Tamil Nadu CM's Iron Age Claims: Omitting Inconvenient Questions

Archaeology is closely connected with science. It is a far distance away from politics. But in India, it is a far distance away from science and closely connected with politics. This is true at both the national and the regional level. The recent announcement by the Tamil Nadu Chief Minister M. K. Stalin that the Iron Age began in Tamil Nadu is a case in point. It is not an accident that the findings of Tamil Nadu archaeologists did not appear in a scientific journal, but in a glossy pamphlet-style book titled, Antiquity of Iron—Recent Radiometric Findings from Tamil Nadu, published by the Tamil Nadu government, with the usual blessings from the emperors of power. Yes, a few experts joined them and made some non-committal remarks, without critically evaluating the actual findings.

The Iron Age

The Iron Age was the final technological and cultural stage in the Stone-Bronze-Iron Age sequence. The date of the Iron Age, in which this metal, for the most part, replaced bronze in implements and weapons, varied from area to area. It began in the Middle East and southeastern Europe about 1200 BCE, but in China not until about 600 BCE. With the large-scale production of iron implements, agriculture became significantly easier and more efficient, allowing people to cultivate more land and produce more crop yields. It also resulted in increased population and new settlements. The utilisation of iron for weapons meant that many more people carried arms than previously, setting off a series of large-scale movements that changed the face of the world.

It is not that iron smelting was completely unknown before the arrival of the Iron Age. Smelted iron appears in archaeological findings much before this age. For instance, an article published in Science on January 9, 2009, says that “several French and Belgian archaeologists have pointed evidence from sites in Niger, Rwanda and Burundi suggesting that Africans invented ironworking independently as early as 3600 BCE”. There is no doubt that India too was using iron much before 1200 BCE.

Findings in Tamil Nadu

Antiquity of Iron lists various sites from which iron objects were found. The actual iron was tested from two places, both disturbed. The one from Mangadu yielded the calibrated age of 1510 BCE. This was a disturbed site. The other iron sample—a sword collected from a pit in Thelunganur—yielded two calibrated age ranges: the hilt was dated to 2900–2627 BCE, while the blade was dated to 1435–1233 BCE These dates are highly unreliable as they are from disturbed sites. The rest of the samples were not actual iron objects, but paddy husks, charcoal bits and ceramic pieces.

Here, it is important to highlight a basic archaeological principle. In archaeology, a stratigraphic layer is a distinct level of soil that has accumulated over time at an excavation site. These layers represent different periods of human activities and natural processes, helping archaeologists to understand the chronological sequence of past events. The layers usually contain artifacts, and basically, two laws govern them. The first law says that deeper layers are generally older than those above them. This is common sense. The second says that the age of a stratigraphic layer is typically determined by the most recent artifact found in it, meaning that the layer cannot be older than the youngest object it contains. Thus, if an artifact, the age of which cannot be ascertained, is found in a layer, the archaeologists look for objects in the same layer the age of which can be scientifically determined. Usually, the layers are likely to have charcoal bits and ceramic pieces. A charcoal bit라이브 바카라 age can be determined by Accelerator Mass Spectrometry (AMS) testing. A ceramic piece라이브 바카라 age can be determined by Optically Simulated Luminescence (OSL) dating. If an object, whose age is not known, is found near these tested objects, a surmise can be made that they all belong to the same age. This is at best a surmise, and even that can be legitimately made only after several conditions are met.

What was given for laboratory testing in Sivagalai?

The spectacular announcement made by Stalin is purely based on the tests made on paddy, charcoal bits and ceramic pieces found in the village of Sivagalai. The book says as follows:

“The maximum depth of the pit is 150 cm and the diameter of the pit is 100-110 cm. The size of the urn varies from large to small... Many of the urns developed a crack due to the pressure of the overlying soil. In a few cases, the lid of the urn was found intact which did not permit to percolation of the soil inside the urn. In a few, the lids were broken and collapsed allowing the soil to fill in the urns...Ceramics are the predominant grave goods comprising bowls, lids, rings stands and pots made of black-and-red ware, white painted black-and-red ware and black ware.”

A paddy sample from an urn with an intact lid was dated to 1155 BCE. In the same trench (A 2), a charcoal bit found near urn 1 was tested and its age was found to be 3259 BCE. A ceramic piece found near the same urn was tested by the OSL method, and its age was found to be 2427 BCE! In other words, the earliest age arrived at in the tests has been transferred to the iron objects found in the same trench measuring merely 10 meters X 10 meters. The trench was not pristine, but highly disturbed. Thus, these dates will not be accepted by any reputed archaeologist without serious analyses, especially since what is implied here is that the same burial site was being used for 2,000 years without any major change in the objects found.

The African Example

The Science article mentioned above discusses a similar issue. It says, “Their analyses (dating of the artifact to 3600 BCE) was strongly criticised by prominent researchers in the United States who argued that the early radiocarbon dates likely came from wood older than the iron artifacts... (It was) also suggested that Francophone researchers had fallen under the influence of African nationalism and pride, which blinded them to the problems in their data.” It goes on to discuss another site where an actual iron forge was discovered and its age was assessed to be as early as 3490 BCE. This date too was considered dubious because of the distinct possibility that the later iron workers could have dug into the ground laced with charcoal from an earlier occupation or forest fire.

The Unasked Questions

Did the supposed knowledge of iron smelting more than 5,000 years ago bring about any revolutionary change in the lives of the people? There is no evidence that it did so. Tamil Nadu is bereft of any remains of a city or even a single remarkable construction until the early years of the common era. There is also no evidence that the possession of iron objects brought about appreciable changes in agricultural practices. Was there any iron furnace discovered anywhere on these sites? The answer is no. The earliest furnace discovered in Kodumanal, a site far away from Sivagalai, is dated to be from the 5th century BCE. The book omits such inconvenient questions.

When jingoism reigns supreme, science takes a backseat.

(Views expressed are personal)

P A Krishnan is a renowned writer in Tamil and English

(This appeared in print as 'Rusted Ruins')