Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7czq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T21:57:24.509Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Mohenjo-Daro; Some Observations on Indian Prehistory

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 April 2016

Extract

Despite the fact that Mohenjo-daro is of world-wide interest, and is such a rich field for discussion and speculation, until recently only two books had been written giving an authoritative account of the excavations, and the remains and the culture which they disclosed. These have now been joined by a third, namely, Dr. Mackay's full-length monograph on the excavations from 1927 to 1931.

When one has viewed the excavations, and read the works of Sir John Marshall and Dr. Mackay, and one realizes the immense amount of hard work and scholarship which has been lavished on them, it seems petty and churlish to raise the carping voice of criticism. Mohenjo-daro is not easily reached, and once the traveller has arrived there, without a well-prepared scheme of provisioning it is a difficult place in which to maintain oneself for a period of days while engaged in study. The fact that the available works of authority are so few and the visits of competent observers so rare makes it necessary that some more independent voice should be heard, even though it be a critical one. Without this, the few works would gain an almost Biblical authority and infallibility; this would be most deplorable, as it is almost always the least fortunate observations that secure the most frequent repetition. There is another point also which often escapes attention, and that is the relative proportion of certain objects, styles, and fabrics to the whole, stress being laid on them often in such a way as unintentionally to mislead the student and to give a false impression of quantitative importance.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © The British Institute for the Study of Iraq 1940

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

page 1 note 1 All references to plates or pages in the course of this article refer, unless it is otherwise specified, to Further Excavations at Mohenjo-daro, by MacKay, E. J. H.. Vol. 1, Text; Vol. 11, PlatesGoogle Scholar; Government of India Press, New Delhi, 1938.

page 4 note 1 The expression ‘early historic period’ when used in this article refers to the period from the beginning of the Mauryas to the end of the Guptas, i.e. 322 B.c. to c. A.D. 500.

page 4 note 2 Further links between Ancient Sind, Sumer, and elsewhere. Mackay, E. (Antiquity, 12 1931, 468)Google Scholar.

page 5 note 1 Mackay, , Further Excavations, 1. 265 and 557 Google Scholar.

page 7 note 1 Mackay, , Further Excavations, 1. 395 Google Scholar.

page 9 note 1 Journal of the Indian Society of Oriental Art, IV, No. 2, 12 1936 Google Scholar.

page 10 note 1 Antiquity, 09 1937, 351 Google ScholarPubMed.

page 10 note 2 This is amply borne out by his own article India and the West before Darius (Antiquity, March 1939), in which the Nilgary Hills (sic, but located no longer in Kashmir) are still shown as the locality producing amazonite.

page 10 note 3 Seals of Ancient Indian Style found at Ur, by Gadd, C. J., 1932 Google Scholar.

page 10 note 4 The seals with Indus script have high narrow knobs with a single line, in the same manner as those from Mohenjo-daro. The others have flat wide knobs with double or treble lines and dotted circles; there is not the least reason to associate these latter with India.

page 11 note 1 Vide fig. 2, p. 25, The Aryans, by V. Gordon Childe.