Revision summary
Harappan maritime trade joined Indus rivers and coastal sites to Oman, Bahrain and Mesopotamia. Lothal, Dholavira, Kuntasi, Balakot and Sutkagen-dor were important nodes. Meluhha texts, Indus seals, Gulf materials and etched carnelian beads provide converging evidence. Exports included crafted beads, shell, ivory, timber and probably textiles; metals moved inward. Lothal’s basin may be a dock or reservoir, so do not make the whole case depend on it. Trade supported craft specialisation and urban integration but was not the sole cause of Harappan civilisation.
Model answer
Introduction
Harappan maritime trade linked the Indus cities and coastal settlements with Gujarat, Makran, Oman, Bahrain and Mesopotamia during the third millennium BCE. Archaeology does not preserve a shipping ledger; it reconstructs the network from ports, seals, weights, imported materials and Mesopotamian references to Meluhha.
Body
Evidence and network
- Coastal nodes: Lothal in Gujarat had a large brick basin conventionally called a dockyard, warehouses, seals and bead workshops. Its nautical function is debated—some read it as a reservoir—but its estuarine location and craft-trade assemblage are secure. Dholavira connected Kachchh routes; Kuntasi, Balakot and Sutkagen-dor served coastal exchange from Saurashtra to Makran.
- Routes and craft: River transport fed coastal entrepôts. Sewn or reed boats probably followed coastwise routes to Magan (Oman) and Dilmun (Bahrain), then Mesopotamia. A boat motif on seals and terracotta models supports water transport, though it cannot specify cargo volume.
- Exports: Etched carnelian beads, shell and ivory objects, timber, cotton textiles and perhaps sesame travelled west. Harappan-style weights, cubical stone measures, seals and bead-making technology enabled standardised transactions.
- Imports: Silver, copper and other scarce raw materials entered the Indus system. Omani copper and Gulf shells have archaeological signatures, while lapis lazuli also moved through overland Afghan routes.
- External testimony: Mesopotamian cuneiform texts mention Meluhha, Meluhhan ships and a Meluhha village/interpreter. Indus seals and carnelian beads occur at Ur, Kish and Gulf sites; Gulf seals and foreign materials occur in the Indus sphere.
Anthropological significance
The trade sustained urban craft specialisation, redistributed prestige goods and tied hinterland producers to cities. It also carried styles and techniques without erasing Harappan standardisation. Shereen Ratnagar has emphasised West Asian interaction, while other archaeologists caution against making long-distance trade the sole cause of urbanism.
Silting, shoreline change and river shifts complicate present maps. The network was maritime and terrestrial, regional and overseas; it was not a single state-run “navy” for which evidence is absent.
Flow diagram
flowchart LR H[Indus hinterland] --> L[Lothal / Kachchh / Makran] L --> M[Magan: Oman] M --> D[Dilmun: Bahrain] D --> U[Mesopotamia] U -->|silver and raw materials| H H -->|beads shell textiles| U
Conclusion
The strongest case rests on a chain of coastal settlements, standardised craft goods, Gulf materials and Meluhha texts. Lothal’s basin remains debated, but Harappan seaborne exchange does not depend on that feature alone. Maritime trade amplified, rather than single-handedly created, Indus urbanism.
Quick related
Students also ask
-
Critical perspective on avoidance and joking relationship
Next question in the 2024 paper (Q1). View answer →
-
Was Lothal certainly a dockyard?
No. A tidal dock is the classic interpretation, but reservoir and irrigation interpretations exist. Maritime trade is independently demonstrated by the wider coastal and Gulf evidence.
-
Was trade only with Mesopotamia?
No. Most exchange was probably regional, while Oman and Bahrain formed crucial intermediate circuits in the longer Mesopotamian connection.
PYQ trend
When UPSC asked this
Related PYQs from other years, newest first. Open a question to read it.
-
2025 · Q5(a) · Anthropology GS 1 · 10 marks
Multispecies, Multi-sited and Critical Ethnography. -
2022 · Q3(b) · Anthropology GS 1 · 15 marks
Enumerate the evidence of animal domestication in Indian microlithic industry -
2021 · Q5(e) · Anthropology GS 1 · 10 marks
Modes of Subsistence.
More from this paper
Q1(a) · UPSC Mains 2024 · Anthropology GS 1 · 10 marks
Attributes of culture
The Nature of Culture
Culture is a learned and symbolically mediated design for living. Its core attributes are sharing, symbolism, patterning, adaptation, transmission and change. Tylor supplies the complex whole; Geertz supplies public meaning; Bourdieu links culture to embodied practice. Kula shows integration of exchange, rank, ritual and inter-island relations. Shared culture is never identical experience: gender, class, age and power matter. Treat integration as a question, not as automatic harmony.
Q1(c) · UPSC Mains 2024 · Anthropology GS 1 · 10 marks
Critical perspective on avoidance and joking relationship
The Nature of Culture
Avoidance prescribes reserve; joking licenses teasing between named kin categories. Radcliffe-Brown read both as complementary ways of regulating conjunction and separation. Mother-in-law/son-in-law avoidance and cross-cousin or junior-affine joking are common patterns. Symmetrical joking permits reciprocity; asymmetrical joking protects one-sided licence. Gluckman highlights ritualised expression of contradiction. Critical analysis asks whether joking reproduces gendered power and whether rules match actual conduct.
Q1(d) · UPSC Mains 2024 · Anthropology GS 1 · 10 marks
Lethal and sublethal genes
Mendelian genetics in man-family study, single factor, multifactor, lethal, sub-lethal and polygenic inheritance in man.
A lethal genotype causes death before reproduction; a sublethal genotype substantially lowers viability or fertility. Recessive lethals hidden in carriers can produce a 2:1 ratio among survivors. Tay–Sachs illustrates a recessive lethal; homozygous FGFR3 achondroplasia is lethal while heterozygotes live. Huntington persists partly because onset is often after reproduction. HbSS is severely deleterious, while HbAS can be favoured in falciparum-malaria regions. Endogamy changes homozygosity and health care changes the fitness effect.
Toppers' copies
Toppers' copies for this question will be uploaded soon.