-ironinmetalsage

7/28/2019 -ironinmetalsage

1/23

1

Iron in early Metals Age of India

So it is with the smith, sitting by his anvil, intent on his art-work, The smoke

of the fire shrivels his flesh, as he wrestles in the heat of the furnace. The

hammer rings again and again in his ears, and his eyes are on the pattern he

is copying. He concentrates on completing the task, and stays late to give it aperfect finish.

Ecclesiasticus, or The Wisdom of Jesus son of Sirach, 38:28

Survival of Traditional Indian Iron Technology

By Pankaj Goyal

Recently an interesting book, Tradition and Innovation in the History of Iron

Making has come out. We give below a summary of some interesting essays

dealing with traditional iron technology.

After aluminum, iron is the second most abundant metal in the earths crust and is

considered as one of the most useful metal as it is utilized in almost all industries.

It is believed that iron was accidentally discovered late in the Bronze Age. The early

iron encountered by man was meteoritic iron. In India and China iron making may

have developed independently and by 600 BC excellent steel was being made in

India. India has been known for its ancient heritage of iron and steel production

and metal craftsmanship. There are a large number of iron monuments in India

that represent the ancient metallurgical expertise, some of the examples are iron

pillars at Dhar and Delhi, iron beam at Konark, Orissa etc.

The beginnings of iron technology in India date back to probably the end of the

second millennium B.C. Initially, it was generally believed that iron came to India

with the Aryans. Several of such conjectures have been discarded now. Some of

these are discussed below.

1. It was believed that iron was a monopoly of the Hittites and with the disruption

of their empire the technical know-how dispersed to different parts of the

world around circa 1200 B.C. But now it is known that there are several sites in

the world where metallic iron was in use in pre-1200 B.C. period although in

small quantity. Metallic as well as smelted iron has been reported in some early

contexts.

2. The word Ayasthat generally stands for iron occurs several times in the

Rigveda, the earliest text of the Aryans in India. But a detailed examination of the

wordAyas reveals that it was used either to indicate metal or copper bronze.

There are certain contexts that can be interpreted both ways but more precisely

Ayas meant copper-bronze and if it was true then we cant say that iron come to

India along with the Aryans (the composers ofRigveda).


2/23

2

3. Metallurgically, iron smelting and forging processes were considered so complex

that independent origin of technology at several places was regarded as

improbable. But recent investigations show that iron is a by-product of copper

and lead smelting and this makes iron production a viable proposition in any

copper bronze working society. The availability was greater in more

elementary and less efficient groups as they were likely to blunder and stumble

upon a new product than the expert groups whose skill ruled out mistakes.

Hence, under certain conditions iron-rich copper and even metallic iron could

get reduced out of copper lead smelt as a result of use of fluxes.

4. If we go through chronological evidence, it also shows that iron was indigenous

in origin. Recently, from the mid-Ganga plains several sites like Raja Nal-Ka-Tila

in Sonabhadra district, Malhar in Mirjapur district and Pandurajar Dhibi,

Hathigra, Mangalkot in Bengal etc. have yielded important early evidence of

the occurrence of iron. No one can ignore all such evidence that suggests that

iron technology developed independently in India. Although, it may be possible

that in certain bordering regions iron could have come through interactions

with neighboring regions but there is no data to support diffusion of foreigntechnology into the deeper parts of the subcontinent.

Literary Evidence

The existing literature related to indigenous iron and steel industry is really vast.

The accessible literature on Indias indigenous iron industry is largely based on

European accounts as most of the ethno-historical data on this subject was

collected by the European observers of the early colonial period. However, it

seems that most of the European evidence concealed more than they exposed and

the actual artisan is missing in this perspective. These European observers chiefly

dealt with the broad outer characteristics of craft production (the shape and thesize of the furnace, working method, product etc.) with only a passing reference to

the smith as a tribal, a savage or simply as an emaciated creature. One other

factor that played a significant role in the restriction of the accessible

historiography on Indian iron is its failure to take note, much less highlight, the fact

that the colonial observers notion of iron metallurgy in India differed widely

between the early eighteenth century and the post-Bessemer invention period.

But the available indigenous literature shows a different perspective of the Indian

craft tradition, though this indigenous literature has its own limitations. The

limitations of the nationalist historiography are widely known at present as one

could hardly get into the actual working sphere of the artisans simply by dependingon archival and similar other evidences generally used in historical research.

Historical evidence cannot give or explain the idea of early technologists

perception of his work, his position in the particular craft structure, site of his work

and the design of his workshop.

Indigenous Iron Industry of Jharkhand


3/23

3

Jharkhand has a long tradition of metallurgy as archaeological evidence of copper,

gold and iron smelting has been found in this region. Jharkhand has beenan

epicenter of the growth and dispersion of a particular tool technique. It is believed

that a nomadic group known asAsurhad introduced the craft of iron smelting in

this region (It is interesting to note that the nameAsur is also associated with

traditional iron technological sites of Kumaun in the Central Himalayas). How old is

theAsurs association with Jharkhand is not known. There are two types of small

iron smelting workshop that distinguish the iron industry of Jharkhand the open

air furnace of the nomadic blacksmith and the more numerous thatched furnace.

Then, there was the larger iron-smelting workshop of the Koth-Saaltype, followed

by Khammar-Saalor iron refining houses. There were also some groups that did

not smelt iron but specialized in forging tools. These different groups show

differences in their tool techniques which are reflected in their widely different

narratives and legends relating to their craft techniques. Significantly, the

dichotomy between the ordinary Saalor the small iron-smelting furnace and the

larger workshop of the Koth-Saaltype also existed in some other parts of India.

Traditional Iron Workings in India

There are a number of groups in India, whose main occupation is iron smelting or

related to iron working, but here only four ethnic groups (Agaria, Asur, Brijias and

Lohar) are taken into consideration for highlighting the Indian traditional iron

smelting technology. These four groups give a good idea about the traditional iron

techniques in India.

(1) Agaria Iron Smelting Techniques

TheAgaria is a scheduled tribe living in the districts of Mandala, Dindhori, Bilaspur,

Balaghat of Madhya Pradesh. Iron smelting is the chief and traditional professionofAgaria groups. TheAgaria community resides in close proximity of ore deposits,

perhaps to save time as well as energy. There is no need of deep digging in India as

iron deposits are profusely distributed. Iron ores used by them are mainly hematite

or magnetite that occur in association with lateritic rocks in the form of heavy

reddish brown stones. These stones are then broken into small pieces and cleaned

of sticking earth. They mix the ore with charcoal in proportion of 1:3 and put this

mixture into the furnace. After filling the mixture up to the top of the furnace they

ignite it and plaster the mouth. After a continuous blast of one and half hour, the

thick molten liquid starts appearing through the waste flue that indicates that the

processes of melting of iron has begun. When the flow of slag stops, the bellows

are removed. Finally, the bloom of glowing semi-molten iron balls are lifted outwith the help of tongs and carried for hammering. After repeated hammering and

heating this iron ball is used for making various implements and household tools.

(2) Asur Iron Smelting Techniques

We can say that theAsuriron smelting technique is a living tradition of the past.

Asuris one of the thirty scheduled tribes in Bihar and are found in the districts of


4/23

4

Gumla, Lohardaga and Palaman and the Pat area of Netarhat plateau in Bihar.

Three different varieties of iron ore are recognized by them: Magnetite is the first

one and termed as POLA by theAsur. The second one is haematite, commonly

known as BICHI. The third one is Haematite from laterite and commonly termed as

GOTA. Charcoal of green sal trees is used by them as this charcoal is capable of

generating sufficient heat for smelting processes as well as the sal tree is a good

quality of forest wood.

(3) Birjia the Iron Smelters

The Birjia is one of the most primitive tribes of Bihar. At present, Birjia people are

mostly found in Lohardaga, Bishunpur and Raidih (Gumla) and Guru police stations

of Palamu district. Traditionally the chief occupations of the Birjia are iron

smelting, benora cultivation and basket making. They are believed to be the first

human race, who discovered the iron ore and prepared different types of iron

implements with the help of their indigenous process. A few among them still

follow their traditional occupation, but due to shortage of raw materials they have

started to adopt new economic activities. Kothi(the basic open hearth furnace) isthe iron smelting furnace used by them the height of which is about 2-1/2 feet

with a single hole. The mixture of iron ore and charcoal was charged from the top

and air was blown through a nozzle, by repeated pressing of the cylindrical bellow

with the help of the feet. This bellowing with the legs is known as Chaupa. The air

is blasted for about 4-5 hours. The temperature in the furnace is determined by

the skilled workers themselves. After the reduction the bellow is removed and the

furnace mouth is broken. The bloom in the form of sponge is taken out from the

furnace and hammered, first gently and then by hard hammering to shape it into

desired forms. But the unfortunate thing is that the tradition is now almost lost in

competition to the modern technology.

(4) The Godulia Lohar and their Iron Making Technique

The Godulia Lohars live in Rajasthan, Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh, Punjab, Western

parts of Maharashtra and Uttar Pradesh. Black smithy is the chief traditional

profession of the Godulia Lohars. As they are nomadic groups, their home is their

bullock cart that holds all the possessions and requirements that they need for

their living. The same techniques were followed by their forefathers and the

tradition is still continuing today by transmitting knowledge from father to son.

They specialize in recasting waste scraps of iron. A small pit in the ground is used

as a firing place and with the help of a manually operated wheel-fan the blast is

produced. The quality of the scrap iron is enhanced by repeated heating andhammering and thus the new desired shaped tools and implements are made.

Traditional Iron Making in Modern Context

The traditional iron working is still alive in certain remote areas of the country,

where higher quality of product is made by the workers in small furnaces. But in

the present context there appears a need to review the technical availability of


5/23

5

traditional iron making due to the changing politico-culture and socio-ecological

constraints. It has been said that the traditional iron making is wasteful both from

the point of view of raw material as well as charcoal consumption as it plays an

important role in the process of deforestation. But, if we look at their technology

closely we find that these groups are tapping those ores that are neglected or

rated as low grade and not considered important for smelting by modern steel

mills. The other significance of their work is that they locate and exploit those

small pockets of ore deposits that have not been recorded in the geological texts

while listing economically viable mining zones. The delicate way of ore picking by

them cannot be neglected. So if we take a holistic look, their technology is based

on maximum utilization of the available ore resources. Regarding the second

allegation that they are over exploiting forest resources, we find that most of the

charcoal is made by them with dead trees lying in the forest. TheAgaria families of

Chhattishgarh and Chhota Nagpur visit forests for the collection of the sal leaves to

use them as the plates for their meals, but the number of leaves per family is fixed

and they do take a lot of care while plucking the leaves. So when even leaves are

not plucked indiscriminately or carelessly by them, how can we accuse them of

wasting trees? They show a great regard and respect towards the trees. The treesare considered as the abode of deities or ancestor spirits that take care of the

welfare of the people.

Role of Traditional Iron Technology on Ecology

In the present ecological conditions, the traditional technology can play a vital part

by saving the environment and making it pollution free. The charcoal used by them

as a source of energy is proved to be a far less pollutant in comparison to the fuels

used by the modern steel mills. On the one hand, coal or other fossil fuels produce

a large number of carcinogenic byproducts, while on the other charcoal is not a

pollutant because of its low sulphur content. The furnaces used by thesecommunities are small and so they do not cause damage to the atmosphere. The

traditional iron working is in the form of small scale household industries

distributed over a large area. Resource exploitation by these communities is

therefore shallow, expanding over an extensive area. So, one can say that the ore

and fuel used by these communities are not affecting the environment. These data

lead us to construe that these the traditional crafts of iron making have an eco-

friendly economic viability in the present context.

Conclusions

Traditional iron technology in India was well developed as shown by the abovefacts.

The indigenous iron smelting was found among the tribal artisan groups and this

tradition is gradually losing due mainly to the following reasons:

1. Thistradition is losing its grip because of the availability of better tools and

implements in the market.


6/23

6

2. The scarcity of the raw materials forced these tribes to adopt some new ways

of economic activities.

3. The work is very laborious and time consuming.

4. The other factor that is playing an important part in losing this tradition is the

adoption of the western techniques. The Indian tribes have been dispossessed

of their habitat and thrown into an alien world without being equipped to face

the harsh world. As a result of this, they are losing their traditional techniques

and are forced to adopt the new ways to eke out an existence. As we are now

realizing the potential of their craft, we need to review our industrial policies

after over fifty years of independence.

Indira Gandhi National Museum of Mankind, Bhopal, is trying to revive this dying

tradition. This will certainly help to protect these traditional iron smelters from

unemployment and thus will be able to save this traditional system of iron

technology.

Sources:

Sarkar, Smritikumar. 2002. Studying Indias Indigenous Iron Industry: Looking for

an Alternative Approach. In Tradition and Innovation in the History of Iron Making,

Girija Pande and Jan af Geijerstam (Eds). Nainital: PAHAR. Pp. 205-224.

Tripathi, Vibha. 2002. Iron Technology in India: Survival of an Ancient Tradition. In

Tradition and Innovation in the History of Iron Making, Girija Pande and Jan af

Geijerstam (Eds). Nainital: PAHAR. Pp. 225-236.

Nayal, Rakesh and Nilanjan Khatua. 2002. Traditional Iron Making Techniques in

India. In Tradition and Innovation in the History of Iron Making, Girija Pande and

Jan af Geijerstam (Eds.) Nainital: PAHAR. Pp. 250-257.

http://www.indianscience.org/essays/t_es_iron_technology.shtml

The problem in India is that most of the archaeologists have been using a stamp

collectors approach and quoting the isolated instances of the occurrence of iron not

only from the Chalcolithic levels but also from the Harappan sites! To get scientific

answers to the problems of early iron technology we however need to study and

provide answers to the following types of question.

If iron technology is indigenous to India what and where are thetechnological stages.

Where are the early examples of the production of the accidental iron duringcopper smelting.

Did we use meteoritic iron in India. Why cast iron making was so late in India. What are the stages of steel

making? Was there an ornamental stage of iron use in India too when it was

valued as a precious metal.


7/23

7

What are the developmental stages of making Wootz iron and how extensivewas its use.

In what way iron contributed to the socio-economic processes associatedwith the second urbanisation.

When does iron effectively replace bronze and stone. What role Central Himalayas played in providing iron and its technology to

the Ganga Valley.

Did early iron technology come with some Indo-Aryan groups. How are the multiple foci of early Iron technology related to each other, if at

all.

What is the absolute chronological framework of early Iron Age based oncalibrated radiocarbon and TL dates. Now that AMS dating is going to be

available at the Institute of Physics at Bhuvaneshwar, we should be able to

date the actual iron artefacts and slags so that there is no ambiguity about

relating the age of an iron artifact and the date based on charcoal. Review:

The Age of Iron in South Asia Legacy and Traditions. Tripathi, Vibha. 2001.

New Delhi: Aryan Books International. Pp.xvi+ 280; Figs.47; Maps 10. by D.P.

Agrawal & Manikant Shahhttp://www.indianscience.org/reviews/t_rv_agraw_iron.shtml

Biswas [1995 ] has identified three main areas where iron is known to be smelted

since the ancient times. These areas are :

( 1 ) Atranjikhera ( Fig. 15 ) near Delhi or Aligarh ( Uttar Pradesh ) ,

( 2 ) Singhbhum - Raipur areas where Asuras and Gond tribals live , and

( 3 ) Karnataka and Tamilnadu areas where one can see places like Paiyampalli (

again Neolithic- Megalithic ),which is in the Arcot district of Tamilnadu, where iron

was smelted .

Biswas, A.K., 1996" Minerals and Metals in India", D.K. Print World Ltd., Shree Kunj ,

F-52 Bali Nagar, New Delhi-15.

Possehl, Gregory L. and Gullapalli, Praveena, 1999 ,@ The Early Iron Age in South

Asia A , In Pigott, Vincent, editor, The Archaeometallurgy of the Asian Old World.

University Museum Monograph 89, MASCA Research Papers in Science and

Archaeology Volume 16 , Philadelphia:The University Museum, University of

Pennsylvania, pp. 153-175.


8/23

8

http://www.engr.mun.ca/~asharan/bihar/ironage/IRONAGEINDIA2.htm

Rakesh Tiwari's findings of iron smelting in Ganga valley of 19th century BCE are also

validated by AK Sharma's finds of iron in Gufkral. Sharma (1992: 64, 67) has

proposed a range of 1550-1300 BCE... for the subsequent iron bearing period at

Gufkral (Jammu & Kashmir). This has also been referenced by Gregory Possehl.

Sharma, A.K., 1992 Early Iron Users ofGufkral, in Nayak B.U. & N.C. Ghosh (eds.),


9/23

9

New Trends in Indian Art and Archaeology I: 63-68. A.K. Sharma, 1980, Excavations at

Gufkral in: Puratattva: Bulletin of the Indian Archaeological Society, Vol. 11. 1979-80, edited by K.N. Dikshit. Reprint.New Delhi, D.K. Printworld, 2005, viii, 192 p.

Gufkral (District Pulwama, Jammu and Kashmir) (ca. 3rd

millennium BCE)

The lower age aceramic period has been pushed back at Gufkral to 2400 BCE.

7.1 Kashmir valleyOf special significance is a globular pot with painting of a

horned deity, very similar to specimens from Kot Diji and Gumla in Pakistan. This

find, along with that of a copper hairpin from the upper levels of

Gufkral, resembling a specimen from Chanhudaro in Pakistan, suggests contact

between the Kashmir Neolithic and the Harappan civilization.

http://www.ias.ac.in/jbiosci/nov2001/491.pdf

The excavation site at Gufkral (Lat 350

54' N.Long 750

60'E) is located on anextensive upper Karewa deposit 45 kms from Srinagar near the township of Tral.

These have revealed three main periods of occupation similar to the one at

Burzahom. These range from Aceramic Neolithic, characterized by a total absence of

pottery with settlement pattern consisting of large and small dwelling pits cut into

loessic deposits circular and oval in plan with narrow mouth and wide bottom.

Occurrence of post holes indicates a superstructure of grass and reeds. The artifacts

recovered include stone and bone tools. The inhabitants depended for their food

predominantly on wild game. The dwellings were further improved with a sudden

spurt in domestication of animals like sheep, goats and cattle and some early crop

husbandry. The excavation site at Semthan in Anantnag district has revealed five

periods characterized by successive floor levels. The artifacts recovered range fromterracotta and bone beeds and a piece of copper. In addition the pottery is

represented by a sturdy red ware to hand made, ill-fired and crude ware made of

clay containing stone grits. There is no evidence of painting. Wheat barley and rice,

appear to have been cultivated on a small scale. The timbers used were mostly blue

pine. The latter periods have given red ware pottery and included cast copper coins

from the upper levels. In later periods the wares and their types continued with the

addition of large number of terracotta figurines, clay seal depicting an Indo-Greek

deity. The last period belongs to the time of "prolific temple building and

flourishing sculptural art". In addition to the above mentioned sites about a dozen

more similar sites, have been located throughout the valley which have confirmed

the findings at the earlier three sites. Some of the well known new sites are atBegagund, Brah, Hariparigom, Jayadevi- Udar, Thajwor, Waztal, Olichibag, Pampur,

Panzgom and Sombur. All these sites are located on the Karewas, especially in the

S.E. parts of the Kashmir valley. A.N. Fotidar, 2002, Kashmir: the legend and

scientific facts, Vitasta annual number, Vol. XXXV (2001-2).

http://www.vitasta.org/2002/1.3.html


10/23

10

[quote] Iron occurs in the native metal state as meteoric iron which was exploited by

the North American Indians to make weapons. Since iron has a high melting point of

around 1550oC it was commonly produced in the Old World by reducing the ore to

metal in the solid state to produce bloomery iron which was then wrought to give

low carbon wrought iron (0.1-0.2 % C). The Hittite kingdom of the mid second

millennium BC was one of the major early iron producing centers and was thought to

have a monopoly of iron production, and iron production became widespread in

Greece and the Mediterranean by the beginning of the 1st millennium BC. Iron

seems to have been used in India from about the late second millennium BC and iron

smelting and the use of iron was especially well established in the south Indian

megalithic cultures of this period.

The forging of wrought iron seems to have reached its zenith in India in the first

millennium AD. The earliest large forging is the famous iron pillar at New Delhi dated

by inscription to the Gupta period of the 3rd c. AD at a height of over 7 m and weight

of about 6 tons. The pillar is believed to have been made by forging together a series

of disc-shaped iron blooms. Apart from the dimensions another remarkable aspect

of the iron pillar is the absence of corrosion which has been linked to thecomposition, the high purity of the wrought iron and the phosphorus content and

the distribution of slag.

In fact the use of high-carbon iron alloys was developed in parts of Asia before they

came into vogue in Europe. We may mention high-carbon steel from India and cast

iron from China, both of which required higher furnace temperatures and more

reducing conditions than the bloomery iron process. Cast iron was produced in China

prior to other parts of the world in small blast furnaces which were precursors to the

modern blast furnaces. Cast iron with a high carbon content of between 2-4% C is a

brittle and fairly unworkable alloy with poor strength, but it has the lowest melting

point in the iron-carbon system being a eutectic at around 1100oC. By the earlyChristian era in China cast iron was used on a very large scale for producing tools,

weapons, vessels and utensils.

In Europe the use of cast iron was not appreciated until after about the 14th c. AD

when it was used for making cannons. [unquote] Source: Metallurgical Heritage of

India byS. Srinivasan and S. Ranganathan http://tinyurl.com/357fmr

Meteoriciron has a higher nickel content. POSSEHL [POSSEHL, Gregory. 2002. The

Indus Civilization. Walnut Creek (California): Alta Mira Press, p. 93] notes iron

artefacts predating 1000 BCE and it is yet to be established if these are ofmeteoric

iron. Possehl also notes that iron can be produced as a by-product during thesmelting of copper, and it cannot be ruled out that this is the source of Harappan

artifacts made from iron.

Possehl, Gregory and Gullapalli, Praveena; 1999; 'The Early Iron Age in South Asia'; in

Vincent C. Pigott (ed.). The Archaeometallurgy of the Asian Old World; University

Museum Monograph, MASCA Research Papers in Science and Archaeology, Volume

16; Pgs. 153-175; The University Museum, University of Pennsylvania; Philadelphia


11/23

11

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Map_of_Vedic_India.png

Post-Harappan and Iron age pottery sites, Schwartzberg Atlas, p. 12

The origins of Iron-working in India:

New evidence from the Central Ganga Plain and the Eastern Vindhyas

By Rakesh Tewari

[Director, U.P. State Archaeological Department, Roshan-ud-daula Kothi,

Kaisarbagh, Lucknow 226 001 (U.P.) India (Email: [email protected])]

Recent excavations in Uttar Pradesh have turned up iron artefacts, furnaces, tuyeres

and slag in layers radiocarbon dated between c. BCE 1800 and 1000. This raises

again the question of whether iron working was brought in to India during supposed

immigrations of the second millennium BCE, or developed independently.

Introduction


12/23

12

The date and origin of the introduction of iron artefacts and iron working into India

has remained a much debated research problem, not unconnected with the equally

debatable question of its association with the supposed arrival, in the second

millennium BCE, of immigrants from the west, as often suggested on the basis of the

Rigveda. Around the middle of the last century, iron-working origins in India weredated to c. 700-600 BCE (Gordon 1950; Wheeler 1959). Subsequently, a combination

of an association with Painted Grey Ware (PGW) and the advent of radiocarbon

dating began to push this date back towards the second millennium BCE, a period

which had in fact favoured by some scholars earlier in the early twentieth century

(Chakrabarti 1992: 10-12).

Considering the radiocarbon dates for the iron bearing deposits at Ataranjikhera in

Uttar Pradesh (Table 1) and Hallur in Karnataka, and stratigraphic position of iron in

the lower levels mainly at Kausambi near Allahabad, Jakhera in district Etah in the

Ganga Valley, and Nagda and Eran in central India, dates around 1000 BCE were

suggested (Subramanyam 1964; Banarjee 1965; Chakrabarti 1974; Nagarajarao

1974). At the same time Chakrabarti (1974: 354) challenged the view of a western

origin, stating there is no logical basis to connect the beginning of iron in India with

any diffusion from the west, from Iran and beyond, and further (1976: 122) that

India was a separate and possibly independent centre of manufacture of early

iron.

Since then there has been fresh evidence for even earlier iron-working in India.

Technical studies on materials dated c. 1000 BCE at Komaranhalli (Karnataka)

showed that the smiths of this site could deal with large artefacts, implying that they

had already been experimenting for centuries (Agrawal et al. 1985: 228-29). Sahi

(1979: 366) drew attention to the presence of iron in Chalcolithic deposits at Ahar,

and suggested that the date of the beginning of iron smelting in India may well be

placed as early as the sixteenth century BCE and by about the early decade of

thirteenth century BCE iron smelting was definitely known in India on a bigger

scale. On the basis of four radiocarbon measurements, ranging between 3790 + 110

BP and 3570 + 100 BP, available for the Megalithic period (without iron) Sharma

(1992: 64, 67) has proposed a range of 1550-1300 BCE (uncalibrated) for the

subsequent iron bearing period at Gufkral (Jammu & Kashmir).


13/23

13

On the basis of this evidence a date of around 1300/1200 BCE has been suggested

for the beginning of iron in India and c. 800 BCE for the mid Ganga Valley (Allchin &

Allchin 1982: 345; Prakash & Tripathi 1986: 568; Gaur 1997: 240). Chakrabarti (1992:

68, 164; 1999: 333) has observed that at Ahar it would be the first quarter of the

second millennium BCE and in Malwa soon after the middle of the secondmillennium BCE. However, the early dates for iron at Ahar are refuted on the

grounds of uncertain stratigraphy (Gaur 1997: 244). As far as Komaranhalli is

concerned, it is stated that the TL dates have large errors and hence uncertain

(Agrawala 2000: 197, 200).

Table 1. Dates* for early iron-use from Indian sites

* These dates are calibrated by Dr B. Sekar, BSIP, Lucknow. References for datasets

used: Stuiver, et al. 1998a. 537

More recently, early contexts containing iron at Jhusi, located on the confluence of

the Ganga and Yamuna in district Allahabad, have been dated to 1107-844 cal BCE

(Tewari et al. 2000: 93). Komaranhalli (Karnataka) has given TL dates in the twelfth

fifteenth century BCE, while the radiocarbon dates for early Iron Age sites of

Veerapuram and Ramapuram (Andhra Pradesh) are sixteenth eleventh century cal

BCE (Table 1) (Deo 1991: 193; Moorti 1994: 122-23) while in Vidarbha region


14/23

14

(Maharastra), contexts containing iron have given radiocarbon dates between the

fourteenth and tenth centuries cal BCE (Table 1).

Recent Findings in Uttar Pradesh

This paper briefly reports the results of some recent excavations conducted by the

Uttar Pradesh State Archaeological Department under the leadership of the present

author and their implications for understanding the beginning of iron-working in the

Central Ganga Plain and the adjacent part of the Vindhyas.

Map showing locations of the Early Iron Age sites in the Central Ganga Plain, the

Eastern Vindhyas, and different regions of India.


15/23

15

This has further implications in defining the

beginning of iron in the subcontinent as a

whole. The excavated sites are Raja Nala-

ka-tila (199698), Malhar (1998-99), Dadupur

(1999-2001) and Lahuradewa or Lohradewa(2001-2002) (Figure 1) Raja Nala-ka-tila (Lat.

2441 55 N.; Log. 8319 E.) is located in

the upper reaches of the Karamnasa within

its loop like meander in district Sonbhadra.

The excavations revealed a sequence which

has been divided into four periods (Tewari

& Research Srivastava 1997; 1998).

In Period I, no metal was fund and is stratigraphically

continuous into Period II. Period III is characterised

by the presence of Northern Black Polished Ware

(NBPW). Period IV is defined as a Gupta/ post Gupta

phase. Iron was found in pre-NBPW deposits (1.5 to

2.00m thick) of Period II in association of the pottery

hitherto supposed to be the characteristics of the

Chalcolithic period, placed between early to late

second millennium BCE, in the area concerned.

The main associated ceramic industries were plain

and painted black-and-red black slipped and red

wares, in forms which included footed bowl, legged

bowl with perforated base, pedestal bowl and

button-based goblet. Some sherds also showed cord

impressions. Evidence for iron-working included slag

and iron artefacts such as a nail, arrowhead, knife and a chisel Radiocarbon dates for

the iron bearing deposits range between 1400 and 800 cal BCE.

Table 2. New 14C dates for early iron-use from the Ganga Plain and the Eastern

Vindhyas

Painted black-and-red ware shards,

from early iron bearing deposits of

Period II, Raja Nala-ka-tila, Dist.

Sonbhadra.

Iron artefacts, from the lower

and middle levels of Period II,

Raja Nala-ka-tila, Dist.

Sonbhadra.


16/23

16

* These dates are calibrated by Dr B. Sekar, BSIP, Lucknow. References for datasets

used: Stuiver, et al. 1998a.

Since the date for the introduction of iron in the middle and lower Ganga Valley was

being considered as c. 800 BCE (above), its appearance in c. 1400/1300 cal BCE at

Raja Nala-ka-tila posed new questions. Realising that this should not be the only site

with such early evidence and that there should be examples of experimental iron-

smelting which were earlier still, we started a new search. These efforts were

rewarded in locating a potential site near a village called Malhar.


17/23

17

Malhar (district Chandauli; Lat. 2459 16

N.; Long. 8315 46 E.) is on the bank of the

Karamnasa which at this point flows

through a rocky, haematite-rich terrain

before joining the Ganga near Banaras. Theexcavations carried out at this site also

revealed a sequence of four periods:

defined as Period I: Pre Iron; Period II: Early

Iron; Period III: NBPW; Period IV: BCE 200 to

300 AD (Tewari et al. 2000: 69-98). There is

no stratigraphic interval between the layers

of Period I and Period II. Iron is present in all the layers of Period II,and identified

finds include a nail, clamp, spear-head, arrow-head, awl, knife, bangle, sickle and

plough share. As well as iron slag, there were tuyeres and several elongated clay

structures, with a burnt internal surface. The ceramic industries of this period are

represented by mainly red, black-and-red, black slipped, and grey wares. Red ware

and black-and-red ware sherds bearing cord impressions on their exterior were

found in greater number in the lower levels. The presence of the coarse variety of

corded potsherds implies that the iron appeared earlier here than in Period II at Raja

Nala-ka-tila. This assumption was endorsed by two radiocarbon dates ranging

around 1800 cal. BCE (Table 2).

Iron artefacts, from the lower and

middle levels of Period II, Malhar,

Dist. Chandauli.


18/23

18

The area around Malhar may have been something

of a centre of iron production. A small mound, of a

kind known locally as lohsan or lohsanwa, about

500m south to the main site of Malhar, which looks

like a heap of iron slag, on excavation revealed twodamaged clay furnaces, one of them is illustrated

here as Figure 6, filled with iron slag along with a few

sherds of the red, grey, and black slipped wares, an

axe, and tuyeres. Survey revealed several lohsanwa

sites near Musakhand village, the site known as

Phakkada Baba located within the Musakhand dam,

to the north-west of Malhar, on Baba Wali Pahari

(Tewari et al. 2000) and near Naugarh kot (Singh et

al. 2000: 143). Plans of damaged clay furnaces within

heaps of iron slag along with tuyeres stuck with

smelted iron, and potsherds of the grey, black

slipped, NBP and red wares were found at these

sites. The pottery assemblage at Phakkada Baba also

included examples of dish or bowl-on-stand and

other forms, comparable to those from Malhar

Period II, in red ware, and black-and-red ware. This

extraordinary concentration of iron-slag heaps on

Baba Wali Pahari and Naugarh kotsuggests that

large-scale iron smelting continued at these sites for

a long time.

Important cultural

components of the early iron

Naugarh kot suggest that

large-scale iron bearing

deposits, showing corded

ware sherds, iron artefact,

slag, smelting activities

continued at these sites

tuyere, stone and bone

artefacts, painted and incisedpotsherds, for a long time.

stone and terracotta beads.

Period II, Malhar, Dist.

Chandauli.


19/23

19

As discussed elsewhere (Tewari et al. 2000)

the sites at Malhar, the Baba Wali Pahari,

and the Valley are archaeologically linked to

the area of Geruwatwa Pahar which

appears to have been a major source of ironore. The Geruwatwa Pahar situated to the

southeast of the Baba Wali Pahari, is full of

hematite. Villagers reported (as a tradition

passed down from several generations),

that the agarias (a particular tribe known

for their iron smelting skills) from

Robertsganj side, used to come in this area

to procure iron by smelting the hematite. Probably hematite was being primarily

smelted at the Baba Wali Pahari and carried over to the valley sites (situated at a

distance of about 6-8 km) for secondary smelting. The presence of tuyeres, slags,

finished iron artefacts, above-mentioned clay structures with burnt internal surfaces

and arms, revealed at Malhar, suggest a large scale activity related to manufacture

of iron tools. It appears that smelted iron was being carried to this site to

manufacture the artefacts and the clay structures were used as the furnaces for

forging purposes. Thus this part of the Karamnasa Valley would have been a regional

centre for iron production and the Malhar a workshop-site for the manufacturing of

the iron artefacts.

Damaged circular clay furnace,

comprising iron slag and tuyeres and

other waste materials stuck with its

body, exposed at lohsanwa mound,

Period II, Malhar, Dist. Chandauli.


20/23


21/23

21

vegetations referred to above have generally 60-70 yrs of average life span in case of

trees and the shrubs and herbs survive hardly from two to three months to the

maximum period of a year or two.

There are other observations on the assemblages from these four sites which might

be significant. Copper has been found in a lesser proportion in comparison to iron;

presence of burnt clay chunks bearing reed and straw marks and postholes are

indicative of wattle and daub houses and thatched huts; associated finds include

mainly bone arrowheads, terracotta, stone and steatite (?) beads; some storage bins

are dug into the surface and bases of the large earthen storage vessels are

represented at Lahuradeawa and Raja Nala-ka-tila; a large quantity of faunal and

carbonised archaeo-botanical remains have been recovered at all the sites. As a

whole the assemblage is suggestive of well equipped and permanent settlements.

Discussion

These results indicate that iron using and iron working was prevalent in the Central

Ganga Plain and the Eastern Vindhyas from the early second millennium BCE. The

dates obtained so far group into three: three dates between c. 1200-900 cal BCE,

three between c. 1400-1200 cal BCE, and five between c. 1800-1500 cal BCE. The

types and shapes of the associated pottery are comparable to those to be generally

considered as the characteristics of the Chalcolithic Period and placed in early to

late second millennium BCE. Taking all this evidence together it may be concluded

that knowledge of iron smelting and manufacturing of iron artefacts was well known

in the Eastern Vindhyas and iron had been in use in the Central Ganga Plain, at least

from the early second millennium BCE. The quantity and types of iron artefacts, and

the level of technical advancement indicate that the introduction of iron working

took place even earlier. The beginning of the use of iron has been traditionally

associated with the eastward migration of the later Vedic people, who are also

considered as an agency which revolutionised material culture particularly in

eastern Uttar Pradesh and Bihar (Sharma 1983: 117-131). The new finds and their

dates suggest that a fresh review is needed. Further, the evidence corroborates the

early use of iron in other areas of the country, and attests that India was indeed an

independent centre for the development of the working of iron.

Acknowledgements


22/23

22

I am thankful to Dr Rajagopalan and Dr B.Sekar, Birbal Sahni Institute for

Palaeobotany, Lucknow for the determination of 14C dates, to Dr Sekar for the

calibration of most of the 14C dates, to Dr KS. Saraswat a renowned

archaeobotanist of the same institution for the observations regarding the

material radiocarbon dated, to Dr P.C. Pant and the Editor, Antiquity for the input toimprove the manuscript and to Shri Ram Gopal Mishra and Shri Manmohan Dimri

for the figures which illustrate this paper.

References

AGARWAL, D.P. 2000. Ancient Metal Technology and Archaeology of South Asia.

New Delhi: Aryan Books International.

AGRAWAL, D.P., S. KUSUMGAR & R.P. SARNA 1964. Radiocarbon dates of

Archaeological samples, Current Science 33: 266-69.

AGRAWAL, O.P., H. NARAIN AND G.P. JOSHI 1985. Iron Objects from South Indian

Megaliths (Karnataka)

A Technological Study and Significance, in Sundara, A. (ed.), Archaeology in

Karnataka: 219 234. Mysore: Directorate of Archaeology & Museums.

ALLCHIN, BRIDGET & RAYMOND 1982. The Rise of Civilization in India and Pakistan.

Cambridge.

BANARJEE, N. R. 1965. The Iron Age in India. Delhi.

CHAKRABARTI, D.K. 1974. Beginning of Iron in India: Problem Reconsidered, in A.K.Ghosh (ed.), Perspectives in Palaeoanthropology: 345-356. Calcutta: Firma K.L.

Mukhopadhyay.

1976. The beginning of iron in India. Antiquity 4: 114-124.

1992. The Early Use of Iron in India. Delhi: Oxford University Press.

1999. India An Archaeological History. Delhi: Oxford University Press.

DEO, S.B. 1991. New Discoveries of Iron Age in India, in C. Margbandhu, K.S.

Ramachandran, A.P. Sagar & D.K. Sinha (eds.), Indian Archaeological Heritage I: 189-

97. New Delhi: Agam Kala Prakashan.

GAUR, R.C. 1997. Studies in Indian Archaeology and Ancient India I. Jaipur:

Publication Scheme, pp. 238-250.

GORDON, D.H. 1950. The Early Use of Metals in India and Pakistan, Journal of the

Royal Anthropological Institute, 55-78.

MOORTI, U.S. 1994. Megalithic Culture of South India: Socio-Economic Perspectives,

Varanasi, Ganga Kaveri Publishing House.


23/23

NAGARAJARAO, M.S. 1974. Iron Age in South India: Fresh Evidence on Chronology, in

A.K. Ghosh (ed.), Perspective in Palaeoanthropology: 357-62. Calcutta: Firma K.L.

Mukhopadhyay.

POSSEHL, G.L. & P.C. RISSMAN 1992. The Chronology of Prehistoric India: From

Earliest Times to the Iron Age, in R.W. Ehrich (ed.) Chronologies in Old WorldArchaeology, Vol. I: 465-490; Vol. II: 447-474.Chicago and London: The University of

Chicago Press.

PRAKASH, B. & V. TRIPATHI 1986. Iron technology in ancient India, Historical

Metallurgy: 568-579.

SAHI, M.D.N. 1979. Iron at Ahar, in D.P. Agrawal &

D.K. Chakrabarti (eds.). Essays in Indian

Protohistory. Delhi: pp. 365-68.

SHARMA, A.K. 1992. Early Iron Users of Gufkral, in Nayak B.U. & N.C. Ghosh (eds.),

New Trends in Indian Art and Archaeology I: 63-68. New Delhi: Aditya Prakashan.

SHARMA, R.S. 1983. Material Culture and Social Formations in Ancient India. Delhi:

Macmillan.

SINGH, P., R. TEWARI & R. N. SINGH 2000. Explorations in Chandauli District (U.P.)

19992000: A Preliminary Report, Pragdhara 10: 135148.

SUBRAMANYAM, B.R. 1964. Appearance and Spread of Iron in India An Appraisal of

Archaeological Data, Journal of the Oriental institute, Baroda 13: 349-59.

TEWARI, R., & R. K. SRIVASTAVA 1997. Excavations at Raja Nala-ka-tila (1995-96),

District Sonbhadra (U.P.): Preliminary observations, Pragdhara 7: 77

95.

1998. Excavations at Raja Nala-ka-tila (1996-97) District Sonbhadra (U.P.):

Preliminary Observations, Pragdhara 8: 99-105.

TEWARI, R., R.K. SRIVASTAVA, K.S. SARASWAT & K.K. SINGH 2000. Excavations at

Malhar, District Chandauli (U.P.) 1999: A Preliminary Report, Pragdhara 10: 69-98.

TEWARI, R., R.K. SRIVASTAVA, & K.K. SINGH 2002. Dadupur Excavations 1999-2000-

2001, District Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh: A Preliminary Report, Pragdhara 12: 99-116.

TEWARI, R., R.K. SRIVASTAVA, & K.K. SINGH 2002a. Excavation at Lahuradewa,

District Sant Kabir Nagar, Uttar Pradesh, Puratattva 32: 54-62.

WHEELER, R.E.M. 1959. Early India and Pakistan. London.

http://www.vijnanabharati.in/origins_of_iron_ore.html

-ironinmetalsage

Documents