An intriguing article in the way it creates multiple openings in thinking about ancient Indus society. The subject is a set of three of four beads found at a rural "Sorath Harappan" site (2300-1900 BCE) in Gujarat, one of many of what the authors call "numerous contemporaneous settlements [which] were occupied by residents who used predominately local ceramic styles and do not seem to have had access to many objects of classically Harappan material culture as their neighbors in the massively walled settlements." In other words, this "Sorath Harappan" settlement seems distinct but related to the more obviously fortified, neighboring Indus settlements in Gujarat. Three of the beads found there – looking like the standard Indus steatite beads, manufactured to exacting standards and heated at a high temperature to achieve their characteristic whiteness – turn out, with proper analysis, to be "fake." They were made from a local clay mineral combination that is not steatite. In short, they were "counterfeit" even if we don't quite know what that would have meant so long ago.
Gujarat Indus sites imported white steatite beads as they were far from steatite sources; this discovery suggests possible local production of imitation beads. It may indicate restricted access to true steatite bead trade trade networks, or an entrepreneurial adaptation using local materials.
The paper also raises a number of ancillary questions about steatite beads, besides the large question of authenticity and value in Harappan society. Why were they hoarded and stored with jewelry, with thousands sometimes found together in a single vessel? The authors speak of "the extensive circulation of these apparently highly-valued objects. This is especially the case in Gujarat . . . " (p. 177). Their manufacture, so far attested to in Harappa and Mohenjo-daro "alongside steatite and faience tablets in a spatially segregated workshop," (ibid) also speaks to the special status and nature of these objects, perhaps making a market for counterfeit ones understandable. "In this way, the local creation of imitation steatite beads may have allowed for individuals and communities to socially transform themselves in ways consistent with Indus cultural values of transformation through technical virtuosity embodied in the objects of their desire (Vidale & Miller, 2000). Only further analysis of more beads from more sites will allow us to evaluate these hypotheses," (p. 181) is another way to look at the imitation beads issue.
In short, an accidental discovery using instrumental neutron activation analysis is an opening for many more research questions (e.g. how many existing beads have been misidentified as steatite from other sites?). The paper makes one want to re-examine various aspects of Indus society, like its relationship to local cultures like those in Gujarat, and the manifestation of value in appearance at the time. Further discoveries should be most interesting to watch.
Image: Four Small White Beads from Kotada Bhadli and their XRD Spectra