Question

What are the opinions archaeologists about the status of Harappan society?
Which theory seems most plausible?Explain

Answer 1

Answer:

Through material evidences and use of ingenuity archaeologist have come up with some notion of how harappan societies were

1. Burial is one of the strategies used by archaeologist. Through studies of burial archaeologist have found out that there are certain differences in the way graves are made: for example some pits are laid with bricks whereas some are not, thus bringning forth the notion of social differences. However, it is still a specualtion.

2. Evidence of luxury goods too are a good indicator that shows how social structures were, for example most of the evidences of luxury goods were found at the larger settlements like, Harappa and Mohenjodaro. Thus it could be possible that social differences were prominent in the larger settlement due to large population.

3. There are Some graves that contain pottery and some ornaments, it has lead archaeologist to believe that these things are indicating a belief in the after life.

4. On the basis of evidences related with different occupations the archaeologists (or archaeo-botanists or archaeo-zoologists) indicate that the people of different occupations or of different socio-economic positions used to live in the Harappan cities.

5. Some archaeologists are of the opinion that Harappan society had no rulers, and that everybody enjoyed equal status. Others feel there were no single ruler but several, that Mohenjodaro had a separate ruler, Harappa another, and so forth, yet others argue that there was a single state, given the similarity in artefacts, the evidence for planned settlements, the standardised ratio of brick size, and the establishment of settlements near sources of raw material. As of now, the last theory seems the most plausible, as it is unlikely that entire communities could have collectively made and implemented such complex decisions.