161

CHAPTER VII

HARAPPAN FORTIFICATIONS

The large-scale excavations at the various Indus

valley sites in the nineteen-thirties failed to prove

the existence of fort-walls or fortification of any other

sort though the same wsds expected by a few scholars.

In other words the Indus valley civilization showed a

sharp contrast to its contemporary Egyptian and Summe-

jrian societies. And hence the Indus society was consider­

ed to toe a wealthy mercajitile comniTinity that had in some

unscrutable manner done away with aristocratic or princely

rule symbolised by citadels and forts and further that

it had established a democracy based on "bourgeoisie

economy”. But owing to the availability of Indus seals

at Ur (1 or 2 ), Kish (2 ), Tell-Asmar (2 ), Tape Gawra (1)

and Susa (1) in association with seals certainly or pro­

bably of Sargonid date^, it was inferred that the Harappan

culture was in contact, by way of maritime activities

through the Arabian sea and Persian gulf or through the

land routes, with Sumer in and about the time of Sargon

of Agade (Akkad) dated to C. 2350 B.C. In such conditions

certainly there were chances of intermixing of societies.

The Indus people must have borrowed so many things includ­

ing certain ideas and technological advancements from the

16‘J

Mesopotamians and vice-versa. As such it was a big

mystery for the archaeologists as to why the art of forti­

fications alone was not learnt by the Indus people from the

Sumerians.

The mystery was solved by Wheeler's discovery of

fortification around a mound at Harappan in 19^6. Beside

the fortification wall Harappa yielded a citadel too —

a conventional seat of power of a few — the priest,

priestly king or the king. Soon the mounds at Mohenoo..

daro were also made to reveal their secrets. Mohenjodaro

yielded an identical pattern of fortification viz. the

fortification wall and the guardian citadel, although the

citadel here was more heavily fortified. Afterwards

various sites of Indus valley civilization were excava­

ted. Suktagendor, Soktakoh, and Kot-Diji in Baluchistan,

Ali-lurad in Sind Desalpur in Kutch, Lethal Surkotda in

Gujarat and Kalibangan in Ra^jasthan yielded traces of for­

tification. Being the earliest known concrete manifesta­

tion of military engineering in India, they can perhaps

be the prototype or have some bearing on the defence

works of future India. They are significant from some

other aspects as well. Their strength/weakness is the

measure of the dangers, they were expected to face, their

plans indicate the nature of the dangers and obviously

1G3

the military tradition of the Indus peoples. Through an

analysis of the distribution of these fortified sites one

can very easily guess the expansion of the power controll­

ing them. Strategical study of the situation of diffe­

rent fortified places would give an idea about the fron­

tiers and core of the vast empire.

The e^qpanse of Indus Civilization is spread over

an area that makes up the entire Pakistan to-day. The

western-most site, Sxiktagen-dor is on the Makran coast in

West Pakistan, while the eastern-most limit is Alamgirpur

some 4 3 km., north-east of Delhi in Distt. Meerut of U.P.

Rupar in Punjab and Bhagtrav in Gujarat form the northern

and southern extremities of the area influenced by this civi­

lization. If all the four points are joined with a straight

lin e , rough parallelogram is formed. The core of the

civilization, obviously was the valley of Great Indus.

The northern, north-western and north-eastern extre­

mities of the region are surrounded by the Himalayas and its

subsidiary hill ranges like Karakoram and Hindukush. On

the western side it is partially separated from the table­

land of Iran and Hazara-highlands by Kirthar, Sulaiman,

and Safed-Koh ranges. The extreme westerly and southerly

expansion is mainly on the coast-line of the Arabian sea.

Eastern border of the civilization is generally demarcated

IGl

by the Great Indian Desert — The Thar, besides it being

parallel to the Aravali hill ranges. The entire area

defined by the above limits forms a more or less homoge­

neous geographical unit, watered by the Indus and its tri­

butaries like Sutlej and Ravi. The river Saraswati is no

more to-day but it also must have been an important asset

of the Indus people. The two valleys that of Indus and

Saraswati, owing to the absence of any physical barrier

between them, must have been complementary to each other.

Within these areaf, more than a hundred villages, townships

and stations of the Harappans have been investigated. To

sum up, the geographical features of this expanse fulfil

the basic pre-conditions of an compact political unit as it

is more or less secluded but united internally.

Out of these sites, especially the fortified sites

were located at the points of strategic importance, though

not as effectively as in contemporary Egypt — where a

series of fortifications guarded the approaches from the

island of Elephantine to the fortress of the sea or as the

approaches from Asia were guarded by the forts at S ile ,

Pelusium and Pithon. Most of the fortified Indus sites

are situated so as to command important trade/military

routes. There are almost negligible changes in these

routes, (especially in hilly regions) even after a lapse

of many centuries, and it can be safely inferred that som(

of the routes (specially carved out of natural formations

should have been used by the Harappans and their contempo'

raries.

Kohtras-Bhuthi — one of the fortified site of A.mr;

culture, commands the route from Arabjo Thana to Taiing.

Another site Suktagen-dor occupies a position upon which

convenient routes towards KeJ, converge from a number of

little fishing harbours on the coast from the Gwatar bay,

Pasu-Bandar and Gwadar^. These routes may well have clail

some importance in pre-historic times also. As such it i«

not quite unreasonable to take the site as a check-post oj

the sea-routes to India. Similarly Lothal in Gujarat whe;

in the existence of a dock has been revealed by the excavi

tions, must have acted as a sentinal against any invasion

through the Arabian sea, beside its being on important

trade centre for the import and export of the various

commodities between India and Mesopotamia. Another site

Gujarat, Surkotda, though not situated to command a trade>

route or some frontier is strategically important. As it

is situated on the portion of land joining the island of

Kutch with Indian mainland, it could have regulated the

entry of the people of the mainland into Kutch. If the

river Indus is taken as a barrier against the inroads to

India as in fact it worked, the passes through the Suli^B

I W l

and Kirthar ranges from the tableland of Iran were guarded

by Ali-Murad, Mohenoodaro, Judeirodaro and Dabar-Kot,

Pathani-Damb — also an Indus culture site is located at

4the entrance of the Harbab-pass . A further survey near

the approaches of sutfh routes may throw some light on the

military aspects of the Indus civilization.

The study of the weaponry possessed by the people

of some culture has got a direct bearing on the fortifica­

tions of that particular culture. The weaponry of the Indus

people includes a large number of flakes and blades of stone

which according to scholars like Wheeler and Mackay do not

belong to the class of "arms and weapons". The various

arrow-heads of Copper and Bronze leaf-shaped, having long

tangs but without mid rib discovered at Indus sites attest

the use of bow and arrow as their favourite weapons of war

and chase. A split bamboo or wooden handle served the

purpose of mid-rib. The shape and dimensions of these

arrow-heads, resemble to the flint arrowheads of Northern

Iran and Egypt^ but stone arrow-heads are not recovered

from the Harappan sites except the two specimen one at

6 7Harappa and the other at Periano-ghundai*^. The chert

arrow-heads unearthed from Kot-Diji are all from pre-

Harappan levels. The metal type does not occxir in EgyptQ

or Sumer but is found in Minsan Crete . A type of barbed

w

arrow-head occurs rather infrequently. Spearheads and

knives are easily confused and both have such thin blades

that they would warp on impact with any hard material,

these must have been stiffened by being set back between

the split ends of the shaft which would thus serve as a

mid-rib. The two small holes near the base of the blade

in some of the specimen, suggest a former binding for

such a device. Rarely the blade has a slight median thick­

ening, giving a diamond shaped section^ Mackay reports the

discovery of two short swords, one of which some 4? cm.

long, broad blade, was evidently used for slashing ratherQ

than thrusting, for its point is blunt^. According to

iTheeler this weapon representing rather short sword or

dirk, is a type of weapon for which there is no other

evidence. They are from late levels, and have parallels of

C. 2200-1750 B.C. in Syria and Palestine^®. Whatever arms

and weapons m e found are made of Copper or Bronze with

poor Tin percentage. Axes are hafted with tangs, no sockets

or socket-holes are found. At Mohenjodaro in a hoard of

buried implements beneath the floor of a house an Adze-

axe of hard Bronze some 25 cm. long was found and it is

the only specimen of a socketted tool. It is to be noted

that socketed tools were in extensive use in Elam and

Sumer before $000 B.C.^^

16^

Mace-head of Alabaster, sand-stone, Oherty-limestone

and a hard green coloured stone resembling slate are not

uncommon and were doubtless used as weapons, especially

perhaps for individual protection in the jungle though these

can be suspected to be weights for digging These

mace-heads generally lentoid shaped but rarely pear-shaped

and circular too, are perforated in a hour-glass form

bored from both ends and they were presximably lashed to a

handle with leather thongs. This type was in general

occurrence at Susa, in Egypt, in the Caucasus and exten­

sively in pre-historic Europe. A mace-head of Bronze or

Copper has also been reported from the late Harappan levels

or Jhukar phase of Chanhu-daro. Comparable with Persian

examples of the second millennium B .C . , though the nearest

analogy is from Luristan, where a date rather after than

before 1400 B.C. may be conjectured in the absence of direct

12evidence .

Baked-clay-pellets of various sizes having round and

oblong shapes have been found. These might have been

used as missiles hurled with the hand or from a sling,

as there is no evidence of the invention of the catapult

as such an early date either in or outside India. Three

categories of these pellets could be distinguished. Twok

common types were compressed in the Zand and then baked

lightly. The only difference between the two is of weight

JG'i

one is approximating to I 7 0 gm. while the other to 340 gm. At

Mohenjodaro in 1950 at the foot of the citadel mound, in

the vicinity of the great Granary many pellets were found.

The parapet wal^ interconnecting two of the southeastern

towers of the citadel yield^ 98 pellets each weighing I 7 0 gm.

A hoard of 50 or more had been found stored in a large

pottery vessel in the lesser of the two halls on the southern-

half of the citadel. Further south in the same area quite

a number of large pottery balls were found lying in confu-

1?sion upon the ground outside the very thick enclosure wall

According to Marshall “their shape, material and the spot,

where they were found certaihly lead us to regard them as

weapons of offence or rather of defence . The third

category is round and about 2 .5 cm. diameter or ovoid and

upto 6 . 5 5 cm. in length but this category is quite rare.

According to Vats "The weapons of war and of chase

one the bow and arrow, spear, axe, dagger and mace. The

sword they have not yet evaded nor is there any evidence of

defensive body armour”^^. Whether they had any thing as a

substitute for the defensive body armour, made of perishable

material like wood or leather, nothing can be said for want

of evidence. But in the present state of our knowledge,

the evidence of shield, helmet, and of-metal are absent.

However as suggested by Marshall the domed pieces of Copper,

each pierced by two holes, were stitched on to a piece of

170

cloth might have been used as a coat of mail. In a few

pictographs of the Indus script, men are represented holding

such shields^^.

By way of comparison if the weaponry of the West-

I

Asian contemporaries of the Indus people is surveyed, one

can easily infer that the Indus valley people were lagging

far behind them. In Assyria the first recorded specimen of

a type of dagger which defends not upon the cut or thrust

3?d-but on the slit, is of the time of the 3 dynasty of Ur,

and it is clearly distinct from the weapons used in Baby­

lonia. The curved blade of this copper dagger is sharpened

on the outer edge^*^. There is evidence in a seal impre­

ssion on a Cappadocian tablet of the use of the four-horse

1 ftchariot in Asia-Minor at about 2100-1900 B.C. The use

of mace though a constant phenomenon in Mesopotamia but was

reduced to a great extent after the introduction of a strong

helmet. Then comes the axe. In third millenium B.C. Copper

axes were being used. The sword appeared and gradually «advanced to a curved shaped. Before this the Mesopotamian

phalanx was using spears with a long wooden staff and leaf­

shaped metal blade, shoulder-sloped on march and carried

horizontally in assault. Many a monuments of the end of

millennium B.C. depict the use of bow. The Egyptian

bow was double convex while the Mesopotamians had a single

one. The Nubians also had two curves. There is of course

171

no evidence regarding the use of bow by the charioteers

before 5000 B.C. Composite bow is seen for the first time

in the victory monument of Naram Sin (C. 2800 B .C .) . The

effective range of a light bow was 2 7 5 to 365 m. and

consequently the shields and armours of suitable strength

were introduced. The first coat of mail was a cap worn

by the Smerians studded with small circular*pieces of

metal^^.

Coming to the description of extant remains indivi­

dually, Harappa can be referred to in the beginning as the

rmins of large scale fortifications were first discovered

here. The citadel at Hari^ppa is roughly a parallelogram

measuring 450 M x 210 M. It is between 9 to 12 metres higher

than the level of the surrounding plains. The defences

rest on the pre-Harappan deposits which show signs of having

been subjected to heavy flooding. These inroads of water

were first filled up with mud-brick and the whftle was then

raised to a higher level with baked bricks. This served as

the antiflood bund, spreading protectively beyond the outer

foort of the great defensive wall some 14 metres wide at

the base and tapering upwards. The core of the wall was of

mud-brick but it had an burnt brick revetment 1 .2 m. to

1 .8 m. thick externally. To give extra strength to the

wall, a sort of buttress was added on the interior of the

wall. The buttress was in the form of a sloping platform

of mud bricks. Bastions were built at fairly regular interval

PRINCIPAL mVNDS AT HARAPPA

( ANCIENT IHDIA NO3 PAG£ NO^SS)

17 :i

and some of them at least were taller than the circuit

wall. The main entrance was on the northern side. Evi­

dence of guard rooms flanking the subsidiary gateways in

the western wall was clear. At the southern end a broad

ramp or stair led upto the citadel.

Excavations have revealed three phases of recons­

truction. Regarding the original phase Wheeler says "as

originally built the defences of the citadel long remain-o

ed untouched save by the weather, which w^re and rounded

the exposed surface of the baked brick revetment to a

notable extent" . The final phase of rejuvenation was

the enlargement of the defences on the north-west corner

and the blocking of the gateway in the northern wall, when

the Harappans were on the defensive according to Wheeler.

After a preliminary occupation of the site or its

vicinity, mound AB was heavily fortified — a stage indi­

cating the arrival of mature^ Harappans. The defensive

wall overlies and is an integral part of the rampart. The

function of the rampart was presiimably to raise the base

of defences proper above the flood level. The bund or

rampart was crowned with the main wall of mud brick batt­

ered on both sides (internally and externally). It had a

basal width of 12.2 m. and was 10.6 m. high. This was

strengthened by an outer revetment of burnt brick and

174

battered back to a slope of 2 3 . 3 1 degree from the vertical.

An elaborate system of infilade is indicated by the rectan­

gular towers at regular intervals. The decline of Harappans

is indicated by the blocking off the gateway in the northern

wall and strengthening the salient on N.W. corner. Some

of the Vanished features of the citadel of Harappa can be

guessed from the analogy of the citadel of Mohenjodaro

21and of course vice-versa .

Mohenjodaro is the second site to yield the forti­

fications of the Indus valley civilization. The analogy

between these two sites and to certain extent with other

sites also is quite obvious. Specially regarding the

analogy of Harappa and Mohenjodaro Wheeler says "it is tempt­

ing to infer something like an imperial status for so

uniform a civilization perhaps with the metropolitan duality

which was later to mark the Kushanas, Arab and Mughal regimes

in northern India and seems indeed to be endemic in that

spacious land". He further adds that "the Indus civiliza­

tion exemplified the vastest political experiment beforeO O

the advent of the Roman fimpire" .

Mohenjodaro yielded a citadel located as in case of

Harappa to the west of the township. This was also raised

on an artificial mound, the general height being 6.5 m. to

17o

1 3 metres. Obviously this artificial platform was raised

as an anti-flood measure and naturally to protect it from

water-erosion, a brick-embankment was added to it as an

after thought. The width of this anti-water-erosion embank­

ment was 14 metres. At or near the south-east corner of

the Mohenjodaro citadel platform exhibits the gradual multi­

plication of rectangular bastions of burnt-brick. The

earliest of these bastions is found contemporary with the

platform but their purpose cannnot be fully explained

without further excavations. Two of them seem td have

originally flanked a postern gate which was later blocked

and replaced by a platform with a parapet^^.

The dimensions of the citadel here are almost the

same as that of Harappa. The only difference is that this

citadel was more heavily fortified. It had massive towers

at regular intervals, built of burnt brick with a timber

reinforcement given in the beginning — an idea \msuitable

for a damp climate like that of Mohenjodaro. Hence after­

wards the cavities of timber left in the wall were filled

up with burnt brick and also the later builders of the

adjacent towers presumably warned by this weakness, did not

repeat the method. It is to be noted here that the method

was not suitable for the damp climates like that of Mohenjo-

daro but it has been used in^futurenIndia. The most remar-

Vs'hlA AYonmlA hAincr the wooden Dalisade of Fataliputra*

17G

About the location of the main entrance nothing so

far has been said or suggested. On the west side of the

citadel and south of the Granary a baked brick tower or

salient still standing to a height of 5 metres has been

partially unearthed, and to the north of this tower, a small

postern has been identified. It is clear that the platform

of the citadel was of a defensible character, throughout

its circuit and even the residential quarters of the city

were overlooked by a brick-wall, at one point with a breast-

high parapet, linked or rather continued from the assemblage

of solid burnt-brick towers at the S-S corner of the citadel.

This is the parapet where a large number of terracotta

missiles were found.

The presence of a large building measuring 75 M. x

2 5 M. within the enclosed area of the citadel probably the

residence of some high official, chief-priest or perhaps

the king; ”the Great Bath" and a huge Granary on its fringes,

made Wheeler infer that this citadel was "both a religious

,,24and a secular head quarters

In the lower city in the HR area, a remarkable

block of barracks comprising 16 similar sub-units arranged

back to back in two lines, an eastern and a western, divi­

ded, save for the end pair by an axial passage, was un­

earthed. Here each normal barrack consists of a small

177

bed-room and a larger front room, most of the front rooms

contain in one corner a small brick-paved bathing floor

with an escape-hole for waste water. The precise function

of these barracks can only be guessed, whether shops,

coolie-lines, police quarters or priests' quarters, "what­

ever their precise function, they fit into and enhance our

general picture of a disciplined and even regimented civi­

lization^^.

The massively fortified site Suktagendor was disco­

vered first by A. Stein and afterwards surveyed by Dales.

The observations of both are identical but for a few details.,

The more important contribution of Dales is his interpre­

tation of the locus of this site on the estuary of river

Dasht. The fortifications here consist of the usual pair

of a township and a citadel like the two sites already des­

cribed. The only difference here is that the two components

are situated on two separate sand-stone ridges. The citadel

here is a rough parallelogram of 205 If. x 103 M. The main

stone wall is built of roughly squared stone blocks in

courses. It was 11 metres wide at the base having the

inner face vertical. Stein observed a buttress wall on

the inner side made of mud-brick, 2 . 5 metres thick and

making an angle of It must have been 6.1 to 7»6 metres

high. There are traces of a gateway at the western end of

17S

the southern wall. The gateway was only 2 ,4 wide and

probably was flanked on either side by massive rectangular

26towers . The plateau was not continuously walled as the

ridges on the northern and southern sides are high enough

and steep as if scarped by nature. These ridges were Joined

by the artificial defences on the eastern and western

sides to complete the enclosure. The excavator observed

three phases of construction. The first one was of stone

structures with solid stone fortification walls. In the

second phase a floor of earth was observed built of thick

stone filling. In the third phase the structures were of

semi-dressed stone blocks. These three phases are strati-

graphically associated with the fortification wall and the

occupation of the site was a continuous one and purely

27Harappan in character ' .

Sviktagendor must have been an important trading

centre as providing contacts with the sea-borne trades of

ore

29

28the Persian Gulf and the Arabian sea . According to

Dales and his colleagues Suktagen was a port

Dales and his colleagues also get the credit of

discovering one more HaraPPan site — Sokta-Koh (Burned

Hill) situated about 9 miles north of Pasni in the Shadi

Kaur Valley. Like Suktagendor^ it is also situated on the

17!^

mouth of the river. The place is a key-point to the central

traffic between the coast and the interior. It is situated

on the top of a Jagged natural outcrop and a strong wall

along the edge of the rock on the western side was traced

to a length of 488 metres. The plan of the fortification

at Soktakoh is identical in all respects to that of the

Suktagendor, v iz ., a citadel (fortified) and a township.

The fortifications at Eot-Diji in Sind, can he taken

as the earliest known fortifications in India. Here a for­

tified town of pre-Indus valley culture date, was revealed

by the excavations. The pre-Harappan strata was covered by

a burnt layer and below this layer the fortification was

discovered. It consists of at strongly walled citadel, armed

with rectangular towers of stone and mud-brick. This pre-

Harappan fortification was not utilised or rebuilt by the

Harappans. They built their residential structures over it,

Thase residential buildings were set very close to the wall

and in fact the defence-wall often served as the back wall

of the houses. This pattern of houses at Kot-Diji is of

common occurrence at a ntimber of Anatolian and west-Asian

sites of the same age^^. It is difficult to explain how

the pattern was imported to India but if this pattern is

kept in mind, the buildings within the citadels of more

Harappan sites would express something more than they do

180

Kot-Diji possessed two mounds, obviously the citadel

and the lower city, measuring 183 metres x 122 metres rising

about 12 metres above the surroundings. Massive walls

about 3 metres high were erected around the citadel area.

These were built on the bed-rock with undressed blocks of

stone set in mud-mortar over which brick courses were laid,9

On the inner face of the wall no plaster was found. At

places there is a mud-brick revetment to the stone founda­

tion. The walls were strengthened by bastions set at

irregular intervals on the outer side of the wall, maximum

extant height was from 3*65 to 4.25 metres. The walls are

thicker at the base and taper upwards. At some places

the walls fell in dis-use and houses were built on their

top instead of against them. The burnt layer — a demarca­

tion line at the cultural break between pre-Harappan and

Harappans, corroborate the date of the settlement C. 2400

B .C ., as indicated by the method^^.

A fortified site of Amri culture-slightly earlier

than the Harappans, was discovered at Kohtras-Buthi, in

Sind by N.G. Ma^jumdar. Situated on the bank of river Baran,

the site occupies the top of a hill. There was a low rampart

wall to begin with. A much larger wall of cyclopean masonry

was built after some time. Four ruined bastions could be

traced. The entrance to the enclosure is on the south­

eastern side. The walls are built of boulders without

m

mortar, bastions are situated on the four corners of the

enclosure. The hill on which the site is situated is about

2 9 metres in height, gradually sloping down to only 3 metres

above the plains and on the south side meeting the track.

On the east, west and north the hill is quite steep, rugged

and difficult of approach. A large number of stone founda­

tions of rooms and houses were observed. Probably drinking

water was collected by draining the catchment areas with

stone walls. The site is situated so to command the route

from Arabjo-Thana to Taung^ .

Pigffot calls the site as a *'promontory-fort" and

compares it with the fortifications of the Tharro hill —

also in Sind. Here too the fortification similar to Kohtras

Buthi, take the form of a double-wall, curved, and of

massive construction and at a distance of 76 metres apart

cuts off the southern headland of the hill in the promontory

fort manner. AMri ware was found on the surface but plain

red ware allied to that of Harappan culture was also in

53e idence-^- .

A small Harappan site Ali Murad some 32 km ., south

of Dadu in Sind was also found fortified. Here a long

ran5)art wall, built of irregularly dressed stone blocks,

surrounds a mound of about 8 metres general height. The size

of the stone blocks was found 61 cm. x 3 0 x 30 _____

182

the average. The extent recorded height of the wall was

not more than I . 5 metres. It encloses an irregularly

squarish area measuring about 240 metres each side. The

roughly dressed stone wallfabout 1,40 metres in width.

The entrance of the fortified enclosure probably lay on

the southern side.

The southern side of the enclosure was traced

to a length of 52 metres with a maximum extent height

of 1 . 5 2 metres. It is not a straight wall but have

several bends turning in and out several times. The use

of mud-mortar was observed in the western wall. The

enclosed area bears the traces of many stone structures

built within and also possesses one well for water

supply. The system as a whole can be interpreted as

the remains of a huge fortified palace. In the words

of Piggot "the fortification seem to have been a normal

II54provision for safety from enemies and robbers .

Kalibangan in Rajasthan on the left bank of

the river Ghagger revealed the evidences of its being

an important centre of Harappan cilpilization. It had

two separate mounds viz. the citadel mound and the

lower city. The citadel is situated on the western

side of the city-mound and measures roughly 1 5 0 metres

east to west and 250 metres north to south. After the

18T

arrival of Harappans at the site, a massive mud-brick wall

was built around the site now called KLB-1 which presumably

served as a citadel^^. At the smaller mound (KLB-1) while

excavating in 1962-63 the existence of a fortification

wall of Harappan occupation suggesting its function as a

citadel was indicated and it was exposed to a length ofa'T'c4

100 metres. Rectangular salientsAbastions were exposed.

The Excavators inferred two principal phases of construc­

tion. In phase I the width of the wall was 6 .5 to 7 metres

and the salient projecting to 9*55 metres from the main

face of the wall and^was 1? metres broad. It rose impo­

singly and was battered on the outer face. The fortifica­

tion wall and salient cut through the strata or the

structure of the preceding occupations. In no place the

fortification wall was integral with any of the platforms

within the citadel. Against the fortification wall there

was a normal occupational strata — a feature not quite

common to Harappan citadels. But the inner face of the

fortification wall bore mud-plaster, suggestive of its

standing height above the inside ground level. The outer

face of the wall is battered back to an angle of 3 * degree.

The extant height of the wall was found to be 3«^0 metres

36at the maximum' .

184

It was only in 1967-68 that the presence of Harappan

fortification was fully confirmed. The width of the main

fortification wall was 3.0 to 5 . 9 metres. The maximum

available mud-brick courses were 15 where two brick-sizes

were used in the construction (viz. 40 x 20 x 10 cm. and

3 0 X 1 5 X cm). Northern portion of the city-wall was

built in box-pattern, with mud filling inside. One gateway

in the middle of the wall was traced. This gateway, pro­

bably flanked by the guard-rooms, was 3*7 metres in width^*^.

The citadel of Kalibangan has preserved the forti­

fications of two periods viz. pre-Harappan and Harappan.

The wall was initially 1.90 metres thick but was increased

in width during the pre-Harappan phase itself to 3*70

metres to 4.10 metres and also strengthened by rectangular

bastions. It had a wall-guarded entrance. The Harappans

superimposed this fortifications on this but occupied

only half of the area on the southern side. In this cons­

truction also mud-bricks were used, and massive towers

stood sentinal over the corners. The main gate lay ona-nd

the southern sidewas perhaps flanked by a bastion.

Desalpur in Kutch, almost on the southern fringes

of the area of expansion of the Harappan civilization,

yielded massive stone fortifications of the Harappan

period. The basal width of the fortification wall measured

18

enclosure was reinforced by corner towers and salients.

The north-east corner showed an additional feature of

mud-trick filling in the shape of a platform. Accord­

ing to K.V. Soundara Ra;]an, who excavated the site, the

structural work of the site has to be assigned to the

matured Harappan period and can be dated by comparative

statues to C. 2000-1600

Lothal on the Gulf of Cambay revealed a huge dock

with its carefully planned and executed arrangements for

flooding and draining. The next feature was the neat

town-planning with rectangular mud-brick platforms. Be­

side this, the most important feature was the mud-brick

rampart some 4 ,5 metres in width and 2.30 metres in extant

height. The whale plan of the city was rectangular.

Of course the enclosing ramparts can be taken as anti­

flood measures but they can as well serve as a fortifi­

cation wall. Within the enclosed area, was found one more

enclosure which has been rightly identified by Rao as the

citadel. Excavations at Lothal revealed three periods

of occupation, and these could be named as pre-defence,

defence and post defence period. A.11 these three periods

are sub-divided into three sub-periods each. A.S an anti­

flood measure, a clay rampart was erected which appears to

have been 10.6 metres wide and i ,4 4 metres high. The

18G

high and more than 4 .8 metres thick. As shown by the

traces of breaches, the rampart suffered due to floods

and repairs were effected from time to time. As a last

resort the northern face of the platform was revetted

with bricks^^.

Surkotda in Kutch was explored by J.P . Joshi and

T .V .G . Shastri and was reported to have yielded a mound

measuring about 130 x 200 metres with vestiges of rubble

fortifications. During excavation this mound revealed an

enclosure of 115 metres x 60 metres. This area was divi­

ded into two ports of 60 x 60 metres. One square area of

60 X 60 metres was the citadel and the other part was

either for the common men or for the soldiers.

According to the excavator the earliest occupants

of the site were Harappans with some affiliation with an

antecedent culture. The Harappans built a fortified

settlement, consisting of a citadel and a residential com­

plex. The citadel constructed over a platform of hard

yellow rammed earth, which was contained by a fortification

wall built of mud and mud-brick (size 40 x 20 x 10 cm)

with a rubble veneer of five to eight course, on the inner

side. The basal width of the rampart was approximately

7 metres, plastered on the inner side with 5 cm. thick

clay. Four stages of construction each separated by a

187

thin whitish clay band were observed. At a later stage a

buttress of mud-brick having a width of 1 7 metres with

a rubble cushioning was provided on the eastern side of

the citadel rampart. The citadel had two entrances for

inter-communication with the residential annexe, one on

the southern side and the other on the eastern side. In

sub-period A, around the citadel area, a mud-brick forti­

fication having a width of 3 . 2 5 metres was also provided.

On the south western side it still stands to a height of

1 .8 metres and stows remains of a gateway.

In sub-period C the arrival of a new people

using white painted black and red ware is detected. The

fortifications of the citadel and the residential annexe

as well were reconstructed in stone. The wall had the

thickness (basal) of 3*5 to 4 metres, and was provided with

bastions on the corners. On the southern side of the

citadel portion, a gateway complex having a 10 x 23 metres

projection contained steps and a ran^ leading to the

entrance of the citadel, at either side of the passage,

which was 1 .7 metres in width, was a guard room. Besides

an equally wide entrance was also provided on the eastern

side of the citadel for inter-communicating with the resi­

dential complex, which was blocked subsequently. The

residential area had a separate entrance also on the

40southern side

18H

Dhillanijo-Kot — on the right bank of the river

Baran in Sind — a site of Amri culture possesses rema-

nants of a fortification wall surrounding the site. The

wall is built of stone and has a basal width of 1.5 metres.

Among the ruins"'of buildings, within the enclosure were

found chert flakes and prehistoric pot-sherds in abundance.

Also at Taji and Mazna Damb, in south Baluchistan indica­

tions of a possible defensive wall around the settlement

were noted by Stein. Probably a similar wall stood at

Siah Domb of Jhau and at Mughal-Ghundai too, there are

41the evidences of a defensive wall to the settlement

Before undertaking a detailed discussion regarding

the Harappan fortifications, based on the above descrip­

tions of the extant remains, it is advisable to visualise

the role of a fort/fortified town in the pality of a

nation. As stated earlier it is a great contraction in

the size on one hand and a vast expansion in intent and

purpose on the other. One can obviously on this basis

categorise fortifications into two varieties. The one

which defends only the king'while the other defends the

kingdom as a whole, consequently the institution of king­

ship and ultimately the king himself.

In the first case the boundaries of a state are

not expected to be far removed from the capital/stronghold.

18!1

And such an assumption would be valid only for the initial

stage of the growth of a kingdom. The other variety

would be required when the kingdom is considerably expan­

ded, covers a much larger area. For the defence of a

kingdom as a whole, it is not necessary that the boun­

daries of a state should be cordoned off by a continuous

wall or a closely set chain of forts, pound common sense

demands the situation of a minimum number of fort located

at some strategic points, taking the geography or physio-

gamy of the region; the ups and downs of the earth's

crust or the terrains into account. These can very well

serve the purpose.

As an instrument of offence, a fort could also play

another role. In a newly conquered area, a fort would

enable a band of soldiers to spread out still farther offHu

and establish on a firm footing the new rule threin,^newly

conquered lands. To launch a new offensive a fort would

serve as a good springboard. ’i?hile acting as a spring­

board for a large-scale attack, a fort can be taken as a

mobile instrument of aggeession. Utilising this twofold

benefits characteristic of a fort, its situations can be

shifted to appropiate places, according to the changing

needs of the offensive. Although the shifting may not

obviously be as frequent as the shifting of the army camps

it will beAa more permanent nature and can withstand more

190

resistance both in offence and defence. The practice was

prevalent in Egypt — a civilization contemporary to

that of Harappan.

Now can be undertaken a detailed analysis of

the fortifications of the Indus valley culture. A

glance over the map of the area of expansion of the

culture will reveal that the entrances to the area

through the passes of the Sulaiman and Kirthar ranges

from the tableland of Iran were guarded by the sites like

Ali-Murad, Mohenjodaro, Judeirodaro, and Dabarkot,

Entrance through the Horbab pass was checked by a

settlement at Pathani-Damb — a Harappan site although

not fortified as per the present state of knowledge.

Almost all the routes leading towards Kej from the

fishing harbours on the Makran coast from Gwatar bay to

Pasu-Bandar and Gwadar were commanded by the fortified

site at Suktagendor. Lothal, Somnath, Desalpur and the

two promonotory forts at Suktagendor and Soktakoh pro­

bably stood as sentinals over the approaches from the

west. Surkotda — a fortified site, as described earlier,

checked entry into Harappan Kutoh from the mainland.

The fortified sites of Harappan culture can be divided

into two categories the fortified settlements which

contain only a township and the other sites containing

191

a fortified citadel guarding a township. In some cases

the lower city is also surroimded by ramparts while

in the other it is left tindefended. Surkotda can be

taken as an exception to this categorisation, as there

is no space sufficient for being temed as a 'town­

ship'. It is purely a military outpost, where the re­

sidence of civilian population cannot be inferred.

Though one- half of the fortified enclosure is very clear­

ly seen as dominated by the other half indicating the

dominant half as the reminiscence of a citadel but the

other half is so small that it can be taken as the

residence of the low-ranking military personnel but not

the civilian population.

According to the size of the fortification

again these can be divided into two categories. The

bigger one like Mohenjodaro and Harappa and the smaller

ones like Suktagendor, Soktakoh and Surkotda. Some of

Jrhem like Surkotda are so small in dimensions (e .g . 60

X 120 yds.) that if besieged by an enemy arm* of great

magnitude, even the middle portion of the enclosure are

not safe from the missiles hurled from small bows and

the slings.

As far as the plans of these fortifications are

concerned (big or small) almost all are roughly parallelo­

grams or rectangles. The guardian citadels of the

192

concerned sites are invariably situated on the west side

of the lower city and whether parallelograms or rectan­

gles, these are oriented with their major axis along SsuH)

north-&i4e direction. In the case specially of Mohenjo-

daro and Harappa, even the dimensions of the citadels

are almost the same (parallelograms of 366 metres

from north to south and 183 metres from east to west).

These similarities in ground plan and orienta­

tions indicate the prevalence of a tradition of and con­

siderable experience of military architecture. How­

ever the strange insistence on the regular and syste-

matic shape of the structure, <»f fer without reference to

the contours of the ground is a sure sign that the

architects were beginners in the art of fortification.

The use of terrain was never thought of in the context

of getting a better natural inaccessibility. And this

ignorance regarding the use of terrain compels one to

hypothesip that the shape of the fortification wall was

dependent more on the nature of the structures to be

constructed inside the enclosure. \nd the inner cons­

tructional work was more or less a traditional one with

'nits accept on regular geometric shapes. No improve-

ment/alterations regarding the internal structure was

thought necessaiy so as to save labour and time and also

19‘J

to make the structure more resistant to warfare. The

number of internal buildings, the size of each build­

ing and even the orientation of these in relation to

each pther was pre-determined. One can guess that this

was either a traditional arrangement directed by the

rulers or may be even a religiously oriented one.

Similarly the size of the walls and the citadel may

also depend upon the socio/religious or trade-impor-

tance of the particular site.

The Harappans used the locally available material

for the construction of these defensive work as in

the rest of their structures. Mud-brick formed the

mainstay. Baked brick revetment are added in few

places like Mohenjodaro and Harappa. Vv'herever stone

was available as at Suktagendor, Soktakoh, Surkotda,

and Desalpur, it is used. V/hile using the material,

there was no selection exercised. Especially demands

of the structure were not taken into account. Strength

of a particular material for a particular construction

was never thought of. There may be three probable

reasons for this viz. either they were unaware of the

strength/suitability of the material used for a parti­

cular purpose or they lacked the means of transport

or finally more probable of the three, they knew how

to use the material av*iilable for a given purpose.

191

One cannot think of the Harappaxis being unaware of the

relative strengths of stone and brick, ks far as the

scarcity of means of transportation is concerned, the

use of vehicles was known to the Indus people, so was

river transport. As such it could not be the reason.

In the third case though the Harappans realised that

mud-rampart was not resistant enough to the floods of

the river and they provided the rampart with wooden

revetment, the damp climate — unsuitable for wood,

made them to realise that some alternative to wooden

revetments have to be found out and it was in the form

of burnt brick. It was realised that brick ramparts

could not be as strong as the ones in stone and hence

there was considerable expansion in the width of the

rampart when built.

/

The location of the sites were situated on the

easy access to water routes, but whether inside the en­

closure there were arrangements for water supply cannot

be ascertained. Only Ali-Murad out of all the forti­

fied sites have yielded the existence of a well inside

the enclosure. Obviously enough in case of a long term

siege the lack of fresh water would be the first reason

for surrender. There are no traces of ditches or

moat surrounding the sites.

19.1

The entrance to a fort is always a weakest point,

but this was apparently not much realised by the Indus

people. Entrances were of course guarded by flanking

towers but any other complexity in the gateway complex

to baffle any forced entry by the enemy was not provided.

Save the western gate at Harappa citadel. The approaches

to the gates are quite simple and also not commanded by

any other major port of the fortifications. The fighters

on the flanking towers and within the gate, preventing

a forced entry could not have been supported from any

other point within the enclosure. Arrangement to

harass or prevent the entry, such as erecting two gates,

the inner and outer and placing them so as to expose the

enemy e3q)osed to the fire (of arrows) from the defen­

ders, as in the case of Hittite strongholds, has not

been observed. The gateway of course are flanked by

guard rooms, but the dimensions of the rooms restrict

the number of defenders and perhaps they were far fewer

than the enemy forces that could assault them.

The walls of mud-brick and mud had an average

thickness of 5*50 metres to 4.00 metres and the height

could have been as much as twice the width. In one case

the extent height was twice the width indicating that it

could originally be more, perhaps thrice. The walls

are tapered upwards from either sides and the thickness

19G

and the height was sufficient enough to make the enclo­

sure fairly invulnerable. Bastions and towers along the

walls were generally taller than the circuit walls and .

served as observation post as well as the points from

which missiles could be hurled as at Mohenjodaro, where

a large number of clay-pellets were found on one of the

bastions. It is difficult to say whether these bastions

and the circuit walls were provided with battlements

and embrassures or also the loop-holes for want of any

evidence in this regard though this feature is available

in the walls of fort Buhen in Sgji5)t — an almost con­

temporary monument. In the absence of battlements and

embrassures it was not a difficult task for the besie­

gers to overpower the defenders on the bastions, and

walls by their missiles. The ramparts at Harappa pro­

vides a parapet-walk from one tower to the another but

the efficacy of this walk, without the loop-holes,

battlements and the embrassures in between, comes down

to a minimum. All these considerations makes it clear

that although there are no remains extant, some sort of

battlements must have been

This general survey of these fortifications

makes one infer that the only factor of resistance

against enemy was the rampart. But there was no com­

plexity in the arrangements and also no advantages of

39

the natural features of the land v/as taken.

It appears that these forts were not for the

defence of empire as a whole but were the local safety

measures and the hypothesis hecomes more clear v/hen the

structures inside the enclosure are observed. The inner

structures like the Great Bath, big residential build­

ings and the Granary indicate that the whole complex

must be belonging to some aristocratic priestly rulers

or kings. Obviously enough the granary must be indicat­

ing the common wealth of the people or the taxes collec­

ted by the rulers from the public could have been

deposited in these. And consequently the importance of

these secular buildings must have been great in the eyes

of the rulers than that in the opinion of the public

and also the rulers must be more worried about the

protection of these from the outside enemy and the

public as well. As in the case of some crisis like

famine etc. these buildings must be attracting the atten­

tion of public. In other words these buildings were

the first target in the hours of distress and revolt.

And to avoid any such probabilities the rxilers must

have fortified the citadels and also the origin of the

ground plan to establish the citadel at a safe distance

or rather separately from the lower city, may be the

result of a farsightedness against the revolts.

19H

In case of outside invasions also the e n e m y also

would cast his covetous eyees on these wealthy points

to topple the economy of the country. But had there

been ar r major invasion of that sort, it must have left

some impression on the sites which on the contrary,

according to the excavator — ”as originally built the

defences of the citadel long remained untouched save by

the weather, which wore and rounded the exposed surface of

the baked brick rivetment to a notable extent" (Wheeler

G .H .I . Supple. Vol. 1955 p .20) except in the last phase

of Harappan cities. Though it may indicate the absence

of any major public revolt, but as far as the outside

invasion is concerned, the total absence of it cannot be

relied upon, as it is a thing almost impossible for any

country of any age. Though the situation of the land of

the Indus people, isolated by the mountain ranges of

Kirthar, Sulaiman and Hindukush, except some passes,

on the west; by a bigger mountain range on the north,

the great Indian Desert and Arabian sea protecting it

from east and south, there may be fewer chances of inva­

sion but the total absence is never possible. And in

fhis case the only probability left is that the Harappans

might be relying on the open battle. It is difficult

to say how much experience of siege warfare they had.

An standing army of able fighters, as indicated by the

presence of some barrack type constructions at Mohenjo-

19!t

daro, facing the enemy before they could reach near the

city, can either stop, make them to retreat or even

destroy them. And as such the architecture defined so

far was not the integral part of Harappan military system.

Another reference, though a guess-work which can

also answer even the vast expansion of the culture, is

the two-fold use of a fort in the case of offensive as

stated above. Though as told by Wheeler that "but it

must be remembered that at present we know almost nothing

of the earliest phase of the civilization". The sites

located at far off distances from the core of the civili­

zation, might have served as the effective spring-board

for fresh egression/spread of the civilization and thus

the wealth of Indus cultiire people , though mostly derived

from agriculture and trade must have been supplemented

and enlarged by the military conquests, in the early

phase of expansion of the civilization.

200

REFBRENCSS

1 Ancient India No. 3 p. 78

2. M .A .S .I . No. 48 pp. 153-3^

5 M .A .S .I . . No. 43 p. 71

4 Pakistan Archaeology 1954 p. 28

5 Wheeler — The Indus Civilization. C .H .I. Supple.

Vol. 1968 . . p. 75

6 ’Vheeler — Early India and

Pakistan p. 102

7 A. Stein — M .A .S .I . No. 37 p . ^

8 V/heeler — The Indus Civili­

zation C .H .I. Supple.Vol.1968 p. 75

9 Mackay — Journal of Royal

Society of Arts Jan. 193^ P* 220

10 D.H. Gordon — The Early use

of metals in India and

Pakistan — J.R . Anthrop

Inst. Vol. LXXX (London 1952) p. 57; '.*/heeler-CH.I.

supple. Vol. 1972 p. 73

11 Mackay — Further Excavations

at Mohenjodaro — J.R .S .A . Jan. 193^ P* 220

12 Piggotis — Ancient India No. 5 (19^8) pp. 38 ff ;

Wheeler C .H .I. Vol. 1972

pp. 77 ; 1 1 3

13 Wheeler — C .H .I . Vol. 1969 PP. 76-77

14 Marshall J. — Mohenjodaro & the Indus

Civilization, London 1931 PP* 465-467

1 5 Vats M.S. — Excavations at Harappa p. 6

201

16 Marshall J. — Op.cit. Vol.II p .535; Mackay — Op. cit.

p. 596;

17 Smith Sidney — Early History of Assyria p. 137

18 Ibid . . p. 214

19 Montgomery D.L. — History of 'Jfarfare p. 35

20 Wheeler — C .H .I Supple. Vol. 1968

21 Ancient India No.3 pp. 611-65; 'iVheeler — The Indus

Valley Civilization, C .H .I. Suppl. Vol.1972 pp .30-31

22 i(7heeler — Early India & Pakistan p. 98

23 Pakistan Archaeology 1964 pp. 38-39; Wheeler — The

Indus Valley Civilization C .H .I. Vol. 1968 p. 40

24 Wheeler — Ancient India I960 p. 244

25 Wheeler — The Indus Civilization, C^H.I. Vol. 1968

pp. 53-5^

26 Stein A. — M .A .S .I . No.43 p .60 ff.

27 Pakistan ^rch^^eology — 1964 p. 36

28 Piggot S. — Pre-historic India p. 175; V/heeler —

The Indus Civilization, C .H .I Supple Vol. 1968 pp.59-61

29 Antiquity — June 1962 pp. 86-92

30 Piggot S. — Pre-historic India

31 Pakistan Archaeology 1964 pp. 39-40 ; '.Vheeler — Early

India and Pakistan p. 106

32 Arch. Survey of India Report 1930-34 p. 162; M .A .S .I.

No.48 pp. 133-34

33 Piggot S. — Pre-historic India p. 79

34 Arch. Survey of India Report 1930-31 PP* 97-98 ;

Majumdar N.G. — Explorations in Sind M .A .S .I. No.48

p. 89

'.'Jlieeler — The Indus Civilization C .H .I. Supple Vol.

202

35 Indian A.rchaeology — A Review 1951-62 p. 43

36 Indian Arch. — a Review 1963-64 pp. 30-39

37 Indian Arch. — a Review 1967-68 pp. 42-45

38 India Arch. — a Review 1963-64 pp. 11-12

39 Indian A.rch,— a Review 195^-55 P* 12; Rao 3.R. —

Further excavations at Lothal pp. 14-30

40 Indian Arch. — a Review 1971-72 pp. 13-21

41 Arch. Survey of India Reports 1930-34 p. 104 ;

Piggot S. — Prehistoric India p. 99;

Singh S.D. — Ancient Indian 7/arfare with special

reference Vedic Period . . p. 120