More than one growing season

Indus food systems drew on different crops and growing seasons. Cameron Petrie, Jennifer Bates, Thomas Higham and Ravindra Nath Singh’s 2016 study presents direct dates for rice, millets and three tropical pulse species at two settlements near Rakhigarhi. These summer crops complicate an account of urban provisioning built only around winter cereals. The authors connect crop diversity with the labour and scheduling needed to feed settlements through the year.[1]

The geographical scope is important: these are findings from particular sites in Rakhigarhi’s hinterland, not a list of what every person ate throughout the Indus world. The authors’ interpretation is that varied crops and strategies, including growing crops in more than one season, contributed from early phases of urban development. Their dated samples give a stronger basis for that argument than an undated seed or a modern regional menu would provide.[1]

Crop remains also document work

Bates, Singh and Petrie’s crop-processing study combines large plant remains with phytoliths, microscopic plant silica remains, at five small settlements in Haryana and Rajasthan. The two kinds of evidence preserve different information. Large remains can identify species more precisely, while phytoliths can retain evidence of early processing stages whose chaff is poorly represented among the larger finds. A missing component in one dataset is therefore not automatically evidence of an absent activity.[2]

Their combined analysis suggests that the organisation of crop processing differed with the season in which cereals were grown. This challenges a simple model in which village labour changed uniformly as cities developed or declined. It also gives smaller settlements an active place in agricultural history. Questions about cleaning, storing and preparing grain are questions about people’s time and work, as well as the supply of calories.[2]

A newer interpretation from Harappa itself

A study first published online in December 2024 examines 1,144 archaeobotanical samples from Harappa. Nathaniel James and colleagues argue that small weed seeds in the assemblage can partly result from burning dung as fuel. Seeds may enter a deposit through fuel use, crop processing or food waste. Similar-looking remains can thus arise from different activities, which makes it risky to infer a labour system from seed proportions alone.[3]

The researchers argue that crops probably reached Harappa in a substantially processed state, with dung burning adding small weed seeds later. They also recognise that no single process explains every sample. This revises the interpretation of the archaeological record; it does not make plant evidence useless. It shows why knowing how remains were burnt and deposited can change an account of relationships between an urban centre and its suppliers.[3]

What fats in pots can and cannot identify

Akshyeta Suryanarayan and colleagues used surviving fats to investigate 172 pottery fragments from seven urban and rural sites in northwest India. The team obtained interpretable concentrations from 122 fragments, about 71 per cent, and identified animal-fat signatures alongside limited evidence of dairy processing. The authors found broadly similar product use across their urban and rural samples and limited changes between the Mature and Late Harappan periods.[4]

The authors also stress interpretive difficulties: low concentrations, a lack of local modern reference fats and possible mixtures of plant and animal products. The results are consequently not a recipe book or a precise tally of meat consumption. Read alongside seeds and processing evidence, they add information about vessel use while preserving the difference between an identified chemical pattern and an entire community’s diet.[4]

Sources & notes

Source records include access dates and, where known, limits on what was examined. Checks used AI assistance; independent human or specialist review has not been completed.

  1. C. A. Petrie, J. Bates, T. Higham and R. N. Singh / Antiquity. Feeding ancient cities in South Asia: dating the adoption of rice, millet and tropical pulses in the Indus civilisation ↗archaeobotanical dating research, abstract inspected · Source date: 2016-11-21 · Locator: Public Abstract; Antiquity 90(354), pp. 1489–1504. Accessed 2026-10-31.Only the publisher abstract was inspected. No crop-by-crop sample ages or sites not named there are invented.Return to More than one growing season, paragraph 1 ↑Return to More than one growing season, paragraph 2 ↑
  2. Jennifer Bates, Ravindra Nath Singh and Cameron A. Petrie. Exploring Indus crop processing: combining phytolith and macrobotanical analyses to consider the organisation of agriculture in northwest India c. 3200–1500 bc ↗open-access archaeological research · Source date: 2016-05-21 · Locator: Abstract and introduction, five small sites and complementary plant remains; Vegetation History and Archaeobotany 26, pp. 25–41. Accessed 2026-11-04.Publisher abstract and introduction inspected; study concerns Haryana and Rajasthan rather than a representative sample of all Indus settlements.Return to Crop remains also document work, paragraph 1 ↑Return to Crop remains also document work, paragraph 2 ↑
  3. Nathaniel James, Alexia Decaix, Isabell Villasana, J. Mark Kenoyer, Richard H. Meadow and Jade d’Alpoim Guedes. Taphonomy and labour at the Indus Valley site of Harappa (3700–1300 BC) ↗open-access archaeological research · Source date: 2024-12-06 · Locator: Abstract; Introduction (1,144 samples); Discussion and Conclusion on dung burning and processed grain; Antiquity 99(403), pp. 83–100. Accessed 2026-10-31.Inspected the article’s public introduction and discussion, including its multiple-process qualification. Online publication date differs from the February 2025 issue.Return to A newer interpretation from Harappa itself, paragraph 1 ↑Return to A newer interpretation from Harappa itself, paragraph 2 ↑
  4. Akshyeta Suryanarayan and colleagues, Journal of Archaeological Science. Lipid residues in pottery from the Indus Civilisation in northwest India ↗peer-reviewed archaeological residue study, full text · Source date: 2021 journal volume · Locator: Volume 125 (2021), article 105291; sections 2.6–3.1, 4.1 and 4.3, and conclusion. Accessed 2026-11-04.Read the accessible full article’s sampling methods, results, interpretation and conclusion. Its sample contains 172 pottery fragments from seven sites; low concentrations, reference-fat gaps and possible mixtures limit identification. Underlying sample data were not independently reanalysed.Return to What fats in pots can and cannot identify, paragraph 1 ↑Return to What fats in pots can and cannot identify, paragraph 2 ↑
Help improve this entry. Suggest a correction with a source. · Read recorded changes
Record PH-HIS-0006 · English edition · human review not performed