A Brief Report of the Excavation at Ibbankatuva, a Proto and Early Historic Settlement Site.

PRIYANTHA KARUNARATNE

This is a report of the excavation carried out at Ibbankatuva, in Dambulla, situated within the Matale district. This site was first thought to be only a megalithic tradition settlement site. But from the data retrieved from the excavations, it was found that there are Early Historic settlement cultural layers overly­ ing the protohistoric settlement layers.

This is the first protohistoric village settlement ever ex­ cavated in Sri Lanka. The Anuradhapura Gedige excavation was of an early urban centre. Layer 3a at the Anuradhapura Gedige excavation consisted of megalithic habitation remains (Deraniyagala 1972: 122).

Location

Ibbankatuva lies 3km from Dambulla on the Colombo - Trin- comalee highway. The site, which is approximately 300m off the road, can be approached on foot. The Dambulu Oya flows within 250m of the site.

The site

The excavation site lies within a coconut plantation. Pot­ sherds are scattered in plenty on the surface of the soil, over an area of approximately 6ha. The potsherds have surfaced as a result of trenching for coconut cultivation, digging for ag­ riculture and erosion by rain. The site is situated on a slightly elevated area that slopes smoothly in every direction. The highest point of the area lies close to the centre of the settle­ ment. The sherds are more concentrated at the centre and lessen gradually towards the outer margins. The Ibbankatuva megalithic burial site is situated 500m west and shows similar physical features.

Previous research

The site was first discovered by the Cultural Triangle and the Kommissariat fur Allegemeine und Vergleichende Archao- logie (KAVA) exploration (Seneviratne 1990: 130) in 1988 and excavations were carried out in 1988, 1990 and 1991 March/April field seasons under the same projects. Evidence retrieved from the excavations show that this site was a pr­ otohistoric and Early Historic settlement site.

Figure 8:1 Ibbankatuva-Polvatta settlement site with Dambulla rock in the distance. Foreground a small vava adjoining the settlement, after the monsoon rains. Photo: Maya Upananda.

Present research

Present research commenced in the season September to No­ vember 1991. A 10x8m trench was excavated. The entire area was re-explored and plotted. The context system was followed for the first time in this site. Previously the planum system was used for earlier excavations. This system is not suitable for sites that have more than one cultural phase. By using the context system a more accurate picture could be gained.

The excavation was recorded under 50 contexts. Every cut, slot, deposit and structure was given a context number. A Harris matrix was constructed to show the stratigraphical se­ quence (Harris 1979). All related information was plotted and profiles were drawn. Bone, charcoal, soil and other relevant samples were taken for analysis. Pottery classification was done at the site. Rim sherds and any decorative motifs were drawn and copied. A complete ware analysis was done after the excavation (see Appendix I to Mogren: "Objectives” this volume). Three charcoal samples were sent to Sweden for 14C analysis.

Settlement phases

Two major settlement phases were identified from the ex­ cavations. The earliest habitation phase belonged to the pr- otohistoric period and the layers overlying these layers were of the Early Historic cultural phase.

The protohistoric settlement phase

From the data analysis of the first phase it could easily be accepted that the settlement site and the burial site are con­ temporaneous. The type of Black-and-Red Ware pottery fo­ und at this site is common to the megalithic sites of the Indian sub-continent. From the analysis of wares it was evident that

these people had produced both Black-and-Red Ware as well as Red Ware pottery. There was more Red Ware than Black- and-Red Ware potsherds. These people had produced wheel- made as well as hand-made pottery. The finishing technology of the pottery was of a very high standard. Some graffiti symbols were also found on the potsherds. One of these is similar to a symbol that was found in Pomparippu (Sitram- palam 1990: 295).

Very few iron objects were found. But from the iron slag remains which were recovered from the site, it is evident that this was an iron production site. Two spear heads, a knife blade and other unidentifiable artefacts were found. Copper and silver too, were found in the settlement site. Several types of beads, made out of various materials, were recovered. Am­ ong them, carnelian and onyx beads are significant in colour and shape. Various sizes of terracotta beads too, were recovered from this level. These finds support the idea that the people who lived in the megalithic context paid much attention to personal ornamentation.

Although some evidence was found of the houses of this context in the March/April excavations, no evidence was re­ trieved during this field season.

A considerable amount of cattle bones and other wild animal bones was also recovered. Some saddle querns and rubbing stones were found. Pieces of a pottery kiln with heaps of Black-and-Red Ware and Red Ware pottery were found from context 28. This points to the possibility that these people had been producing pottery at the site itself.

Early Historic settlement phase

It is clearly evident that the pottery had completely changed in type and ware from the protohistoric levels, with a very low percentage of Black-and-Red Ware pottery. Squat, short-necked storage vessels and round-necked tray bowls are significant in this layer. Several spouts and lids were recovered from this level. More than 90 % of the sherds are of Red Ware vessels. By comparison with pottery at other sites, this could be identified as an Early Historic settlement layer. The presence of resin coated buff ware (Persian wine jars) shows there had been links with foreign trade. Graphite co­ ated, silver coloured pottery and fine Gray Ware speak of the people who lived in the site as being an elite group. Glass

artefacts, glass ornaments, such as beads and bangles, were also found. No evidence of glassware was found from the protohistoric layers of the settlement. Evidence of iron pr­ oduction during this period is very high. Pieces of slag from the bottom of a furnace were recovered. This will enable us to determine the size and shape of the furnace.

These people built fairly strong houses, using granite, stone and clay. The thickness of the walls is approximately 30- 40cm. Many grinding stones were retrieved from this level. Terracotta discs, around 3-4cm in diameter, were recovered, clustered together. These were probably used for a kind of indoor game. Two terracotta dice were recovered from this level. Considered as a whole, the data from this site sets it apart as a habitation site of an elite group in a semi-urban society of the Early Historic period.

14C-Dating

Three 14C-datings were made to determine the ages of the settlement site (see fig. 8:7 and "14C-datings" this volume). One of the oldest contexts, belonging to the megalithic cul­ ture, no. 28, has a calibrated age range from cumulative prob­ ability (using one sigma) of 436-226 BC (Ua 5566). When we look at the profiles of proto-and Early Historic layers of the Ibbankatuva settlement, it is obvious that there had been con­ tinuous habitation at this site through several centuries. The two other samples were taken from the latest deposits of the site. Context 16 and the nearly contemporary context 5 have calibrated age ranges from cumulative probability (using one sigma) of 347-534 AD (Ua 5565) and 311-483 AD (Ua 5564) respectively (see ',14C datings" this volume).

Conclusions

The above descriptions give a fair idea of the two major phases of the Ibbankatuva settlement site. But when we con­ sider the sudden disappearance of the protohistoric culture and the emergence of a new culture over it, there arise various questions which need to be answered. What type of people first inhabited the site? Where did they come from? Did they migrate along the perennial waterways, or did they belong to the native inhabitants who lived in the area from prehistoric times? How did they acquire the megalithic tradition? Did they bring it with them, or did they get it from another group of people who were practising this tradition? How long had they been settled in the settlement? Why did this settlement suddenly disappear with the advent of a new cultural tradi­ tion? Who were the new settlers? Where did they come from? Did these new settlers chase away the early inhabitants? Or did the new culture superimpose itself on the earlier one? If so, why was the earlier technology abandoned almost totally? Why are there no transitional forms of artefacts from proto to Early Historical types? How could we link this without writ­ ten historical sources?

So, it is not easy to find answers to all these from the data revealed from the excavation. But if we discuss these problems on a theoretical basis, we may be able to conjecture how such things could happen to human societies.

This report consists of only introductory data. A complete excavation report will be published after an in-depth study.

REFERENCES:

Deraniyagala, S. U. 1972. The Citadel of Anuradhapura, 1969: Excavations in the Gedige Area. Ancient Ceylon. 2\ 48-162.

Harris, E.C. 1979. Principles of Archaeological Stratigraphy. London: Academic Press.

Seneviratne, S. 1990. The Locational Significance of Early Iron Age Sites in Intermediary Transitional Eco-systems: A Preliminary Survey Study of the Upper Kala Oya Region. The Settlement Archaeology of the Sigiriya-Dam- bulla Region. Bandaranayake S., M. Mogren and S. Epitawatte (eds.). Colombo: PGIAR

Sitrampalam, S.K. 1990. The Um Burial Site of Pomparippu of Sri Lanka - A Study. Ancient Ceylon. 7, Vol. 2: 263- 297.