The Indus Civilization Page 20

  The Drainage System and Domestic Water Facilities

  One of the most remarkable features of Mohenjo-daro and several other Mature Harappan settlements (e.g., Harappa, Kalibangan, Nausharo, Chanhu-daro, Allahdino, Dholavira, Lothal) is the drainage system. At Mohenjo-daro the streets and lanes in all of the neighborhoods were provided with drainage.23 There was also provision for the management of wastewater inside the houses, with intramural drains, vertical drain pipes in the walls, chutes through walls to the streets, and drains from bathing floors into street drains. Mohenjo-daro receives less than 13 centimeters of rain per year, probably about what it received in the third millennium. This would not seem to be enough rain to justify such an elaborate system.

  At Mohenjo-daro drains were found at all levels of the site. They seem, therefore, to have been made at the very beginning of the Indus Civilization and may be another technology of these peoples that was developed in the important Transitional Stage. The street drains at all sites were generally made of baked brick, although the one at Allahdino is of stone.

  In SD Area of Mohenjo-daro there are some drains where the bottom was made of gypsum and lime plaster with sides of baked brick. In most instances ordinary baked brick was used, but specially dressed brick was noted in some drains of SD and DK Areas. Specially shaped bricks were used to form the gently rounded corners of drains. The integrity of the drains was achieved by closely fitting the bricks with a bit of mud mortar. Dressed bricks made the fit even better.

  Drains were often reused from building period to building period at Mohenjo-daro. This was done by simply raising the walls with more bricks. At the southern end of First Street in DK-G the walls of a drain were repaired and raised at least twice. In its last construction phase this drain was 42 centimeters wide, but 2 meters deep in places.24 Most of the drains had brick or stone covers because they were under the street or ground surface. Open drains have been found along the sides of streets, a common feature of contemporary villages in Pakistan and northwestern India. The most frequent cover was simply an ordinary baked brick laid flat across the sidewalls, although bricks laid on edge across the channel are also well documented. The wider drains were covered with large limestone blocks quarried from the nearby Rohri Hills. These blocks are especially common on the Mound of the Great Bath.

  The drains were mostly hidden underground, out of the way of the traffic. Mackay estimates that the average depth was in the range of 46 to 60 centimeters, but some drains were very close to or at the surface. Limestone drain covers in SD Area sometimes had a distinct polish on their upper side—“polish that must have been caused by the feet of passers-by.”25 We should imagine the tops of these covering blocks right at ground level, some slightly buried, and that as the earth of the street surface changed and moved, some were periodically exposed and the slight polish of wear was applied to them.

  Small settling pools and traps were built into the system of drainage. This allowed coarse sediment and other materials to drop out of the flow in places were it could be periodically collected.

  That the drains of Mohenjo-daro were cleaned out periodically is attested by the little heaps of greenish-gray sand that we frequently found alongside them. The more finely levigated clays would be readily carried off by the rush of water whereas the heavier particles of sand were deposited.26

  The wider drains, or culverts, could not be covered in an ordinary way. Sometimes special bricks of extra length were baked.27 The corbelled arch was used for the culverts. The Great Bath was provided with the largest of all the Mature Harappan culverts (figure 5.3).

  Water from inside houses was sometimes led directly into a street drain, but there are other facilities that were used as well: brick-lined cesspits and pottery jars along the streets. But it was clearly important for the water from bathing floors to be moved out of the home and for it not to be allowed to sink directly into the ground. This suggests that the water from bathing (and other domestic activities) was polluted and dirty beyond the simple scientific sense, leading to the close connection with ideology.

  Figure 5.3 Elevation of a culvert with a corbelled arch (after Marshall 1931i)

  Bathing Facilities

  One of the most common features of a house at Mohenjo-daro was a special platform for bathing (figure 5.4). These are usually on the order of 1.5 meters on a side, sometimes not square, but always rectilinear. The bricks of the floor were very carefully prepared, sawn and ground to shape, with right angles where faces met and smoothed upper surfaces. This was specialized, careful work, expensive in terms of time, but then the jobs were relatively small in scale. The bricks varied in size, even within a single platform. A raised rim around the platform was achieved by ringing the platforms with a course of bricks on edge. The surfaces of these bathing platforms were slightly tilted so that water would run to a corner and out of the bathing area through a drain in the wall.

  Not only were the floors of these platforms sloped, they were very smooth, probably ground down after all of the bricks had been fitted to give a seamless surface. Then they were coated with a plaster of lime and brick dust that was polished by the plasterer and the feet of the users.28

  Bathing facilities are also found in abundance at Harappa, where they conform to the patterns outlined here. Somewhat different is the line of thirteen bathing platforms on the High Mound at Lothal. This seems to have been a civic facility, open to many, but not likely all, of the relatively few people at this small site.

  These bathing platforms seem to be the chief source of water that went into the drainage system of Mohenjodaro, except, of course, for those few days when there was a really good rain.

  Privies

  The issue of latrines, or privies, in the Indus Civilization begins with Marshall’s discussion of the vertical terracotta pipe in the wall of a house:

  From its small size it is clear that this vertical pipe was meant to convey fluid only, not solids; and this seems to be true of the house drains of Mohenjo-daro. . . . [However,] in House XLIX of HR Area, Section B, Block 7 privies with seats (as to the character of which there can be no question) are directly connected with brick drains of the usual type, which must therefore have been designed for sewage of any kind, solid or fluid.29

  There is one more privy as well, but that is all, and the drains of Mohenjo-daro seem not to emerge as conduits for solid waste. There are just too many good points against it, as noted by Mackay (figure 5.5).30

  Figure 5.4 Bathing platform at Mohenjo-daro (after Jansen 1993)

  Figure 5.5 Privy in DK-G at Mohenjo-daro (after Jansen 1993)

  In a discussion of triangular terra-cotta cakes, Wheeler once said: “Their great abundance, especially in drains, would be consistent with a use in the toilet, either as flesh rubbers or as an equivalent to toilet paper.”31 Hummm!

  The Indus Civilization and Water: Summary

  Water was important in the Indus Civilization in two ways. From a practical point of view, it sustained the life of humans, plants, and animals. But it also played an important symbolic role as an essential part of the Indus ideology. Clean, fresh water was provided to urban peoples from deep, brick-lined wells. Dirty, polluted water was moved out of the houses of urban peoples by an expensive system of drains. The Great Bath at Mohenjo-daro was a special place for the ablutions of elites.

  Residential Architecture: Mohenjo-daro

  Most of the buildings of the Lower Town of Mohenjo-daro seem to have been used as residences. Some of them, perhaps even most, may have served other purposes as well, but the Lower Town is the part of Mohenjo-daro where the people lived and worked. The buildings there were the prime setting for these activities. Marshall offers a vivid, well-illustrated picture of two buildings that might have been houses.32

  There are several recurring features of the residences at many Mature Harappan sites. The best preserved are found at Mohenjo-daro, and extensive use is made of these data. But there are also residences at other sites, and they wil
l serve to broaden these observations.

  Extensive Use of Baked Brick

  The standard baked brick at Mohenjo-daro was 28 by 14 by 7 centimeters. The 1:2:4 ratio is one of the most efficient proportions for laying bricks and was an improvement over the Early Harappan 1:2:3 standard. The largest brick found at Mohenjo-daro is 50.65 by 26.25 by 8.75 centimeters. It was incorporated into a wall of the Late Period on the Mound of the Great Bath and may originally have been used to cover a drain.33 The smallest brick is 23.75 by 10.875 by 5 centimeters.

  Baked brick was used at Harappa, but there were many structures of unbaked brick as well.

  Side by side with burnt brick middle class houses of the Intermediate Period dwellings of the poor were made of mud and mud brick, e.g., Houses 1-4 in Trench I, Mound D. Sometimes in the better class houses mud bricks were used in alternate courses along with burnt brick masonry. Mud brick was also used for raising solid terraces to guard against the danger of floods. Where used in masonry it was always well molded, and once the walls were plastered over with mud and straw, no distinction would be possible between the two.34

  The use of sun-dried brick at Mohenjo-daro was different. There are no complete structures made of this material. Sun-dried brick was also extensively used as fill there.

  Substantial Buildings at Mohenjo-daro

  The buildings of the Lower Town are also generally substantial and solidly built. Walls with a thickness of a meter or two are common. The very latest levels of the site have shabby squatters’ quarters. Mackay informs us that this was generally true at Mohenjo-daro.

  The sizes of the bricks tell us nothing, and it is practically impossible to distinguish between the brickwork of the early and intermediate periods, the brickwork of the Late Period is as a rule quite unmistakable . . . the majority of the rooms and buildings at Mohenjo-daro are out of truth in the Late Period, and this feature is noticeable in even the largest buildings.35

  Vats says something similar about the late architecture at Harappa:

  During the Late Period, however, most of the foundations of numerous fragmentary walls seem to have been laid on any kind of slipshod debris, possibly as a majority of them had nothing more than a thatched roof to support. Indeed, this is exemplified by the Late III dwellings in the extension of Pits I and II in Mound AB where a considerable quantity of charcoal of pinewood rafters, bamboos and reeds was brought to light.36

  More Than One Floor

  The thickness of the walls of the houses at Mohenjo-daro and the presence of stairways leading up (to open sky today) seem to imply that many, perhaps most, of these buildings had an upper story. The stairs could have led to the roof, but the thickness of the walls argues against this, at least as the general pattern. The number of floors cannot be determined in an accurate way, but one story above the ground floor can be hypothesized securely. It is entirely possible that the general pattern was a ground floor, another with living space, and then a roof. But some of the larger buildings could have had two, even three, additional floors below the roof.

  Hearths, Kitchens, and House Fires

  The frequency of fires at Mohenjo-daro is a minor, but intriguing, topic. There is much evidence for burning at Mohenjo-daro and fires consumed many of the buildings. 37 Additional information on fire at Mohenjo-daro comes from Dikshit’s report on his excavation near the “Jewelry Block”: “The destruction of the latest city in this quarter seems to have been caused by fire. This was evident from the existence of stratified layers of ashes, alternating with debris of fallen structures.”38 These statements can be contrasted to Mackay: “Evidence for houses having been burnt out is extremely rare and accidental fires were carefully guarded against.”39

  It is difficult to know exactly what the frequency of fires was at Mohenjo-daro, and an examination of the standing remains is not really helpful, given postexcavation cleanup and conservation. Fresh digging is needed to resolve the issue, but it is two diggers against one right now. If there were a significant number of fires this could be contrasted to the small number of hearths.

  Marshall notes only three doubtful hearths at Mohenjo-daro. 40 Mackay informs us that these fireplaces were simple platforms of brick, slightly raised, usually placed along one side of a room. “In one house in HR Area there was an arrangement for boiling water; the vessels were set on a high brick stand with an ample space beneath for fuel.”41

  Here is an interesting situation. Very few hearths on the ground floor, but abundant evidence for house fires. If the hearths and kitchens were not on the ground floor, then they must have been on the parts of the buildings with wooden floors. We can be certain that the hearths would not have been laid on the bare wooden floors. A base of bricks, possibly several courses thick over a good area and covered with mud plaster, that baked to terracotta through use would have been there. But, over time, these open fire hearths so near the wooden floors were a bad combination. They would not pass code today. No matter what the precautions, over the long run they were very dangerous and frequent house fires resulted.

  In this case, if house fires were a result of this pattern of living, why did the people of Mohenjo-daro persist in their “suicidal” ways? A difficult question, but the situation is reasonably clear: frequent house fires and almost no hearths. The hearths and therefore the cooking seem to have been done upstairs.

  Windows, Doors, Roofs, and Other Features

  There are some windows in Mature Harappan buildings. Terra-cotta fragments that look like grilles could be “window” filling. Mackay observes that the trick at Mohenjodaro was to keep the heat out, just as we do with cold, and windows work counter to this.42

  There are a few door sockets, but not as many as one would expect if every door had one. Lack of door sockets may indicate wooden doors and frames with sockets in the frame.43 Dales found a portion of a door frame in his 1964 excavations at Mohenjo-daro but made no mention of a socket (figure 5.6).44

  The only coherent discussion of roofs on Mature Harappan buildings deals with those from Mohenjo-daro. Marshall opts for flat roofs set on timbers for all of his buildings at Mohenjo-daro, as does Mackay.45

  There is no direct evidence for furniture although a number of individuals depicted on the stamp seals sit on a kind of dais. There appears what may be a chair on a seal, and one or two figurines depict furniture. The high dish-on-stand suggests to me that it is a raised plate and that the people who used them sat on the ground, probably cross-legged with this utensil in front of them.

  Figure 5.6 Wooden door jam from Mohenjo-daro (after Dales 1982: 103)

  Architecture of the Lower Town: A. Sarcina’s Study

  There is a special study of the residential architecture at Mohenjo-daro that was undertaken by A. Sarcina.46 Her study of the ground-floor architecture found that there were five recurring house plans in the city, which she identifies with color names (figure 5.7). Table 5.2 lists the number of occurrences as well as the sizes of each building type.

  Table 5.2 Sarcina’s counts for houses of different types at Mohenjo-daro

  Model Number of buildings Size (m2)

  Yellow model 58 104.27

  Red model 42 97.35

  Green model 6 183.60

  Brown model 4 106.70

  Blue model 2 130.42

  Total 112

  Note: After Sarcina (1979: 435).

  SUMMARY: THE ARCHITECTURE OF THE INDUS CIVILIZATION

  In some ways the substance of the Indus Civilization is its architecture, and the artifacts found within these contexts. This chapter has attempted to give an overview of architecture, not as an architect would necessarily view it, but from the perspective of an archaeologist. Such topics as town planning, civic and domestic drainage, platforms, and well digging have provided a glimpse into the subject as have discussion of bricks, roofs, fires, and doorways. More is found in the individual site surveys on buildings, town planning, and architecture generally. Mohenjo-daro is the defining settlement for the Mature Harappan
and Indus urbanization, so a special tour of the ancient city highlights and deepens the discussion of architecture and other qualities of the Mature Harappan.

  NOTES

  1 Vats 1940: 12.

  2 Vats 1940: 15.

  3 Wheeler 1968: 26; Piggott 1950: 151; Rao 1973: 11—23.

  4 Mackay 1937—38: 29.

  5 Piggott 1950: 152; Wheeler 1968: 36.

  6 Jansen 1987, 1993a, 1994: 269.

  7 Jansen 1987: 15.

  8 Dales 1968b: 60.

  9 Cucarzi 1984: 195.

  10 Mackay 1937—38: 42—44.

  11 Jansen 1985: 12.

  12 Marshall 1931b: 21.

  13 Marshall 1031b: 19

  14 Marshall 1931i: 124—27. As an aside: Wheeler criticized Marshall for his lack of attention to stratigraphy, but here Marshall tells a coherent story of the buildup of the mound, and the subsequent order of building during the Indus and Buddhist periods. He even places his Arabic strata numbers in small circles; very Wheelerian.