Chronology of the Indian Stone Age: the Impact of Recedt Absolute and Relative Dating Attempts Sheila Mishra Department of Archaeology Deccan College Pune 41 1 006

Abstract Stone Age chronologies are built up by relating archaeological material to a number of processes which produce change over time. These include the progressive nature of change in the stone 1001 technology (an elaboration of the Three Age system), the evolution of life forms, and the geological record, especially, the record of climatic change - to build up sequences of the change in human cultures. Since the 1950s, physical processes, such as radioactive decay, for which the rates of change can be precisely known, have been developed into an impressive array of additional dating methods. The impact of new methods of dating, new dates, new arch%eologicalevidence, all contribute to an ever changing chronology of the past. In the last ten years a significant number of new dates have become available. These are summarized and their implications for the age of different phases of the Indian Stone Age discussed. The earliest contributions to the study of the Stone Age in India were by Foote (1916), a geologist, who made observations about the stone age material from many parts of Peninsular India. He published a catalogue of his collection which he donated to thkhladras Museum. Foote, distinguished the Palaeolithic material from that of the Neolithic. In the later 1930s Cammiade and Burkitt (1930) divided the Indian stone age into four series based on differences in technology seen in surface collections from the Andhra coastal region. These "series" more or less coincided with the divisions of Lower, Middle and Upper ~alaeolithic,and Mesolithic. Lower, Middle and Upper Palaeolithic terminology was adopted by Sankalia (1974) who also tried to relate the different Palaeolithic stages to Quaternary stratigraphy. In the late 30s de Terra and Paterson (1939) tried to relate the Indian stone age sequence to the Quaternary glacial sequence. Zeuner (l950), dated the Acheulian in Gujarat to the Penultimate Glaciation, based on its occurence in gravels underlying a prominant fossil soil horizon which he correlated to the last interglacial. It was only from the 60s that some of the radioisotopic dating methods were applied to the Quaternary and Palaeolithic sites. Radiocarbon dates made an invaluable contribution to the chronology of the Upper Palaeolithic and Mesolithic phases of Indian prehistory but

could not be applied to the earlier phases. In the last 10 to 15 years, other dating methods such as WAr, T M J and TL have become available, and some dates have become available for the earlier phases of the Indian Stone Age. Along with these new methods of absolute dating, relative dating, using weathering of Quaternary gravels and fluorinelphosphate ratios in fossil bones were also applied (Mishra et al. 1988). In this paper, I would like to review the evidence for dating four important transitions in the Indian Stone Age sequence. The first of these is dating the earliest arrival of man in the Indian subcontinent. The second is the age of the Acheuli'an, the third, the LowerMiddle Palaeolithic transition and the fourth the MiddlelUpper Palaeolithic transition.

-

Earliest Evidence for Man in the Indian Subcontinent Lower Palaeolithic sites have been known from India since the discovery of AcheuIian handaxes by Foote (1866) in the 1860s. Since then, Acheulian assemblages have been reported from all parts of the Indian subcontinent, where surfaces/ sediments of the Pleistocene period are exposed (Paddayya 1984; Misra 1987; Mishra 1994). Dating these assemblages, as well as certain non-Acheulian Lower

Man and Environment XX ( 2 ) - 1995 Palaeolithic assemblages such as the Soan has, however, been quite difficult. In the last few decades absolute dating for the sites in East Africa pushed back the antiquity of the beginning of tool use to at least 2 myr and the Acheulian to 1.6 myr (Toth and Schick 1986; Asfaw et al. 1992). No Lower Palaeolithic assemblages outside Africa appear to match the antiquity of some of the African sites. While this may retlect a younger age for the assemblages outside Africa, very few sites outside Africa have been dated or are amenable to similar dating attempts. The recent dating of some of the hominids in Java to 1.8 myr (Swisher et al. 1994) would imply that the expansion of hominids from Africa took place in the Lower Pleistocene. In Java, inspite of the wealth pf fossil hominid evidcnce, stone tools are rare and the Acheulian unknown. Dennell ( 1984) has discussed the jmportance of the dating of the entry of man into India, in evaluating the earliest migration of hominids out of Africa. If the early dating of hominids in Java is correct, it is very difficult to imagine the entry of hominids into Java without their also reaching India. So far, however, The only concrete evidence for a lower Pleistocene presence of man in the Subcontinent is from the Riwat locality in Pakistan (Rendell et al. 1989; Dennell et al. 1988a and 1988b). At this locality a flaked stone piece was found in a gravel. The gravel can be dated on the basis of the palaeomagnetic stratigraphy and tectonic history of the area to 2 myr. From the Pabbi Hills rcgion artefacts have been found on the surface of sediments dating between 1.2 and 2.0 myr. As there are no younger sediments in the region, it is probable that the artefacts are derived from the sediments they are now on the surface of. The Pabbi Hills assemblage is made up of amorphous flakes struck from

small quartzite pebbles (Hurcombe and Dennell 1992). It is not very different from the material from the Sungara Formation which dates to the same time period. The Age of the Acheulian in India

The Acheulian in India has been dated to the beginning of the Middle Pleistocene both at Bori (Mishra et al. 1995; Horn et al. 1993) in the Peninsular region and at Jalapur and Dina in thc Siwalik sediments in Pakistan (Rennell and Dennell 1985). At Bori, a tephra layer associated with an Early Acheulian industry has been dated by WAr to 670 kyr by Mishra et al. 1995 and to 538 kyr by Horn et al. 1993. At Jalapur and Dina, Acheulian artefacts were found in situ in gravels just above the BruhnesIMatuyama boundary. Rendell and Dennell (1985) have estimated the age of the Acheulian to be between 600-400 kyr at these sites on the basis of the palaeomagnetic stratigraphy. Recently Corvinus (1994) has found handaxes in folded Siwalik sediments at the Satpati site in Nepal. While this site is undated, the folding implies that the Acheulian prcdates the formation of the Dang-Deokhuri valley so that an Early Middle Pleistocene age for the site is probable. Mishra (1992) reviewed the results of ThIU dating of some of the Quaternary dcposits of Peninsular India. Minimum dates of 190 kyr and 66 kyr were obtained on nliliolitc overlying gravels containing Acheulian artefacts in Saurashtra (Baskaran et nl. 1986). More recently, Acheulian artefacts from four different sites, the 16 R dune at Didwana (Raghavan et al. 1989), the gravel sites of Yedurwadi and Nevasa (Atkinson et al. 1990; Kale 1990) and the sites of Sadab and Teggihalli in the Baichabal

Table 1: Thorium Uranium Dates for Acheulian Sites in India Site

Context

Reference

Milioli te

Overlies Acheulian

Baskaran et al. 1986

Adi Chadi Wao Miliolite

Overlies Acheulian

Baskaran et al. 1986

Sadab

Elephas molar

Associated with Acheulian artefacts

Szabo et al. 1990

Teggihalli

Bos molar

Associated with Acheulian artefacts

Szabo et al. 1990

Teggihalli

Elephas molar

Associated with Acheulian artefacts

Szabo et al. 1990

Didwana(16R) Calcrete

Middle Palaeolithic

Raghavan et al. 1989

Didwana (1 6R) Calcrete

Middle Palaeolithic

Raghavan et al. 1989

Didwana (16R) Calcrete

Lower Palaeolithic

Raghavan et al. 1989

Yedurwadi

Calcrete

Acheulian

Atkinson et nl. 1990

Nevasa

Calcrete

Acheulian

Atkinson et al. 1990

---

-

Umrethi

Material

Date

--

Chronology of Indian Stone Age

valley in Karnataka (Szabo et al. 1990) have been dated by the T h N method. The Didwana, Yedurwadi and Nevasa dates all show that the Acheulian is beyond the range of Th/U dating while from the Baichabal sites one date is beyond the range of T h N dating and two further dates from the same context are close to the limit of ThIU dating (see Table I). It is surely significant that all the Acheulian sites dated so far are beyond the limit of the Th/U dating method. LowerIMiddle Palaeolithic Transition The Middle Palaeolithic in India is still a poorly defined entity. Very few Middle Palaeolithic assemblages have been located in a stratigraphic context. Most often, strata containing Late Acheulian handaxes will also yield retouched flake tools and prepared cores typical of what is conceptualized as the "Middle Palaeolithic." Separation of the Middle Palaeolithic and Acheulian horizons has proved to be a problem. Sankalia thought that the "Nevasian", a collection of flakes from a gravel horizon at Nevasa, was such a separate Middle Palaeolithic horizon (Sankalia 1964). However, this Nevasian assemblage of flakes, lacked typical Middle Palaeolithic features and was identical to the flake component of the underlying Acheulian horizon (Corvinus 1983). Mishra (1986) reinterpreted the Nevasian as part of the Acheulian, the large tools having been selectively destroyed by weathering and transport. These large tools would have been mainly on basalt since large nodules of chalcedony and chert which occur as secondary nodules within the basalt are quite rare, while flakes could have been prepared on basalt as well as chertkhalcedony. Inspite of the difficulty of locating the Middle Palaeolithic in a stratigraphic context, Middle Palaeolithic artefacts are common in a surface or surface1 rubble horizon in most parts of Peninsular India. The earliest Middle Palaeolithic industries are beyond - the range of radiocarbon dating. In the last decade or so

ThIU and TL dating methods have begun to give us some dates for the Middle Palaeolithic. Both TL and T h N dating methods are still in the processes of development and occasionally give divergent results. Therefore the correlation pf a number of Middle Palaeolithic sites to the oxygen isotope record where the last interglacial (stage 5e) is dated to about 125 kyr is important in supporting the early dates for the Middle Palaeolithic obtained by absolute dating methods. In South Africa, the Middle Stone Age I phase has been correlated with oxygen isotope stage 5e, based on the oxygen isotope ratios in marine shells brought to theXlassies River Mouth cave by hominids in the MSA I phase. This is considered in a recent review as the most reliable of the numerous dates obtained so far (Thackerey 1992). The Bir Tarwafi sites in the Egyptian desert have also been correlated to phases of the last interglacial (Wendorf et al. 1993). The dating of the Middle

Palaeolithic to the last interglacial in India is supported by the evidence from Rajasthan. In the 16R sand dune, near Didwana, in Rajasthan, the Middle Palaeolithic levels are associated with a number of calcrete horizons, which represent stabilization of the sand dune during a more humid climatic phase (Misra 1979; Misra and Rajaguru 1979). This can be plausibly correlated to the last interglacial period, oxygen isotope stage 5e dated in the deep sea cores to 125 kyr. This interpretation is supported by TL dating of the Middle Palaeolithic layer to 126 kyr (Chawla et al. 1990). Th/U dates of the calcrete below this layer are 166 kyr to 350 kyr (Raghavan et 01. 1989). Joshi (1972) has suggested that the rare occurrence of Middle Palaeolithic artefacts in alluvial contexts in Peninsular India is due to the Middle Palaeolithic corresponding to a period of dominant erosion in most parts of Peninsular India. This would suggest.that the Middle Palaeolithic corresponds to an interglacial period. In the Jaisalmer area, which is close to the most arid core of the Thar desert, Mishra et al. (1993) found that Stone Age material was either microliths, belonging to the Holocene period, or Middle Palaeolithic artefacts. They have argued that the Jaisalmer area was only occupied during humid phases and consequently the Middle Palaeolithic in that region probably dates to the last interglacial period. The Middle Palaeolithic in India therefore dates at least from the last interglacial (125 kyr) to the early part of the Last Glaciation (?40 kyr). The MiddleNpper Palaeolithic Transition Radiocarbon dates for the Upper Palaeolithic (see Table 2) obtained in the 70s from the Belan valley, at Inamgaon, Kurnool, Nandipalle and Patne were all in the time range of 19 to 25 kyr, which became accepted as the time span for the Upper Palaeolithic in India. However more recent dates from Bhedaghat, Dharampuri, ~ h a r a n ~ a o n , Chandrasal, Mehtakheri and Nagda are all in the time range of 25 to 40 kyr. It therefore seems that the Upper Palaeolithic in India begins sometime around 40 kyr. Conclusions 1. The Early Acheulian contexts at Bori, Hungsi, Yedurwadi, Nevasa and Singi Talav are beyond the range of T h N dating - i.e. >400 kyr. KIAr dating of volcanic ash at Bori suggests that the Acheulian at Bori belongs to the Early Middle Pleistocene. From the Siwaliks in both Pakistan and Nepal, Acheulian artefacts have been found in comparably early contexts. The Riwat evidence is suggestive of man arriving in the Subcontinent in the Early Pleistocene. 2. The Middle Palaeolithic at the 16R dune near Didwana is associated with the last interglaciil (125 kyr) phase of dune stabilization and a TL date of 126 kyr. The levels below the Middle Palaeolithic horizon yielded

-

Man and Environment XX ( 2 ) - 1995

Table 2: Radiocarbon dates for Upper Palaeolithic sites

Material Dated

Reference

Beta 4793

freshwater shells

Williams and Clark 1995

Bhedaghat

A 6619

freshwater bivalve shells

Mishra and Rajaguru 1993

Belan Valley Deoghat

TF 1245

freshwater shells

IAR 72-73

Belan Valley Deoghat

Beta 4789

freshwater shells

Williams and Clark 1995

Belan Valley Deoghat

PRL 86

freshwater shells

Mandal 1983

Belan Valley Koldiwal

Beta 4877

freshwater shells

Williams and Clark 1995

Chandrasal

GRN 10638

ostrich eggshell

Kumar 1988

Chandrasal

GRN 10639

ostrich eggshell

Kumar 1988

Dharangaon

BS 662

freshwater shells

unpublished

Dharampuri

BS 286

freshwater shells

Mishra 1985

Gargaon

TF 1111

wood

Kale and Rajaguru 1985

freshwater shells

Agrawal and Kusumgar 1975

Site Name

Lab. No.

Bagor

Date

Inamgaon Inamgaon

TF 1177

freshwater shells

Agrawal and Kusumgar 1975

Inamgaon

BS 146

freshwater shells

Rajaguru et al. 1979

Kurnool

TL date

burnt caves

Nambi and Murthy 1983

Mahagara

P,RL 603

freshwater shells

Mandal 1983

Mahagara

PRL 602

freshwater shells

Mandal 1983

Mahagara

SUA 1421

freshwater shells

Mandal 1983

Mehtakheri

A 6518

freshwater shells

unpublished

ostrich eggshell

unpublished

>3 1,000

ostrich eggshell

Kumar 1988

Nandur-Madhemeshwar BS 163

27,4 1 0 ~ 4 2 5

freshwater shells

Rajaguru and Kale 1985

Nandipalle

24,300+660

freshwater gastropod shells

Reddy and Sudarsen 1979

freshwater shells

Rajaguru and Kale 1985

freshwater shells

Rajaguru and Kale 1985

Mehtakheri Nagda

-

.

Nevasa

PRL 1 196

PRL 293

.

Nevasa

Paiihan

TF 891

17,0752660

freshwater shells

Rajaguru and Kale 1985

Patne

GRN 7200

25,000+200

ostrich eggshell

Sali 1989

Rampur

Beta 4752

11,870~k120

freshwater shells

Mandal 1983

Rampur

Beta 4793

26,250k420

freshwater shells

Mandal 1983

Sangarnner

PRL 470

12,8902350

freshwater shells

Sangamner

BS 78

25,3902710

freshwater shells

IAR 78/79: 105 IAR 78/79: 105

The BS dates have been converted from I4Chalflife of 5570 years to halflife of 5730 years.

Man and Environment XX (2)- 1995 -

Adaptation and Other Essays (N.C. Ghosh and S. Chakrabarti Eds.), pp. 69-74. Santiniketan: Visva Bharati. -

Mandal, D. 1983. A Note on the Radiocarbon Dates from . the Middle Son Valley, in Palaeoenvironments and Prehistory in the Middle Son Valley (G.R. Sharma and J.D. Clark Eds.), pp. 284-289. Allahabad: Abinash Prakashan. Mishra, S. 1994. The South Asian Lower Palaeolithic, Man and Environment 19: 57-72. Mishra, S., S.N. Rajaguru and S.N. Ghate 1993. Stone Age Jaisalmer: Implications for Human Adaptation to Deserts, Bulletin of the Deccan College PostGraduate and Research Institute 53: 259-266. Mishra, S., A. Kshirsagar and S.N. Rajaguru 1988 Relative Dating of the Quaternary Record from Upland Western Maharashtra, in National Seminar on Recent Quaternary Studies in India (M.P. Patel and N. Desai Eds.), pp. 267-278. Baroda: M.S. University of Baroda. Mishra, S. and S.N. Rajaguru 1993. Quaternary Deposits at Bhedaghat, near Jabalpur, Madhya Pradesh, Man and Environment 18(2): 7-12. Mishra, S., T.R. Venkatesan, S.N. Rajaguru and B.L.K. Somayajulu 1995. A 0.67 Myr. Acheulian Industry from Peninsular India, Current Anthropology 36: 847-5 1. Mishra, S. 1986. Archaeological Assemblages and Basalt Weathering: a Re-evaluation of the 'Nevasian', Man and Environment 10: 91-96. Mishra, S. 1992. The Age ~f the Acheulian in India. Current Anthropology 33: 325-328. Misra, V.N. 1989. Human Adaptation to Changing Landscape of the Indian Arid zone During the Quaternary, ih Old Problems - New Perspectives in the Archaeology of South Asia (J.M. Kenoyer Ed.), pp. 3-20. Madison: Wisconsin Archaeological Reports. Misra, V.N. 1987. Middle Pleistocene ~daptionsin India, in The Pleistocene Old World: Regional Perspectives (0.Soffer Ed.), pp. 99-120. New York: Plenum Press.

Bulletin of the Deccan College Post-Graduate and Research Institute 42: 110-13. Paddayya, K. 1984. Stone Age India. in Neue Forscheungen zur Altsteinzeit (C.H. Muller-Karpe Ed.), pp. 345-403. Munich: Beck Verlag. Raghavan, H., S.N. Rajaguru, and V.N. Misra 1989. Radiometric Dating of a Quaternary Dune Section, Man and Environment 13: 19-22. Rendell, H.M. and R.W. Dennell 1985. Dated Lower Palaeolithic Artefacts from Northern Pakistan, Current Anthropology 26: 293. Rendell, H. M., R.W. Dennell and Halim H.A. 1989. Pleistocene and Palaeolithic Investigations in the Soan Valley,Northern Pakistan. Oxford: British Archaeological Reports, International Series: 544. Sali, S.A. 1989. The Upper Palaeolitlzic and Mesolithic Cultures of Malzarashstra. Pune: Deccan College. Sankalia, H.D. 1964. Middle Stone Age Culture in India and Pakistan, Science 146:365-75. Sankalia, H.D. 1974. Prehistory and Protohistory of India and Pakistan. Poona: Deccan College. Swisher, C.C., G.H. Curtis, T. Jacob, A.G. Getty, A. Susprijo, and Widiasmoro 1994. Age of the Earliest Known Hominids in Java, Indonesia, Science 263: 1 118-1121. Szabo, B.J., Mckinney Curtis, T.S. Dalbey and K. Paddayya 1990. On the Age of the Acheulian Culture of the Hunsgi-Baichbal Valleys, Peninsular India, Bulletin of the Deccan College Post-Graduate and Research Institute 50: 3 17-321. Thackeray, A.I. 1992. The MSA South of the Limpopo River, Journal of World Prehistoly 6(4): 385-440. Toth, N. and K.D.Schick 1986. The First Million Years: the Archaeology of Protohuman Culture, in Advances in Archaeological Method and Theory 9 (M.S. Schiffer Ed.), pp. 1-96. New York: Academic Press. Wendorf, F., R.Schild, A. Close, and 30 associates 1993. Egypt During the Last Interglacial: The Middle Palaeolithic of Bir Turfawi and Bir Sahara East. New York and London: Pleneum Press.

Misra, V.N. and S.N. Rajaguru 1989. Palaeoenvironments and Prehistory of the Thar Desert, Rajasthan, India, in South Asian Archaeology 1985 (K. Frifelt and R. Sorensen Eds.), pp. 296-320. Copenhagen: Scandinavian Institute of Asian Studies, Occasional Papers no. 4.

Williams, M.A.J. and M.F. Clarke 1995. Quaternary ~ e o l o &and Prehistoric Environments in the Son and Belan Valleys, North Central India, in Quaternary Environments and Geoarchaeology of India (S. Wadia, R. Korrisettar and V.S. Kale Eds.), pp. 282-308. Bangalore: Geological Society of India Memoir 32.

Nambi, K.V.S. and M.L.K. Murthy 1983. An Upper Palaeolithic Fireplace in the Kurnool Caves,

Zeuner, F.E. 1950. Stone Age and Pleistocene Chronology in Gujarat, Pune: Deccan College.