| Literature DB >> 29513672 |
Abstract
Ancient civilisations depended heavily on natural fuel resources for a wide array of activities, and this had an impact on such resources that can be traced in the archaeological record. At its urban apex, the populations of the Indus Civilisation (2600-1900 BC) produced a wide range of objects and crafts, several of which involved highly specialised pyrotechnology. In the wake of increasing aridity and a period of weakened monsoon rainfall that affected South Asia from 2100 BC, these activities potentially put pressure on the natural resource base that may have had to be counterbalanced by differentiation in fuel use. The combined analysis of archaeobotanical and geoarchaeological remains from four Indus urban phase archaeological sites, has enable an assessment of the mechanisms through which people exploited wood, and diversified their fuel resources to adapt to the arid to semi-arid environments in which they lived. The combined use of local wood species with alternative fuels, such as dung and crop-processing leftovers, are evidence for resilient socio-ecological practices during the 700 years of Indus urbanism and perhaps beyond.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29513672 PMCID: PMC5841642 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0192364
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Fig 1Map of northern South Asia.
The map shows the location of the 4 sites discussed in this study (white) as well as some of the main archaeological sites pertaining to the Indus Civilisation.
Summary of the samples analysed, indicating number of samples of each context and proxy at the four sites, and the main quantitative data.
*density at Harappa is inferred from indirect data on quantity of soil floated derived from Steve Weber’s work on macroremains [62–63].
| Samples (n) | Charred remains (excl. seeds/grains) | Phytoliths | Spherulites | |||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Site | Context | Flotation | Sediment | vol (ml) | Weight (g) | frag.N | Diversity | density (g/l) | % undet | r2 den/div | r2 div/und | conc (k) | Morpho-types | r2 | pres/ n. samples | |
| 21 | 4 | 4.36 | 1.11 | 1370 | 0.53 | 0.123* | 2.83 | — | 0.40 | 654 | 9.20 | 0.60 | 2/4 | |||
| 2 | — | 0.30 | 0.12 | 179 | 0.74 | 0.013* | 13.19 | — | — | — | ||||||
| 3 | 2 | 1.86 | 0.47 | 473 | 0.70 | 0.052* | 6.57 | 2948 | 11.50 | 0/2 | ||||||
| — | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | 780 | 16.30 | 0/3 | ||||||
| — | 7 | — | — | — | — | — | — | 153 | 8.40 | 1/7 | ||||||
| 4 | 8 | 1.10 | 0.16 | 307 | 0.75 | 0.008 | 26.95 | 0.83 | -0.45 | 11371 | 15.60 | 0.34 | 7/8 | |||
| 1 | 2 | 6.00 | 2.29 | 136 | 0.83 | — | — | 7027 | 12.50 | 0/2 | ||||||
| 2 | 4 | 3.90 | 1.16 | 248 | 0.85 | 0.015 | 15.77 | 16448 | 14.30 | 1/4 | ||||||
| — | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | 8118 | 13.00 | 0/2 | ||||||
| 3 | 5.55 | 1.83 | 531 | 0.83 | 0.038 | 25.89 | — | — | — | |||||||
| 5 | 3 | 0.22 | 0.20 | 329 | 0.51 | 0.018 | 23.84 | -0.26 | 0.43 | 18329 | 16.50 | 0.51 | 0/3 | |||
| 2 | 2 | <1 | 0.12 | 86 | 0.44 | 0.006 | 12.69 | 15050 | 13.50 | 1/2 | ||||||
| 3 | 4 | <1 | 0.14 | 150 | 0.68 | 0.007 | 17.19 | 6738 | 11.00 | 0/4 | ||||||
| — | 4 | — | — | — | — | — | — | 15872 | 13.75 | 1/4 | ||||||
| — | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2975 | 9.00 | 0/3 | ||||||
| 5 | — | <1 | 0.08 | 197 | 0.72 | 0.006 | 23.62 | — | — | — | ||||||
| 5 | 6 | 0.28 | 0.06 | 142 | 0.24 | 0.002 | 12.27 | 0.73 | 0.03 | 27950 | 17.20 | -0.12 | 0/6 | |||
| 7 | 7 | 0.25 | 0.05 | 195 | 0.33 | 0.003 | 23.50 | 21903 | 16.40 | 0/7 | ||||||
| 3 | 3 | 0.30 | 0.03 | 49 | 0.07 | 0.002 | 34.07 | 31182 | 16.30 | 1/3 | ||||||
Wood species mentioned in the text with ubiquity test scores for each site according to floras of South Asia [43, 78].
| Ubiquity scores (%) | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Family | Genus and species | Ecology | Harappa | Kanmer | Shikarpur | Alamgirpur |
| FABACEAE | Acacia Senegal (L.) Willd. | DRY THORN SCRUBLAND | 6.9 | 50 | 13 | — |
| MELIACEAE | Azadirachta indica A. Juss. | 6.9 | 80 | 47 | 6.7 | |
| ZYGOPHILLACEAE | Balanites aegyptiaca (L.) Delile | — | — | — | 13.0 | |
| ASCLEPIADACEAE | Calotropis procera (Aiton) W.T. Aiton | 13.8 | 50 | 7 | — | |
| CAPPARACEAE | Capparis decidua (Forssk.) Edgew. | 3.5 | 80 | 53 | 27 | |
| LAMIACEAE | Clerodendrum sp. | 6.9 | 20 | — | — | |
| BORAGINACEAE | Cordia sp. | — | 10 | — | — | |
| ASCLEPIADACEAE | Leptadenia pyrotecnica (Burm. f) Juss. ex Schult. | 0.5 | — | 7 | — | |
| FABACEAE | Prosopis cineraria (L.) Druce | 20.7 | 50 | 13 | — | |
| FABACEAE | Prosopis farcta (Banks & Sol.) J.F. Macbr. | 20.7 | — | — | — | |
| SALVADORACEAE | Salvadora oleoides Decne | 55.2 | 10 | 20 | — | |
| SALVADORACEAE | Salvadora persica L. | 48.3 | 50 | 27 | 6.7 | |
| FABACEAE | Senna siamea (Lam.) H.S.Irwin & Barneby | — | 20 | — | — | |
| CHENOPODIACEAE | Suaeda monoica Forssk. | 3.5 | — | — | — | |
| MORACEAE | Ziziphus mauritiana Lam. | 24.1 | 10 | 27 | — | |
| MORACEAE | Ziziphus nummularia (Burm. F.) Wight & Arn | 17.2 | 50 | 27 | — | |
| FABACEAE | Acacia nilotica (L.) Delile | RIVERINE | 17.2 | 60 | 40 | — |
| FABACEAE | Dalbergia sissoo Roxb. Ex DC. | 3.5 | 10 | — | — | |
| SALICACEAE | Populus euphratica Oliv. | 6.9 | — | — | — | |
| TAMARICACEAE | Tamarix aphylla (L.) Karsten | 79.3 | 10 | — | — | |
| ACANTHACEAE | Avicennia marina (Forssk.) Vierh. | MANGROVE | — | 40 | — | — |
| RIZOPHORACEAE | Bruguiera gymnorrhiza (L.) Lam | — | — | 7 | — | |
| PINACEAE | Cedrus deodara (D. Don.) G. Don | MOUNTAIN FOREST | 3.5 | — | — | — |
| ADOXACEAE | cf. Viburnum sp. | 3.5 | — | — | — | |
| MORACEAE | Morus macroura Miq. | 3.5 | — | — | — | |
| PINACEAE | Pinus sp. | 27.6 | — | — | — | |
| FAGACEAE | Quercus sp. | 3.5 | — | — | — | |
| MORACEAE | Ficus sp. | ECOLOGICALLY | — | 10 | — | — |
| MYRISTICACEAE | Myristica cf malabarica Lam. | — | — | — | — | |
| OLEACEAE | Olea ferruginea Royle | — | — | — | — | |
| ARECACEAE | Phoenix dactylifera/sylvestris | 24.1 | 10 | — | — | |
| ANACARDACEAE | Pistcia integerrima J. L. Stewart ex Brandis. | 6.9 | — | — | — | |
| APOCYNACEAE | Wrightia tinctoria (Roxb.) R. Br. | — | 10 | — | — | |
* These two species have been included in this category as, although they can grow far form watercourses they tend to thrive in presence of moist soils (personal observation in the field).
Fig 2Pie charts summarising the results of the anthracological analyses.
The charts represent the proportion of different types of vegetation exploited at the 4 study-sites divided by context-type.
Fig 3Pie charts summarising the results of the phytolith analyses.
The charts represent the proportion of different phytoliths groups identified at the 4 study-sites divided by context-type.
Fig 4PCA biplots of multi-chemical analyses.
The plots show the results of PCA analyses on multi-chemical data: a) Harappa, b) Kanmer, c) Shikarpur and d) Alamgirpur.
Fig 5Correspondence analysis biplot.
The plot shows the association between site/context and the type of wood charcoal or phytolith categories that most characterize them.