Indus Valley Civilization:
Que. The urban character of the Harappan Civilization was a result neither of any outside influence nor a sudden act but a gradual evolution of regional socio-economic factors. Comment. [UPSC CSE-2022]
Introduction:
The grand old civilization near the Indus Valley and beyond roughly lasted from 3200 B.C. to 1900 B.C. The most iconic aspect of this discovery made in 1921 was that it expanded the history of the Indian subcontinent from Vedic period to roughly 1500 years older. It is due to this that today we stand as one of the oldest civilisations in the world forming a group of four great cradles of civilization in the Old World viz. Mesopotamia, Ancient Egypt, Ancient India and Ancient China.
The Harappan Civilization as it is called differentiates itself from other settlements in the peninsula due to various factors, the most important being its urban character. To understand the urban nature of this civilization, it becomes imperative to figure out what constitutes “urban”. According to Childe, there exists a ten-fold criteria that indicates the development of an urban civilization: This includes increased settlement size, concentration of wealth, large-scale public works, writing, representational art, knowledge of science and engineering, foreign trade, full-time specialists in non subsistence activities, class-stratified society and political organisation based on residence rather than kinship. He saw the underlying causes of the urban revolution as the cumulative growth of technology and the increasing availability of food surpluses as capital. Although this exact criteria might not fit all instances, Harappan civilization is the by-product of such a criteria.
Features of Harappan Civilization that highlight its urban character were heterogeneity of Harappan people, Harappan society included occupational groups, availability of great variety of standardized, mass produced craft items, uniformity in designs and in technique of production of tools and implements, efficient mass- production of pottery by using various types of techniques for multiple uses use of seals and script, weights and measures, granaries, town planning with drainage, sanitation, housing pattern etc.
Various theories propounded by historians about the emergence of these urban features:
(1) A result of outside influence/Diffusionist Theory/Migration Theory/Foreign Origin Theory:
Representative Historians: Mortimer Wheeler, D H Gordon, E JH Mackey
Argument: The first thing to analyse is to figure out in which part of the world the change first occurred. This is identified as the point of origin from where the change is presented as having diffused or spread to other areas. They say that people came from outside (ie. Mesopotamia, Sumeria) and developed IVC. That is, the city dwellers of civilisation like Mesopotamia came and developed it.
Wheeler says that there was migration of ideas and not people from those outside places.
Criticism: The fact that city life emerged in Mesopotamia a few centuries before it appeared in the Egyptian and Harappan centuries does not mean that the latter were derived from the former in a direct or indirect way.
There are difficulties in accepting this view because there are several fundamental differences between Mesopotamian Civilization and the IVC. For instance,
(1) There are differences in scripts. The script of Mesopotamia has been deciphered but not IVC.
(2) Town planning: IVC grid pattern is absent in Mesopotamia.
(3) Canal system: large scale canal system of Mesopotamia is absent in IVC.
(4) There was much greater use of bronze in Mesopotamia.
(5) There are differences sin the shape and sizes of seals.
(6) Religious structures of Mesopotamia are absent in IVC.
Thus, it cannot be concluded that the urban character of Indus Valley Civilization was a result of outside influence.
(2) Result of a sudden act/Aryan Theory
Representative Historians: S.R. Roy, T.R. Ramachandra, K.V. Shastri
Argument: IVC was developed by Aryan who invaded the region and settled near the Indus Valley.
Criticism: There is a great contrast between IVC and Vedic Culture. For e.g.
(1) The Indus Valley civilization was essentially an urban civilization. The main occupation of the people was trade and commerce. The Vedic civilization on the other hand was essentially rural character, with pastoralism as the main occupation of the people. Vedic literature discusses an entirely nomadic life and there are no fixed places of stay or worship while Harappan people led a sedentary life.
(2) No Harappan like town planning, water management etc are visible during Vedic civilization.
(3) Large-scale uniformity of construction plan at different places during Harappan period indicate the existence of some form of Civic authority in towns. While no such civil authority seems to have existed during Vedic period. The Vedic polity was largely tribal in nature.
(4) The Indus Valley people were icon-worshippers. The common gods of the Indus Valley people were Mothor-Goddess, Siva, tree, animals etc. Whereas the people of Vedic civilization were opposed to icon-worship. The people of the Vedic age on the other hand were nature worshippers the various objects of nature like Varuna, Indra, Prithvi, Sun. They even treated them as deities. The people of Vedic age attached great importance to fire. However, this was not the case with the people of the Indus Valley civilization.
(5) The people of the Indus Valley civilization were completely ignorant of the use of the iron. The people of the Vedic age knew the use of various metals. They used gold and copper in the beginning but later on also used silver, iron and bronze.
(6) The Vedic people attached great importance to cow and horse amongst various animals. The Indus Valley people were not aware of the use of horse and did not show the same regard for the cow or bull.
(7) Indus Valley people were much more advanced than the people of Vedic age in the art of writing. The Various seals discovered from the Indus Valley suggest that the people had an independent script of their own. Though this script has not been deciphered so far it certainly suggests that they were more advanced than the Aryans.
(8) The Aryan people took delight in games like horse racing and chariot racing which could be categorized as out-door games. The people of the Indus Valley on the other hand loved dancing and music and hence loved in-door hobbies.
(9) Spatially the Vedic culture started in sapt sindhu region and gradually covered all over northern India. While Harappan civilization remained concentrated in north-western part of the sub-continent.
(10) Harappans were short stature, black in complexion; Aryans were tall, well-built and handsome.
(11) Harappan ate all type of animals, as well as wheat, barley and bread. The Vedic people preferred Barley, milk, ghee etc. There seems to be some restriction for eating COW.
(12) Cotton was basic fabric of the Harappans while the Aryans put on woollen garments.
(13) Harappan people were peace loving while the Vedic people were warlike tribes.
(14) Harappans practiced earth burial, whereas the Vedic people practiced cremation after death.
(15) Harappans used black and red type pottery. The vedic people were acquainted with four types of pottery: Black and red ware, Black-slipped ware, painted grey ware: It was the most distinctive pottery of the period. red ware: This type of pottery was most popular with them and has been found almost all over western Uttar Pradesh.
(16) Harappans used burnt bricks for making houses whereas Vedic people used mud-brick houses and wattle-and-doub houses.
(3) Rise of urban character as result of gradual evolution of sociology economic factors/Indigenous Origin Theory/Cultural Evolution Theory
Representative historians: A Ghosh, MR Mughal, Fairservis
Argument: IVC had precedence. There were settled farming cultures which gradually evolved and finally resulted in rise of civilization.
Explanation: The origins of Harappan Civilization can be traced to the emergence of settled farming. communities in Baluchistan in the 7th millennium BCE.
It’s more immediate prelude was the cultural phase that used to be known as pre-Harappan or early Harappan phase
Amalananda Ghosh was the first archaeologist to identify similarities between a pre-Harappan culture and the mature Harappan culture, he focused on the pre-Harappan Sothi culture of Rajasthan
He asserted that there were similarities between Sothi pottery and the pottery of Harappa. In view of these similarities, he argued that the Sothi culture should be described as proto-Harappan.
Criticism:
(1) It was based exclusively on a comparison of pottery and did not consider other material traits.
(2) In emphasising ceramic similarities, Ghosh had ignored the many differences between the Sothi and Harappan cultures.
(3) There are several mature Harappan sites where there is no early Harappan level eg., Lothal, Desalpur, Chanhudaro, Mitathal, Alamgirpur and Ropar.
(4) There are several early Harappan sites in the Potwar plateau which do not have mature Harappan levels. Further, there are no early harappan sites in the active Indus plain.
(5) At sites where there are both early Harappan and mature Harappan levels, the transition from one to the other is not always smooth. For instance, at Kot Diji and Gumla, a burnt deposit between the two suggests a major fire. Evidence of burning was also found at Amir and Nausharo. At Kalibangan, the break in occupation may have been due to an earthquake.
Conclusion:
However, this theory is the most acceptable theory among the historians and its limitations are due to lack of further research and evidences in support of it. In case of other views, present evidences available already refute the theories of Aryan invasions or even the diffusionist idea of settlement.
