Stone Age secrets: Ancient tool-making site discovered in Haryana's Mangar Bani
Tired of too many ads? go ad free now
The discovery — confirmed by the former joint director-general of Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) SB Ota — has taken the lid off a treasure trove of
Lower Palaeolithic artifacts
dating back to humanity's earliest known phase of development — the Acheulean culture.
"We're peering through a window that opens half a million years into our past. Mangar Bani isn't just another prehistoric site, it's a complete workshop where our ancestors crafted their tools, lived, and thrived," said Ota, who led the survey.
The survey, however, traces its roots to the early 90s, when the ASI team conducted a small-scale excavation in Anangpur. "After that, there was a gap. And now, we are starting again," he added.
The weeklong exploration unveiled a collection of over 200 artefacts, including stone tools that bear testament to the presence of Homo erectus — a human species from the Pleistocene age. These ancient craftsmen worked primarily with locally sourced sandstone and quartzite, turning them into cleavers, handaxes, and various types of scrapers.
What makes this discovery particularly significant is the presence of both finished tools and manufacturing debris — or "lithic debitage" — scattered across the site. "It tells us this wasn't just a place where tools were used, but where they were born," Ota said.
The archaeological team conducted the surveys in Mangar Bani, the surrounding hills and nearby Bandhwari. Apart from Ota, the team included his colleague Niharika Srivastava from the Academy for Archaeological Heritage Research and Training; Chetan Agarwal, a senior fellow; and Sunil Harsana, a researcher associated with the Centre for Ecology, Development and Research.
Tired of too many ads? go ad free now
"The tools we discovered were likely used for a variety of tasks — from butchering animals and cutting trees to cleaning hides and polishing wood. The level of refinement in these tools suggests this site could have existed in the later part of the Acheulean period. So, its estimated age could well be around 500,000 to 200,000 years," Ota said.
While Attirampakkam near Chennai is currently the oldest known Acheulian site in India at 1.7 million years old, Mangar Bani is among the most important for this cultural phase in north India, given its tool-making evidence and strategic location in the Aravali hill range.
The team plans to submit a preliminary report to Haryana govt within the next month, advocating for legal and environmental protection of the site. Currently, Mangar Bani and its surrounding Aravalis are part of the Natural Conservation Zone, which restricts construction around it, but lacks formal heritage protection.
The site lies near the now-defunct Mangar Nallah, a seasonal stream that may have provided water for early human settlers the year round.
"The hilltops here are flat, close to raw materials, and would have supported a range of prehistoric activities. It's a textbook example of an ideal Stone Age settlement site," said Chetan Agarwal.
Ota agreed that a more detailed and scientific analysis of the site was required, including sampling of sediments to ascertain the date. "This is not just a site of national importance, but of global significance. It deserves protection, study, and recognition," he added.
The ASI, however, has no immediate plans to protect the site. "Right now, we haven't had any requests like that. If we do, we will act on it," said Nandini Bhattacharya Sahu, the current joint director-general of ASI.
Bhattacharya, however, agreed that the Mangar Bani sites were of utmost importance.
"The Lower Paleolithic tools and stone tools found here signify the earliest type of human occupation. Moreover, there are a few rock shelters with painted walls in Mangar, which are equally significant as well.
We have another important site in Anangpur, where we found evidence of factories," she added.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
16-07-2025
- Time of India
Face to face with the past: What Keeladi reveals about ancient Tamil civilisation
The Tamil Nadu state archaeology department, which took over excavations at Keeladi from the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) in 2018, obtained 29 radiocarbon dates from US lab Beta Analytics. These range from 580 BCE to 200 CE and confirm the site is contemporaneous with the urbanisation of the Gangetic plains and is part of India's second urbanisation, which took place in the 6th century BCE. Archaeologists have pieced together — after studying residue in bowls and potsherds, skulls and bone fragments, and fossilised algae in terracotta pipes and ring wells — how people lived on the banks of the Vaigai some 2,500 years ago.
News18
13-07-2025
- News18
What's Been Knocked About By Shadow-Boxing Over Keeladi?
That was bound to fuel charges of manipulation, and lead to allegations of suppressing the 'truth". It would also make any professional—as superintending archaeologist Amarnath Ramakrishnan definitely is—double down on his work. After all, another Archaeological Survey of India stalwart KK Muhammed also refused to budge from his report on the Hindu pillars and terracotta figures found beneath the Babri Masjid though he was under intense pressure. Even in Tamil Nadu, the case of Keeladi is not unique; T Satyamurthy, who led excavations at Adichanallur, also went through travails related to the submission of his findings. Not only did a century go by between the first dig and the next—1904 and 2003-4—over 15 years elapsed before the ASI came out with a report about what was found. And Tamil parties cited its findings as proof of a separate civilisation separate and superior to the Sindhu-Sarasvati one. As the Adichanallur saga continued, ASI asked Ramakrishna for clarifications on what depth (and therefore what date) some artefacts were excavated in Keeladi too, particularly those attributed to the oldest period, saying they needed more analysis. Like Satyamurthy, Ramakrishna did not budge, asserting his findings were sound and based on established archaeological procedures—stratigraphic sequences, material culture and Accelerator Mass Spectrometry. 'Science" has long been used as a weapon to prop up hypotheses on antiquity and tear them apart. So it is not surprising that in Keeladi too, science is being posited as the neutral adjudicator in a bruising battle of competing political ideologies as state elections in Tamil Nadu loom menacingly. Setting up a museum in Keeladi even as excavations and discoveries are still happening point to the drumming up of popular support for discoveries yet to be peer-reviewed. The southern extremity of Indian is the location of many ancient burial sites—in cists, cairns and urns—but no settlements had been found until the dig at Keeladi. Indeed, even the 178 urns unearthed at Adichanallur had human remains with a diverse racial range: 35% Caucasoid, 30% Mongoloid, 16% Negroid, 6% Australoid, 8% ethnic Dravidian, and 5% mixed trait. Thus, Adichanallur was not a strong candidate to assert a superior 'Dravidian' civilisation. So Keeladi, 12 km southeast of Madurai—one of many ancient sites identified along the Vaigai river, is now the poster-place for Tamil pride. Thousands of artefacts were unearthed there by ASI's Ramakrishna, indicating a 2,100-year-old thriving urban centre of the Sangam era, the first discovery of this kind. Many theories have been expounded since then about Keeladi, including postulations that it was sophisticated and 'highly literate' and even 'secular'. Assertions of 'secularism' in that pre-modern society even though the presence of ritual burials prove that the people of that time had certain beliefs indicates a distinct political agenda given the trajectory of current Dravidian politics; the politicisation of Keeladi is clear. That is why the Centre and ASI have to tread carefully, even when citing science as the reason for their scepticism about Keeladi's antiquity, or any other aspect of the findings there. When Ramakrishna refused the Centre's order to revise his 982-page report on the two phases of excavations he carried out at Keeladi in 2014-2016, he gained huge support from segments in the state who claimed 'northern' bias. Transferring Ramakrishna to Assam—a very bureaucratic move—and delays in central funds for more excavations at Keeladi only exacerbated Tamil anger. Eventually excavations there by ASI restarted, but under PS Sriraman. However, Sriraman concluded there was no continuity in the brick structures discovered earlier, so all the accusations of suppression of Tamil heritage surfaced again. The Madras High Court intervened, visited Keeladi and ordered ASI to continue digging and allow Tamil Nadu's department of archaeology to join in. The latter promptly published a report in 2019 saying Keeladi was an urban settlement dating from 6th century BCE to 1st century CE. In January 2023 Ramakrishna, by then back in Tamil Nadu, submitted his report on the first two phases. But he was again transferred thrice more in quick succession. Meanwhile the third phase of excavation by the state's archaeology department has been accompanied by strong 'Tamil pride' narratives by a wide range of mostly non-experts in archaeology. The ASI, and by extension the Centre, maintain that scientific lacunae remain about Keeladi. advetisement The discovery of hundreds of ancient megalithic burials points to the probability of nearly as many as-yet unexcavated human settlements too, as hunter-gatherers gradually became agro-pastoralists. But centuries of disconnect with our ancient roots, then colonial exploitation followed by post-1947 decades of focus on increasing agricultural production and economic infrastructure has led to the destruction of evidence that could have given a clearer picture. But instead of shadow-boxing, the Centre (and the ASI) must join hands with Tamil Nadu, and indeed all states, to formulate a policy on accessing excavation sites that are so crucial to our understanding of India's ancient heritage. Extensive digs in the north have led to the realisation that the Indus was not the fountainhead of subcontinental civilisation and that many more contemporary settlements flourished further east along a paleo-channel of the Sarasvati.
The Hindu
13-07-2025
- The Hindu
The peopling of the Indian subcontinent
How and from where did we, the people of India, come from? Based on genetic analysis of 25 diverse groups in India, a paper in 2009 titled 'Reconstructing Indian Population History', jointly authored by David Reich and colleagues from Harvard and MIT in the US and K. Thangaraj and Lalji Singh from CCMB Hyderabad, provided strong evidence for two ancient genetically divergent populations, which are ancestral to most Indians. I recommend the reader download the paper and see Figure 1 (shown above) and read Table 1 of the paper. How divergent are we? One group called 'Ancestral North Indians' (ANI) is genetically close to people from West Asia, Central Asia, and Europe. A higher proportion of ANI ancestry is predominantly found in the people in the northern states of India. The other, 'Ancestral South Indians (ASI)', is distinctly different from ANI and is of East Eurasian origin. In a more detailed analysis, they analysed ancient genome-wide data from over 500 individuals from Central Asia and Northern South Asia, and concluded that ASIs are direct descendants who live in tribal groups in South India. All these migrations by the ANIs and ASIs seem to have come about over 3,000-4,000 years ago. There is thus an admixture of North Indian and South Indian (also called Dravidian) people across the country. Groups with ANI ancestry ranging from 39-71% are seen in traditional (so-called) upper caste people across the country. But people with distinct ASI ancestry are seen in some South Indian states. However, the true ASIs, also named AASI, are the Adivasis of the Andaman-Nicobar Islands, who had migrated from the East Asian-Pacific regions over 60,000 years ago, and don't mix socially or genetically with Indian mainlanders. A recent paper in Cell pointed out that all people of Indian descent have their roots in a single, large migration that happened when humans travelled out of Africa around 50,000 years ago. Note the term 'upper caste' mentioned above in the Harvard-CCMB papers. When did the 'caste system' arise? It has been discriminatory for over 2,000 years among the Hindus. In its four-tier system, way at the bottom are the Adivasis. Inter-caste marriages are seldom practised, and if they are, they can lead to violence. Ethnicity and haplotypes A 2003 paper from Prof. P.P. Majumder's group looked at ethnicity using what are called 'haplogroups', which are genetic markers of common parentage (paternal or maternal) shared within a social group. The paper pointed out that haplogroup details of various populations across India provide insights into the caste system of India, with certain ancestral components being highest in tribes, somewhat less in lower castes, and least in upper castes. This system of ethnicity is slowly changing with time, particularly in educated classes, with democracy and modernisation of the country. As people began going to schools and colleges, learning more languages and moving beyond their native places for jobs and other opportunities, inter-caste and inter-regional marriages have begun rising. According to the 2011 Census, inter-caste marriages were about 6% and inter-faith ones about 1%. It is likely these numbers will have risen significantly, particularly among urban groups, when the forthcoming 2027 Census offers the numbers. The author is grateful to Dr Thangaraj for his advice and critique of the manuscript.
