Hominin migration in South Asia and raw material sources in the Banas-Berach basin

Quaternary International 269 (2012) 59e67

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Quaternary International journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/quaint

Hominin migration in South Asia and raw material sources in the Banas-Berach basin Teresa P. Raczek* University of Pennsylvania, Department of Anthropology, 3260 South Street, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA

a r t i c l e i n f o

a b s t r a c t

Article history: Available online 9 August 2011

Previous research conducted by V.N. Misra in the Berach River basin and its tributaries identified dozens of Early and Middle Paleolithic sites. Although southeastern Rajasthan is non-coastal and outside of the Purana-Gondwana basin zones described by Korisettar, sufficient resources in the form of water, food, and stone made the region habitable in the Pleistocene. Misra’s groundbreaking survey indicated that several non-riverine raw materials were used by hominins, but no evidence had been produced outside of the immediate vicinity of the rivers to demonstrate pursuit of stone material. Mobility restricted to riverine zones would present a challenge to migration between various ecological zones and ultimately to populating the subcontinent. This paper presents the results of a recent survey conducted directly to the south of Misra’s study and identifies an open air site situated on a raw material source. This find upholds the claim for non-riverine Pleistocene habitation by hominins in southeastern Rajasthan and the ability of hominins to migrate between multiple ecological zones. Ó 2011 Elsevier Ltd and INQUA.

1. Introduction Several decades of Paleolithic research in South Asia have produced a number of important studies that point to the prolonged presence of hominins in the region (Korisettar, 2002; Pal, 2002; James and Petraglia, 2005). As a result, South Asia now figures prominently in the story of early global human migration (James and Petraglia, 2005). In his model of trans-subcontinental migration, Korisettar argues that fourteen Purana-Gondwana Basins in South Asia provided ecosystems which were favorable to hominin adaptation (Korisettar, 2007). According to the conditions that he outlines, hominins traversed through “peripheral” zones which acted as corridors between these core Basin areas. Southeastern Rajasthan is one region that likely falls into the “peripheral” category, which means that it lies just outside of a core area of hominin occupation (Proterozoic Vindhyan/Vindhyachal Basin). As such, it may have served as a corridor that fostered migration to and from other core areas. In order for the area to serve as a corridor, sufficient resources in the form of water, food, and stone would have to be present. Towards this end, this study examined stone raw material sources located in southeastern Rajasthan. * Present address: Department of Geography and Anthropology, Social Sciences Bldg #22, Rm 4042, Kennesaw State University, 1000 Chastain Road, MD 2203, Kennesaw, GA 30144, USA. E-mail address: [email protected]. 1040-6182/$ e see front matter Ó 2011 Elsevier Ltd and INQUA. doi:10.1016/j.quaint.2011.07.037

Two main regions in Rajasthan have been well studied for the Paleolithic: the Thar Desert and the Berach River basin. This study focuses on the latter area where Misra’s notable survey of the Berach River and related tributaries found several Acheulian handaxes and Levallois cores among other Early and Middle Paleolithic artifacts (Misra, 1967). However, as the project focused on the riverbed and associated nullas, it did not identify any Paleolithic sites beyond these confines. In his study, Misra noted that several artifacts were made from raw materials not immediately available in the riverbed, which implies that hominins must have traversed across the region, utilizing various raw material sites to produce flakes and tools. As did Misra, many early Paleolithic researchers emphasized riverbed zones since riverbed surveys are an efficient means of identifying and locating evidence of past human and hominin activity as well as discerning faunal profiles. While fruitful, such research also has drawbacks most notably the problem of secondary deposition (Jacobson, 1975; Paddayya, 1978; James and Petraglia, 2005, pp. S4). Research at open-air sites like those found on hilltops in nearby Eastern Malwa (Jacobson, 1975), and those found in the Rohri and Ongar Hills (Allchin, 1976; Biagi and Cremaschi, 1988; Negrino and Kazi, 1996; Biagi, 2005, 2006), as well as many throughout Sindh has countered some of these problems and has also proven to be quite fruitful, especially for the pursuit of Acheulian technology. Research at quarry sites has also provided rich data (Biagi et al., 1996; Paddayya et al., 2000; Paddayya, 2007).

60

T.P. Raczek / Quaternary International 269 (2012) 59e67

Research on open-air sites has been extremely productive for the documentation of global hominin behavior (Dennell et al., 1992; Gilead and Bar Yosef, 1993). While there are drawbacks to this type of research, namely, challenges to accurate dating and the deposition of multiple chronological contexts into a single surface layer (Villa, 1982; Olszewski et al., 2005; Chiotti et al., 2007), the benefits are crucial for identifying migration patterns. In addition, assemblages collected from open-air sites tend to be more homogenous (i.e. have less variation within the assemblage) than those collected from rock shelters and caves (Rolland and Dibble, 1990). One of the main challenges faced by hominins in the occupation of non-riverine contexts was the pursuit of water. Studies of open air sites such as that conducted by Jacobson to the southeast of Rajasthan (Jacobson, 1970, 1975, 1980, 1985) have demonstrated that hominins were capable of occupying areas away from riverine environments in South Asia. Such finds in southeastern Rajasthan would add support to the idea that this area was a corridor for population dispersal throughout the subcontinent. A number of issues present challenges for identifying migration routes and patterns of hominins in South Asia. Although thousands of Acheulian handaxes have been found in open air sites in South Asia, the easternmost region in which this type of artifact is found (Pappu, 2001), few of these finds have been securely dated. Several dates precede the Middle Pleistocene (Gaillard et al., 2010a, 2010b; Pappu et al., 2011), but few are confirmed (Chauhan, 2010). Lack of hominin fossil evidence outside of the Narmada specimen (Sonakia, 1985) has challenged archaeologists to reconstruct past behavior such as migration patterns, solely on artifactual evidence. In addition, many surface sites, including those in Rajasthan, were repeatedly re-occupied and have cultural material that dates to multiple phases of both the Pleistocene and Holocene (Hooja, 1988). Many of these sites have only been identified through survey, which presents additional challenges for dating. Identifying raw material sources and quarries is one way to begin mapping out routes of hominin movement. Although hominins likely travelled with a “lithic tool kit” (Kuhn, 1994), raw material procurement was likely embedded in their regular movements (Binford, 1979). Studies in Africa, Europe, and Central Asia indicate that most Early and Middle Pleistocene hominids rarely transported raw materials over 5 km (Dennell, 2007). Thus, the identification of suitable local materials in a region would lend support to the idea that the region had the necessary prerequisites for sustaining hominin occupations. As several researchers have noted, raw material acquisition strategies and mobility affect lithic production and therefore the composition of artifact assemblages at any given site (Geneste, 1985; Dibble, 1991; Marks et al., 1991). Thus, attention to raw material use across sites can also aide in the pursuit of the study of mobility and migration. 2. Regional setting The Mewar Plain, sometimes called the Eastern Plains or the Banas-Berach basin, is an alluvial plain comprised mainly of preCambrian rocks and with a gentle slope to the north/northeast (Roy and Jakhar, 2002). Most of the area lies approximately at sea level, although intermittent hills comprised of granites, schist and dolomitic rocks can rise as much as 1000 m higher and therefore provide excellent unimpeded views of the surrounding area in all directions. The Aravalli mountain chain runs roughly northwestesoutheast on the western edge of the plain. The Aravallis, comprised of Proterozoic rocks on top of Archaean rocks, lie between fault lines and were created through uplift activity (Roy and Jakhar, 2002). The Mewar plain is bounded on the eastside by the Vindhyan supercomplex, a group of hills that run roughly parallel to the Aravallis, approximately southwest to

northeast. The Deccan Plateau, a massive geological formation comprised largely of basalt and dark basaltic soils, rises from the south to meet the Mewar plain. The region is crisscrossed by a network of rivers and tributaries. The major rivers are the Kothari, the Banas, and the Berach (which flows into the Chambal), which originate in the Aravallis. The subcontinent’s watershed line is located in the Aravalli Mountains. As a result, all of the rivers in this region flow in a generally eastern direction into the Bay of Bengal on the eastern part of the Indian subcontinent. The Aravallis act as a block to the monsoons, holding the rains back from the areas immediately north and west; they cause the aridity of the Thar Desert that lies to the north. Climate studies indicate that seasonal monsoons were present by the Quaternary. Such annual rainfall patterns may have influenced hominin movement, dispersal, and aggregation (Paddayya, 1982). The most common kinds of knappable stone available in southeastern Rajasthan include quartz, chert (including brecciated chert and conglomerate comprised of chert, quartz and other minerals), and quartzite. Quartz is the most abundant of these but occurs in small pieces. Chalcedony forms naturally in the basalt of the Deccan trap, a geological formation to the south of this region. The northernmost extant of the basalt can be found on both sides of the border between Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh. The Mewar Plain is thought to have been first inhabited during the Middle Paleolithic. Paleolithic implements have been found in the Berach Basin (Kumar 1963e64; Misra, 1967, 1968), near Chitorgarh (Indian Archaeology, a Review IAR, 1953e54; IAR, 1954e55; IAR, 1955e56; IAR, 1956e57; IAR, 1957e58a; IAR, 1957e58b; IAR, 1958e59; IAR, 1959e60; IAR, 1960e61; IAR, 1961e2; IAR, 1962e63a; IAR, 1963e64a; IAR, 1982e83c), and near the border of Madhya Pradesh (IAR, 1963e64b; IAR, 1981e82c; IAR, 1984e85b; IAR, 1984e85c). Middle Paleolithic sites have been found in other areas as well, including western Rajasthan (IAR, 1976e77; IAR, 1977e78a; IAR, 1977e78b; IAR, 1978e79; Allchin, 1980; IAR, 1980e81; IAR, 1981e82a; IAR, 1981e82b; IAR, 1982e83a; IAR, 1982e83b; IAR, 1982e83d; IAR, 1983e84b; IAR, 1983e84a; IAR, 1984e85a; IAR, 1989e90) and northern Rajasthan (IAR, 1962e63b; Dikshit, 1966e68; Allchin and Goudie, 1973; IAR, 1981e82d; IAR, 1985e86; IAR, 1987e88). Although the first occupations of the Mewar Plain occurred in the Pleistocene, the population increased in the early Holocene (Misra, 2002). In addition, hundreds of microlithic sites have been located in Rajasthan through survey (Misra, 1967; Hooja, 1988). Although these sites are difficult to date on the surface, many have been classified as Mesolithic (generally dated from 5500 to 3000 BC in this region, based on radiocarbon dates from Bagor) and two have been excavated: Bagor and Tilwara (IAR, 1967e68; Misra, 1971a,b, 1973, 1982; Lukacs et al., 1982). It is certainly possible that many of these sites were occupied both earlier and later than the Mesolithic (Hooja, 1988). The Upper or Late Paleolithic has been difficult to identify in Rajasthan since most researchers have relied on surface surveys which are difficult to date. Misra’s survey focused on the Berach River and three of its tributaries: the Wagan, the Gambhiri, and the Kadmali. In addition to various flakes and simple cores, Misra found several Levallois cores and Acheulian Handaxes. He divides his finds into “industries” named after the river or tributary in which they were found. Some of these artifacts were found in the riverbed and others showed significant rolling, indicating that they were not recovered from intact contexts. However, he describes others as being “virtually in mint condition” (Misra, 1967, pp. 10). As a result, the survey yielded both primary and secondary deposits of artifacts from multiple time periods that Misra identifies as being associated with Early, Middle, and Late Stone Ages. He identifies artifacts made from quartzite, cherty quartzite, sandstone, chert, and chalcedony. As all of these materials are not readily available in the riverbed, it is

T.P. Raczek / Quaternary International 269 (2012) 59e67

suggested here that hominins would have had to leave the riverine environment in order to procure some of these materials. The sites of the Berach River basin fall between two main clusters of sites in the northwestern region of South Asia: sites such as those of the Didwana complex, the Luni Valley complex, Budha Pushkar and Hokra in the Thar Desert and sites clustered in Madhya Pradesh, such as Bhimbetka, Adamgarh, and Samnapur. Therefore southeastern Rajasthan is of interest when considering paths of movement. Although the mid-Pleistocene occupations in the Thar Desert may have been contemporary with those found in the Berach survey, it has been hypothesized that the populations were isolated due to the barrier of the Thar Desert (James and Petraglia, 2005, pp. S6). However, no such barrier existed between the Berach and the sites of Madhya Pradesh. In order to demonstrate that these areas may have been connected, sufficient stone and water must be identified. 3. Materials and methods The survey conducted in this study was initially developed to identify raw material sources used in the production of lithics at the sites of Gilund (c. 3000e1700 BC) and Bagor (c. 5500 BCeAD 200). While most lithics at these sites were made of locally acquired quartz and quartzite, many were comprised of a variety of cherts and chalcedonies. Khanna (1992) previously suggested that lithics may have been brought in from the Deccan Plateau, just south of the research area. Although the goal of the study was to illuminate raw material procurement patterns among pastoralists and farmers of the mid- to late Holocene, it quickly became apparent that the results were significant for understanding the Paleolithic occupation of the area. The survey was conducted in this region as potential sources had been identified in this area by the Geological Survey of India’s District Resource Map I (Geology and Minerals) for Rajsamand and Bhilwara Districts and maps found in Roy and Jakhar (2002) and Gupta et al. (1997). Maps published by the Survey of India provided topographical and other geographical information. United States Army map for India NG43-14 was also used. Geologists agree that chert can be found in scattered deposits in this region. Twelve areas were positively identified as chert sources based on the geological maps and consultations. These areas included (in alphabetical order): Bhanwar Mata, Berugati, Bhagwanpura, Chitauriya, Kajucheriya, Nathdwara, Semara, Semarthali; and various hills in the Jahazpur Range including Amargala, Asouli, an area near Chanpura mine, and Jikri. Several additional areas were identified as potential chert sources. Each area was field checked in order to assess whether chert and chalcedony were present and if it had been used as a quarry for the production of lithic tools. The field survey consisted of three parts. First, an informal walk and quick assessment of the area was undertaken in order to determine whether or not any stone raw materials or artifacts were visible and if so, where they were generally concentrated. Second, all areas with visible raw materials or artifacts were divided into transects spaced either 10 or 20 m apart, depending on the size of the area. Each transect was walked and the presence and density of raw materials and artifacts was noted. Finally, a series of targeted 1
1 m collection units was set up at each locale in order to collect raw material samples and artifacts. The number and placement of units varied between locales and was determined based on the extent and density of artifacts. In addition to artifacts collected within the 1
1 m units, significant artifacts encountered while walking transects were collected. Raw material samples were collected at each source of chert and chalcedony. All collected materials are now housed at Deccan College Postgraduate and Research Institute in Pune.

61

This study employed a modified version of Misra’s typology for artifact analysis (Misra, 1967, 1973). The definition of blades, burins, and microburins has been adapted to reflect current trends in lithic analysis. For example, a piece was identified as a blade if it had parallel sides (or nearly parallel sides in the case of quartz, which frequently breaks with imperfect edges), even if the length was not twice the width. Under Misra’s typology, artifacts had to meet both criteria in order to qualify as a blade. Several non-metric and metric attributes were recorded individually for complete and proximal flakes and blades including descriptions of platforms, dorsal ridges, backing, truncation, retouch, and raw material. With the exception of metric measurements, complete data also was collected for proximal pieces of artifacts as well as the medial and distal parts of tools, backed pieces, truncated pieces, and retouched pieces. All other medial and distal artifacts were separated by raw material, then counted and weighed as a group for each collection unit. Raw material and a number of raw material attributes were recorded for lithics and raw material samples from the survey sites. 4. Results The raw material survey identified several chert deposits and one chalcedony deposit (see Fig. 1 and Table 1) (Raczek, unpublished). Bhagwanpura (District Udaipur) has bed deposits of limestone and highly diaphanous black chert (Kumar and Srivastava, 1992). A number of microliths were found here as well as small parallel-sided blade cores (length: 16.2 mme31.7 mm), small blades (length: 15.29 mme51.29 mm), and other tools including scrapers, an awl, and a burin spall. While most of these were made of the Bhagwanpura black chert, some were made of non-local light brown and red cherts. Chitoriya (District Udaipur) has bed deposits of red and brown chert along with a quartz outcrop. An Early Historic settlement was built on one part of this area which is located approximately 10 km west of Semara. Microlithic tools, parallel-sided blade cores (length: 20.07 mme39.7 mm) and flake cores (length: 20.07 mme29.75 mm), small flakes (length: 7.02 mme27.35 mm), and small blades (length: 24.62 mme38.8 mm) were all found, mostly made of the local red and brown chert although artifacts made of quartz and Bhagwanpura black chert were also found. No tools were found. Berugati (District Udaipur) is located near Chitoriya and is comprised of a small hill range with light brown brecciated chertbeds. Pink, red, and cream deposits were also identified as well as a small deposit of blue-black chert boulders near the southern end of the hill. A few dense lithic scatters, some of which had considerable evidence of blade manufacture, were noted. Although flakes (length: 4.92 mme54.26), flake cores (length: 10.43 mme32.71 mm), blades (length: 9.63 mme48.45 mm), and blade cores (length: 12.98 mme22.1 mm) are common at this site, no microlithic tools were observed. Several other tools were identified including a Levallois point, burins, burin spalls, a drill, a notchon-flake, 31 scrapers (2 of these were fragments, and 2 were made on burins), and 7 awls. The high number of awls and scrapers is unusual and may indicate the performance of specific activities at this site. At all of these sites, the chert beds are weathered and naturally broken boulders, cobbles, and pebbles are present. The density of artifacts in 1
1 m units collected at these sites ranges from 0 to 19, with Berugati then Bhagwanpura showing the highest density of artifacts. Finally, the site of Semara (N24 260 , E74 420 ) sits on a low hill that rises behind the modern village of Semara (Fig. 2). The site is located on the southern-most edge of a 7 km long chain of hills that run NortheSouth. It has been identified in the geological literature as having a non-fossiliferous chert bed. The hill is comprised of semi-angular boulders (approximately 1e2 m in size) and small round cobbles and pebbles. The chertbed lies about halfway up the

62

T.P. Raczek / Quaternary International 269 (2012) 59e67

Fig. 1. Location of raw material sources and lithic scatters. Area of Misra’s original survey is marked as a box.

hill and varies from approximately 1e3 m in thickness; it is only present irregularly (Fig. 3). The chert is mostly in boulder form, although some non-cortical nodules also exist. Red and light brown chert are sometimes found together. In a separate location lies clear and smoky chalcedony along with bluish grey chert. Most artifacts are located at the top of the hill, although some can be found in the vicinity of the chert below. In all, four chert sources and one chalcedony source were identified in this area. In addition to these chert deposits, quartz was found to be abundantly available throughout the region. It should be noted that these deposits were all very small and highly localized, but would have sufficed for embedded procurement (Binford, 1979). The geological maps of the region are not complete for chert and as a result, it is possible that additional

chert and chalcedony deposits exist in the region, but were undetected during field survey. Similarly, it has been shown that small sources can be easily depleted and rendered invisible in modern contexts, even if they were heavily used in the Paleolithic (Dibble, 1991). The artifacts at Semara are of significance to this study. In all, twenty transects were walked and artifacts were collected in 54 units. On the eastern end of the hill, small blades (length: 21.99 mme59.28 mm) and flakes (length: 12.12 mme38.45 mm) were identified in addition to one Levallois flake core, three unidirectional flake cores, and one simple (non-fluted) blade core. The tools included one biface and six scrapers (three end, two side, and one double). The densest area of artifacts (1e6 artifacts per m2)

T.P. Raczek / Quaternary International 269 (2012) 59e67

63

Table 1 Artifacts and raw materials identified at survey sites. Site

Raw Materials Present

Number of 1
1 m units collected

Artifacts present

Bhagwanpura

Black chert

25

Chitoriya

Red chert Brown chert

40

Berugati

Pink chert (2 shades) Red chert (2 shades) Brown chert Grey chert Cream chert Chert of mixed colors

25

Semara

Red chert (3 shades) Brown chert (2 shades) Grey chert Cream chert Chert of mixed colors Clear chalcedony Smoky chalcedony

54

Blades: 14 complete 15 proximal 26 medial 36 distal Flakes: 32 complete 20 proximal 32 medial 46 distal Cores: 10 complete parallel-blade 6 unidirectional flake 1 multi-directional flake 1 bidirectional flake 1 parallel-blade fragments 1 unidirectional flake fragment Tools: 3 geometrics 1 microburin 1 burin spall 20 scrapers 1 awl Blades: 3 complete 1 proximal 7 distal Flakes: 11 complete 3 distal Cores: 7 complete parallel-blade 1 complete bidirectional flake, 1 complete multi-directional flake Blades: 30 complete 20 proximal 26 medial 63 distal Flakes: 160 complete 44 proximal 61 medial 128 distal Cores: 5 complete parallel-blade 5 complete unidirectional flake 1 complete bidirectional flake 1 complete multi-directional flake 2 unidirectional flake fragments 3 multi-directional flake fragments Tools: 4 burins 1 burin spall 1 drill 1 notch-on-flake 27 complete scrapers 2 scraper fragments 2 burin-scrapers 7 awls 1 Levallois point Blades: 26 complete 3 proximal 4 medial 23 distal Flakes: 33 complete 1 proximal 11 medial 41 distal Cores: 1 Acheulian handaxe 3 Levallois 4 unidirectional flake 1 multidirectional flake 3 parallel blade 1 simple blade 1 unidirectional flake core fragment Tools: 1 Burin 1 Biface 7 scrapers

64

T.P. Raczek / Quaternary International 269 (2012) 59e67

Fig. 2. Hill and vista from Semara.

Fig. 3. Chert bed at Semara.

T.P. Raczek / Quaternary International 269 (2012) 59e67

was located on the western end of the hill. In that area, several flakes (length: 11.15 mme46.88 mm) and small blades (length: 13.00 mme46.87 mm) and three parallel-sided blade cores (length: 21.1 mme55.58 mm) were identified. In addition, two unidirectional (one fragmented) and one multi-directional flake core, and two Levallois flake cores were identified in addition to a burin, a convex side scraper, and an Acheulian handaxe (length: 109.48 mm, width: 50.04 mm, thickness: 28.74 mm) (Fig. 4a and b). The westernmost edge of the hilltop had very low to minimal artifact density and no evidence of small blade manufacture. Artifacts collected on the slope show considerable edge damage, presumably from rolling down-slope. Study of the Acheulian handaxe indicates that the material was procured from one of several hilltops located within a few kilometers. The three Levallois cores were made of brown and reddishbrown chert such as that found on the Semara hilltop. They do not appear to have been imported to this site. The other artifacts such as scrapers, bifaces, flakes, and simple flake cores, cannot be securely dated to the Paleolithic since they are non-descript enough to have been produced in later time periods. However, blade and microlith technology begins at about 35 ka in South Asia (Petraglia et al., 2009) and scrapers and bifaces are extremely rare in Holocene collections from this region. In sum, this survey identified several raw material sources that were available for hominins in addition to artifacts like Acheulian handaxes and Levallois cores on a hilltop removed from local waterways. Some of these items were made of materials not found in the immediate vicinity and may have been transported several kilometers. 5. Discussion The identification of a possible open air site at Semara is a unique contribution to the study of the Paleolithic in southeastern Rajasthan. It confirms the possibility that the region served as a corridor for movement between various Purana-Gondwana Basins. It also provides evidence of hominin activity outside of riverine environments and suggests that hominins ventured into

65

a variety of environmental contexts in search of stone and possibly for other reasons including procuring food resources. The low hilltops where stone was available may have also provided excellent vistas for surveying the surrounding area. From such a vantage point game, predators, and other hominins could be observed. The main drawback to these stone sources is their distance from river water. Misra writes: “The Late Stone Age culture is very widely spread in the Berach basin. In fact, microlithic assemblages are found on almost every rock outcrop where chert, cherty quartizite or quartz was available for making tools.Many of these sites are several kilometers away from perennial sources of water, and so could have been used as home sites or even as factory sites only seasonally” (Misra, 1967, pp. 204). The constraints that Misra discusses here also apply to hominins in the Pleistocene. The distance between raw material and water, thus posed a challenge in some cases, such as at the site of Semara. However, during the monsoon season, and potentially at other times of the year, intermittent shallow basins may have collected sufficient water to allow for consistent mobility beyond a few hours journey away from the river. Misra’s studies were limited to riverine contexts with the exception of a single Acheulian handaxe found at the site of Gadriawas, which was also identified as a “protohistoric site” dated to the first few millennia BC. Regarding the “Berach industry” and the find at Gadriawas, Misra wrote: “The tools from all the localities except Gadriawas are from the river, found either in situ in cliff sections or loose in the bed. They are labeled after the nearest village where they were found. The only specimen from Gadriawas was found on the surface of a protohistoric habitation mound near the village about three kilometers away from the river. The specimen is a small, fully worked Acheulian handaxe in perfectly fresh condition (Figs. 3 and 6), showing sharp contrast to the heavily rolled state and crude technique of the tools found in the river at adjacent sites” (Misra, 1967, pp. 22).

Fig. 4. a. Acheulian handaxe from Semara, front. b. Acheulian handaxe from Semara, back.

66

T.P. Raczek / Quaternary International 269 (2012) 59e67

This single find presents a thorny problem for securely dating surface finds of Acheulian handaxes. While Misra suggests the residents of Gadriawas brought it from the riverbed to the site as a manuport, it is certainly possible that it was manufactured by site residents. The manufacture of such style handaxes at such a late date would be highly unusual and uncharacteristic of the small blades, microliths, and small simple flakes that were preferred at both temporary occupations and permanent settlements in the region at that time (see for example the collections in Raczek, unpublished). Beyond this unique find, problems remain with dating surface finds. The hilltops of this region have been repeatedly reused throughout time and as the finds of microlith industry remains, pottery, and plastics indicate, it is difficult to correctly place these finds within their correct time period. Such problems can be overcome with excavation. 6. Conclusions The results of the survey presented here suggest that some of the Paleolithic artifacts found in southeastern Rajasthan during Misra’s 1967 survey, may have been produced using raw materials available in the region away from riverine contexts. Although the context at Semara is not dated, the collection resembles Late Acheulian technology as well as technology from later time periods. The hilltop was likely used over multiple time periods. The presence of Late Acheulian technology at Semara demonstrates that some hominins ventured away from riverine areas and utilized hilltops, perhaps in part because they offered adequate stone and vistas of surrounding areas. Moreover, these early occupants carried worked lithics with them over several kilometers. The ability to traverse multiple ecological zones lends support to the idea that hominins were capable of migrating across South Asia. Acknowledgements I would like to thank the Archaeological Survey of India for granting me permission to conduct this research. I am also grateful to the William J. Fulbright foundation for providing funding and the American Institute for Indian Studies for assistance with logistics. Julie Hanlon, Randy Law, and Prabodh Shirvalkar were instrumental in the research process. Several geologists kindly offered advice on identifying raw material sources including Dr. R.A. Sharma, Senior Geologist at the Geological Survey of India, Rajasthan; Dr. Chauhan at the Department of Geology, Udaipur (an independent university); and Dr. G.L. Vyas, the Director of the Rajasthan Department of Mines and Geology, Udaipur. Two anonymous reviewers provided very helpful critique and advice. Finally, many thanks go to Parth Chauhan and Rajeev Patnaik for inviting me to participate in this volume. Any weaknesses and oversights remain mine alone. References Allchin, B., 1976. Palaeolithic sites in the Plain of Sind and their geographical implication. Geographical Journal 142 (3), 471e489. Allchin, B., 1980. Observations on the nature and development of Middle and Upper Palaeolithic industries in the Thar desert during the last Pleistocene humid phase. Man and Environment 4, 13e18. Allchin, B., Goudie, A., 1973. Pushkar: prehistory and climatic change in western India. World Archaeology 5 (3), 358e368. Biagi, P., 2005. Ongar revisited. Sindhological Studies 21 (1e2), 1e21. Biagi, P., 2006. The Levalloisian assemblages of Sindh (Pakistan) and their importance in the Middle Palaeolithic of the Indian subcontinent. In: Kroeper, K., Chlodnicki, M., Kobusiewicz, M. (Eds.), Archaeology of Early Northeastern Africa. Poznan Archaeological Museum, Poznan, pp. 1005e1017. Biagi, P., Cremaschi, M., 1988. The early Palaeolithic sites of the Rohri hills (Sind, Pakistan) and their environmental significance. World Archaeology 19 (3), 421e433.

Biagi, P., Kazi, M.M., Negrino, F., 1996. An Acheulian workshop at Ziarat Pir Shaban on the Rohri hills (Sindh, Pakistan). South Asian Studies 12, 49e62. Binford, L.R., 1979. Organization and formation processes: looking at curated technologies. Journal of Anthropological Research 35, 255e273. Chauhan, P., 2010. Comment on “Lower and Early Middle Pleistocene Acheulian in the Indian sub-continent” by Gaillard et al. (2009) (Quaternary International). Quaternary International 223e224, 248e259. Chiotti, L., Olszewski, D.I., Dibble, H.L., McPherron, S.P., Schurmans, U., Smith, J.R., 2007. Paleolithic Abydos reconstructing individual behaviors across the high desert landscape. In: Hawass, Z., Richard, J. (Eds.), The Archaeology and Art of Ancient Egypt: Essays in Honor of David B. O’Connor. Supreme Council of Antiquities Press, Cairo, pp. 169e184. Dennell, R., 2007. “Resource-rich, stone-poor”: early hominin land use in large river systems of northern India and Pakistan. In: Petraglia, M.D., Allchin, B. (Eds.), The Evolution and History of Human Populations in South Asia: Inter-disciplinary Studies in Archaeology, Biological Anthropology, Linguistics, and Genetics. Springer, Dordrecht, pp. 41e68. Dennell, R.W., Rendell, H.M., Halim, M., Moth, E., 1992. A 45,000-year-old open air Paleolithic site at Riwat, northern Pakistan. Journal of Field Archaeology 19, 17e33. Dibble, H.L., 1991. Local raw material exploitation and its effects on Lower and Middle Paleolithic assemblage variability. In: Montet-White, A., Holden, S. (Eds.), Raw Material Economies among Prehistoric Hunter-Gatherers. University of Kansas Publications, Lawrence, pp. 33e48. Dikshit, K.N., 1966e68. A note on a Palaeolithic site at Bairat, in Rajasthan. The Researcher 7-9, 26e30. Gaillard, C., Mishra, S., Singh, M., Deo, S., Abbas, R., 2010a. Lower and early middle Pleistocene Acheulian in the Indian subcontinent. Quaternary International 223e224, 234e241. Gaillard, C., Mishra, S., Singh, M., Deo, S., Abbas, R., 2010b. Reply to: “Comment on ‘Lower and early middle Pleistocene Acheulian in the Indian sub-continent’” by P. Chauhan. Quaternary International 223e224, 260e264. Geneste, J.-M., 1985. Analyse Lithique d’Industries Moustériennes du Périgord: Une Approche Technologique du Comportement des Groupes Humains au Paléolithique Moyen. Université de Bordeaux I, Bordeaux. Gilead, I., Bar Yosef, O., 1993. Early Upper Paleolithic sites in the Qadesh Barnea area, NE Sinai. Journal of Field Archaeology 20 (3), 265e280. Gupta, S.N., Arora, Y.K., Mathur, R.K., Iqbaluddin, Prasad, B., Sahai, T.N., Sharma, S.B., 1997. The Precambrian Geology of the Aravalli Region, Southern Rajasthan, and Northeast Gujarat. Government of India, Jaipur. Hooja, R., 1988. The Ahar Culture and Beyond: Settlements and Frontiers of ‘Mesolithic’ and Early Agricultural Sites in South-Eastern Rajasthan, c. 3rd-2nd Millennia B.C. Oxford. British Archaeological Reports. Indian Archaeology, a Review. Important discoveries e Stone implements from river-beds near Chitorgarh, 1953e54. Archaeological Survey of India, New Delhi, pp. 37. Indian Archaeology, a Review. Important discoveries e Palaeolithic sites in Rajasthan, 1954e55. Archaeological Survey of India, New Delhi, pp. 58. Indian Archaeology, a Review. Other important discoveries e Palaeolithic sites in southern Rajasthan, 1955e56. Archaeological Survey of India, New Delhi. pp. 68. Indian Archaeology, a Review. Explorations in Rajasthan and Malwa, 1956e57. Archaeological Survey of India, New Delhi, pp. 5e11. Indian Archaeology, a Review. Further exploration in District Chitorgarh, 1957e58a. Archaeological Survey of India, New Delhi, pp. 45e46. Indian Archaeology, a Review. Microlithic site, District Kotah, 1957-58b. Archaeological Survey of India, New Delhi, pp. 69. Indian Archaeology, a Review. Exploration in Districts Ajmer, Barmer, Bhilwara, Chitorgarh, Jodhpur, Marwar and Tonk, 1958e59. Archaeological Survey of India, New Delhi, pp. 42e45. Indian Archaeology, a Review. Exploration in Districts Bhilwara, Chitorgarh, Jodhpur, Pali and Udaipur, 1959e60. Archaeological Survey of India, New Delhi, pp. 39e40. Indian Archaeology, a Review. Exploration in Districts Ajmer, Barmer, Bhilwara, Chitorgarh, Pali and Udaipur, 1960-61. Archaeological Survey of India, New Delhi, pp. 30e31. Indian Archaeology, a Review. Exploration in District Chitorgarh, 1961e2. Archaeological Survey of India, New Delhi, pp. 38. Indian Archaeology, a Review. Exploration in District Chitorgarh and Udaipur, 1962e63a. Archaeological Survey of India, New Delhi, pp. 18e19. Indian Archaeology, a Review. Rock-shelters and Early Stone Age Tools, Bairat, District Jaipur, 1962e63b. Archaeological Survey of India, New Delhi, pp. 70. Indian Archaeology, a Review. Exploration in District Chitorgarh, 1963e64a. Archaeological Survey of India, New Delhi, pp. 29e30. Indian Archaeology, a Review. Middle Stone Age Tools, Patan, District Jhalawar, 1963e64b. Archaeological Survey of India, New Delhi, pp. 91. Indian Archaeology, a Review. Excavations at Tilwara, 1967e68. Archaeological Survey of India, New Delhi, pp. 39e41. Indian Archaeology, a Review. Exploration in District Jodhpur, 1976e77. Archaeological Survey of India, New Delhi, pp. 46. Indian Archaeology, a Review. Exploration in Districts Ajmer, Barmer, Jalor, Jodhpur, Nagaur and Pali, 1977e78a. Archaeological Survey of India, New Delhi, pp. 45e46. Indian Archaeology, a Review. Middle Palaeolithic tools, Pokaran, District Jaisalmer, 1977e78b. Archaeological Survey of India, New Delhi, pp. 82.

T.P. Raczek / Quaternary International 269 (2012) 59e67 Indian Archaeology, a Review. Exploration in District Nagaur, 1978e79. Archaeological Survey of India, New Delhi, pp. 31. Indian Archaeology, a Review. Exploration and Excavation in District Nagaur, 1980e81. Archaeological Survey of India, New Delhi, pp. 57e63. Indian Archaeology, a Review. Excavation at Didwana, District Nagaur, 1981e82a. Archaeological Survey of India, New Delhi, pp. 56e58. Indian Archaeology, a Review. Excavation at Singi-Talav, District Nagaur, 1981e82b. Archaeological Survey of India, New Delhi, pp. 58e61. Indian Archaeology, a Review. Exploration at Kishan Bilas and Kapildhara, District Kota, 1981e82c. Archaeological Survey of India, New Delhi, pp. 56. Indian Archaeology, a Review. Lower Palaeolithic Tools, Garh (Neelkanth), District Alwar, 1981e82d. Archaeological Survey of India, New Delhi. Indian Archaeology, a Review. Excavation at Didwana, District Nagaur, 1982e83a. Archaeological Survey of India, New Delhi, pp. 68e9. Indian Archaeology, a Review. Excavation at Singi-Talav, District Nagaur, 1982e83b. Archaeological Survey of India, New Delhi, pp. 69. Indian Archaeology, a Review. Exploration in District Chittaurgarh, 1982e83c. Archaeological Survey of India, New Delhi, pp. 66e67. Indian Archaeology, a Review. Exploration in District Nagaur, 1982e83d. Archaeological Survey of India, New Delhi, pp. 68. Indian Archaeology, a Review. Excavations at Didwana, District Nagaur, 1983e84a. Archaeological Survey of India, New Delhi, pp. 72e74. Indian Archaeology, a Review. Exploration in Districts Bhilwara, Jaipur, Jaisalmer and Jodhpur, 1983e84b. Archaeological Survey of India, New Delhi, pp. 71. Indian Archaeology, a Review. Exploration in Districts Jaisalmer and Nagaur, 1984e85a. Archaeological Survey of India, New Delhi, pp. 72e75. Indian Archaeology, a Review. Palaeoliths, Gaughat, District Kota, 1984e85b. Archaeological Survey of India, New Delhi, pp. 152. Indian Archaeology, a Review. Palaeoliths, Kherdi, District Kota, 1984e85c. Archaeological Survey of India, New Delhi, pp. 152. Indian Archaeology, a Review. Exploration in District Bharatpur, 1985e86. Archaeological Survey of India, New Delhi, pp. 69e70. Indian Archaeology, a Review. Exploration in District Bharatpur, 1987e88. Archaeological Survey of India, New Delhi, pp. 99e100. Indian Archaeology, a Review. Explorations around Jaisalmer, 1989e90. Archaeological Survey of India, New Delhi, pp. 94. Jacobson, J. 1970. Microlithic Contexts in the Vindhyan Hills of Central India. PhD Dissertation, Department of Anthropology, Columbia University. Jacobson, J., 1975. Early Stone Age habitation sites in eastern Malwa. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 119 (4), 280e297. Jacobson, J., 1980. Investigation of late Stone Age cultural adaptations in the central Vindhyas. Man and Environment 4, 65e82. Jacobson, J., 1985. Acheulian surface sites in central India. In: Misra, V.N., Bellwood, P. (Eds.), Recent Advances in Indo-Pacific Prehistory. Oxford and IBH, Delhi, pp. 49e57. James, H.V.A., Petraglia, M.D., 2005. Modern human origins and the evolution of behavior in the later Pleistocene record of South Asia. Current Anthropology 46, S3eS27. Khanna, G.S., 1992. Patterns of mobility in the Mesolithic of Rajasthan. In: Jarrige, C., Gerry, J.P., Meadow, R.H. (Eds.), South Asian Archaeology 1989. Prehistory Press, Madison, pp. 153e159. Korisettar, R., 2002. The archaeology of the South Asian Lower Paleolithic: history and current status. In: Settar, S., Korisettar, R. (Eds.), Prehistory. Indian Council of Historical Research, New Delhi, pp. 1e65. Korisettar, R., 2007. Toward developing a basin model for Paleolithic settlement of the Indian subcontinent: geodynamics, monsoon dynamics, habitat diversity and dispersal routes. In: Petraglia, M.D., Allchin, B. (Eds.), The Evolution and History of Human Populations in South Asia: Inter-disciplinary Studies in Archaeology, Biological Anthropology, Linguistics, and Genetics. Springer, Dordrecht, pp. 69e96. Kuhn, S.L., 1994. A formal approach to the design and assembly of mobile toolkits. American Antiquity 59 (3), 426e442. Kumar, S., Srivastava, P., 1992. Microfossils from the black chert of Bhagwanpura limestone (Middle Proterozoic), Vindhyan Supergroup, Chittorgarh area, Rajasthan, West India. Current Science 62 (4), 371e372.

67

Kumar, V., 1963e64. Palaeolithic site of Nagari on the Berach. The Researcher 3e4, 61e63. Lukacs, J.R., Misra, V.N., Kennedy, K.A.R., 1982. Bagor and Tilwara: Late Mesolithic Cultures of Northwest India, the Human Skeletal Remains. Deccan College, Pune. Marks, A.E., Shokler, J., Zilhão, J., 1991. Raw material usage in the Paleolithic: the effects of local availability on selection and economy. In: Montet-White, A., Holen, S. (Eds.), Raw Material Economies Among Prehistoric Hunter-Gatherers. University of Kansas Publications, Lawrence, KS, pp. 127e139. Misra, V.N., 1967. Pre- and Proto-History of the Berach Basin South Rajasthan. Deccan College Postgraduate and Research Institute, Poona. Misra, V.N., 1968. Middle Stone Age in Rajasthan. In: La Prehistoire, Problems et Tendances, pp. 295e302. Misra, V.N., 1971a. Two late Mesolithic settlements in Rajasthanea brief review of investigations. Poona University Journal (Humanities) 35, 59e77. Misra, V.N., 1971b. Two microlithic sites in Rajasthanea preliminary investigation. The Eastern Anthropologist 24 (3), 237e288. Misra, V.N., 1973. Bagor: a late Mesolithic settlement in north-west India. World Archaeology 5 (1), 92e100. Misra, V.N., 1982. Bagor: the archaeological setting. In: Lukacs, J.R., Misra, V.N., Kennedy, K.A.R. (Eds.), Bagor and Tilwara: Late Mesolithic Cultures of Northwest India, vol. I: The Human Skeletal Remains. Deccan College Postgraduate and Research Institute, Pune, pp. 9e20. Misra, V.N., 2002. The Mesolithic age in India. In: Settar, S., Korisettar, R. (Eds.), Prehistory: Archaeology of South Asia. Manohar and Indian Council of Historical Research, Delhi, pp. 111e126. Negrino, F., Kazi, M.M., 1996. The Palaeolithic industries of the Rohri hills (Sindh, Pakistan). Ancient Sindh 3, 7e38. Olszewski, D., Dibble, H.L., Schurmans, U., McPherron, S.P., Smith, J.R., 2005. High desert Paleolithic survey at Abydos (Egypt): preliminary report. Journal of Field Archaeology 30, 283e303. Paddayya, K., 1978. New research designs and field techniques in the Palaeolithic archaeology of India. World Archaeology 10 (1), 94e110. Paddayya, K., 1982. The Acheulian Culture of the Hungsi Valley (Peninsular India): A Settlement System Perspective. Deccan College, Pune. Paddayya, K., 2007. The Acheulian of peninsular India with special reference to the Hungsi and Baichbal valleys of the lower Deccan. In: Petraglia, M.D., Allchin, B. (Eds.), The Evolution and History of Human Populations in South Asia: Interdisciplinary Studies in Archaeology, Biological Anthropology, Linguistics, and Genetics. Springer, Dordrecht, pp. 97e119. Paddayya, K., Jhaldiyal, R., Petraglia, M.D., 2000. Excavation of an Acheulian workshop at Isampur, Karnataka (India). Antiquity 74, 751e752. Pal, J.N., 2002. The Middle Paleolithic culture of South Asia. In: Settar, S., Korisettar, R. (Eds.), Prehistory: Archaeology of South Asia. ICHR and Manohar, Delhi, pp. 67e84. Pappu, S., 2001. Acheulian Culture in Peninsular India. D.K. Printworld, Delhi. Pappu, S., Gunnell, Y., Akhilesh, K., Braucher, R., Taieb, M., Demory, F., Thouveny, N., 2011. Early Pleistocene presence of Acheulian hominins in South Asia. Science 331, 1596e1599. Petraglia, M.D., Clarkson, C., Boivin, N., Haslam, M., Korisettar, R., Chaubey, G., Ditchfield, P., Fuller, D., James, H., Jones, S., Kivisild, T., Koshy, J., Lahr, M.M., Metspalu, M., Roberts, R., Arnold, L., 2009. Population increase and environmental deterioration correspond with microlithic innovations in South Asia ca. 35,000 years ago. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 106 (30), 12261e12266. Raczek, T.P., 2007. Shared Histories: Technology and Community at Gilund and Bagor, Rajasthan, India (c. 3000e1700 BC), PhD Dissertation. University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, unpublished. Rolland, N., Dibble, H.L., 1990. A new synthesis of Middle Paleolithic assemblage variability. American Antiquity 55 (3), 480e499. Roy, A.B., Jakhar, S.R., 2002. Geology of Rajasthan (Northwest India): Precambrian to Recent. Jodhpur, Scientific Publishers, India. Sonakia, A., 1985. Skull cap of an early man from the Narmada Valley alluvium (Pleistocene) of central India. American Anthropologist 87, 612e616. Villa, P., 1982. Conjoinable pieces and site formation processes. American Antiquity 47, 276e290.