Sie sind auf Seite 1von 30

Heidrun Schenk

The Dating and Historical Value of Rouletted Ware "

"Old myths die hard".
H. P. Ray drew this conclusion when describing
the "surviving conceptions" on the part of
scholars for Indo-Roman trade (H. P. Ray 1999:
317)1. She refers especially to "all attempts being
made to keep the linkage with Indo-Roman
trade alive".
Rouletted ware, in the following called R W,
is the subject of many articles which deal with
early historic trade and contacts; many excava-
tion sites have been dated by means of this
distinctive form. And to this day many scholars
still regard Arikamedu and RW as well as proof
of Indo-Roman trade during the early first
centuries A.D., as reflected in the Periplus maris
erythrcae, despite new divergent results which
have come forth within the last 20 years
uncritical reliance on half a century old pub-
lications and/or the non-observance of recent
often leads to a perpetuation of
obsolete "classic" conceptions. S. Suresh recent-
ly complains about the "non-availability of data
pertaining to the precise stratigraphical context
of each of the RW sherds on a site-by-site basis"
(2004: 95).
The present study confirms Ray's above-
mentioned criticism and points to the need for
a greater awareness of the revised significance
of Arikamedu and R W in particular which
V. Begley has revealed since 1983. The follow-
ing remarks rest on the results of the excava-
tions at Tissamaharama, Sri Lanka, and its main
focus lies on the R W (Fig. 1 a, b). I would like
to point out, that the already largely accepted
earlier beginning of this distinctive pottery
should have consequences for most of the
studies on the Early Historic Period and its
maritime trade. Moreover, the study of the
pottery from Tissamaharama provides clear
indication that the production of RW ceases
within the 1" century B.C. A continuity for it
as late as the 4'" century A.D. has often been
suggested (N agaswamy 1995: 78). But, finds in
later contexts arc taken to be residual heirlooms,
which occur inevitably on sites with long set-
tlement sequences
A riveted RW vessel found
in the campaign of 2004 at Tissamaharama also
suggests a certain esteem for a piece in this ware
(Fig. 1 c). Apparently such vessels were kept
long after their production. Altogether, this
reduces the value of RW as a key type for the
This article is an updated and revised version of an article
published in German (Schenk 2001c). - I would like to
thank Roberta Tombcr, London, and Paul Yule, Hei-
delberg, for comments and going over my text.
Sec also Ray 1993: 575.
Nagaswamy 1995: csp. 78; Nath 1 'J95a: 158; Ball 2001:
123-133, esp. 128. - Accepting the new reception c. g.:
Raman 1992: 127; Gupta 1995/96; Rahman 1999: 121-
131; Basa/Behera 1999: 18; Suresh 2004: 98.
Sec the dating of Kaveripattinam according to the
"advent of Roman Rouletted Ware and imitation of it":
Soundara Rajan/Raman 1994: 133; in an appendix he
very strictly defends Wheeler's dating of RW and
Arikamcdu being an Indo-Roman site versus Begley:
Soundara Rajan/Raman 1994: 149.
Schenk 200la: 63; Sallcs/Boussac/Brcuil 2002: 540. - Sec
also at Arikamedu: Begley 1996: 30.
Zeitschrift fur Archaologie AuBereuropaischer Kulturen 1 (2006): 123-152
Fig. 1. 'l'issamaharama -
Rouletted Ware (R \\:/ ).
a, b reconstruction of the
typical dish wirh frag-
ments from di fferent loci,
c rim with
bronz;e rivet on the in-
side and iron rivet on rhe
oursidc. Scale l : 2, sec-
tion nor ro scale.
lCl ,
x -
The Dating and Historical Value of Rouletted \r
are 125
dating of sites with a long lifespan starting
before Christ. Evidence for an exclusively pre-
Christian antiquity for RW exists, but it must
be taken gingerly. Thus, sites which yield RW
rather belong to the settlement pattern ascribed
to the Mauryan expansion, often termed the
"Second Urbanization".
A dating for t he manufacture and distribu-
tion of RW in the 3'J/2'"
century B.C. ending
at the latest in the 1" century B.C. would also
resolve sore dating questions which arc exacer-
bated by the absence of R W at some sites with
supposedly evidenced "Roman" contact (Sound-
ara Raj an/ Raman 1994: 44; Suresh 2004: 97).
f ollowing t his line of thought, such sites may
not yet have existed in t he 1" century B.C.
Therefore, only a thorough study of stratigra-
phy and all findings can render valid results for
the dating of a given site.
Excavation reports in our region unfortu-
nately seldom go beyond the mere listing and
counting of wares. But the mere listing of long-
living wares such as Black-and-Red Ware (HRW),
for exampl e, is of little help toward a pottery
sequence. At Tissamaharama, the evaluation of
pottery started from the principle that changes
and improvements are always to be expected
especially among day-to-day potter y. Be it
changes e. g. of form or colour due to t he ever-
human competition among traders to attract
customers or be it technological innovations,
developments are always recognisable. There-
fore, such novelties serve as key types and their
first emergence wit hin find assemblages in in-
terrelation between their stratigraphical posi-
tions is significant in order to define phases. To
achieve this, the evaluation of wares first must
imply the definition of according vessel forms
belonging to each ware.
As a result, the establishment of an at first
relative chronology leads to phases, which may,
but need not correspond with architectural
phases of a respective site or with historically
known transitions.
In light of the above, distinctive modifica-
tions over the course of time among all wares
were clear at Tissamaharama, not to mention
those wares t hat newly emerged and as such are
key types themselves . This is especially striking
for Black Ware which is present among the
pottery assemblage through all periods. Its
detailed study reveals a distinctive change of
vessel forms and alterations in details of its
fabrication' .
At Tissamaharama, the study of pottery lead
to the reconstruction of contemporaneous
"crockery sets" for each phase, thus providing
a tool for dating purposes relevant at least for
the site
The results of the excavations at Arikamedu on
the Coromandd coast of southern India ap-
peared 60 years ago (Wheder/Ghosh/ K rish-
na 1946 ). This site became one of the most
renowned sites of the early historical period in
India due to the surprising discovery of Italic
Arretine Sigi ll ata, still unique in South Asia.
Especially the finds of the well-known Sigi llata
seemed to provide an anchoring point to date
the site's strati graphy.
Thus, \Xfheelcr considered Arikamedu to be
one of t he Indo-Roman trading centres de-
scri bed in the "Periplus Mare Erythraei" and as
a single-period site which flourished largely
within the first two centuries of the Christian
era. Given the exemplary comprehensive pub-
li cation of its finds, this material henceforth
served for comparative dating especially with
regard to the Indo-Roman trade within the last
three centuries A.D. according to Wheeler's

' A det ailed report on rare or imported wares from
Tissamaharama is in preparation.
See also Schenk 2000; Schenk 2001 a with the first results
on the pottery at Tissamaharama in d etail.
In the following the pottery sequence could be impro-
ved. E. g. phased is now divided into t he phases dl (1"
century A.D. ) and d2 (2'"' century A.D.). An update of
t he pottery chronology of T issamaharama is in prepa-
Begley 1996: 30: "Until now it was held that Arikamedu
was essentially a one- peri od si te which fel l i nto disuse
t owards the end of the second century o r sli ghtly later" .
126 Heidrun Schenk
The discovery and definition of RW seemed
to support this interpretation due to the epon-
ymous decoration on the inside of the bottom
of this flat dish with its characteristic "beaked"
rim. The usually two concentric rows of inden-
tations resembl e closely the decoration of the
Arretine ware. In addition, R W is made of an
excellent quality of paste, outstanding within
the contemporary pottery not only of Ari -
kamedu and also that of South i ndia and Sri
Lanka in general. Therefore, most believed R W
to be a Roman import. Samples of so-called
coarser quality with a surface less glossy, or
rather roughly made rouletting were taken to
be local copies.
In 1972 S. B. Deo and J.P. Joshi hinted that
R W on the whole could be of local origin apart
from the decoration that indeed was externally
inspi red (Deo/Joshi 1972: 76). Prior to this,
R. Subrahmanyam mentioned "conflicts with
the dating" with regard to inscriptions on
sherds dated as early as 2"d century B.C. (1964:
8; 43). H e also suggested an indigenous origin
for RW. Inspire of all this, however, in the end
he stuck to the position for dating R W usual
at that time to date the site of Salihundam.
In the early 1980s Begley took up the topic
in a more detailed fashion (1983: 461 ff.). Her
analysis rests on a reconsideration of the st ratig-
raphy and finds of Arikamedu. She dated the
beginning of the first settlement activiti es at the
site and the emergence of R W into the 3'd/ 2"d
century B.C. (sec also Begley 1986; Begley 1988).
To confinn this, Begley resumed excavation at
the site from 1989 to 1992 (1996). Begley
realized that the site "was exploited by gener-
ations of occupants". It was reoccupied, inter-
mittently, from the third century B.C. up to
modern times (Begley 1996: 8; 30). Therefore,
she emended t he former excavation resul ts from
Arikamedu for dating purposes. This new as-
sessment applies also to vessel types which
usually arc quoted as evidence for t rade during
the first centuries A.D. between the Red Sea
region and India with regard to Wheeler's
interpretation of Arikamedu
Begley deter-
mined especially those vessels to be medieval
(1996: 33; 32, fi g. 1: 19; 128, fig. 4: 13-14 ).
A new awareness should also apply, by the
way, to the finds of Mediterranean amphorae
accepted until now unanimously as evidence for
the trade described in t he Periplus, just as in the
case of R W. A review of those vessels excav<lted
at Arikamcdu, however, points to a rather wide
range of datings starting at the latest in the late
century B.C. (Will 1992: 151; Will 1996:
317 ff.; Begley 1996: 22 f.). Therefore, finds of
amphorae fragments alone do not authenticate
the Roman trade of t he Periplus era automat-
Taking all these new results into consider-
ati on, Arikamedu should be associated at first
with chose settlement sites cited for the "Second
Urbanization" especially as known in northern
India. They seem to be connected to the Magadha
empire of the 4'h century B.C. and the Maurya
kingdom which succeeded it from t he end of
the century onwards (Allehin/AIIchin 1997: map
7). Contact between South Asia and the West
is attested by various ancient historians at least
since Alexander and his Indian campaign (Kart -
tunen 1989; 1997; Ray 1994: 51 ff.; Thapar 1997:
csp. 129). Begley published archaeological ev-
idence for "p re-Periplus trade" following the
redat ing of Arikamcdu (1992). Of course, Ari -
kamedu continued to be settled up to medieval
times, yet its significance should by no means
be restricted to the post- Chri stian centuries and
a li mitation of western t rade to this period.
Roul etted Ware and its evaluation in literature
As already mentioned, this distinctive ware acts
as indicator for Indo-Roman trade at the time
' E. g. Red Sea region: Kervran 1996: 37 ff. and 1 I;
Yule/Ka?:enwadd 1993: 257; Whitehouse/Williamson
1973: 38-39; Smit h/ Wright 1988: 135 figs. S: a, b; 9: a.;
Southeast Asia: Mallcrct 1960: 169 (Oc Eo, Cambodia).
- 'J'he according shapes arc now dated as medieval at
Arikamedu: Begley 1996: 30ff.; 39; 115f.; at Tissama-
harama also similar nm forms are not found before
century A.D.: Schenk 200la: 124.
R. Tomber, London, is currently studying the amphora
finds in India as well as those irom the excavation at
. t-
' al
II ;
Fhe Dating and llistorical Value of Rouletted Wme 127
of the Periplus. Additionally, it serves as a key
characteristic for the dating of excavation sites.
Therefore an exact definition of this pottery as
well as a determination of the duration of its
production and its origin itself is crucial for the
impact on a historical interpretat ion of this
vesseL Most characteri stic of distinctive RW
fragments found in excavations are bases with
the eponymous decoration. This part of the dish
surface commonly is blackened with a grey core
similar to N BP (Northern Black Polished Ware),
whereas rim and wall shenls display a BRW-
firing technique (Fig. 1 a, b). Yet their sections
also reveal the grey-fired paste at least visible
on the blackened interior zone (Fig. 2 k)
Differing qualiti es, as evidenced at Tissamaha-
rama (sec below), probably led to the misun-
derstanding of an alleged local production in
opposite to so- called "true Roman" RW, prob-
ably represented only by black bases of high
quality. Such misconceptio ns persist
The re-
cent excavation report of Banavasi describes
even decorated bases of RW as "imitation
Rouletted Ware". It is further quoted, "it is a
well known fact that during the early hi storic
period almost all the cultural centres of South
India, wherever Roman contact was in exist-
ence, produced imitation of the Roman roulet-
ted ware" (Narasimha Murthy et al 1997: 120).
Additionally, the unfortunate notion of the
manufacture of RW in South India persist s in
the rel evant literature despite t he evident differ-
ences in the fabric compared to the local pottery
in South India and despite en tire series of
material analyses which counter thi s percep-
As Begley a I ready pleaded ( 1988: 428) it has
to be stressed agai n that an exact defini tion of
the characteristics of RW is crucial for its
understanding. I n India alone more than 100
sites supposedly yield RW (Fi g. 3 and appen-
dix), but unfortunately those sherds are often
only casually mentioned and not published in
a suffici ent st ringency that would reveal their
true nature. To judge from the p ublished re-
ports, the amount of sherds found on these sites
is rather small (sec also Ray 1994: 60--61 ). This
by the way also holds true for NBP found in
peninsular India. For exampl e the excavation
report for Nevasa lists only one base with
rouletted decoration under "R W". However, at
least one of the two rim sherds listed for NBP
should be categorised as R W as well because the
published illust ration shows the typical " beaked"
rim. Moreover, t he fabric of both rim sherds is
described as reddish on t he outside, as it is
characteristic of RWn. All in all, t his accounts
for an indeed small occurrence of R W at
N cvasa .
Regarding t he origin, Satanikota (Andhra
Pradesh) is mentioned from time to time as
evidence for a local South Indian manufacture
of RW (at last Suresh 2004: 96). According to
a laboratory analysis of two ceramic samples
f rom this site, BRW and RW from Satanikota
were "exactl y similar in miner alogy and struc-
ture" (TAR 1978-79: 35). Fortunately, the pot-
tery of thi s si te is well-published (Ghosh 1986:
l 02- 152). Listed as RW arc typically beaked rim
sherds as well as f ragments of bases with the
character istic decoration. None of them show
evidence of being able to be fitted together. As
Ghosh states, complete dishes have yet to be
found. The rim sherds are described as resem-
bling BRW, yet they also occur in Red Ware.
On the other hand, he stresses the extraordinary
similarity of t he workmanship to Black Ware
with regard to the bases. Accordingly, they
Sarkar 1966: 63: "core is i nvari abl y grey".
E. g. Soundara Rajan/ Ram<l l1 1994: 151; Nath 1995a:
158; Nagaswamy 1995: 78. - Surcsh 2004: 94 qu otes:
"a finer varicl >' which is almost identical ro the Medi-
terranean roukucd ware". - Sometimes even the term
"Rouletted Black Ware" emerged : c. g. Ray 1993: 573;
Suresh 2004: 9H.
Basa/Bchcra I 999: 18; Surcsh 2004: 92; 95-96: "Signi-
ficamly, Arikamedu was a major manufacturi ng centre";
Glover 2005: 17. - Kr ishna Mohan Reddy 2001: 143
st resses that the cia y is " completely diiicrmt from the
early South Indian pottery" and t herefore rel urns to rhe
o pinion of a production in the Red Sea region. -
However, alrc;ldy Deraniyagala '1972: 104 f. suggested a
nort hern Indian origin due to the obvious and plainly
visible similarity in t exture. Sec also Jahan 2004: 94.
" Sankalia!Dco/ Ansari/ Ehrhardt 1960: 278- 79 and fig. 140:
T110 (Wheeler type 1). Till could well be Wheeler 1ypc
2. for the RW-sherd: Sankalia/ Dco/Ansari/Ehrhardt
1960: 280.
Fig. 2. Tissamaharama - a-k "Fine Grey Pottery": a NBP, b RW with Graffito, c-g Wheeler type 18,
h Plain Grey ware, i Wheeler type 10, j paddle-stamped dish, k RW; llocal imitation in BRW. Scale 1:2,
sections not to scale.
l l
The Dating and Historical Value of Rouletted Ware 129
seem to be completely different from the rim
sherds. As only two pottery samples have been
analysed from Satanikota, it may well be pos-
sible that unfortunately both belonged to local
BR W. Such local imitation of R W dishes def-
initely do occur at Tissamaharama and Ari-
kamedu (see below). Therefore Satanikota can-
not disprove with certainty the various material
analyses of R W made in recent years always
showing a uniformity of paste combined with
an obvious difference to BR W. Also the one rim
sherd of Brahmagiri defined as R W could well
be a local imitation of BRW. It has been
compared by Begley with those from Ari-
kamedu and she found the latter "quite differ-
ent" (1988: 428).
At Mahasthan in present-day Bangladesh, an
independent production centre for NBP is said
to occur (Salles/Boussac/Breuil: 2002). There,
fragments with typical R W decoration are de-
nominated as NBP (Salles/Boussac/Breuil 2002:
555, fig. 11). The indentations are sometimes
even placed both the inside and outside surfaces
of the base. This is similar to other published
fragments from Mahasthan, yet there said to be
R W, but showing decoration with wavy lines
(Alam/ Alam 2001: 345, fig. 3; Salles/Boussac/
Breuil: 555, fig. 10 there again with NBP de-
nomination). Decoration on both sides as well
as wavy lines is unknown for "common" RW

Altogether, the pottery production of Mahasthan
would have a dating-range from the early yd
century B.C. to the late 1 sc century B.C. (Salles/
Boussac/Breuil 2002: 542), as proposed here as
well for RW.
As a conclusion, a secured definition of R W
following a comprehensive study of this pottery
from all known sites is a precondition for
further historical interpretations based on this

Characteristics of Rouletted Ware dishes and
their local imitation made of BRW at Tissamaha-
ram a
Up to 2005 some 650 fragments of RW alone
have occurred at the sites investigated in Tis-
samaharama. There, RW is categorised to "Fine
Grey Pottery", a group of different vessel forms
that all have in common a very dense and
extremely fine grey clay (Munsell 2YR N6).
This high quality paste is eye-catching and
completely different among contemporaneous
southern Indian and Sri Lankan pottery assem-
blages and should be regarded as determinable
for the classification (Fig. 2 k). Besides R W,
NBP and small cups such as Wheeler type 10
and type 18 as well as a plain grey ware with
streak-polished surface and a flat, rather coarse
dish with paddle-stamped bottom also belong
to this group (Fig. 2 a-k)

In addition to the fine and grey paste, the
particular form of a flat dish with the so-called
beaked rim is significant for RW
A simple
featureless rim also occurs
Both shapes have
been found in Tissamaharama without any
chronological difference up to now
The dec-
oration consists of two bands of rouletted or
better-called chattered indentations applied on
the inside the base of the wheel-thrown dish

Reconstructable shapes of rim sherds fitted to
decorated bases are known at Tissamaharama
(Fig. 1 a, b).
Due to varying states of preservation of the
sherds, however, a proper classification is some-
Only two sites seem to yield this variety bearing wavy
lines: Manigramam (Soundara Rajan/Raman 1994: pl.
XIX: B); Wari-Bateshwar (Haque/Rahman/Ahsan 2001:
17, pl. 1: 10) there also called NBP.
Also Begley 1992: 181: "But it is becoming increasingly
apparent that the Indian R W must be treated on a site-
by-site basis and the sites should be dated independent-
" y.
Schenk 2000; 2001a.- A detailed report on all fine wares
from Tissamaharama is in preparation.
Wheeler/Ghosh/Krishna 1946: 45-49: Wheeler type 1
and rouletted fragments: Pl. XXV-XXVI; 47, fig. 12;
Pl. XXX: B: 6; 55 Wheeler type 3a.c.d.f also "invariably
grey", but "inferior".
Wheeler/Ghosh/Krishna 1946: 55 (local ware, but "iden-
tical in fabric" to Wheeler type 1): Wheeler type 2:
fig. 14, 2-2c.
Variety 1 and 2 (Schenk 2001a: 72). - For Arikamedu
see Begley 1996: 226.
For the technique of rouletting/ chattering see Begley
130 Heidrun Schenk
Fig. 3. Distribution of Rouletted Ware m Bangladesh, India and Sri Lanka (for site numbers sec appendix).
times difficult. Most of the fragments have worn
surfaces (Fig. 1 b, c). There seems to be no
chronological difference regarding the thickness
or the gloss. Yet one can easily sec that the
potters of RW as well as of Wheeler types 10
and 18 intended to use the BRW firing tech-
nique, one which is typical for the local pottery
tradition of peninsular India and Sri Lanka
during the second half of the last millennium
B.C. Rather often this seems to have failed. The
potters somehow were not very familiar with
this technique and therefore most sherds of R W
The Dating and Historical Value of Rouletted Ware 131
Fig. 4. Distribution of Rouletted Ware in the Red Sea region and Southeast Asia (for site numbers see appendix).
yield a mottled appearance despite the otherwise
high quality (Fig. 1 c). Some fragments even
bring to mind Sigillata wares when " misfired"
to an almost entire red (Fig. 2 b). NBP, Plain
grey ware or paddle-stamped dishes of the
"Fine Grey Pottery", on the other hand, have
been well-flrcd, either plain grey or with a black
glossy slip on the outside.
But then, RW-Imitations from Tissamahar-
ama always show the potters' experience with
BRW manufacture (Fig. 2 I). Such dishes with
beaked rim are classified among Form G of the
local pottery typology of Tissamaharama. Form
G, a carinated dish belongs to the basic vessel
types of BRW (Schenk 2001a). The rim of Form
G is usually featureless and simple. Therefore
the appearance of that peculiar novelty as this
characteristic beaked rim on form G was strik-
ing. At Arikamedu, this dish wi th a beaked rim
can be found among the local wares as well
(Wheeler/Ghosh/Krishna 1946: 55 type 3 and
3e). However, it must be bourn in mind that
this imitation strictly lacks the rouletted dec-
oration1I .
The outer zones at wall- and rim sections of
BR W imitations of R W at Tissamaharama are
largely fired to a reddish hue, which is common
to BRW vessels on the whole. On the other
hand, sections of R W fragments are almost
entirely grey with a rather thin band of red
towards the outside at the same areas (Fig. 2 k,
1). Common to both is a sharp borderline on
top of the rim dividing the blackish firing on
the inside and the oxidised outer part. This
feature differs from common BRW vessels with
1946: 55: Wheeler type 3 is
"like the majority of the local types of inferi or and
coarser fabric; ... invariably devoid of rouletted deco-
Heidrun Schenk
where the reduced kiln atmosphere usually has
reached over the rim to the outside. The ancient
customer could not readily distinguish well-
fired examples of RW and imitation BRW when
still complete, aside from the mi ssing decoration
on the latter (Fig. 2 k, I).
This BRW-imitation of RW belongs to the
final development status of BR W in phase c2
(1" century B.C.) at Tissamaharama. A quite
thick shiny slip is a common feature for this
late stage of BRW. Additionally, the reddish
colour is more distinctive t han can be seen on
the preceding BRW of the

century B.C.
At that time, the slip was coalesced with the
surface and hardly can be recognized, similar to
RW. On later specimens of BRW the slip often
flakes off. These arc distinctive features for the
latest BRW.
The distributional pattern of R W shows a
concentration along the eastern coast of penin-
sular India and Bangladesh and includes sites
alongside rivers such as Krishna, Godavari and
Kaveri used as natural transportation routes
(Fig. 3; Ray 1996: 352, fig. 1 ). For the Malabar
coast evidence was lacking. Recent investiga-
tions at Pattanam near the Periyar River re-
vealed the first fragments of RW on the west
coast (Shajan!Tomber/Selvakumar/Cherian 2004:
317). This site could have been easily reached
from the cast coast via Kodumanal on the route
along the Kaveri river (Ray 1994: 16, fig. 2;
Rajan 1998: 67, fig. 2). Only two sites, Ayodhya
and Raj ghat, are noted in northern India from
whence NBP supposedly originat ed. Several
other sites cover the Ganges Delta, facing the
Bay of Bengal (Fig. 3 and appendix).
Four such sites in Sri Lanka arc publi shed
(Fig. 3 and appendix), easily to be reached from
the southern tip of India (Begley 1996: fi g. 1.1 ).
Some fragments have been reported from the
Red Sea coast of Egypt
, Oman and Yemcn

Occurrence in Southeast Asia is reported from
Malaysia, Thailand, Indonesia and Vi etnam
but it was only to be verified for both the latter
(Fig. 4 and appendix). At Bukit Tengku Lembu
in Malaysia one can at least trace a fragment of
a probable Wheeler type 18 cup (Sieveking 1962:
25-26, fig. 1). Beikt hano in Burma is also re-
peatedly mentioned as a further findspot. The
sherds referred to, however, arc totally different
from RW in decoration and especially in terms
of shape (Aung Thaw 1968: 199, pl. XLVb;
Stargardt 1990: 265-266 and figs. 86a-b, esp.
subtypes 79, 80, 117).
Wheeler types 10 (Fig. 2 i) and 18 (Fig. 2 c-
g) have a distributi on patt ern similar to RW,
this applies especially to the first mentioned.
Wheeler first described his type 10 stamped
cup from Arikamedu
Since then it has ap-
peared also at Vaddamanu
\ A1agankulam (Na-
gaswamy 1991: 249), Karaikadu (Begley 1996:
25; 231) and Adam (Nath 1995a: 161 f. and
fig. ll: 7) in southern Indi a and from Chan-
draketugarh in Bangladesh (IAR 1957- 58: pl.
LXXII: 6, 7). In addition, it has turned up at
three sites at Sri Lanka
and at Scmbiran in Bali
Bcrenike and Myos Hormos: Tombcr 2002 within dated
contexts of late-Augustan as the earl iest. She also
mentions Coptos as a probable further site.
' Qana, Yemen: Sedov 1996: 17, fig. 4: 19; Khor Rori
(ancient Sumhuram), Oman: Sedov/Benvenuti 2002: pl.
10: 3: the published piece recalls Wheeler type 2 with
the simple rim. The description of the paste includes
inclusions, which are never visible in actual RW: Sedov/
Benvenuti 2002: 186. It could therefore well be an
imitiation made in BR W. - Meanwhile the occurrence
of actual RW at Khor Rori is confirmed and dated
within 3'" to 1" century B.C. (pers. comment A. Sedov).-
Surcsh 2004: 92 also refers to an occurrence in East
Africa and on the Maldives.
It was found in layer 6 at Tra Kieu, Vietnam, dated by
"C to cal. 380-0 B.C.: Glovcr/Yamagata 1994: 157;
Glover 2005: 17, fig. 3a. - Also found in Go Cam,
Vietnam: Glover 2005: 17, fig. 3b. - For contact to
Southeast Asia see also: Glover 1996; Basa 1999; Smith
1999; Ardika 1999.
" Wheeler/Ghosh!Krishna 1946: 59f. and figs. 17- 18;
Begley 1992; Begley 1996: 229 Form 5.
Sa.m i/Kasturi bai!V ccrendcr 1992: 109 list of decorated
shcrds n. 2.1 7. 18 and pl. LXIII with a first appearance
in peri od l (300 B.C.- 100 B.C.); see also p. 97 and pl.
I. X: I: a frab'Tilent listed under Red Polished W arc, could
possibly be part of the bottom area of this cup. This site
ha., yielded some finds of NBP and RW as well.
Kantarodai: Begley 1996: 25; Anuradhapura: Schenk
200la, 131 n. 306; Tissamaharama: Schenk 200\a: 129,
fig. 107: 1-9.
; of


a ted
: pl.
a ted
v). -
I by

: to
a ted
i pl.
The Dating and Historical Value of Rouletted Ware 133
(Glover 1996: 152, pl. II: c; Ardika 1999: 83)
and at Bcrenike, Myos Hormos and Coptos at
t he Red Sea (Tomber 2000: 630; Tomber 2002:
27 and fi g. 4.7), thus confirming a distribution
pattern indeed identical to RW.
The occurrence of Wheeler type 18
ij , a
carinated small bowl, till now has mainly oc-
curred in Sri Lanka and Arikamedu (Schenk
200la: 301 n. 307) and Sembiran, Bali (Ardika
1999: 83 ). Another fragment probably is pub-
lished from Bukit Tengku Lembu, Malaysia
(Sieveking 1962: fig. 1). This last site has
been frequently mentioned as a findspot for
, apparently referring to a first report by
Williams-Hunt in 1952 whereK, according to
Sieveking," at the time of discovery interest
concentrated on some fragments of very thin,
hard, highly burni shed or polished black pot-
tery". However, further fragments found after
the first publication appeared made the recon-
struction of a small cup possible with, " ... a close
resemblance to the highly characteristic Greek
black glazed wares of the late 4'h century B.C.".
Sieveking found the closest parallels for this
vessel among the Indian NBP. No further
reference to actual finds of RW at this site
appears in her article.
Complete, reconstructablc shapes of Wheeler
type 18 at Arikamedu and Tissamaharama show
a base on stand-ring (Fig. 2 f, g). Stand- rings
mentioned for other sites like Vaddamanu or
Anuradhapura probably bel ong to this vesseP

Such stand-rings arc published for Mahasthan
as well, where t hey are subsumed under NBP
in local production (A lam/ Alam 2001: 343 and
fig. 1). At Tissamaharama, the surface of the
base is often fired to a blackish shade, as it is
typical for the R W -dishes (Fig. 2 g). Yet, rather
reddish varieties are also known, being fi red
almost entirely red on all parts of the vessel
(Fig. 2 c). But more often a mottled appearance
of both forms, Wheeler types 10 and 18, again
indicate the potter's rather unsuccessful intention
of using the BRW-firing technique (Fig. 2 d, e) .
NBP is the other most prominent pottery
belonging to the group of "Fine Grey Potter y"
of Tissamaharama (Fig. 2 a). Analogous to RW
as supposedly indicative of " Indo-Roman trade",
the simple occurrence of a few NBP sherds
often leads to an automatic dating of sites to
the Mauryan period and as being under its
influence, which A. Datta fi nds questionable
(1999: 102). Therefore the identification and use
as a key t ype in southern India and Sri Lanka
should also be treated as carefully as is due to
R W. Its main distribution seems to be the
Northern part of India, yet also occurring at
Southern Indian sites (Sharma 1990/91: fi g. 1 ),
but there mostly rare in quantity just like RW.
As opposed to the South, where the BRW
tradition has a longer lifespan, NBP form a
major pottery industry associated with grey
ware and a simple plain red ware in northern
India during the Mauryan Peri od. Only in the
middle Ganges plain does BRW continue along
with NBP (A. Ray 1999: 96)
Sites as Sonpur,
Rajghat, Rajgir, Pataliputra seem to represent
the NBP "core region" or "nucleus zone"

However, grey-fired wares are indeed more
common in this region than in peninsular India.
As with RW, the occurrence and definition of
NBP on sites seems to need a review
tradition probably also spread to Bengal. At
" Wheeler/Ghosh/ Krishna 1946: 60 and fig. 18; Begley
1996: 231 and figs. 4.296-4.299.
G lover 1996: 136 refers to "high-fired polished black
pottery which has been various! y bo:en described as
"Greekn, and Indo-Roman Roulet ted Ware"; Gogte
1997: 7; Jahan 2004: 94.
Williams- Hunt 1962: 186 refers to two sherds "of Greek
Origin". Further description sec p. 187- 1 HR.
" Vaddamanu: Sastri/Kasturi bai/ Vecrendcr 1992: pl. LX
listed u nder Red Polished Ware; p. 93: "the section is
fine and grey in colour; an imitation variety"; Anuradha-
pura: Bouzek/Dcraniyagala 1985: 5lJ2- 593. - Another
fragment is publi shed from Adam: Nath 1995a: 159,
fig. 10: 4. It is not further described.
" To t he opposite, Sharma 1997: 112 states: "The Red
Wares . .. form the major bulk of ceramic ... at all the
Norrhern Rlack Polished Ware sites".
" Mishra 1989: 90; Sinha 1997: 100-108; Datta 1999: 104;
103: mainl y in the "all uvial" tract "western Utt ar
Pradesh and Bihar ". - Sec also A. Ray 1999 when
discussing excavated Mauryan Sites in northern and
eastern India.
" Sinha 1997: 86: "However, in t he context of it s wide
all-India distribution, the name Northern .Black Polished
Ware seems to be rat her redundant".
134 Heidrun Schenk
least more than 5000 fragments of NBP and
related wares are r egistered at Mahasthan which
arc said to be locally produced (Salles/Boussac/
Breuil 2002: 540). Chandraketugarh apparently
also contained "extensive remains" of NBP
(A. Ray 1999: 95).
In 1993, an attempt to understand the origin of
RW appeared (Ardika/ Bellwood/Eggleton!El-
lis 1993; Ardika 1999: 83-86). The authors'
laboratory analyses rested on samples from
Anuradhapura, Arikamedu and Bali which
proved to be mineralogically identical. Thus the
authors proposed a single source, most prob-
ably at Arikamedu. Further analyses were con-
ducted based on samples from Anuradhapura.
It included RW, other fine grey wares such as
Wheeler type 10, "Hellenistic" sherds and local
BR W (Krishnan/Coningham 1997). The authors
also pointed to a South Indian origin. The local
samples differed completely from RW and the
group of fine grey wares.
In 1997, V. Gogte publi shed an analysis
using samples of RW of Arikamedu, Alaganku-
lam, Kottapatnam, Manikpatna, Sisupalgarh,
Nasik and Tra Kicu in Vietnam. And for the
first time he included samples from outside
peninsular India, from Chandrakctugarh in
Bangladesh. His study included Wheeler type
10 and Roman amphorae from Arikamedu as
well as so-called African Red Ware from Ala-
and NBP from Nasik. He also
added fired local days from Arikamedu, Chan-
draketugarh, Nasik, Sisupalgarh, Kottapatnam
and Manikpatna. The analysis showed that the
clay used for R W from all sites as well as for
Wheeler type 1 0 and for NBP were identical.
However, among the local potteries only the
clay of Chandraketugarh matched in terms of
mineralogical content R W and t he other fine
grey wares (Gogte 1997). Gogte therefore pro-
posed an origin in the Ganges Delta.
Gogte repeated x-ray diffraction (XRD)
analysis on samples from Tissamaharama in-
cluding all members of "Fine Grey Pottery" and
sherds of local, contemporaneous BR W. He
selected specimens from Chandraketugarh, Sis-
upalgarh, Nasik, Ari kamedu, Tra Kieu, the
latter in Vietnam. He included sherds from
Mahasthan, Bangladesh. Unfortunately, again
only samples from Chandrakctugarh of locall y
obtained clay represented the northern region
of the Indian subcontinent. Gogtc's new study
confirms his results from 1997. The specimens
of BR W from Tissamaharama proved entirely
different, but the "Fine Grey Pottery" and the
other samples matched the clay from Chan-
draketugarh (Gogte 2001).
Recently, a British team also carried out
further geochemical analysis on samples from
t he excavations at Anuradhapura
The sample
included "Grey ware", Wheeler types 10 and 18
and so-called "omphalos ware". Different from
the earlier mentioned analysis at Anuradhapura,
t he new study now included material from
Kantarodai and Mantai in Sri Lanka as well as
from Arikamedu, Alagankulam, Vaddamanu and
Kopbal in peninsular Indi a. Our colleagues also
conclude a "single geological source" for the
relevant pottery.
Besides Gogte's study, all other material
analyses are based solely on samples from
peninsular India and Sri Lanka, despite t he
results that local clays do not match with RW
and its relatives from a" single geological source".
Unfortunately, the scientists never considered
NBP despite its easily visible closeness to RW
and the other members of its pottery group
Its North Indian origin would have given a clue
to the whereabouts of the "single geological
source". The inclusions of samples of local
origin (optimally contemporaneous to RW) from
the northern region into further analysis series
lS Some pieces indeed resemble Sigillata wares
(Fig. 2 b). Sec here the comments on firing technique
of RW.
Jr, Ford/l
ollard/Coningham/Stern 2005; Ford/Coningham
2005: 394.
Already 1997 this relationship to NBP led w
proposal of an o rigin of the entire group of "Fine Grey
Pottery" somewhere in Northern India: Schenk 2000.
) m
" e.
~ e
~ u e
The Dating and Historical Value of Rouletted Ware 135
would be a desideratum. However, it is indeed
not imperative to connect the source of RW to
Chandraketurgarh, but Gogte's first tests which
included samples from a northern region seem
to come close to the probable origin.
Further laboratory analyses have been car-
ried out (Das/ Panja/Mukhopadhyay/Chakrabarti
2002), apparently in order to challenge Gogte's
suggestions of a similarity of local clay from
Chandraketugarh to RW, NBP, Wheeler types
10 and 18. This study uses chemical analysis as
well as scanning electron microscopic study and
also X-ray diffraction (XRD) analysis. They
included Black-Slipped Ware
ij and recent local
clays from Chandraketugarh itself.
The research outlined above leads to the
conclusion that we urgently need a separate
study on RW thus providing a firm definition
for this pottery. These same authors claim that
Gogte concentrated, "on a certain type of
Rouletted Ware" and did not consider "the
variation of the pottery itself" (Das/Panj a/
Mukhopadhyay/Chakrabarti 2002: 430). This
"variation" comprises the classification of R W
into different groups described only as "thin"
and highly polished on one hand and "coarse"
and less shiny (and one group of "in between"),
as the only differentiation within both analysed
ancient pottery groups of RW and Black Slipped
Ware with regard to the samples having used
(Das/ Panja/ Mukhopadhyay /Chakrabarti 2002:
430). Strangely, the experts mention nothing
about the paste and its colour although this is
the crucial difference between e. g. Black Ware,
Black-slipped ware, Black polished ware and
NBP in this respect as at least experienced in
Tissamaharama. There the Black Ware is com-
pletely fired black in section with a either rather
matte surface or is polished to a gloss. We also
have sherds here with a reddish fired section
covered by a black slip and thus to be call ed
Black-slipped ware. Additionally, all have in
common a more or less coarse paste and thus
entirely different compared to NBP with the
typical very dense and grey paste of "Fine Grey
To date more than 600 pieces of RW have
been registered from Tissamaharama and all are
identical in terms of paste. No chronological
differences are visible among worn, dull or
polished samples or on thin or thick sherds. The
only deviation is either a rather blackish or
greyish colour on the interior or a mottled
appearance instead of plain red on the outside
of the sherd. Some arc worn to such an extent
that only tiny speckles of the slip remain;
sometimes even this completely gone. Most of
these worn sherds are holdovers. The only
actual and indeed important variation to be seen
is the evidence of different tools for making the
decoration which could hopefully reveal differ-
ent workshops (Fig. 1 a)l
This homogeneity
also applies to R W sherds from Arikamedu as
observed during a visit to the site. It also seems
valid for all pieces published in a photo for
southern India, Sri Lanka and abroad that are
here acknowledged as RW.
However, this above-mentioned recent lab-
oratory study reveals that the chemical compo-
sition of all "varieties" of both wares (R W and
Black Ware) arc "more or less" comparable
besides the amount of potash (that is supposed
to be added separately). Yet, the XRD analysis
shows no real similarity of either variety (Das/
Panja/Mukhopadhyay/Chakrabarti 2002: 439).
Local clays collected in a radius of 10 kms prove
to be "similar in nature" but apparently not so
when compared to RW and Black-slipped Ware.
Astonishingly, XRD-anal ysis used by Gogte
showed a similarity of RW and local clay. This
indicates that the outcome of laboratory anal-
yses depends on the quality of samples which
are submitted and needs the suitable prepara-
tory studies to verify the contemporaneousness
of the samples.
However, Chandrakctugarh need not be the
production site, and it seems doubtful that it
" There is a terminological "medley for one and the same
pottery that has been analysed: it is either described as
"the fi ner variety of which has been identified as
Nonhero Black Polished Ware or named Black Ware,
Black-slipped ware or Black polished: Das/ Panja/Muk-
hopadhyay/Chakrabani 2002: 426, 429, 430, 439 (Black
slipped and Black polished); 440 (Black Ware).
,. A study on the RW and other fine and/ or imported
pottery from Tissamaharama is under preparation.
.. ...
136 II eidrun Schenk
can answer questions about origin from recent
clays, more than 2000 years later, with regard
to ancient pottery. Samples of locally produced
pottery from Tissamaharama used by Gogtc for
his analysis comprised BR W shcrds which were
clearly contemporaneous with the analysed
samples of RW and belong to the bulk of ail-
day pottery of that period according to the
pottery studies on the site. Once again we see
the need for independent site-by-site studies, a
proper definition of wares and the discovery of
a kiln site before further efforts on provenance
studies are done.
Kilns that actually would give evidence for
the place of manufacture of "Fi ne Grey Pot-
tery" have not been discovered yet. Without, an
exact localisation may prove difficult if sedi-
ment from one of the numerous rivers in
northern India was used. This provenance is at
least the most probable with regard to the
correlation of NBP to its relatives from the
"Fine Grey Pottery". However, a large variety
of alluvial sand transported by rivers over
considerabl e distances are a doubtful source for
provenance studies. The production may have
taken place ncar Chandraketugarh or near
Rajghat or some other place e. g. along the
Ganges. On the other hand, the clay might have
been collected and then processed somewhere
else, although not too far away and therefore
most probably excluding sites at peninsular
As long as the discussion of either South
or North Indian origin continues, it remains for
the moment of minor importance whether a
single kiln or decentralized production some-
where in northern India were responsible for
the manufacture of this specific "Fine Grey
Remarks on the dating of R W according to the
results at Tissamaharama
As mentioned above, Begley redated the appear-
ance of R W from the 1" cent. A.D. back to the
3'dJ2nd century B.C. (Begley 1992: 176 and 193
n. 58; Begley 1996: 12). The excavations at
Tissamaharama confirm this earlier dating
(Schenk 2001a). At Anuradhapura, RW is said
to have been found even as early as 400-300
B.C. However, this dating rests on the first
emergence of RW in period I with a
reference ranging from 380 to 190 B.C. {at latest
Ford/Coningham 2005: 393-394).
At Tissamaharama, the evaluation of the day-
to-day pottery, representing the main bulk of
the pottery assemblage, with regard to the
stratigraphy provides the basis for the pottery
chronology. Radiocarbon dating substantiate
the chronology. RW as well as other finds of
comparatively rare occurrence are not used as
evidence for dating, their positions arc solely
defined by the context in where they have been
found (Schenk 20Dl a). Relevant and secured is
only the date of their first appearance. Regard-
ing the first appearance of "Fine Grey Pottery",
vessels of "Plain grey ware" proved to be the
first out of this group to reach Tissamaharama
(Fig. 2 h)
A further important question is the
production period which gives answers for the
relevance of RW as a key type. At Tissamaha-
rama, indications for a definition of this pro-
duction period seems to be possible for RW.
However, Tissamaharama in this case being the
recipient of pots/sherds that reach there from
some distance can only try to give an answer.
In the following, the latest results on the
dating of RW will be summarized embedded
within a short summary of the excavations at
Tissamaharama (until 2005). The excavations at
Tissamaharama have been carried out since 1992
f'W eisshaar/Roth/Wijeyapala 2001 ). At first, the
investigations took place at Tissa 1 ncar the
eastern slope of the shallow citadel mound.
Most of the upper strata are erosion layers of
dating to about the 6'h to 8'h/9'h century A.D.
Below these levels date as early as the 1" century
A.D., the features of which arc also not very
' Kramer 1997: 54: this study at Jodhpur
and Udaipur recorded 100 km as greatest distance for
clay to be transported for pottery production. Between
60 to 80 percent were located in a radius of about 10 km.
Regarding trade, 230 km was the most distant export
place for finished products: Kramer 1997: 153_
" Also at Anuradhapura: Ford/ Coningham 2005: 394.


. l S

f or

The Dating and Historical Value of Rouletted Ware 137
distinctive and often disturbed by pits originat-
ing from the superimposed layers. Sometimes
the intrusions reached even deeper into pre-
Christian period features. The habitational areas
which postdate the 1" century A.D. apparently
were situated somewhere else. For the pre-
Christian period the excavations at Tissa 1 re-
vealed a largely undisturbed in-situ situation of
a workmen's quarter reaching down to the
bedrock. The earliest settlement phase dates to
about the beginning of the 4'h century B.C.
(Weisshaar/ Schenk/Wij eyapala 2001; Schenk
194 fragments of R W are known from Tis-
sa 1. Thirty of them were found in contexts
from phase b (3'd cent. B.C.) to phase dl (1''
cent. A.D.). The remaining sherds from the
fillings of the later pits are in a worn condition
and presumedly were dug up anciently from the
earlier periods. Extensive re-depositing is com-
mon on long-existing settlement sites and in-
tensively experienced at Tissa 1 as mentioned
above. This vertical distribution pattern changes
at Tissa 3 as it is described below.
After reaching bedrock in Tissa 1, we started
further investigations at an area of the citadel
which is situated near the shore of the nearby
lake. There, the situation was completely dif-
ferent regarding the strata of the early centuries
A.D. More or less undisturbed features from the
6"' century A.D. downwards were discovered
already directly under the surface. Expected
layers of younger age were obviously washed
away by erosion. This applies to the area of
Tissa 2 (excavated 1995- 96) and to the since
1998 ongoing excavations in Tissa 3.
At Tissa 2, for RW the discovery of seven
pieces is recorded. Further investigations stopped
before reaching the levels of phase dl due to
the construction of a new district court building
on the site.
234 fragments have been counted in the
neighbouring Tissa 3 up to 2004. 161 thereof
date from the 1" century B.C. to the 1" century
A.D. (phases c2-d1). Those phases have been
further investigated on a larger scale in the
recent season of 2005 again bringing to light
about 225 pieces of RW. The dating evaluation
for the 2005 season is not yet completely
finished but many sherds belong in the 1"'
century B.C. (phase c2). Their state of preser-
vation was very good and quite a few could be
joined to larger pieces. This applies also to 39
fragments of Wheeler type 10 and 32 sherds of
Wheeler type 18 found this year alone. On the
other hand only 8 sherds of NBP have appeared
this season. About 150 fragments from this
year's campaign are considered to be local
imitations of RW.
It is supposed here, that a rather rare appear-
ance of fragments compared to the frequency
in phases c2-d2 is assumed for "Fine Grey
Pottery" in the next campaigns when reaching
levels below phase c2. This proposed high
esteem for "Fine Grey Pottery" may owe to
their distant origin. Therefore one may expect
a careful handling of such vessels. They are most
probably not used as day-to-day crockery which
have a shorter life-expectency. As a conse-
quence, in opposite to the latter, "Fine Grey
Pottery" and other finds of value may be
delayed before reaching the soil after their
actual use. Hence shcrds in strata of phase c2
may belong to vessels produced and imported
to Tissamaharama in earlier phases. One can
imagine that it usually needs a few generations
to change the attitude towards goods of some
value. Moreover, this could apply for products
associated with a particular connotation as will
be described below. All in all, it may explain
the phenomenon of such a sudden increase of
RW-finds at least in phase c2 compared to
earlier phases. ln 2005, we already continued
investigation on older levels of phase cl and
phase b in a li mited area of only two trenches
and indeed only few sherds have been found.
This has to be verified within the next few years
for the complete excavation area. The already
mentioned riveted vessel (Fig. 1 c), found in a
structure of the early 1" century A.D. also
points to a longer usage of R W dishes postdat-
ing their origin

Further ri veted fragments of RW and mainly NBP:
Sarkar 1966: 43 (Kesarapalle); IAR 1957-58: 13 ff. ; IAR
1959-60: 19 (Broach); 1992:
138 Hr:idrun Schenk
At Tissamaharama the conditions for strati-
graphical evaluation are promising. Largely
undisturbed in-situ walking levels, acting as
stratigraphic barriers, have been determined for
all settlement periods excavated up to now.
Therefore, as opposed to Tis sa 1, heldover
pottery from lower strata is restricted in upper
levels and that which does persist is in a badly
worn state. Additionally, these sherds often
display abraded sections, obviously having been
used as tools for rubbing (Fig. 2 f). This practice
is confined to fragments with the very dense
paste and of rather hard firing distinctive to
"Fine Grey Pottery", but moreover especially
to pieces of foreign amphorae. On the other
hand, well-preserved and rather large sherds of
"Fine Grey Pottery" were retrieved from fea-
tures of phases dl and c2. The latter period
experienced the emergence of the local imitation
in BR W which is supposed to be one of the
key types for this phase. This early appearance
could not be ascertained at Tissa 1 but was
already suspected (Schenk 2000: 668; 2001a: 95).
Sherds of imitated R W belong to just a few
vessels representing the last development of
BRW at Tissamaharama. From phase dl on-
wards strikingly few BRW sherds occur, mostly
very worn just like the RW ones. In combina-
tion with the sudden emergence of RW imita-
tions, this observation at Tissamaharama pro-
vides clear hints regarding the duration of
production of both BRW and imitation RW.
Sites, independently dated on a site-by-site
basis, which arose after the supposed end of
manufacture of RW provide a further possibil-
ity to confirm the terminal dating of this ware.
Such a site is Godavaya, situated at about 20 km
south of Tissamaharama directly at the coast
(Roth/ Kessler/Recker/Wijeyapala 2001 ). Go-
davaya is reputedly a harbour. The study of its
pottery yielded no evidence for settlement ac-
tivities prior to phase dl (Schenk 2001 b). Beside
a few worn pieces of BRW, no trace of RW
or other kinds of "Fine Grey Pottery" have
occurred. However, some fragments of RW-
imitation are recorded. They are not manufac-
tured in BRW-technique but in plain "Coarse
Red Ware"
This new pottery production,
different not only in production technique but
also in vessel forms, replaces BRW (Schenk
2000; 2001a). Such specimens of imitated R W
in "Coarse Red Ware" also occur in Tissama-
harama, but not before phase d2.
This situation strengthens the observation
that BR W as well as the group of "Fine Grey
Pottery" no longer existed when Godavaya was
founded. Furthermore, it also indicates that the
production of an imitated RW has a short
lifespan. All in all, the transition of BRW to the
usage of entirely red-fired pottery ("Coarse Red
Ware") and from RW to the occurrence of an
imitation apparently took place within the 1"
century B.C.
This must be verified independently at other
sites combined with a study of their pottery
An approach to a historical interpretation
Communication and trade routes established
with the expansion of the Mauryan empire are
often described in literature. Mauryan relations
with the world beyond its own frontiers are
known as early as for Chandragupta Maurya in
the late 4'h century B.C.
Travel routes follow
the given possibilities by natural geography as
already mentioned above. The spreading of
Asokan inscriptions and the findings of NBP
96 (Vaddamanu); Nath 1995a: 158 (Adam); Datta 1999:
106 (Bairat, Ujjain, Rupar, Besnagar); Sinha 1997: 90
(Kumrahar, Sonpur, Ropar) - On utiliarian pottery:
Ahmed 1950: pls. IVb; V; IX, X (Kondapur); Salles/
Boussac/Br euil 2002: 541 and n. 36 (Mahasthan): rejec-
ting that such a repair could be a him for high esteem.
- Sankalia/Deo 1955: 118 and Pl. XXIX: 1 (Nasik, a
riveted shell).
; See also at Arikamedu: Wheeler/Gosh/ Krishna Dcva
1946: 55 Wheeler type 3c "exclusively in red ware" and
listed among local wares of "infer ior and coarser fabric.
" Begley 1992, Kamunen 1997; Mukherjee 1999; 'Thapar
1997: 40 f. and 125 ff., she mentions Suvarnabhumi
known from liter ary sources as contact to Southeast
Asia. It is interpreted as Burma by Allchin/ Allchin 1997:
248 and as Malay peninsular and the Malay Archipelago
by Rahman 1998: 81. - Glover 1996: 130-131: Suvarn-
abhumi as "place for profitable trade and as a field for
Buddhist prosclytisation", mentioned in Indian texts.

, a


The Dating and Historical Value of Rouletted Ware 139
are the main accepted indicators for this period.
Starting with Chandragupta and strengthened
mainly by Asoka the Mauryan Empire witness-
es the rise of cities in a phenomenon called the
"Second Urbanization" of India (Allchin/ Allchin
1997: 223 f. and map 7).
The dating range of RW proposed here
allows the association of sites which contain this
pottery to the above-mentioned Mauryan set-
tlement expansion. This was not possible with
the beginning of R W to 1" century Roman
times. Thus RW has lost relevance as evidence
for Indo-Roman trade. NBP is largely accepted
as a "marker" for the Mauryan period. At some
sites, R W seems in evidence slightly later than
NBP, which may be cited as a counter-argu-
ment. However, if RW dishes and also Wheeler
types 10 and 18 indeed were kept prolongedly
due ro their preciousness, one would not expect
them to get lost during their heyday. Such
questions surround the rather delicate value of
R W as a key typc

Additionally to the value of RW, due to the
distant origi n and the very special appearance,
a particular connotation may be furthermore
linked to the Mauryan expansion during Asoka's
time in the 3'd century B.C. The spreading of
the Buddhist faith by Asoka is often described
as a reason for this expansion. However, this
purely religious motif has been questioned
(Thapar 1997: 137ff. esp. 144-145) and Ray
explains the Mauryan expansion with econom-
ical intentions combined with the institutional
logistic of Buddhist monasteries
the land beyond the Vindhya range, the penin-
sular India, provided mineral resources such as
gold and other goods such as pearls (Ray 1987;
1996). The relatively large frequency of RW-
discoveries reaching as far as Sri Lanka can be
explained hypothetically by a special relation-
ship between Asoka and the contemporaneous
king Devanampiya Tissa at Anuradhapura (Prc-
matilleke 1999; Panth 2004 ). Tissa is said to have
admired Asoka (Thapar 1997: 135).
However, the distributi onal pattern of these
very distinctive vessels of RW and Wheeler
types 10 and 18 is exceptional and obviously
reflects Mauryan contacts. Thus, why should
those vessels, thi s extraordinary kind of dish,
not be a custom-made product, initially aimed
for South Indi an and Sri Lankan markets ?
According to the find concentration, these re-
gions are the main recipients of R W as well as
Wheeler types 10 and 18. There, the population
were accustomed to vessels made of BR W -firing
technique. This production method was shared
in order to fabri cate vessels of R W and Wheeler
types 10 and 18, used by potters usually pro-
ducing NBP. The first emergence of this pottery
seems to coincide with the reign of Asoka. Pots
of "Fine Grey Pottery" may have been distrib-
uted perhaps as presents or special trade good
followi ng the routes of Mauryan trade and as
such also reaching places at Southeast Asia and
the eastern trading centres of the Hellenistic
world at the Red Sea region. This may be
connected with the spread of Buddhism and
may have been used as a present for conver-
sion47. However, regarding a further supply
beyond the decline of the Mauryan Empire,
already established trade connections surely
continued (Ray 1996: 354).
Of course it remains highly speculative
whether those distinctive vessels had some kind
of connotation associated to Buddhist conver-
sion or other meaning now unknown to us or
whether they were themselves traded as "sim-
ple" goods. Yet it must be stressed that this
extraordinary distribution from the Red Sea in
the West to Vietnam in the East reflects not
only Mauryan expansion indicated by Asoka's
inscriptions, but also the range of the histor-
ically known diplomatic activities of the Mau-
ryas. An explanation as a kind of present would
s Al so Smith 1999: 7: . . . the possibility of it being traded
much later than the date of manufacture, again cauti ons
agaimt seeing these it ems as definite proof of large-scale
exchange in the early centuries C.E.".
" Ray 1987: 96 and 102; on Buddhi sm and trade also Ray
1994: 121 ff. - Karttuncn 1997: 229 n. 263 on Buddhist
monks in double function as tr aders.
., For NBP in a missio nary function see Sarma 1990/
91. - Between Southeast Asia and India: Glover 1996:
130; 144: "mut ual exchange . .. that Buddhist missiona-
were already act ive, indeed were established, m
Southeast Asia before the Christian era".
140 Heidrun Schenk
well fit especially to the very beautifully exe-
cuted vessels of RW and Wheeler types 10 and
18 with decoration not known in contempora-
neous South Asian pottery. The obvious need
for a local substitute (imitation) of R W after a
cessation of delivery or production would con-
firm this assessment.
A revised assessment for R W has consequences
for the dating of numerous sites until recently
usually linked to the first centuries A.D. and
to "Roman" contacts. RW seems to be contem-
poraneous with NBP, which is regarded as
evidence of Mauryan dating and influence. Yet,
regarding the whole group of "Fine Grey
Pottery", its value for dating purposes depends
on their thorough evaluation within the local
stratigraphy and finds of the different excavated
sites. The mere existence of a few, often worn
sherds from a distant origin is at best an
imponderable support for dating. Even the
relatively high amount of "Fine Grey Pottery"
at Tissamaharama is insignificant compared to
the abundance of the local pottery.
The occurrence of such RW and "Fine Grey
Ware" on the whole only indicates that the
respective site has already existed within the last
three centuries B.C. However, due to the pro-
longued use of these sherds, as here supposed,
they cannot be used for ascenaincd dating
purposes on a long-lasting site. The emergence
of local imitations in the 1" century B.C., on
the other hand, can serve as key type for dating.
This is evidenced at least at Tissamaharama and
has to be reaffirmed by further studies on other
sites. After all, the distinctive group of "Fine
Grey Pottery" traces a kind of contact to
outside the region supposed to be the heartland
of the Mauryan Empire.
In the light of different material analyses, one
indeed must accept that "Fine Grey Pottery"
doubtless was not produced in southern India
and Sri Lanka. However, both regions represent
the main recipients of R W and Wheeler types
10 and 18, not to mention the still rather rare
appearances in Southeast Asia and the Red Sea
region. The exact location of the production
remains unknown. Such vessels may have been
produced either at different sites or at a single
kiln site in the plains of northern India, be it
Bengal (e. g. Chandraketugharh, Mahasthan) or
the middle Ganga plains (e. g. Rajghat, Ayod-
hya) or both. Therefore, further laboratory
analyses should necessarily include samples from
the latter region.
If R W and Wheeler types 10 and 18 indeed
are special products produced for export outside
the "Mauryan" heartland, one would not expect
them among simple household pottery and
among the find assemblages of northern Indian
settlement sites. Therefore, the lack of RW in
Northern India (besides Ayodhya and Rajghat)
does not disprove its manufacture in this area.
A new evaluation of most of the sites ex-
cavated up to now with regard to our new
assessment of the pottery would probably change
their historical significance. Evidence for strati-
graphic disturbances at long-sequence settle-
ment sites such as Mahasthan, Arikamedu or
Tissamaharama have been noted. They are cer-
tainly not exceptions and a careful study of
finds combined stratigraphically in situ on an
independent site-by-site basis is a logical further
approach. The review of the dating range of R W
alone, as proposed here, shifts the settlement of
sites such as Arikamedu back as early as the
Asokan period. This changes the distribution
maps of the early historical period considerably.
RW, NBP, Wheeler type 10, Wheeler type 18
and Plain Grey ware with burnished surface or
with a paddle-stamped base belong to one
ceramic group designated "Fine Grey Pottery"
ar Tissamaharama. A very fine and grey paste
is distinctive for the whole group and is as such
eye-catching among southern Indian and Sri
Lankan pottery assemblages. This ware is dis-
tinguishable despite different firing technique
and surface treatment. Various material analyses
prove a single source of clay.
a j
~ n
~ w
~ r
The Dating and Historical Vallte of Rouletted Ware 141
The clay ongmatcs from somewhere at the
plains of northern India evidenced by the main
distribution of NBP. Further material analyses
should therefore include samples from this
region for example from Rajghat. Sites such as
Mahasthan and Chandraketugarh near the Bay
of Bengal may be involved as well with a
production of their own.
Ancient inhabitants may have held the very
distinctive R W in high esteem. Alone the distant
origin of " Fine Grey pottery" in general may
have enhanced its value. Therefore, such vessels
remained in use long after their manufacture.
This reduces the value of this ware for dating.
At Tissamaharama, fragments of R W are rather
worn and tiny in layers from the 1" century
A.D. onwards as can be stated for most of the
published fragments from other findspots.
The distribution pattern of R W, Wheeler
types 10 and 18 is mainly restricted to regions
outside the here supposed area of manufacture
as indicated by the main dispersion of NBP.
An overlapping can be ascertained only in
Bengal and in the middle Ganges plain repre-
sented by the only find spots Ayodhya and
Rajghat. The manufacturing technique of RW,
Wheeler types 10 and 18 can be described as
a combination of using clay similar to NBP and
a firing technique especially popular in South
India and Sri Lanka at that time. A custom-
made product for South India and Sri Lanka
seems to be a very probable explanation for this
The occurrence of RW and its associates only
indicates the deliver y of these vessels during the
period of its manufacture. Its occurrence only
demonstrates the antiquity of the relevant sites,
associating them rather with the phenomenon
of the "Second Urbanization" of t he Mauryan
age. This applies to the site of Arikamedu as
Sites lacking RW and derivatives may have
been founded after these wares ceased to be
The manufacture of R W is restricted from
the 3'd century to the 1st century B.C. at the
latest. Imitations in local BRW emerge in the
1" century B.C. as evidenced in many contexts
at Tissamaharama. These imitations are never
decorated. RW as well as Wheeler types 10 and
18 can have a mottl ed or dull surface t hus
suggesting a "coarser" fabric.
A comprehensive study on the R W known
up to now is necessary. This would at least
terminate the confusion of its definition. Many
excavations have been dated on the basis of rare
and special potteries or finds such as R W.
Therefore, a review of important excavations, as
has been done at Arikamedu, would be desir-
able. The evaluation should at first base on the
local pottery development.
RW does not indicate Indo-Roman trade.
Arikamedu is a site with a long sequence
reaching from the 3'd century B.C. into the
medieval period. It is by no means a single-
period "Indo-Roman trading post". Its fi nd
assemblages as a whole cannot be used as
exemplary for the respective period.
Dr. Heidrun Schenk
c/o Kommission fur Archaologie AuflercuropaiKher
Endenicher Str. 41
D - 53115 Bonn
schcnkwcis@t-on line. de
Figure Credits
I a- b, 2 Heidrun Schenk; l c, 3, 4 Hans P. Wittersheim.
. :
142 Heidrun Schenk
Appendix: Sites with Rouletted Ware
Sites in Bangladesh, India and Sri Lanka (Fig. 3)48
1. Gobinda Bhita (Bogra District, Bangladesh).
Rahman 1999: 123.
2. Mahasthangarh (Bogra District, Bangladesh).
Rahman 1999: 122 and plate; Alam/ A lam
2001: 344, figs. 2-3; Salles/Boussac/Breuil
2002: 555, figs. 1 0; 11

3. Ramsahar (Bogra District, Bangladesh). Rah-
man 1999: 123 and plate.
4. Wari-Bat eshwar (District Narshingi, Bang-
ladesh). Haque/ Rahman/Ashan 2001: 17, pl.
1: 5, 6.
5. Atghara (District Nonh 24-Parganas, West
Bengal). IAR 1957- 58: 70, pl. LXXXIll: 4b, 5.
6. Chandrakctugarh/Berachampa/Khana-Mihir-
er-Dhipi'0 (District North 24-Parganas, West
Bengal). IAR 1956-57: 29-30, fig. 14: 8, 10;
pl. XXXIX: 6, 8; 1957-58: pl. LXXII: 1-5
(R W); 1958-59: 55-56, fig. 25; 1959-60: 50-
52, pl. LV: A; 1960--61: 39-40, fig. 11; Jahan
2004: 92, fig. 2 (Wheeler type 1 0).
7. Boral!Baral (District South 24-Parganas, West
Bengal). IAR 1957-58: 70.
8. Deulpota (District South 24-Parganas, West
Bengal). Singh 1977/78: 91.
9. H adipur (District South 24-Parganas, West
Bengal). Suresh 2004: 91 .
10. Harinarayanpur (District South 24-Parga-
nas, West Bengal). IAR 1956- 57: 81; 1957-
58: 70; 1958-59: 77.
11. Hariharpur (District South 24-Parganas, West
Bengal). Suresh 2004: 91.
12. Mahinagar (District South 24-Parganas, West
Bengal). Singh 1977/78: 155; Niranjan Gos-
waml 1n:
A_0341.htm; Suresh 2004: 91.
13. Mangalkot / Mangolkot (District Burdwan/
Barddhaman, West Bengal). JAR 1989- 90:
109, pl. XXXI: B.
14. Pakhanna (District Bankura, West Bengal).
IAR 1997- 98: 200 ff., fi g. 144.
15. Saptagram=Satgaon (District Hugli/ Hoogli,
West Bengal). IAR 1961-62: 59.
16. Tamluk=Tamralipti (District Medinipur,
West Bengal). IAR 1 Y54-55: 20, pl. XXXVII;
1974-75: 52.
17. Rajghat=Varanasi (District Varanasi, Uttar
Pradesh). IAR 1963-64: pl. 40a; Narain/ Roy
1977: 26

18. Ayodhya (District Faizabad, Uttar Pradesh).
IAR 1976-77: 52-53, pl. L: D.
19. Manikpatna (Puri District, Orissa). Patra/
Patra 2004: 111.
20. Palur (District Ganjam, Orissa). Patra/ Patra
2004: 109.
21. Radhanagara/ Radha N agar(Rajnagar?) (Dis-
trict Kendrapara, Orissa). Patra/Patra 2004:
22. Sisupalgarh (District Bubhaneswar, Orissa).
Lal 1949: 86-87, fig. 8: 13; pl. XLII.
23. Dantavarapukota (Dantapuram ?) (Distrikt
Srikakulam, Andhra Pradesh). Surcsh 2004:
24. Kalingapatnam/Calingapatnam (District Sri-
kakulam, Andhra Pradesh). IAR 1967- 77:
1 0; 1977-78: 14; 1978-79: 66.
25. Mukhalingam (District Srikakulam, Andhra
Pradesh). Suresh 2004: 91.
26. Nagarlapet (District Srikakulam, Andhra
Pradesh). IAR 1976- 77: 10.
27. Salihundam (District Srikakulam, Andhra
Pradesh). IAR 1953-54: 11; Subrahmanyam
1964: 41-46, figs.1 3; 14.
28. Gopalapatnam/ Gopalpatnam (District Visha-
khapatnam, Andhra Pradesh). IAR 1990-91:
2; 1992-93: 3; 1993-94: 5.
29. Narasapatnam/Narsipatnam (District Visa-
khapatnam, Andhra Pradesh). Suresh 2004:
30. Ramatirtham/Ramateertham (District Visak-
hapatnam,Andhra Pradesh). Suresh 2004: 91.
Some of the sites are located only wi thin district borders.
This is true for sites numbered: 9, 11, 12, 14, 15, 26,
28, 31, 32, 34, 36, 38, 43, 45, 47, 49, 50, 55- 57, 59, 62,
63, 66, 68, 72, 73, 85, 89, 90, 92, 94, 100, 112, 114-116.
,., There named as NBP; rouletted decoration on both sides
of the bottom.
>l Ray 1994, 29: site c o n s i s ~ of a series of mounds, viz.
" There referring to "bichrome NBP", no mentioning of
rouletted decoration or beaked rim .
~ y
. 16.
vi7 ..
The Dating and Historical Value of Rouletted Ware 143
31. Pavuralakonda/Pavuralla Konda (District
Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh).
12/ stories/200208120091 0200.htm
32. Kotamita (District Warangal, Andhra
Pradesh). IAR 1980--81: 8.
33. Pithapuram (District East Godavari, Andhra
Pradesh). Suresh 2004: 91.
34. Aunangi (near)/ Annangi Hill
District Krish-
na (Andhra Pradesh). IAR 1977- 78: 1.
35. Ghantasala (District Krishna, Andhra
Pradesh). IAR 1959-60: 31.
36. Jujjuru (District Krishna, Andhra Pradesh).
IAR 1994-9 5: 1; 1995- 96: 1.
37. Kesarapalli/Kesarapalle (District Krishna,
Andhra Pradesh). Sarkar 1966: 43; 63, fig. 11.
38. Paritala (District Krishna, Andhra Pradesh).
Suresh 2004: 91.
39. Amaravati (District Guntur, Andhra
Pradesh). Wheeler/Gosh/ Krishna Deva 1946:
49; 48, fig. 13:; pl. XXVII: A: 2, 3; IAR
1958-59: 5; 1973-74: 4-5.
40. Chebrolu (District Guntur, Andhra Pradesh).
IAR 1960- 61: 1.
41. Chcjerla (District Guntur, Andhra Pradesh).
Suresh 2004: 91.
42. Dharanikota (District Guntur, Andhra
Pradesh). IAR 1962-63: 1-2; 1963--64: 2;
1964-65: 2.
43. Mallipadu (District Guntur, Andhra Pradesh).
IAR 87- 88: 1.
44. Vaddamanu (District Guntur, Andhra
Pradesh). Sastri/ Kasturibai/Veerender 1992:
94-96, pis. LVII-LIX; fig. 31.
45. Vaikuntapuram (District Guntur, Andhra
Pradesh). IAR 1960-61: 1.
46. Kondapur (District Medak, Andhra Pradesh).
Ahmad 1950: 4-5, pls. IVa; VIlla.
47. Pagidigutta (District Mahbubnagar, Andhra
Pradesh). IAR 1978-79: 65.
48. Chagatur (District Kurnool, Andhra
Pradesh). IAR 1976-77: 7; Subranmanyam
1997: 57; 228 .
49. J ambuladunic (District Kurnool, Andhra
Pradesh). IAR 1963- 64: 4.
50. Karpakala (District Kurnool, Andhra
Pradesh). JAR 1976- 77: 7.
St. Kudavelli (District Kurnool, Andhra
Pradesh). Surcsh 2004: 91.
52. Mittapali (Kurnool District, Andhra Pradesh).
IAR 1963- M: 4.
53. Nihugondla/Nilugondla (District Kurnool,
Andhra Pradesh). IAR 1963-M: 4.
54. Satanikota (District Kurnool, Andhra
Pradesh). IAR 1978-79: 35; Gosh 1986: 107-
113, fig.34: 11-14; fig.34: 1-4, 4a-c (BRW
55. Siddhirajalingapuram (District Kurnool,
Andhra Pradesh). IAR 1976-77: 7.
56. Tippaipalli (District Kurnool, Andhra
Pradesh). IAR 1976-77: 7.
57. Vamulapadu (District Kurnool, Andhra
Pradesh). IAR 1976-77: 7; 1978: 35-36.
58. Veerapuram (District Kurnool, Andhra
Pradesh). Sascri/Kasturi Bai/Rao 1984: 61,
pl. XXVI: A, B.
59. Vyaparladevipadu (District Kumool, And-
hra Pradesh). IAR 1976-77: 7.
60. Chandavaram (District Prakasam, Andhra
Pradesh). IAR 1974- 75: 6-7.
61. Medarametla (District Prakasam, Andhra
Pradesh). Suresh 2004: 91.
62. Mylavaram (near) (District Prakasam, And-
hra Pradesh). IAR 1979-80: 11.
63. Kambaduru (District Anantapur/Ananthapur,
Andhra Pradesh). Suresh 2004: 91.
64. Allur (District Ncllore, Andhra Pradesh).
Suresh 2004: 91.
65. Duvvuru-Duwur (Nell ore District, Andhra
Pradesh). IAR 1978- 79: 93.
66. Gandavaram (Nellore District, Andhra
Pradesh). Suresh 2004: 91.
67. Kottapatnam/Kothapatnam (Ncllore District,
Andhra Pradesh). IAR 1996-97: 1.
68. Puduru (Distri ct Nellore, Andhra Pradesh).
IAR 1994-95: 2; 1995- 96: 2.
69. Adam (District N agpur, Maharashtra). Nath
1992: 69-79; 1995a: 167, fig. 15 (stratigraph-
ical distribution); 1995b: 135, pl. 19: 3.
70. Paunar (District Wardha, Maharashtra). IAR
1966-67: 27.
Annangi Hill: Suresh 2004: 91.
l .. , !'M . ____________________________________ _, __.. , .
. ....... ___ .. ____ ._ -------------------
144 H eidmn Schenk
71. Arni (District Yavatmai/Yeotmal, Mahar-
ashtra). IAR 1978- 79: 71-72.
72. Marda (District Chanda/ Chandrapur, Ma-
harashtra). IAR 1959- 60: 31.
73. Junnar (District Aurangabad, Maharashtra).
Surcsh 2004: 91.
74. Paithan (District Aurangabad, Maharashtra).
Suresh 2004: 91.
75. Nevasa (District Ahmadnagar, Maharashtra).
Sankalia/Deo/ Ansari/Ehrhardt 1960: 280,
named as NBP p. 278-9, fig. 140 (Tlll);
IAR 1960- 61: 21; Begley 1992: 191 n. 37.
76. Nasik (District Nasik, Maharashtra). Sanka-
lia/Deo 1955: 69-70, fig. 42: j-o; pl. XIX: 1-
5, 7; 63 (RW); fig. 25: type 36c (BRW with
"internally beaked rim"= BRW Imitation?).
77. Ter=Tagara (District Osmanabad, Mahar-
ashtra). Chapekar 1969: v; 62-63; 64, fig. 23:
18- 20.
78. Sannathi/Sannati (District Gulbarga, Kama-
taka). IAR 1966-67: 29 (pl. XVI below left:
a worn body shcrd?); 1990-91: 31; 1993-94:
65; 1994-95: 39; 1995-96: 40; Howell 1995:
79. Maski (District Raichur, Karnataka). Wheel-
er 1946/48: 308; Thapar 1957: 79, fig. 26:
types 6, 6a-b; Gurumurthy 1981: 131 (sur-
face find only).
80. Kopbal (District Raichur, Karnataka). Ford/
Pollard/ Coningham/Stern 2005: 912.
81. Brahmagiri (District Chitradurga, Karnata-
ka). Wheeler 1947-48: 236-237; 238, fig. 27:
Tl29; 240, fig. 28: T143-144; pl. CXI: l-7.
82. Chandravalli (District Chitradurga, Karnata-
ka). Wheeler/Gosh/Krishna Deva 1946: pl.
XXVII: A: 1; Wheeler 1947--48: 278; 282,
fig. 47: Al0-14, A16-20; pl. CXXIII: 1- 3.
83. Banavasi (District Uttar Kannada, Karnata-
ka). IAR 70-71, 29, pl. XLVII: B; 1994-95:
40; Narasimha Murthy ct al 1997: 120; 119,
fig. 33; 195, pl. 55.
85. T. Narsipur (District Mysore, Karnataka).
Suresh 2004: 91.
85. Appukallu (District North Arcot=Vellore?,
Tamil Nadu). IAR 1976-77: 47-48.
86. Santhome=Mylapore (District Madras=
Chennai, Tamil Nadu) . IAR 1992- 93: 11 6.
87. Kanch.ipuram (District Kanchccpuram, Tamil
Nadu). TAR 1962-63: 12; 1971-72: 42--43;
1972- 73: 30, pl. XXXll: A); 1974-75: 3R;
Subrahmanyam 1974/75: 27; Gurumurthy
1981: 275, table 8.
88. Mahabalipuram/Mamallapuram (Dis trict
Kanchcepuram, Tamil Nadu). Soundara
Rajan/Raman 1994: 144.
89. Nerumbur (District Kancheepuram, Tamil
Nadu). Suresh 2004: 91.
90. Punjeri (District Chingleput=Tiruvallur?
Kancheepuram?, Tamil Nadu). Soundara
Rajan/ Raman 1994: 144.
91. Vasavasamudram (District Kancheepuram,
Tamil Nadu). IAR 1970-71: 33; Nagas-
wamy/Majeed 1978: 11- 13, fi g. 4.
92. Mel Sathamangalam (District Tiruvannama-
lai, Tamil Nadu). Soundara Rajan/Raman
1994: 144
93. Sengamedu (Distri ct Villupuram/ Vilup-
puram, Tamil Nadu). Banerjee 1956: 32.
94. Tirukoilur (Distri ct Villupuram, Tamil
Nadu). Suresh 2004: 91.
95. Tiruvamattur (District South Arcot= Villu-
puram? Tamil Nadu). Suresh 2004: 91.
96. Arikamedu/ Virampatnam (Pondicherry,
Tamil Nadu).
l.lisred as imported: Wheeler/ Gosh/Krishna
Deva 1946: 45-49, pls. XXV-XXVI; 47,
fig. 12; pl. XXX: B: 6 (Wheeler type 1 and
rouletted fragments); listed as local: Wheeler
type 2 (simple rim) but "identical in fabric"
to Wheeler type 1: Wheeler/Gosh/Krishna
Deva 1946: 55; 53, fig. 14: 2, 2a-c; 55:
Wheeler type 3c, d, f of "invariably grey
wares" and rim form like Wheeler type 1.
2. Wheeler type 3 listed as local and of
"inferior and coarser fabric": Wheeler!
Gosh/Krishna Deva 1946: 55, 53 fig. 14:
3 (= BRW-lmitation?); 55: Wheeler type
3e "exclusively in red ware"= Imitation?).
Begley 1996: 52, fi gs. 2. 12- 13; 226-228
(form 1); 238-245, figs. 4.243- 4.259
(Wheel er type 1); 246- 249, fi gs. 4.260-
4.267 (Wheeler type 2); 238- 241, figs.
4.243-4.252 (Wheeler type 3).
" mentioned under location Pondicherry.
dar a
a mil
. gas-
. "
l C }.
l of

. 14:

The Dating and Historical Value of Rouletted Ware 145
97. Ki laiyur/ Kilaiyoor (Pondichcrry, Tamil
Nadu). Soundara Raj an/ Raman 1994: 47.
98. Manapattu (Pondichcrry, Tamil Nadu).
Surcsh 2004: 91.

dalore District, Tamil Nadu). IAR 87- 88,
103 (Kudikadu); 1988- 89, 80; Soundara
Raj an/Raman 1994: 1 44; Glover 1996: 152,
pl. II, e-g (Karaikadu); Nattamedu/Nath-
amedu: IAR 1955-56, 27; 1965-66, 25; TAR
1966/ 67, 25;
ilogy/ nat tametu.txt.
100. Maligaimedu (District Cuddalorc, Tamil
Nadu). Surcsh 2004: 91.
101. Karur (District Karur, Tamil Nadu). Na-
gaswamy 1995: 63-65.
102. Kodumanal (District Erode, Tamil Nadu).
Rajan 1998: 67.
103. Perur (District Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu).
Gurumurthy 1981: 157.
104. Sulur (District Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu).
Suresh 2004: 91.
105. Vellalur (District Coimbatorc, Tamil Nadu).
Suresh 2004: 91.
106. Uraiyur (District Tiruchirapalli, Tamil
N adu). IAR 1964-65: 25, pl. XIX; 1965-
66: 26; Gurumurthy 1981: 275, table 8; pl.
31b; Kri shnamurthy 1988: 61-64, fig. 62;
pl. 18.
107. Kavcripattinam/ Poompuhar (District
Thanjavur, Tamil Nadu). IAR 1964-65: 24;
Soundara Rajan/ Raman 1994: 48, fi g. 11.
108. Nagapattinam (District N agapattinam,
Tami l Nadu). Soundara Raj an/ Rarnan 1994:
109. Manigramam/Manigiramam (District Na-
gapattinam, Tamil Nadu). Soundara Rajan/
Raman 1994: 50; 56, pl. XIX: B (wavy
lines); Jahan 2004: 94 .
110. Vanagiri (Distri ct Nagapattinam (Nagai),
Tamil Nadu). Soundara Rajan/ Raman 1994:
47, fig. 11; pl. XIX: A; XX: A-B.

(District Ram-
anathapuram, Tamil Nadu). IAR 1990-91:
68; 1996- 97: 100; Nagaswarny 1991, 249-
254 and pl. 25.1 : 1; pl. 25.2: 6 (inscribed);
1995: 70-81; Raman 1992: 128, fig.7: 4;
129; Suresh 2004: 95, pl. 9.
112. Periyapattinam (Disa ict Ramanathapuram,
Tamil Nadu). Begley 1996: 25 n. 6.
113. Tondi (District Ramanathapuram, Tamil
Nadu). Soundara Rajan/ Raman 1994: 144.
114. S. Pappinayakkanpatti (District Madurai,
Tamil Nadu). Selvakumar 2000: 126.
115. T. Kallupatti (District Madurai , Tamil
Nadu). Selvakumar 2000: 126.
116. Kayal (Distri ct Tirunclvcli, Tami l Nadu).
Soundara Raj an/Raman 1994: 144
11 7. Korkai (District Tir unclvcli, Tamil Nadu).
IAR 1968-69: 32. N agaswarny 1970: 52.
118. Pattanam/Muziris ? (District Ernakulam,
Kerala). Shaj an/ To mber/Selvakumar/
Cherian 2004: 317 .
119. Kant arodai (Sri Lanka). Begley 1967: fig-
ures on p. 25 (above left RW) and 26; p.
25 (below right Wheeler type 18); 1996: 25
(Wheeler type 1 0).
120. Mantai (Sri Lanka). Carswell/ Pricket 1980:
pl. 7a.
121. Anuradhapura (Sri Lanka). Dcraniyagala
1972: 67, fi g. 12: 16i.k.h; Bouzek/Derani-
yagala 1985: 590, fig. 1-2; Prickctt-Fernan-
do 1990: 65, fig. 3: d; Bouzek 1993: 84,
fig. 55: 1; Ueyema/ Nozaki 1996: 45, fig. 15,
122. Tissamaharama (Sri Lanka). Schenk 2001:
127, fig. 106; 176, fi g. 141: 13, 14 (RW);
135, fig. 110 (BRW-i mitation).
123. Godavaya (Sri Lanka). Schenk 2001 b: 343,
figs. 257: 17; 258: 1 (imitation in "Coarse
Red Ware").
124. Kelaniya (Sri Lanka). Bopearachchi 1999:
13, fig. 10.
" Soundara Rajan/Raman 1994: 144 (Kudikadu/ Nathamc-
du); Jahan 2004: 94 (Karaikadu/:-.J at tamedu). Surcsh
2004: 181 n. 2 ("Karaikadu, Kudikadu and Nattamcdu
arc neighbouring coastal sites in South Arcot District,
Tamil Nadu").- Karaikadu = Kudikadu and Nattamcdu
according to Raman 19':12: 128.
ss At first quoted in lAR 1965-66, 25 as Kottaimedu;
Nagaswamy 1995, 7 1: (Alagankulam) the site is now
called Kottaimedu; Suresh 2004, 114: Alagankulam,
located in t be Delta oi the Vai gai, on the northern bank
of t he river, is locally referred 10 ' Kottaimedu' or ' fort

H eidnm Schenk
Sites in India, mentioned m literature, but
district area indeterminate
Bachri (Wesr Bengal).
Suresh 2004: 91.
Chintamani Dibba (Andhra Pradesh).
Suresh 2004: 91.
Kotesvarayalam (Andhra Pradesh).
Suresh 2004: 91.
Nallur (Andhra Pradesh).
Suresh 2004: 91.
Neredubandaguddu (Andhra Pradesh).
Suresh 2004: 91.
Roj a (Karnataka).
Surcsh 2004: 91.
Sasanakota (Andhra Pradesh).
Suresh 2004: 91.
Sendamangalam (Tamil Nadu).
Suresh 2004: 91.
) (Andhra Pradesh).
Suresh 2004: 91.
Sites outside of South Asia (Fig. 4)
1. Myos Hormos, Egypt.
Tomber 2002: 27, fig. 6.
2. Coptos, Egypt.
T ombcr 2000: 630.
3. Berenike, Egypt.
Tomber 2002: 27, figs. 4-5.
4. Qana, Y cmen.
Sedov 1996: 17, fig. 4: 19 (described as "fine
red slipped pottery"); Sedov/ Benvenuti 2002:
5. Khor Rori, Oman.
Sedov/ Benvenuti 2002: 186; 219, pl. 10: 3
(BRW Imitation?) and RW according to
pers. comment A. Sedov (see n. 23).
6. Tra Kieu, Vietnam.
Glover!Yamagata 1995: 166, fig. 139; Glover
1996: 152, pl. II: i; 2005: 17, fig. 3a.
7. Go Cam, Vietnam.
Glover 2005: 17, fig. 3b.
8. Sembiran, Bali/Pacung, Bali.
Ardika/Bcllwood 1991: 224, fig. 2 (RW);
fig. 3 (Wheeler type 1 0); Glover 1996: 152,
pl. II: b, d; Ardika 1999: 83.
9. Buni Complex (Kobak Kendal), Java.
Walker and Santoso 1977: 230, fig. 1; Glover
1996: 152, pl. II: h.
10. Palembang, Sumatra.
www. users. skyoet. be/ network. indonesia/
11. Bukit Tengku Lembu, Malaysia.
Sieveking 1962: 25-26, fig. 1 (only Wheeler
t ype 18).
District N algonda
" District Srikakulam
1: 3

The Dating and Historical Value of Rouletted Ware
Ahmad, K.
1950 Inscribed and riveted pottery of Kondapur.
Kondapur series 1. Hyderabad.
A lam,
M. S. I Alarn, M. M.
Ceramics from Mahasthan. In: Alam, M. S. I
Salles, J.-F. (eds.), France-Bangladesh Joint
Venture Excavations at Mahasthangarh. f irst
interim report, pp. 342-426. Dhaka.
Allchin, B. I Allchin, f. R.
!997 Origins of a Civilization. The Prehistory and
Earl y Archaeology of South Asia. New Delhi.
Ardika, I. W.
1999 Ancient Trade Relation Between India and
Indonesia. In: Behera, K. S. (cd.), Maritime
Heritage of India. pp. 80-89. New Delhi.
Ardika, 1. W. I Bellwood, P. I Eggleton, R. A. I Ellis, D. J.
1993 A single source for South Asian export-quality
Rouletted Ware? In: Man and Environment 18
(1): 101-109.
Aung Thaw
1968 Report o n the excavations at Beikthano. Ran-
Aung-Thwin, M.
1982 Burma before Pagan: The Status of Archawl-
ogy Today. In: Asian Perspectives 25 (2): 1-
Ball, W.
2001 Rome in the East. The Transformation of an
Empire. London & New York.
Banerjee, N. R.
1956 The Megalithic problem of Chingleput in the
light of recent explorations. In: Ancient in-
dia 12: 21-34.
Basa, K. K.
1999 Early Trade in the Indian Ocean: Perspectives
on Indo-South-cast Asian Maritime Contacts.
In: Behera, K. S. (ed.), Mari time Heritage of
India. pp. 29- 71. New Delhi.
Basa, K. K. I Behera K. S.
1999 Indo-Roman Trade. In: Behera, K. S. (ed.),
Maritime Heritage of india. pp. 15- 28. New
Begley, V.
1967 Archaeological exploration in Northern Cey-
lon. In: Expedition 9 {4): 21-29.
1983 Ari kamedu reconsidered. In: American Jour-
nal of Archaeology 87: 461-481.
From Iron Age to Early Historical in South
Indian Archaeology. In: Jacobson, J. (cd.),
Studies in the Archaeology of India and Pa-
pp. 297-319. New Ddhi.
Rouletted Ware at Arikamcdu: A New Ap-
proach. In: American Journal of Archaeolo-
gy 92: 427-440.
Ceramic Evidence for Pre-Periplus Trade on
the I ndian Coasts. In: Begley, V. I De Puma,
D. (cds. ), Rome and India. The Ancient Sea
Trade, pp. 157- 196. Delhi. Indian Edition.
The Ancient Port of Arika.mcdu. New Exca-
vations and Researches 1989- 1992. Vol. 1.
Mcmoires Archeologiques 22. Pondicherry.
Begley, V. I De Puma, D. (eds.)
1992 Rome and India. The Ancient Sea Trade.
Delhi. Indian edition.
Behcra, K. S. (cd. )
1999 Maritime Heritage of India. New Delhi.
Bopcarachchi, 0.
1999 Sites portuaires et emporia de !'ancien Sri
Lanka - nouvelles donnees archeologiques. In:
Arts Asiatiques 54: 5- 23.
Bouzek, J. (ed. )
1993 Ceylon Between East and West. Anuradhapu-
ra Abhayagiri Vihara 1981- 1984. Excavations
and Srudies. Prague.
Bouzek, ]. I Deraniyagala, S. U.
1985 Tessons de vases Hcllenistiques trouves en Sri
Lanka. In: Bulletin de Corrcspondance Hel-
lenique 109: 589- 596.
Carswell, J. I Prickct, M.
1984 Mantai 1980: A Preliminary Investigation. In:
Ancient Ceylon 5: 3-81.
Chapekar, B. N
1969 Report on the Excavation at Ter 1958. Poona.
Das, A. K. I Panja, S. I Mukhopadhyay, T. K. I Chakra-
barti, S.
2002 Pottery Technology and Provenance Studies
form the Site of Chandrakerugarh in Lower
Bengal, In: Sengupta, G. I Panj a, S. (cds.),
Archaeology of Eastern India. New Perspec-
tives, pp. 425-450. Kolkata.
Datta, A.
1999 Northern Black Polished Ware (NBPW) - A
Typical Marker of Mauryan Cultural Expan-
sion. In: Indian Museum Bulletin (Special
Issue), Vol. 34: 102- 109.
Dco, S. B. I Joshi, J. P.
1972 Pauni Excavation ( 1969- 70). Nagpur.
148 Heidrun Schenk
Deraniyagala, S. U.
1972 The Citadel of Anuradhapura 1969: Excava-
tions in the Gedige Area. In: Ancient Cey-
lon 2: 48-168.
L. A. I Coningham, R.
Early Historic Specialisation and Standardisa-
tion: the Technology of Rouletted Ware and
Associated Wares at Anuradhapura. In: Franke-
Vogt, U./Wcisshaar, H.-J. (eds.), South Asian
Archaeology 2003. Proceedings of the J7'h
International Conference of the European
Association of South Asian Archaeologists. 7-
11 July, 2003, Bonn. (= Forschungen zur
Archaologie AuHereuropaischcr Kulturen 1),
pp. 393-397. Aachen.
Ford, L. I Pollard, A.M. I Coningham R. A. E I Stern, B.
200S A geochemical investigation of the origin of
Rouletted and other related South Asian fine
wares. In: Antiquity 79, no. 306, 909-920.
Glover, I. C.
1996 Recent Archaeological Evidence for Early
Maritime Contacts between India and South-
east Asia. In: Ray, H. P. I Salles, J.-F. (eds.),
Tradition and Archaeology. Early Maritime
Contacts in the Indian Ocean. Proceedings of
the International Seminar Techno-Archaeo-
logical Perspectives of Seafaring in the Indian
Ocean 4'h cent. B.C. -15'1.. cent. A.D., Del-
hi 1994, pp. 129-158. Delhi.
200S Avant le Champa: Pouilles a Tra Kieu et Go
Cam, Province de Quang Nam, Centre Viet-
nam, 2000-2003. In: Trcsors d'art du Vietnam.
La sculpture du Champa. V' - XV' siecles.
Erablissement public du musee des arts asia-
tiqucs Guimet. Catalogue realise sous Ia direc-
tion de Pierre Baptiste ct Thierry Zephir. 12
octobre 2005- 9 janvier 2006, pp. 14-21. Paris.
I. C. I Yamagata, M.
The Origins of Cham Civilization: lndigine-
ous, Chinese and Indian Influences in Central
Vietnam as Revealed by Excavations at Tra
Kieu, Vietnam 1990 and 1993. In: Yeung, C. I
Li Wai-Ling, B. (cds.), Conference Papers on
Archaeology in Southeast Asia, pp. 145-169.
Hong kong.
Gogre, V. D.
1997 The Chandraketugarh-Tamluk Region of Ben-
gal: Source of the Early Historic Rouletted
Ware from India and Southeast Asia: In: Man
and Environment 22 (1): 69-85.
2001 XRD Analysis of the Rouletted Ware and
Other Pine Grey Ware from Tissamaharama.
In: Weisshaar, H.-J. I Roth, H. I Wijeyapala,
W. (cds.), Ancient Ruhuna. Sri Lankan -
German Archaeological Project in the South-
ern Province, Vol. 1. (== Marerialien 7.ur Allge-
meinen und Vergleichenden Archaologie 58),
pp. 197-202. Mainz.
Gosh, N.C.
1986 Excavations at Satanikota (1977-80). New
Gupta, S.
1995/96 Beyond Arikamedu: Macro Stratigraphy of the
Iron Age-Early Historic Transition and Ro-
man Contact in South India. In: Puratattva 26:
Gurumurthy, S.
1981 Ceramic Traditions in South India. Madras.
E. I Rahman, S. S.M. I Ashan, S.M. K.
A preliminary report on Wari-Bateshwar Trial
Excavation by ICSBA. In: Haque E. (ed.),
Excavation At Wari-Bateshwar: A Preliminary
Study. Studies in Bengal Art Series 5. The
International Centre for Study of Bengal Art.
pp. 11-40. Dhaka.
Howell, ]. R.
1995 Excavations at Sannath (1986 - 1989). Mem-
oirs of the Archaeological Survey of India 93.
New Delhi.
IAR == Indian Archaeological Review
Jahan, S. H.
2004 Of Gange and Gafigabandar: Location of the
Port and Condition of the Harbour. In: Man
and Environment 29 (2): 90-101.
Karrtunen, K.
1989 India in Early Greek Literature. Studia Ori-
entalia 65. Helsinki.
1997 India and the Hellenistic World. Studia Ori-
entalia 83. Helsinki.
Kervran, M.
1996 Indian Ceramics in Southern Iran and EJstern
Arabia: Repertory, Classification and Chro-
nology. In: Ray, H. P. I Salles, J.-F. (eds.),
Tradition and Archaeology. Early Maritime
Contacts in the Indian Ocean. Proceedings of
the International Seminar Techno-Archaeo-
logical Perspectives of Seafaring in the Indian
Ocean 4'h cent. B.C. -IS'h. cent. A.D., Delhi
1994, pp. 37-58. Delhi.
Kramer, C.
1997 Pottery in Rajasthan. Ethnoan;haeology 111
Two Indian Cities. Washington/London.
) -
l C

") -
. ),
Thr: Dating and Historical Value of Rouletted Ware 149
Mohan Reddy, P.
Maritime Trade of Early South India. New
Archaeo logical Evidence from Motupalli,
Andhra Pradesh. l n: East and West 51: 143-
Krishnamurthy, C.
1988 Pottery. In: Raman, K. V. (ed.), Excavations at
Uraiyur (Tiruchirapalli) 1965-66, pp. 29- 68.
Krishnan, K. I Coningham, R. A. E.
1997 Microstructural Analysis of Sampl es of Rou-
letted Ware and Associated Potter y from
Anuradhapura, Sri Lanka. In: All chi n, R. I
Allchin, B. (eds.), South Asian Archaeolo-
gy 1995. Proceedings of the 13th Conference of
the European Association of South Asian
Archaeologists, Cambridge 5- 9 July, 1995,
Vol. 2: 925 937. New Delhi/Calcutta.
La!, B. B.
1949 Sisupalgarh 1948: An Earl y Historical fort in
Eastern India. In: Ancient I ndia 5: 62- 105.
Malleret, 1...
1960 L' archeologie du delta du Mekong. Publica-
tions de !'Ecole Fran'<aisc d' Extrcmc- Oricm 43.
Mishra, A. K.
1989 The Indian Black Wares. First Millennium
B.C. Delhi.
Mukherjee, B.N.
1999 The Maurya Empire. India and the World. In: Museum Bulleti n (Special Issue), Vol. 34:
1- 28.
Nagaswamy, R.
1970 Excavation at Korkai, District Th.irunelvcli.
In: Nagaswamy R. (ed.), Damilica 1, Journal
of the T amilnadu State Department of Archae-
ology, pp. 50-54. Madras.
1991 Alagankulam: an Indo-Roman Trading Port.
In: Margabandhu, C. I Ramachandran, K. S. I
Sagar, A. P. I Sinha, D. K. (eds.), Indian Ar-
chaeological Heritage. Shri K. V. Soundara
Rajan Festschrift, pp. 249- 254. Delhi.
1995 Roman Karur. A peep into Tamils' past.
Madras .
Nagaswamy, R. I Majeed, A. A.
1978 Vasavasamudram. A report on the excavation
conducted by the Tamilnadu State Depar t-
ment of Archaeology. Madras.
Narasimha Murthy, A. V. ct al
1997 Excavations at Banavasi. Mysore.
Narain, A. K. I Roy, T. N. (eds.)
1977 Excavations at Rajghat 1957-58, 1960-65. Part
II. The Pottery. Varanasi.
Nath, A.
1992 Adam - An I ndex to Vidarbha Archaeology.
l n: Nayak, B. U. I Ghosh, N.C. (eds.), N ew
Trends in Indian Art and Archaeolo gy.
S. R. Rao' s 70h Birthday Felicitation Volume,
pp. 69-79. New Delhi.
Antiquities of Gracco-Roman Affinity from
Adam. An Inland Mart of Central india. In:
East and West45: 149- 171.
Some Mediterranean Finds at Adam. In: Kr-
sna-Smrti. Studies in Indian Art and Archae-
ology, Prof. K. D. B<ljpai Commemoration
Volume, pp. 132-136.
Pant, P. C. I Jayaswal, V. (eds.)
1997 Ancient Ceramic Historical Enquiries and
Scicmific Approaches. Delhi.
Panth, R.
2004 Mahinda's contribution to the Introduction of
Buddhism in Sri Lanka. With reference to Pal i
Literature. In: Pande, A. I Dhar P. P. (eds.),
Cultural I nterface of India with Asia. Reli-
gion, Art and Architecture. National Museum
Institute Monograph Series 1, pp. 116- 120.
N ew Delhi.
S. K. I Patra, B.
Archaeology and the Maritime History of
Ancient Orissa. Jn: The Orissa Historical
Research Journal Vol. 47 (2): 107-118.
Prematilleke, L.
1999 The Mauryan Extension of Cultural Influence
in Sri Lanka as revealed by archaeological
evidence. In: Indian Museum Bulletin (Special
Issue), Vol. 34: 29-34.
Prickett-Pernando, M.
1990 Durable Goods: The Archaeological .Evidence
of Sri Lanka' s Role in the Indian Ocean Trade.
In: Banderanayake, S. I Dewaraja, L. I Silva,
R. / Wimalararnc, K. D. G. (eds.), Sri Lanka
and the Silk Road of the Sea, pp. 60-84.
Rahman, N.H. S. (ed.)
1998 The encyclopedia of Malaysia. Early History.
Vol. 4. Singapore.
Rahman, S. S. M.
1999 Recent Discovery of Rouletted Ware in Ma-
hasthangarh Region of An Ar-
chaeological Perspective. In: Indian Museum
Bulletin (Special Issue), Vol. 34: 121- 131.
150 Heidnm Schenk
Raman, K. V.
1992 .Further Evidence of Roman Trade from Caostal
Sires in Tamil Nadu. In: Begley, V. / De Puma,
D. (eds.), Rome and India. The Ancient Sea
Trade, pp. 125- 133. Delhi. lndian edition.
Rajan, K.
1998 Further excavations at Kodumanal. In: Man
and Environment 23: 65-76.
Ray, A.
1999 The Excavated Mauryan Sites in Northern and
Eastern India. In: Indian Museum Bulletin
(Special Issue), Vol. 34: 85-109.
Ray, H. P.
1987 Early historical urbanization: the case of the
western Deccan. ln: World Archaeology 19
( 1): 94-104.
1993 East coast Trade in Peninsular India c. 200
B.C. to A.D. 400. ln: Gail, A. ]. I Mevissen,
G. J. R. ( cds.), South Asian Archaeology 1991,
Proceedings of the 11'h International Confer-
ence of the Association of South Asian Ar-
chaeologists in Western Europe held in Berlin
1- 5 July 1991, pp. 573-584. Berlin.
1994 The Winds of Change. Buddhism and the
Maritime Links of Early South Asia. Delhi.
1996 Early Coastal Trade in the Bay of Bengal. In:
Reade, J. (ed.), The Indian Ocean in Antiquity,
pp. 351-364. London.
1999 l 'he Legacy of Childe and the Archaeology of
Coastal Sites. In: Ray, H. P. (ed.), Archaeol-
ogy of Seafaring, Indian Council of Historical
Research, Monograph Series I, Appendix I,
pp. 313-322. Delhi.
Ray, H. P. / Salles, J.-F. (eds.)
1996 Tradition and Archaeology. Early Maritime
Contacts in the Indian Ocean. Proceedings of
the International Seminar Techno-Archaeo-
logical Perspectives of Seafaring in the Indian
Ocean 4th cent. B.C. - 15th. cent. A. D., Delhi
1994. Delhi.
H. I Kessler, 0. I Recker, U. I Wijeyapala, W.
The Godavaya Harbour Site. Report on the
1994- 1997 Excavations. In: Weisshaar, H.-J. I
Roth, H. I Wijeyapala, W. (eds.), Anciem
Ruhuna. Sri Lankan - German Archaeological
Project in the Southern Province, Vol. l. (=
Marerialien zur Allgemcinen und Verglcichcn-
den Archaologic 58), pp. 291- 326. Mainz.
Salles, J.-F. / Boussac, M.- F. I Breuil, J.-Y.
2002 Mahastangarh (Bangladesh) and the Ganges
valley in the Mauryan Period. In: Sengupta,
G. I Panja, S. (eds.), Archaeology of .Eastern
India. New Perspectives, pp. 533- 549. Kolka-
Sankalia, H. D. I Deo, S. B.
1955 Report on the Excavations at Nasik and Jorwe
1950--51. Poona.
Sankalia, H. D. I Deo, S. B. I Ansari, Z. D. I Ehrhardt, S.
1960 rrom History w Pre-History at Nevasa (1954-
56). Department of Archaeology and Ancient
History, Deccan Coll ege, University of Poo-
na. Poona.
Sarkar, H.
1966 Kcsarapalle 1962. In: Ancient India 22: 37- 74.
Sanna, I. K.
1990/91 Ceramics and Maritime Routes of India: New
Evidence. In: Puratattva 21: 37-42.
T.V. G. I Kasturibai, M. / Veerender, M.
Vaddamanu Excavations (1981 - 85). Birla Ar-
chaeological & Cultural Research [nsri rute.
T.V. G. / Kasturi Bai, M. I Rao, .J. V. P.
Veerapuram - a Type Site for Cultural Study
in the Krishna Valley. IIyderabad.
Schenk, H.
2000 Rouletted Ware and Other Imports of Tissa-
maharama. Observations on the Pottery Se-
quence from Southern Sri Lanka. In: Taddei,
M. / De Marco, G. (cds. ), South Asian Archae-
ology 1997. Proceedings of the l4'h Interna-
tional Conference of the European Associa-
tion of South Asian Archae.ologisrs, held in the
lstituto Italiano per !'Africa e !' Oriente, Pal-
azzo Brancaccio, Rome 7- 14 July 1997, Scrie
Orientale Roma 90 (2), pp. 653-677. Rome.
The Development of Pottery at Tissamahar-
ama. In: Weisshaar, H.-J. I Roth, H. / Wijeya-
pala, W. (eds.), Ancient Ruhuna. Sri Lankan
-German Archaeological Project in the South-
em Province, Vol. I. (= Marerialien zur Allge-
meincn und V crglcichendcn Archaologic 58),
pp. 59-195. Mainz.
Remarks on the Pottery from Godavaya. In:
Weisshaar, H.-J. I Roth, H. / Wij eyapala, W.
(eds.), Ancient Ruhuna. Sri Lankan - German
Archaeological Project in the Southern Prov-
ince, Vol. I. ( =Materialien zur Allgemeinen
und Vergleichenden Archiiologic 58), pp. 335-
348. Mainz.
"Rouletted Eine Keramik-
form zwischen Rotem Mecr und Vietnam in
vorromischcr Zeit. In: Pohl, E. I Recker, U. I
'lbeune, C. (eds.), Archiiologisches Zellwerk.
Beitrage zur Kulturgeschichte in Europa und
Asien. Festschrift fu r Helmut Roth zum
60. Geburtstag, pp. 129- 143. Rahden/ Westf.
, s.

J. I
The Daling and Historical Value of Rouletted Ware 151
Sedov, A.
1996 Qana' (Yemen) and the indian Ocean: the
archaeological evidence. In: Ray, H. P. I Salles,
J.-F. (eds.), Tradition and Archaeology. Early
Maritime Contacts in the Indian Ocean. Pro-
<:eedings of the International Seminar Techno-
Perspectives of Seafaring in the
Indian Ocean 4th cent. B.C. - IS'h. cent. A.D.,
Delhi 1994, pp. 11-36. Delhi.
A. V. I Benvenuti, C.
The Pottery of Sumhuram: General Typology.
In: Avanzini, A. (cd.), Khor Rori Report 1.
Arabia Antica I , pp. 177- 248. Pisa.
Sengupta, G. I Panja, S. (eds.)
2002 Archaeology of Eastern India. New Perspec-
tives. Kolkata.
Selvakumar, V.
2000 Investigations fnto The Iron Age - Early
Historic Cultures of the Upper Gundar Basin,
Madurai District, Tamil Nadu, india. In: South
Asian Studies 16: 119-132.
Shajan, K. P.l Tomber, R. I Sclvakumar, V. I Cherian,
P. J.
2004 Locating the ancient port of Muziris: fresh
findings from Pauanam. In: Journal of Roman
Archaeology 17: 312- 320.
Sharma, M.
1997 Comments on the Northern Blat: k Polished
Ware and Other Associated Wares. In: Pant,
P. C. I Jayaswal, V. (eds.), Ancient Ccmmic
Historical Enquiries and Scientific Approach-
es, pp. 111-115. Delhi.
Sieveking, G. de G.
1969 The Prehistoric Cemetery at Bukit Tengku
Lembu. In: Federation Museums Journal 7:
Singh, A. K.
1977/78 Pottery and Trade - a Study of Roman Pottery
from Indian Sites. In: The Journal of the Bihar
Research Society 63164, L. N. Mishra Com-
memoration Volume: 140- 174.
Sinha, B. P.
1997 Ancient Magadha: The Cradle of the Northern
Black Polished Ware. L1: Pant, P. C. I Jayas-
wal, V. (cds.), Ancient Ceramic Historical
Enquiries and Scientific Approaches, pp. 85-
110. Delhi.
Smith, M. L
1999 "lndianization" from the Indian Point of View:
Trade and Cultural Conta<:t s with Southeast
Asia in the Early First Millenium C.E. In:
Journal of the Ewnomic and Sot:ial History
of the Orient 42 (1 ): 1- 26.
Smith, M. C. / Wright, H. T.
1988 The fro m Ras Hafun in Somalia:
notes on a classical maritime site. In: Aza-
nia 23, 1988: 115-141.
Soundara Rajan, K. V. I Raman, K. V.
1994 Kavcripaninam Excavations 1963-73. A port
city on the Tamilnadu coast. Memoirs of the
Archaeological Survey of India 90. New Del-
Stargardt, ].
1990 The Ancient Pvu of Burma. Volume 1: The
Early Pyu in a Man-made Landscape.

Subrahmanyam, R.
1964 Salihundam. A Buddhist Site in Andhra
Pradesh. Andhra Pradesh Government Ar-
chaeological Series no. 17. Hyderabad.
1974-75 Kanchipuram Excavations. In: Journal of the
Andhra Historical Research Society 34: 23- 31.
Subranmanyam, B.
1997 Pre, Proto and Early Historic Cultures of
Krishna Tungabhadra Valley. Delhi .
Surcsh, S.
2004 Symbols of Trade. Roman and Pseudo-Roman
Objects found in India. Delhi.
Thapar, B. K.
1957 Maski 1954. A Chalcolithic Site of the South-
ern Deccan. In: Ancient India 13: 4-142.
Thapar, R.
1997 A -'-Oka and the Decline of the Mauryas. Ox-
ford 1961, revised edition. New Delhi.
Tomber, R.
2000 Indo-Roman trade: the ceramic evidence from
In: Antiquity 74: 624-631.
2002 Indian Fine Wares from the Red Sea Coast of
Egypt. In: Man and Environment 27 (1): 26-
Ueyema, Y. I No:-.aki, S.
1996 The Excavation Report of JOVC Project in
the Citadel of Anuradhapura Project: 1991 -
1992. In: Ancient Ceylon 17: Addendum.
Walker, M.j. / Santoso, S.
1977- 7S Roman - Indian Rouletted Pottery in Indo-
nesia. In: Puratattva 9: 104-108.
Wcisshaar, H.-]. / Roth, H. I Wijeyapala, W. (eds.)
2001 Ancient Ruhuna. Sri Lankan - German Ar-
chaeological Project in the Somhern Province,
Vol. 1. Material ien z.ur Allgemeinen und Ver-
gleichendcn Archaologie 58. Maim;.
152 Heidrun Schenk
Weisshaar, H.-J. I Schenk, H. I Wijeyapala, W.
2001 Excavations in the Citadd at Akurugoda: The
Quarter (Tissa 1) and the Court's
Garden ( f issa 2). In: Weisshaar, H.-J. / Roth,
H./ Wijeyapala, W. (eds.), Ancient Ruhuoa.
Sri Lankan - German Archaeological Project
in the Southern Province, Vol. 1. (= Materi-
alien zur Allgcmcincn und V crgleichenden
Archaologie 58), pp. 5-39. Mainz.
Wheeler, M.
1947/48 Brahmagiri and Chandravalli 1947: Megalithic
and other Cultures in Mysorc State. In: Ancient
India 4: 180- 310.
Wheeler, M. I Ghosh, A. I Krishna Deva
1946 An Indo-Roman Trading Station on the J::ast
Coast of India. In: Ancient India 2: 17-124.
Whitehouse, D./ Williamson, A.
I Sasanian Maritime Trade. In: Iran II: 29-49.
Will, E. L.
1992 The Mediterranean Shipping Amphoras from
Arikamedu. Tn: Begley, V. / De Puma, D.
(eds.), Rome and India. The Ancient Sea
Trade, 151- 156. Delhi. Indian edition.
1996 Mediterranean Shipping Amphoras from the
1941-50 Excavations. I n: Begley V., The
Ancient Port of Arikamedu. New Excavations
and Researches 1989-1992. VoL 1. (= Memoi-
res Archeologiques 22), pp. 317- 349. Pon-
Wi lliam-Hunt, P. D. R.
1952 Recent Archaeological Discoveries in Malaya
(1951). In: J ournal of the Malayan Branch of
the Royal Asiatic Society XXV: 181- 190.
Yule, P. I Kazenwadel, B.
1993 Toward a Chronology of the Latt! Iron Age
in the Sultanate of Oman. In: Finkbeiner, U.
(e<l.), Materialien zur Archaologic der Seleuki-
den- und Partherzcit im siidlichcn Babylonien
und im Golfgebiet . Ergebnisse der Symposien
1987 und 1989 in Blaubcuren, pp. 25 1-277.
a I

r e;