11-08-2005, 04:19 AM
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/JatHistory/message/1312
a review of archaeological reports:
Southern Bactria & northern India before Islam
By: Fussman, Gerard
http://home.btconnect.com/CAIS/Archaeology...ern_bactria.htm
A rather interesting article by Prof. Fussman. from a talk given at
the School of Oriental and African Studies.
He reviews the work of the archeologists , the French - Francfort,
the Germans - Hartel, and the Italians- Tucci, as well as the
English Marshall and wheeler.
Wish we had more like this.
He draws our attention to some of his observations.
The Bactria area, the current area in the Oxus valley, known as
Bactria, was a lush fertile area, with an ancient complex irrigation
system.
It was found settled in the 3rd millennium BCE, i.e. 3000 to 2000BCE,
about the period of the so-called Harappan or IVC or Saraswati
civilization. He also makes notes of links between the IVC
civilization and the Bactrian civilization.
Agriculture was plenty, as was irrigation with canals to make that
agriculture possible.
This was the picture when the Greek intrusion took place. The author
notes that agriculture did not show an increase in the Greek period.
There was no decisive increase in cultivation with the advent of the
Greeks. Hence Greek colonization was not responsible for the
proverbial agricultural wealth of Bactria.
The author also points out that there is no evidence that the Greek
civilization there was destroyed by the nomads, though it is accepted
historical fact to think so.
There is no archeological evidence for the invasion by Indo-Aryan
tribes.
He also pints out what I have been pointing out is the use of
Chinese term to denote a non Chinese people- Yueh Chi, Sai etc
He also points from the Sonkh excavations at Mathura, that circa 0
BCE --"social groups of foreign origin, especially the ruling clans,
kept to quite unshastric family systems and rights of inheritance
(Fussman 1980, 23). Brahmins could be engaged in trade and their
widows could act as family heads (Fussman 1993, 115). This scanty
data is enough to show that around the Common Era, Indian society was
still far from functioning like the ideal Hindu society depicted in
the probably much later dharmasastras."
Ravi Chaudhary
Some quotes:
It is generally agreed that the town was vacated by the Greeks c. 145
B.C. under pressure from the nomads, although no incontrovertible
evidence that it was attacked, burnt, or sacked by these nomads was
ever found.( P. Bernard only made the noncommittal statement: "the
Greeks of Ai Khanum were driven from their city by nomad invaders"
(Bernard 1982, 148)
So one is puzzled to learn that the town was probably vacated after
an attack (Leriche 1986, 57); that it was destroyed by Yuezhi nomads
(Rapin 1992, 291) and that there was a Kushan occupation (Leriche
1986, 99-101). What is P. Bernard's own opinion? Is there any
evidence of these facts in other excavated buildings? And why are we
not given the possibility of judging whether the arrowheads
discovered against the northern wall belonged to Greek troops (who
could have enlisted Central Asiatic archers) or to nomadic tribes?
(27) Can we not know from the ceramic finds whether the city was
inhabited in Kushan times or not?(28)
He should have shortened - among others - his Sakuntala story (pp.
192-97), found in all histories of Indian literature, and I would
have expected him to have been much more cautious in discovering a
depiction of this same Sakuntala story in the so-called "plaque
indienne."(32
The results of these well-planned surveys are impressive. They
demonstrated that, as postulated, the climate had not changed much
during the past 5,000 years; that agriculturists had been settled in
Bactria at least since the early third millennium B.C.; that channel
irrigation was practiced on a large scale, and sometimes under very
difficult technical conditions, long before the Greek conquest; that
Ai Khanum was built on an already densely populated territory; that
some changes in population could be inferred from the distribution of
channels and sherds, and possibly correlated with previously known
historical data.(37)
The irrigated areas were largest in Greek times, but as some channels
were probably in use in pre-Greek, Greek, and post-Greek times, it
was not possible to say whether there was an increase in cultivation
in Greek times.
. It is shown that in the third millennium B.C., eastern Bactria
belonged to a Baluc cultural sphere, without implying that it was a
political entity or that there was any ethnic unity. The same is said
about the Harappan period (2500-1500), at a time when close contacts
with the Indus civilization are attested by surveys and the
consecutive Shortughai dig (Francfort 1989, below): B. Lyonnet
expresses some reservations about any explanation founded upon
economic or ethnic colonization. She clearly says that the eastern
Bactria surveys do not help to solve the vexing problem of the
relationship between Turkmenia, Bactria, and Balucistan, and that
there is no field evidence for the historically sure arrival of Indo-
Iranian or Indo-Aryan tribes. In the same way there is no ceramic
evidence for the inclusion of Bactria in the Persian Achaemenid
empire, although the existence of a Bactrian Achaemenid satrapy is a
well-known fact
B. Lyonnet is probably right in ascribing some shapes (gobelets a
piedouche and bottled-shaped pots) to nomad invaders, less so in
attributing them respectively to the Saka (Sai) and Yuezhi, because
Sai and Yuezhi are Chinese names for shifting confederations of
tribes without any linguistic, ethnic (i.e., racial), and probably
cultural, unity.
. The main economic impulse dates back to the second millennium B.C.:
neither the Achemenids nor the Greeks were responsible for the
irrigation of the larger part of Bactria, and the probable increase
in population which ensued. There was no decisive increase in
cultivation with the advent of the Greeks. Hence Greek colonization
was not responsible for the proverbial agricultural wealth of Bactria.
The final report of the Shortughai excavations, which is a revised
Ph.D. dissertation (Francfort 1989), would deserve a longer review,
both for the importance of the finds and the way they are published.
The excavations, made after the discovery of Harappan sherds during
the survey of the plain of Ai Khartum, brought to light the remains
of a Harappan settlement, either a trading or colonial outpost
(Francfort), or evidence for the existence of a huge cultural zone
including both Central Asia and the Indus valley (Lyonnet), and
proved the use of channel irrigation in Central Asia as early as the
third millennium B.C
H.-P. Francfort is most probably right in denying the existence of
any archaeological evidence of the Indo-Aryan presence,
chronology of the Sacred Precinct.
I would go so far as to say that Butkara I is the best excavation
ever made and published of a Gandharan Buddhist site. As a result,
thanks to this very detailed report, we can use a wealth of reliable
data for tracing the history of building techniques, decorative
elements (mouldings, columns, etc.) and the painting of the
Hellenized art of Gandhara. It is a wonder that nobody, up to now,
has taken advantage of the evidence that is here provided in such a
convenient way for further research. Faccenna 1980 is a welcome
counterpart to Marshall's Taxila excavations, whose data, collected
with less care,(62) are notoriously unreliable.
SONKH, MATHURA
The excavations at Sonkh, near Mathura, were conducted for eight
years (1966-74) by a team of German archaeologists led by Prof.
Hartel. With the objective of unravelling "structural remains to an
extent sufficient for a reassessment of the antiquity of Mathura and
the nature of early historical settlements in its environment"
(Hartel 1993, 12), the relatively undisturbed mound of Sonkh (c. 20 m
high) was selected. T
1 We may assume that, as in almost every society, Indian society at
that time was made up of a number of groups. But we do not know
whether these groups were knitted into a fixed and hierarchized
social frame bearing some resemblance to the modern Hindu jati system
or whether there was only one system of ranking, incorporating the
many groups of followers of Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism, and Iranian
religions into one and the same scheme. If we can judge from some
stray inscriptions, social groups of foreign origin, especially the
ruling clans, kept to quite unshastric family systems and rights of
inheritance (Fussman 1980, 23). Brahmins could be engaged in trade
and their widows could act as family heads (Fussman 1993, 115). This
scanty data is enough to show that around the Common Era, Indian
society was still far from functioning like the ideal Hindu society
depicted in the probably much later dharmasastras.
a review of archaeological reports:
Southern Bactria & northern India before Islam
By: Fussman, Gerard
http://home.btconnect.com/CAIS/Archaeology...ern_bactria.htm
A rather interesting article by Prof. Fussman. from a talk given at
the School of Oriental and African Studies.
He reviews the work of the archeologists , the French - Francfort,
the Germans - Hartel, and the Italians- Tucci, as well as the
English Marshall and wheeler.
Wish we had more like this.
He draws our attention to some of his observations.
The Bactria area, the current area in the Oxus valley, known as
Bactria, was a lush fertile area, with an ancient complex irrigation
system.
It was found settled in the 3rd millennium BCE, i.e. 3000 to 2000BCE,
about the period of the so-called Harappan or IVC or Saraswati
civilization. He also makes notes of links between the IVC
civilization and the Bactrian civilization.
Agriculture was plenty, as was irrigation with canals to make that
agriculture possible.
This was the picture when the Greek intrusion took place. The author
notes that agriculture did not show an increase in the Greek period.
There was no decisive increase in cultivation with the advent of the
Greeks. Hence Greek colonization was not responsible for the
proverbial agricultural wealth of Bactria.
The author also points out that there is no evidence that the Greek
civilization there was destroyed by the nomads, though it is accepted
historical fact to think so.
There is no archeological evidence for the invasion by Indo-Aryan
tribes.
He also pints out what I have been pointing out is the use of
Chinese term to denote a non Chinese people- Yueh Chi, Sai etc
He also points from the Sonkh excavations at Mathura, that circa 0
BCE --"social groups of foreign origin, especially the ruling clans,
kept to quite unshastric family systems and rights of inheritance
(Fussman 1980, 23). Brahmins could be engaged in trade and their
widows could act as family heads (Fussman 1993, 115). This scanty
data is enough to show that around the Common Era, Indian society was
still far from functioning like the ideal Hindu society depicted in
the probably much later dharmasastras."
Ravi Chaudhary
Some quotes:
It is generally agreed that the town was vacated by the Greeks c. 145
B.C. under pressure from the nomads, although no incontrovertible
evidence that it was attacked, burnt, or sacked by these nomads was
ever found.( P. Bernard only made the noncommittal statement: "the
Greeks of Ai Khanum were driven from their city by nomad invaders"
(Bernard 1982, 148)
So one is puzzled to learn that the town was probably vacated after
an attack (Leriche 1986, 57); that it was destroyed by Yuezhi nomads
(Rapin 1992, 291) and that there was a Kushan occupation (Leriche
1986, 99-101). What is P. Bernard's own opinion? Is there any
evidence of these facts in other excavated buildings? And why are we
not given the possibility of judging whether the arrowheads
discovered against the northern wall belonged to Greek troops (who
could have enlisted Central Asiatic archers) or to nomadic tribes?
(27) Can we not know from the ceramic finds whether the city was
inhabited in Kushan times or not?(28)
He should have shortened - among others - his Sakuntala story (pp.
192-97), found in all histories of Indian literature, and I would
have expected him to have been much more cautious in discovering a
depiction of this same Sakuntala story in the so-called "plaque
indienne."(32
The results of these well-planned surveys are impressive. They
demonstrated that, as postulated, the climate had not changed much
during the past 5,000 years; that agriculturists had been settled in
Bactria at least since the early third millennium B.C.; that channel
irrigation was practiced on a large scale, and sometimes under very
difficult technical conditions, long before the Greek conquest; that
Ai Khanum was built on an already densely populated territory; that
some changes in population could be inferred from the distribution of
channels and sherds, and possibly correlated with previously known
historical data.(37)
The irrigated areas were largest in Greek times, but as some channels
were probably in use in pre-Greek, Greek, and post-Greek times, it
was not possible to say whether there was an increase in cultivation
in Greek times.
. It is shown that in the third millennium B.C., eastern Bactria
belonged to a Baluc cultural sphere, without implying that it was a
political entity or that there was any ethnic unity. The same is said
about the Harappan period (2500-1500), at a time when close contacts
with the Indus civilization are attested by surveys and the
consecutive Shortughai dig (Francfort 1989, below): B. Lyonnet
expresses some reservations about any explanation founded upon
economic or ethnic colonization. She clearly says that the eastern
Bactria surveys do not help to solve the vexing problem of the
relationship between Turkmenia, Bactria, and Balucistan, and that
there is no field evidence for the historically sure arrival of Indo-
Iranian or Indo-Aryan tribes. In the same way there is no ceramic
evidence for the inclusion of Bactria in the Persian Achaemenid
empire, although the existence of a Bactrian Achaemenid satrapy is a
well-known fact
B. Lyonnet is probably right in ascribing some shapes (gobelets a
piedouche and bottled-shaped pots) to nomad invaders, less so in
attributing them respectively to the Saka (Sai) and Yuezhi, because
Sai and Yuezhi are Chinese names for shifting confederations of
tribes without any linguistic, ethnic (i.e., racial), and probably
cultural, unity.
. The main economic impulse dates back to the second millennium B.C.:
neither the Achemenids nor the Greeks were responsible for the
irrigation of the larger part of Bactria, and the probable increase
in population which ensued. There was no decisive increase in
cultivation with the advent of the Greeks. Hence Greek colonization
was not responsible for the proverbial agricultural wealth of Bactria.
The final report of the Shortughai excavations, which is a revised
Ph.D. dissertation (Francfort 1989), would deserve a longer review,
both for the importance of the finds and the way they are published.
The excavations, made after the discovery of Harappan sherds during
the survey of the plain of Ai Khartum, brought to light the remains
of a Harappan settlement, either a trading or colonial outpost
(Francfort), or evidence for the existence of a huge cultural zone
including both Central Asia and the Indus valley (Lyonnet), and
proved the use of channel irrigation in Central Asia as early as the
third millennium B.C
H.-P. Francfort is most probably right in denying the existence of
any archaeological evidence of the Indo-Aryan presence,
chronology of the Sacred Precinct.
I would go so far as to say that Butkara I is the best excavation
ever made and published of a Gandharan Buddhist site. As a result,
thanks to this very detailed report, we can use a wealth of reliable
data for tracing the history of building techniques, decorative
elements (mouldings, columns, etc.) and the painting of the
Hellenized art of Gandhara. It is a wonder that nobody, up to now,
has taken advantage of the evidence that is here provided in such a
convenient way for further research. Faccenna 1980 is a welcome
counterpart to Marshall's Taxila excavations, whose data, collected
with less care,(62) are notoriously unreliable.
SONKH, MATHURA
The excavations at Sonkh, near Mathura, were conducted for eight
years (1966-74) by a team of German archaeologists led by Prof.
Hartel. With the objective of unravelling "structural remains to an
extent sufficient for a reassessment of the antiquity of Mathura and
the nature of early historical settlements in its environment"
(Hartel 1993, 12), the relatively undisturbed mound of Sonkh (c. 20 m
high) was selected. T
1 We may assume that, as in almost every society, Indian society at
that time was made up of a number of groups. But we do not know
whether these groups were knitted into a fixed and hierarchized
social frame bearing some resemblance to the modern Hindu jati system
or whether there was only one system of ranking, incorporating the
many groups of followers of Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism, and Iranian
religions into one and the same scheme. If we can judge from some
stray inscriptions, social groups of foreign origin, especially the
ruling clans, kept to quite unshastric family systems and rights of
inheritance (Fussman 1980, 23). Brahmins could be engaged in trade
and their widows could act as family heads (Fussman 1993, 115). This
scanty data is enough to show that around the Common Era, Indian
society was still far from functioning like the ideal Hindu society
depicted in the probably much later dharmasastras.