wah and Nagar Parkar 224-229

17 Evidence in Pieces: Osteological Analysis of Stray Findings 230-246

18 Rock Art and Archaeology of Phulsari: A Revisit to a Forgotten 247-256

19 Indus Graffiti from Gujarat 257-269

20 Soanian Assemblages from the Bam Locality of Siwalik Frontal 270-295

21 Bronze Casting at Mannar in Alappuzha, Kerala - An 296-317

22 New Interpretation on Prehistoric Rock Art at Pha Taem, 318-327

23 Terracotta Roof Tiles from Vizhinjam, Kerala 328-340

24 Tracing the Origins of Aksha Krida (Chaturanga) Game: Study 341-350

25 Tourist Satisfaction towards Archaeological Heritage Sites in 351-354

26 Historiography of the Megaliths of Kerala 355-366

27 Śrīvatsa: Journey of an Auspicious Symbol Crossing All 367-373

28 Reminiscing the “Iron Man of India” through Biographical 374-381

29 Interfaces of Asian Art in the Art Forms of Karnataka: A Few 382-396

30 A Comparative Study of Material Culture Found from 397-403

31 Kerala’s Mediaeval Society and Trade as Gleaned from 404-413

32 Role of Fairs and Festivals in Facilitating Indigenous Trade 414-422

33 Arethipura in Karnataka and Its Surroundings 423-442

34 Glazed Ceramics and Indicators of Glazed Ceramic Production 443-462

35 Tamraparni - Perennial River of Pandya Kingdom: Gleanings 463-470

36 Buddhism in Uttarakhand: Monuments from Past and Present 471-480

37 Small Water Crafts of the Lower Chaliyar Basin, Kerala: An 481-496

38 In Search of a Mythical Artisan: Tracking the Jakanachari 497-524

39 Analysis of Faunal Remains from Navinal, Gujarat 525-540

40 Preliminary Report on Documentation and Study of Rock Art 541-565

41 Survey and Documentation of the Built Heritage of District 566-579

42 An Interesting Form of Nataraja in the Wooden Panel of 580-587

43 Jainism in Kerala: Iconographical Considerations and Identity 588-600

45 An Ethnographic Study of Rock Art of Upper Damodar Valley: 609-621

46 Conserving Nature as Cultural Landscape Reflects in the 622-633

47 Harappan Graffiti from Dholavira 634-645

48 Art and Architectural Grandeur of Muṇḍeśvarī Temple in 646-653

49 Tomb of Adam Shah Kalhoro, Sukkur, Pakistan 654-657

50 Some Aspects of Deccan History: Based on Foreign 658-671

51 “Early Medieval” in the History of Kerala 672-680