Living Traditions: Studies in the Ethnoarchaeology of South Asia.

Living Traditions: Studies in the Ethnoarchaeology of South Asia. These are ambitious scholarly efforts which, together, span the fullspectrum of South Asian cultural development. They contributesubstantially to archaeological knowledge of the region. All three textsemphasize data description rather than interpretation of data withinauthor or editor defined primary concepts of urban centre, state andcultural tradition. These texts thus most assist scholars with limitedaccess to primary data sources and are a more constrained contributionto theoretical discussions of South Asian cultural development. F.R.Allchin's and D.K. Chakrabarti's volumes present descriptive,comprehensive and current discussions of South Asia's Bronzethrough early Iron Ages. B. Allchin's volume presents a collectionof 19 contributions to the rapidly expanding field of South Asianethnoarchaeology Ethnoarchaeology is the ethnographic study of peoples for archaeological reasons, usually focusing on the material remains of a society, rather than its culture. Ethnoarchaeology aids archaeologists in reconstructing ancient lifeways by studying the material and non-material .Although 'cities' are Chakrabarti's focus, he neverprovides a working definition of an urban centre. He confounds readersby stating he will 'not' define the term, yet uses criteria ofsize, density (also undefined), craft specialization, settlement patternhierarchies, defensive walls, 'literati', and 'etc.'(p. 10) to describe urbanism. The failure of any rigorous definition ofan urban centre ultimately creates confusion and some misrepresentation misrepresentationIn law, any false or misleading expression of fact, usually with the intent to deceive or defraud. It most commonly occurs in insurance and real-estate contracts. False advertising may also constitute misrepresentation. of data. For example, Allahdino, a Harappan site in Sind, Pakistan, isconsidered an 'urban settlement' (p.116). Except for humanfemale figurines and settlement enclosing walls, all major Harappanartefact See artifact. categories, including stamp seals and graffiti found atMohenjo-daro (80+ ha) are found at Allahdino (1 ha); yet to designateboth as urban centres, thus having comparable functions, misrepresentsand obscures the complexity of Harappan cultural variability. Throughouthis text Chakrabarti emphasizes multi-tiered settlement patterns (e.g.Mughal's Cholistan survey); however, he never discusses thecultural or analytical bases of tier categories. Since it is unlikelyHarappans divided their world into neat multi-hectare units, it ispossible to define as many tiers as one wants. Furthermore, we aresubsequently told (p. 116) that Harappan settlement sizes are not goodindicators of whether a site is a village, town or city. The importanceof Harappan defensive walls has been greatly exaggerated since Wheelerfirst proclaimed so on a 10-minute, early-morning, walk at Harappa 50years ago, thus placing Harappan culture in an '. . . acceptablesecular focus' (Wheeler 1955: 190-91). In the ensuing half-centuryit still remains unknown against whom Harappans were defendingthemselves; such walls may have multiple functions that may or may notrelate to an urban status. Chakrabarti's use of'civilization' and 'barbarism' in preference to moreprecisely used concepts of culture, tradition or ethnic group isdifficult to understand, and represents a return to 19th-centuryparadigms. Chakrabarti implicitly links civilization with literacy,urban centres and the state, but the reader is never specificallyinformed about the utility of civilization and barbarism bar��ba��rism?n.1. An act, trait, or custom characterized by ignorance or crudity.2. a. The use of words, forms, or expressions considered incorrect or unacceptable.b. in preferenceto the other, more currently used concepts. His equation of ethnic groupwith language group is simplistic sim��plism?n.The tendency to oversimplify an issue or a problem by ignoring complexities or complications.[French simplisme, from simple, simple, from Old French; see simple , given its use in recentarchaeological thought (e.g. Shennan 1989; Erdosy 1995), or its specificapplication in South Asia This article is about the geopolitical region in Asia. For geophysical treatments, see Indian subcontinent. South Asia, also known as Southern Asia to facilitate understanding of ancientcultural dynamics (Shaffer & Lichtenstein 1989; 1995). Likewise, theemphasis upon Harappan literacy and literati literatiScholars in China and Japan whose poetry, calligraphy, and paintings were supposed primarily to reveal their cultivation and express their personal feelings rather than demonstrate professional skill. is unwarranted. Harappansused a symbolic mnemonic Pronounced "ni-mon-ic." A memory aid. In programming, it is a name assigned to a machine function. For example, COM1 is the mnemonic assigned to serial port #1 on a PC. Programming languages are almost entirely mnemonics. device that probably involved adjectives andnouns, but whether the Harappans were fully literate is not currentlyapparent (as per Goody 1986). Furthermore, given the importanceChakrabarti focuses on writing here, it is difficult to understand theauthor's failure adequately to discuss the hiatus when writing isnot evident in the late Harappan, and then its reappearance in latercultural periods.Perhaps the volume's major contribution is its updating of SouthAsian archaeology since Allchin's most recent (1982) book.Chakrabarti's emphasis upon Harappan culture as one of the fewBronze Age Bronze Age,period in the development of technology when metals were first used regularly in the manufacture of tools and weapons. Pure copper and bronze, an alloy of copper and tin, were used indiscriminately at first; this early period is sometimes called the 'civilizations' to have a hinterland occupied byhunter - gatherers, pastoralists and other agriculturists with whichthey were actively engaged is a significant point. Most existingdiscussions treat the Harappan phenomenon as an isolated entity withonly contemporaneous western trading contacts. I applaud his commentthat inter-regional trade is over emphasized as an agent of culturechange (p. 48); unfortunately, this note is followed by considerablediscussions about trade's importance with scant mention of otherpotential agents of change. On another significant issue, Chakrabartidoes suggest a perplexity perplexity - The geometric mean of the number of words which may follow any given word for a certain lexicon and grammar. in describing the geographically widespreadsimilarity in material culture of both the Harappan and Early Historic(NBP NBP Narodowy Bank Polski (Polish: National Bank of Poland)NBP Name Binding ProtocolNBP National Braille PressNBP National Bank of PakistanNBP National Biosolids PartnershipNBP Nathaniel B. ) Periods, noting that political unity during the Early HistoricPeriod emerged later than the cultural homogeneity seen in thearchaeological record The archaeological record is a term used in archaeology to denote all archaeological evidence, including the physical remains of past human activities which archaeologists seek out and record in an attempt to analyze and reconstruct the past. . Since Piggott's book of 1950 on ancientIndia Ancient India may refer to: The ancient History of India, which generally includes the ancient history of the whole Indian subcontinent (South Asia) , Harappan studies have been burdened with political concepts of'conservative, authoritative regimes' dominated by'priest-kings' as reflected in the material culture samenessfound at Harappan sites, and Chakrabarti prudently notes how simplisticthis interpretation is. Although an emphasis upon cultural continuitieslinking the Early Historic Period with prior cultural developments isimportant, the author's failure to address the Indo-Aryan invasionquestion(s) compromises his position.Text illustrations comprise just site and regional maps and thuslimit this book's value to a general reader. Moreover, it issometimes difficult to relate textual discussions with illustrations(e.g. the Mohenjo-daro discussion). The volume needed additional editingas some citations (e.g. A. Nath 1991 on p. 230) are not in thebibliography, and other mistakes occur (e.g. Rakhigarhi, or RakhiShahpur, is 17 m high not 30 m; and, although Suraj Bhan Suraj Bhan (Hindi: सुरज भान) (1928-10-01-2006-08-06) was an Indian politician from the Bharatiya Janata Party, who was elected to the Lok Sabha on three occasions, and served as governor of the states of (1975: 95) doesnot provide linear dimensions, its circumference at 2 km indicates alarger site than stated on p. 88). Chakrabarti usually uses both metricand English measurements but sometimes cites only one or the other, andeven interjects 'furlong' and 'stadia', all of whichdistracts the reader when metric measurements would be fully adequate.Finally, and most regrettably, there is a strong presumptuousness pre��sump��tu��ous?adj.Going beyond what is right or proper; excessively forward.[Middle English, from Old French presumptueux, from Late Latin praes herein entitling the volume 'The archaeology of ancient Indiancities' when many major Bronze Age sites discussed are in Pakistan,with Pakistan mentioned only once in the text. Also Chakrabarti'stext is not, as he suggests in his Preface, the first cogent,well-argued case for stressing indigenous cultural development in SouthAsia (see Kenoyer 1991; Shaffer 1978, 1992, 1993); nor did 'modernarchaeological' interest in ancient South Asian cities begin withthe author's 1972 dissertation or 1972-1974 publications, which arecited but not in the bibliography, as stated on p. 1 (see Possehl 1979).I find the text's presumptuousness in this regard most disquieting dis��qui��et?tr.v. dis��qui��et��ed, dis��qui��et��ing, dis��qui��etsTo deprive of peace or rest; trouble.n.Absence of peace or rest; anxiety.adj. ArchaicUneasy; restless. ,having known Dr Chakrabarti for 20 years, enjoyed his personal andprofessional hospitality and conducted field research with him.F.R. Allchin's volume and the second half of Chakrabarti'scomplement one another and represent rare, independent attempts by fieldarchaeologists to summarize early historic South Asian developments. InAllchin's volume nearly every chapter represents a skilful summarydiscussion by area or period. These discussions, combined with excellentillustrations, all well integrated with the text, and an extensivebibliography makes this a useful book for general readers. At the sametime, a pervasive failure to pursue interpretations of data compromisesits professional value. The following review will focus first onchapters written by various contributors and then those by F.R. Allchin(chapters 1, 3, 4, 8, 10, 11, 13).B. Allchin's summary of environmental factors (chapter 2) froman archaeological perspective is an important contribution for bothgeneral and professional readers. In chapter 5 Coningham addresses many2nd- through 1st-millennium BC theoretical issues such as whether urbancentres disappeared during this period, and ultimately the definition ofancient urban centres. I must note, however, that material quoted hereby this reviewer defined a cultural tradition and not urbanism as stated(pp. 56-7); therefore, no specific scholarly debt is owed to V.G.Childe. Coningham proposes that traditional interpretations advocatingtwo unrelated periods of South Asian urbanism contradict currentarchaeological data. Furthermore, he advocates major revisions inregional cultural history, including a better understanding of EarlyHistoric Period urban dynamics. Coningham co-authored with F.R. Allchinchapter 9 on ancient Sri Lankan urbanization, but unfortunately it lacksany theoretical discussions and basically represents a summary of theAnura-dhapura excavations. Their discovery of early examples of Brahmiscript is important, but the reader expecting a summary of EarlyHistoric Sri Lankan archaeology will be disappointed. Chakrabartiprovides an excellent descriptive summary of post-Mauryan developments,yet other than superficial comments on the importance of trade, thereason for these cultural changes is not addressed. Erdosy'sdiscussion of urbanization and early state formation in the Gangeticarea (chapters 6-7) represents a major contribution to our understandingof Early Historic South Asia. Building upon his dissertation datacombined with other recent research, such as M. Lal's (1984) Kanpursurvey, and theoretical developments concerning ethnic groups andhistorical issues (Erdosy 1995), Erdosy presents one of the mostcomprehensive applications of settlement-pattern analysis in South Asianarchaeology that emphasizes general cultural processes and historicalparticulars.Each of Allchin's chapters focuses to some extent on ancienturban centres; yet the reader is never given an explicit definition ofan urban centre. The result is a general vagueness in the concept'susage and meaning. He presents (chapter 10) a 'typology ofcities' based mainly on site area and presumably pre��sum��a��ble?adj.That can be presumed or taken for granted; reasonable as a supposition: presumable causes of the disaster. reflects thecriteria he wants to emphasize. However, this approach results incontradictions. For example, in chapter 3 Allchin (like many otherscholars) characterizes late Harappan culture as 'post-urban'or non-urban. At the same time, Mughal's Cholistan survey (cited byAllchin) identified five late Harappan sites that qualify as citiesaccording to Allchin's own criteria invalidating his'post-urban' designation. Had theoretical issues been properlydiscussed such contradictions would have been avoided. 'Language,Culture, and the Concept of Ethnicity', chapter 4, betrays a verysuperficial appreciation of modern anthropological, sociological,socio-linguistic and political-science thought about these importantconcepts. The descriptive summaries of the archaeological recordprovided by Allchin are, however, very useful and incorporate a vastarray of data.B. Allchin's volume with 21 contributors is extremelyinteresting and a valued addition to any scholarly library. Each chaptercontributes to our ethnographic knowledge of South Asia, but to whatdegree they represent 'ethnoarchaeology' is another issue.Indeed, except for contributions by Hooja, Rao, Cooper, Horne, Kenoyeret el. and Kramer there appears little appreciation, including that ofthe editor, for what 'ethnoarchaeology' is precisely. Themajority of the articles are either ethnographic descriptions orarchaeological accounts (e.g. contributions by Mughal, Coningham, Khan,Possehl and Chakrabarti) with a little ethnography added. This does notdetract from any chapter's value, since I maintain that descriptiveethnography in the rapidly changing world of South Asia is criticallyimportant, but it does not make these discussions'ethnoarchaeology'. As Kramer notes (p. 30.7)'Ethnoarchaeology entails ethnographic fieldwork designed to answerarchaeologists' questions'. In most chapters such'questions' are missing. Indeed, many of the contributions mayreflect what Kramer critically refers (p. 320) to as '. . .intermittent, serendipitous ser��en��dip��i��ty?n. pl. ser��en��dip��i��ties1. The faculty of making fortunate discoveries by accident.2. The fact or occurrence of such discoveries.3. An instance of making such a discovery. weekend outings by archaeologists . ..'. Likewise the manner in which the 'tradition' conceptis used here is disappointing. Introduced by Willey & Phillips(1958) and advocated by Binford (1965), the 'culturaltradition' is a powerful analytical concept in archaeology, whichhas been specifically applied to the South Asia record (Kenoyer 1991;Shaffer 1992; 1993; Shaffer & Lichtenstein 1989; 1995). B. Allchinchooses totally to ignore these recent discussions and uses the term ina manner suggesting an 'anachronism'. This volume needsdivision into major sections (e.g. hunter - gatherers, crafts-people),each with an introductory discussion. Still, there is a vast amount ofinformation here, but space limitations preclude discussion of allcontributions.Misra & Nagar Nagar, Syria Nagar, Jaiveer Jaiveer, Nagar Jaivir, Nagar Nagar, Pakistan Nagar Valley, Pakistan Former State of Nagar in Pakistan Nagar, Bangladesh and Misra present fascinating documentations ofhunter - gatherers' persistence in modern, highly developed areas,and contemporary hunter - gatherer relationships with other groupssuggest that regionally the ancient world of South Asia was far morecomplex than usually assumed. Rao also discusses current Narmada Valleyhunter - gatherers and directly relates these observations to thearchaeological record. Mughal and Dhavalikar demonstrate the importanceof ethnographic analogy for resolving specific archaeological problems.Using ethnoarchaeological data, Hooja approaches the often ignored, butcritically important, issue of 'cultural frontiers' in ancientSouth Asia. Possehl's observations about a local farmer'sactivities demonstrate Harappan 'engineers' and'priest-kings' were not necessary to build and maintainhydraulic systems. The interesting patterns of hunter - gatherer inlandand coastal encampments on the Andamen Islands are described by Copper.Kenoyer, Vidale & Bhan provide an excellent study of socialcomplexities surrounding carnelian-bead production in Khambhat and itspotential for understanding craft organization in a Harappan context.Based on a study of modern Rajasthan potters in different cities, Krameraddresses the critical issue, among others, of the relationship betweena settlement's metric area and its cultural/administrativefunction. Indeed, there are factors presented by Kramer that would havebenefited the other volumes reviewed here.These three volumes contribute to knowledge of ancient South Asia,but are interpretatively subdued on the whole. Indeed, despite newarchaeological discoveries and methods, these three volumes suggestSouth Asian archaeology is not much changed interpretatively fromWheeler's 1944 May morning walk at Harappa.ReferencesALLCHIN, B. & R. 1982. The rise of civilization in India andPakistan. London: Cambridge University Press Cambridge University Press (known colloquially as CUP) is a publisher given a Royal Charter by Henry VIII in 1534, and one of the two privileged presses (the other being Oxford University Press). .BINFORD, L.R. 1965. Archaeological systematics systematics:see classification. and the study ofculture process, American Antiquity 31: 203-10.ERDOSY, G. (ed.). 1995. The Indo-Aryans of ancient south Asia:language. material culture and ethnicity. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.GOODY, J. 1986. The logic of writing and the organization of society.London: Cambridge University Press.KENOYER. J.M. 1991. The Indus Valley tradition of Pakistan andwestern India, Journal of World Prehistory prehistory,period of human evolution before writing was invented and records kept. The term was coined by Daniel Wilson in 1851. It is followed by protohistory, the period for which we have some records but must still rely largely on archaeological evidence to 5: 331-86.LAL LAL Laughing A LotLAL Los Angeles LakersLAL Lithuanian AirlinesLAL Lightning Activity Level (used for wildfire prediction)LAL Limulus Amoebocyte LysateLAL Latitude and LongitudeLAL Live and Learn , M. 1984. Settlement history and rise of civilization inGanga-Yamuna doab: from 1500 BC-300 AD. Delhi: B.R. Publishing.POSSEHL, G.L. 1979. Ancient cities of the Indus. New Delhi: VikasPublishing House.SHAFFER, J.G. 1978. Prehistoric Baluchistan. Delhi: B.R. Publishing.1992. The Indus Valley, Baluchistan and Helmand traditions: Neolithicthrough Bronze Age. in R.W. Ehrich (ed.), Chronologies in old worldarchaeology 1: 441-64; 2: 425-46. Chicago (IL): University of ChicagoPress The University of Chicago Press is the largest university press in the United States. It is operated by the University of Chicago and publishes a wide variety of academic titles, including The Chicago Manual of Style, dozens of academic journals, including .1993. Reurbanization: the eastern Punjab and beyond, in H. Speth& D.M. Srinivasan (ed.), Urban form and meaning in South Asia: theshaping of cities from prehistoric to colonial times: 53-67. Washington(DC): National Gallery of Art.SHAFFER, J.G. & D.A. LICHTENSTEIN. 1989. Ethnicity and change inthe Indus Valley cultural tradition, in J.M. Kenoyer (ed.), Old problemsand new perspectives in the archaeology of South Asia: 117-26. Madison(WI): University of Wisconsin, Department of Anthropology. WisconsinArchaeological Reports 2.1995. The concepts of 'cultural tradition' and'palaeoethnicity' in South Asian archaeology, in Erdosy (ed.):126-54.SHENNAN, S. (ed.). 1989. Archaeological approaches to culturalidentity. London: Unwin Hyman.SURAJ BHAN. 1975. Excavations at Mitathal (1968) and otherexplorations in the Sutlej-Yamuna divide. Kurukshetra (Haryana, India):Kurukshetra University Press.WHEELER, M. 1955. Still digging. New York New York, state, United StatesNew York,Middle Atlantic state of the United States. It is bordered by Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, and the Atlantic Ocean (E), New Jersey and Pennsylvania (S), Lakes Erie and Ontario and the Canadian province of (NY): E.P. Dutton.WILLEY, G.R. & P. PHILLIPS. 1958. Method and theory in Americanarchaeology. Chicago (IL): University of Chicago Press.