THEORIES REGARDING THE DECLINE OF INDUS VALLEY CIVILIZATION
Introduction:
Archaeologists, archaeological anthropologists and culture historian’s proposed different theories about the decline of Harappan civilization on the basis of archaeological, literary, geological, fossil and ecological evidence:
Suicidal Weakness Theory:
Marshall and Mackay (1931) proposed this theory. According to them the Harappans lacked flexibility, dynamism and plasticity of mind.
- Firstly the floodwaters of Indus destroyed Mohenjo-Daro city by several times. The inhabitants built the city again and again on the same ruined city. They never shifted from there. This clearly demonstrates that people were lazy and lacking in dynamism.
- Secondly, the Harappans were in contact with the Mesopotamians. Even then they showed no inclination to adopt the technical advances of the Mesopotamians and save themselves from the onslaughts of nature.
- Thirdly the Harappans never used more than 20 symbols in the script even though there was scope to use more than that number of symbols in practice. This shows the poor plasticity of the minds of Harappans.
- Fourthly, the metal blades of Harappans were flat and easily bent. On the other hand the Sumerians used knives and spearheads with midribs. The Harappans devised a saw with undulating teeth useful for carpenters but with that they could not have defended themselves in any crisis. This also speaks of the weakness of the Harappans for tradition; their failure to borrow efficient technology from the Sumerians with whom they maintained contacts for generations together costed them deadly.
Invasion theory:
The authors of invasion theory are Childe (1934) Wheeler (1936) and Burrow (1942). According to them Aryans invaded and destroyed the Indus civilization. Archaeological evidence as well as textual evidence reveals the destruction of cities by the Aryans. The archaeological evidence is in the form of huddled skeletal remains. In the last phase of Mohenjo-Daro several skeletons of men, women and children’s were found scattered in several places some in streets some in staircases, some in comers of rooms, kitchens, bathrooms and burial grounds; and some strewn in streets. All the skeletons show knife-cuts. Anthropologists collected traces of iron from the deep cuts on the skeletons. This proves the massacre of the masses by the Aryan invaders who used iron swords.
The textual evidence clearly reveals the destruction of Harappan city by the Aryans. There are references in Rig-Veda about Indra wiping out the remnants Varackhas at Hariyupiya. Indra destroyed the tribe on the banks of Yavjavati or the modern Ravi River.
This refers to actual fight at Harappa. It is, therefore, tempting to believe that cemetery- H at Harappa, belonging to later day history was that of the Aryans. It is often said that Indra freed rivers which had been brought to a standstill by artificial barriers. The demon, Vritra 46 lay like a great snake across the hill slope. When this demon was smashed by Indra, the stone rolled away like wagon wheels.” This statement can hardly mean anything except the destruction of a dam , for all the figures of speech.
According to many philologists the word ‘Vritra’ means obstacle or barrier. If this view is accepted, the Aryans by destroying the barriers erected across the Indus by the Indus Valley people starved them out. And it is a well-known fact that indigent condition came to prevail in the last phases of the Indus Valley history. .
Prof. Burrow throws light on the way in which the Aryans fought their way into India. The words meaning “ruin55 very often occur in the Rig-Veda. At one place it is written: “Strike down O5 Indra, the hose of sorcerers in the ruined city of Vailastanka,” It is argued that during the time of the Rig-Veda, the Aryans associated the great ruined mounds with the early inhabitants of the area. The same idea appears in the later Vedic texts like the Taitireya Brahamana. “The people to whom these ruined sites belonged O! Agni, having been expelled by thee, have , migrated to another land.55 In a later Vedic text, we read: “ On the Saraswathi there are ruined sites called Naitandhava”. These profuse references tq “ruins while the gods Indra and Agni were helpful in driving away the inhabitants reveal that the Aryans had probably a hand in the final destruction of the Harappan cities.
Some historians do not agree with the Aryan invasion and destruction of Indus cities. First they do be association of the cemetery CH? evidence with the Aryans and then supposed massacre at Mohenjo-Daro. Secondly, there is no evidence to show that Aryans attacked Kalibangan. Kalibangan is close to Harappa. If Kalibangan is close to Harappa, the Aryans would not have spared Kalibangan. Thirdly, post-Harappan built directly on the debris of Harappan cities except at Ropar and Alamgirpur. It is curious to learn that Indra and Agni were responsible for the destruction of the cities but not responsible for the other cities which were already in ruins. Fourthly, most of these cities were in the Saraswathi and Punjab regions. It is stated that the dark coloured inhabitants fled and migrated. This would agree with the archaeological evidence that the cities were deserted and not occupied by the new arrivals. They were regarded as places of evil and the haunt of sorceresses (yantumati) and therefore to be avoided. This would hardly be the attitude of conquering people who had actually destroyed the cities. Fifthly, if we are to accept the theory that these cities were invaded by the Rig-Vedic people there should be substantial remains of at least the metal parts of the chariot in various excavations, and particularly at Harappa and Mohenjo-Daro. This is in sticking contrast to the evidence form Egypt where the new arrivals in their horse-drawn chariots are depicted clearly in relieves and engravings on stone. Finally, could the cities have been deserted owing to natural calamity before the arrival of the Indo-Aryans who associated the ruins of cities with evil, the Aryans would have set fire to the remaining mins and ultimately attributed tire destruction of the cities to Indra and Agni? This would also explain chronological gap i.e., the Harappan culture having declined by 1750 B.C and the Rig-Vedic Aryans being dated to circa 1500 B.C. Thus the evidence does not support Aryan invasion and destruction of Harappan cities.
DERANGEMENT THEORY:
Towards the end of the period the defence of Harappa was further strengthen and one was wholly blocked because of the danger from the West. The Baluchistan villages were first ravaged by horse-riding invaders as revealed in the Zhob area. Afterwards some other people who were using unpainted pottery invaded the Baluchistan villages.
In South Baluchistan people of an intrusive culture founded a settlement at Shahi Thum not far from Surkotada. These people used shaft-hole axe and round copper seals, that is, they possessed superior weapons. In the last phase of the Mohenjo Daro culture, painted pottery and stone vessels resembling those of Baluchistan appear indicating a large influx of Kulli refugees.
In one Harappan cemetery a man with short-headed skull has been found. This speaks of replacement of people by new migrants .At Chanhu-Daro the Harappan people were replaced by squatter who had superior weapons. ‘ The impact of the extraneous factors and how they deranged the Indus Valley cities is revealed by various facts. The !ater-day settlements at Harappa show that they were poor structures. Fine buildings gave place to miserable huts. And the citadel itself was surrounded by poor habitations. The water supply system fell into disuse by this time. Techniques used for the production of pottery changed and the ornaments of later day were of a poor quality. The later day evidence also shows that new peoples had penetrated and in some places brick Kilns were located in the middle of streets. Just at that time large rooms were divided into smaller ones at Mohenjo-Daro and potter’s kilns were built within the city boundaries and also in streets whole the street plan was no longer maintained. Hoards of jewellery were buried. When the end came most of the people from Mohenjo-Daro had fled, but a group of huddled skeletons suggests that a few smugglers were overtaken by the invaders. At this level of Indus Valley ruins, a fine copper axe and an adze blade opposite to that of the axe were found . Also swords with midribs made their appearance. It is revealing to note that similar decline was witnessed in the outlaying area like the Kathiawad peninsula. The ties between Lothal and other major cities weakened and then disappeared. It appears that a large number of tribes found their way into the Indus Valley. The foreign tribes, which attacked the Harappan cities, were not large in number. The invaders took the decline of the main cities to the logical conclusions. Possibly some of these tribes were Indo-Aryans.
Degeneration Theory :
Several archaeologists and culture historians proposed degeneration theory. According to them: The decline of the Harappan civilization is most probably due to the inability of the agriculturists to produce enough to support the growing population. The Harappan fanners lacked knowledge of irrigation as well as soil fertilization. The numerous small settlements that grew beyond their natural limits, over used and mismanaged the natural resources leading to degeneration of the environment.
Natural calamities theory:
Several archaeologists and culture historians attribute the decline of Harappan civilization to natural calamities like floods, change of river course, changes in climate, and depletion of natural resources. In this regard they presented river-vagary theory.
- E.J.H Mackey and Marshall (-1931), presented river-vagaries theory. They suggested that the decline of the Harappan civilization was mainly due to the vagaries of the Indus River.
H.T Lambrick (1953) also presented change of river course theory. According to him the Indus river suddenly changed its course. This led to decrease in water supply and dehydration, disruption s of communications also the end of silting led to decline of agriculture. - Marshall and Mackay (1931) opined that the Indus River flooded several times causing decay to disappearance of civilization.
- Robert L. Raikes (1960) presented tectonic uplift theory. He studied the exposed flood deposits and also flood materials acquired through deep drilling. Earthquakes destroyed the cities, changed river courses and pushed the seaports inland, disrupting the essential trade which led to decline of the civilization. All this holds good to Mohenjo-Daro, but not to any
other place. - George F. Dales (1961) presented ponding theory. In his words, tectonic movement led to the uplift near the Sehwa fault creating a natural dam, which caused the formation of a large pond that drowned Mohenjo-Daro. This is the reason for 10 feet silt and the rebuilding of Mohenjo-Daro seven times.
- A.K. Ghosh (1965:123) proposed climate crisis theory. He said that several places of experienced unfavourable climatic conditions causing the decline of the civilization.
- Several culture historians presented island theory. They argue that Mohenjo-Daro was once an island city. Sand is indicative of flooding .The ruins of brick embankments at this city might be ancient bunds. Therefore, floods caused the destruction of the city.
- Shereen Ratnagar (1984) proposes excess water crisis theory. He said that the water of the Indus was so much in excess that it caused the destruction of civilization.
- Archaeologists proposed silt depositional theory. One group of archaeologists says that the flow of Indus was twice that of Nile and its depositional rate was much higher. In other woods, the Indus river carried heavy silt which benefited farming, but in times of flood it caused havoc leading to the very ruining of the civilization. Another group of archaeologists proposed the same theory in a different way. They said that the heavy silt deposits at the mouth of Indus leading to a rise in the water table was the prime factor in the destruction of Mohenjo-Daro. This could not have been a reason because Mohenjo-Daro was situated far away from the mouth of the Indus.
- Some archaeologists presented salination theory. They viewed that the salination of the soil, encroachment of the Rajasthan desert, and changes in the course of the Indus River destroyed Indus civilization.
- A few archaeologists proposed heavy flooding-drying theory. According to them heavy floods destroyed the main cities. But drying of river destroyed smaller towns and villages. Drying of rivers due to climatic change destroyed Kalibangan on the banks of Ghaggar in Rajasthan.
- Walter Fair Service (1971) and Shereen Ratnagar (1984) B.K. Thapar (1986) and Raflq Maghal (1986) advanced ecological degradational theory. According to Fair Service (1971) growing population in Indus civilization caused ecological degradation. Timber for fuel, clearance for agricultural and pasturages led to declining fertility, making the agricultural economy unsustainable. Overexploitation led to erosion of landscape.
- Shereen Ratnagar (1984) argued that the Indus Valley culture was a Bronze Age culture. It began around’3000 B.C Enormous quantities of wood were needed to make copper and bronze. This would have devastated the -surrounding forests. Even using the simplest techniques would mean burning 700 kgs of wood to produce 20 solid axe-heads. Wood was also needed to produce jewellery made of glazed faience and bake bricks, pottery and stoneware. The Harappan needed timber to make boats and ships. Thus the depletion of forests and erosion of soil were considered as causes of decline of Indus civilization.
B.K Thapar (1984) and Rafiq Maghal (1984) also attribute the decline of Indus civilization to ecological factors such as behaviour of rivers, climate and natural resources. Acceding to them, the gradual drying up of the Ghaggar-Hakran river systems, the destruction of forest and intensive grazing in the Himalayan foothills resulted in erosion and the sedimentation of water channels. The consequence was ruin of Indus civilization.
According to anthropologists, the unburied skeletons belong to different levels, hence to different periods. Anthropologists applied new methods of analysis to these skeletons. The results show that malaria, rather than violence was the caus of death. That means malaria wiped out the people and therefore the civilization of Indus.
Conclusion:
An analysis of the factors leading to the disappearance of Harappan civilization show that probably the inherent weaknesses of the Harappans and the havoc wrought by natural forces were the principal reasons for the disappearance. To some extent, Indo-Aryans, and to a greater extent a number of extraneous factors gave the Finishing touches to the demise of the
Indus culture. Even then, the various networks of system and institutions belonging to the Harappans could not have disappeared in some mysterious and romantic manner. If this had been the case, it would be difficult for us to explain the glaring elements that have filtered into later Indian society.