Chapter 9: Vesuvianite-grossular Acquisition Networks | Download PDF
New Introductory Paragraph by Randall Law, 2024
Vesuvianite-grossular garnet is a hard, translucent green-hued stone that early investigators of Indus
Civilization sites mistook for jade. It occurs in three areas of the greater Indus Region – central Khyber-
Pakhtunkhwa Province, northern Balochistan and southern Rajasthan. Samples from these three source
areas were compared to vesuvianite-grossular garnet production debris fragments from Harappa using
Instrumental Neutron Activation Analysis.
---
VESUVIANITE-GROSSULAR ACQUISITION NETWORKS
Chapter Introduction – Harappan “Jade”
In this chapter, I examine a distinctive translucent green to yellowish-green rock that has been recovered at Harappa in the form of beads, amulets and manufacturing debris (Figure 9.1). The Italian researchers Vidale and Bianchetti (1997) analyzed three of the debris fragments using X-ray diffraction (XRD) and determined them to be composed of a mixture of the minerals vesuvianite and grossular garnet (called here “vesuvianite-grossular”). They went on to suggest that translucent green beads from Mohenjo-daro (Figure 9.2 top), which were previously identified as “a peculiar form of jade” (Coulson 1931: 542), may actually be composed of this variety of stone. Reports of “jade” beads from early excavations at Harappa (Beck 1940: 402) and Mohenjo-daro (Mackay 1931c: 519, Mackay 1938: 498, 527), have led some scholars to suggest (Allchin and Allchin 1982: 186; Mackay 1948: 83) that long-distance exchange networks existed between the Indus region and distant parts of Asia where gem-quality nephrite (western China) or jadeite (Myanmar) can be found. Vidale and Bianchetti’s identification of vesuvianitegrossular – a rock that greatly resembles jade and has several of the same mineralogical characteristics, casts doubt on those interpretation. More recently, the Italian team hypothesized (Vidale and Bianchetti 1999) that this stone may have even been a longdistance export from the Indus Civilization to consumers in Mesopotamia region.
I begin this chapter with an overview of the mineralogy of vesuvianite-grossular followed by an account of the effort to identify and characterize. artifacts composed of it at Harappa. After that, the possibility that past researchers misidentified this rock as the mineral jadeite is explored. Next, I review the potential sources of this stone in South Asia and present the results of an INAA study in which samples from three of those sources were compared with artifacts from Harappa and Mohenjo-daro. I then consider Vidale and Bianchetti’s hypothesis that vesuvianite-grossular may have been an export from the Indus region to Mesopotamia. In the concluding section, I explore the spatial and temporal distribution of vesuvianite-grossular at Harappa and discuss what appears to be its close association with “Ernestite,” which is only material in the assemblage from which drills capable of perforating it could have been made. All sites, geologic sources and geographic regions mentioned in this chapter are identified on figures 9.7 and 9.8.
The rest of Chapter 9 is in the attached PDF below.
Images
Figure 9.1 Vesuvianite-grossular garnet artifacts from Harappa.
Figure 9.2 Vesuvianite-grossular garnet artifacts from Mohenjo-Daro.
Figure 9.3 Specific gravity and composition of 31 translucent green-stones (26 debris fragments from Harappa and five geologic samples).
Figure 9.4 Specific gravity range and mean of different types of vesuvianite-grossular artifacts from Harappa
Figure 9.5 Unfinished vesuvianite-grossular bead H96/7106-6 (SG = 3.50).
Figure 9.6 Johri in Peshawar, Pakistan selling raw "jade" (said to be from Sakhakot-Qila) that was later identified at grossular garnet.
Figure 9.7: Vesuvianite-grossular sources of the Greater Indus region and archaeological sites discussed in this chapter.
Figure 9.8: Occurences of vesuvianite, grossular, or both outside of the greater Indus region.
Figure 9.9 A string of Kumbalgarh vesuvianite beads purchased in Udaipur, Rajasthan.
Figure 9.10 Masses of Kumbalgarh vesuvianite purchased from a stone merchant near Udaipur.
Figure 9.11 Samples of vesuvianite-grossular from the Sakhakot-Qila ophiolite, Malakand-Mohmand agencies, FATA.
Figure 9.12 Top - The rodingite outcrop and talus slope of the vesuvianite-grossular occurrence at Taleri Mohammed Jan, Zhob District, Baluchistan. Bottom - Veins of fractured vesuvianite-grossular at Taleri Mohammed Jan.
Figure 9.13 Comparison of samples from three vesuvianite-grossular sources and ten vesuvianite-grossular artifacts using canonical discriminant analysis.
Figure 9.14 Comparison of samples from three vesuvianite-grossular sources and ten vesuvianite-grossular artifacts using hierarchical cluster analysis (Ward's Method).
Figure 9.15 Vesuvianite-grossular artifact distribution at Harappa. Vesuvianite-grossular artifacts have been recovered in all trenches and areas labeled on this site plan.
Figure 9.16 Spatial distribution of all vesuvianite-grossular and “Ernestite” artifacts at Harappa
Figure 9.17 Temporal distribution and shared lot association of all vesuvianite-grossular and “Ernestite” artifacts from stratigraphically secure contexts at Harappa (np = not present).
Figure 9.18 Spatial distr bution of all vesuvianite-grossular and “Ernestite” artifacts from non-secure contexts at Harappa.
Figure 9.19 Harappan vesuvianite-grossular acquisition and trade networks (provisional).
The Chapter section titles are:
The mineralogy of vesuvianite-grossular
Characterization and identification of vesuvianite-grossular at Harappa
Is vesuvianite-grossular Harappan “jade”?
Where did the vesuvianite-grossular acquired by Harappans come from?
Potential vesuvianite-grossular sources in India
Potential vesuvianite-grossular sources in Pakistan
An INAA comparison of vesuvianite-grossular artifacts to samples from three sources
Was vesuvianite-grossular exported to Mesopotamia from the Greater Indus region?
Vesuvianite-grossular at Harappa and its association with “Ernestite”
Chapter conclusion
