Archaeological evidence from Keezhadi and Gottiprolu points to an agro-pastoral economy in early historic South India. Examine.

A 2026 Heritage Science study tested pottery for traces of food (organic residue analysis) and also studied animal bones (zooarchaeology). It covered Keezhadi (Tamil Nadu, 6th–2nd century BC) and Gottiprolu (Andhra Pradesh, 2nd–1st century BCE). It concluded that these societies "primarily depended on agriculture, cattle rearing, and dairying" [1]. The evidence largely supports this claim, but with important caveats.

Evidence of agriculture

• Plant biomarkers (food molecules) trapped in pottery pores show advanced plant processing in 600–100 BC [1].
• Both sites lie on river banks, a fertile setting suited to farming [1].
• Gottiprolu had a huge settlement inside a massive brick enclosure. Such a settlement needed farm surpluses to support it [2].

Evidence of pastoralism and dairying

• Cow-milk residues give direct chemical proof of dairying. This puts South India alongside Indus Valley pottery evidence from c. 2500 BC [1].
• At Keezhadi, cattle, buffalo and goat dominate the 70 bone fragments studied [1].
• Gottiprolu's fauna includes cow/ox, buffalo, sheep, goat, horse, dog and pig. This was a varied herd, and the horse suggests use for transport [1].

Beyond agro-pastoralism: a mixed economy

• Hunting: antelope and wild boar bones at Keezhadi carry cut marks, so wild game added to the diet [1].
• Trade: Gottiprolu was an early historic trade centre near the coast. It has imitation amphorae, rouletted ware, coins and terracotta beads, and its bricks match Satavahana–Ikshvaku structures [2].

Limits of the evidence

• Only four potsherds were tested, as a proof of concept. The results are indicative, not representative [1].
• No fish was found despite the riverside setting. This shows only that the sampled pots were not used for fish; it does not prove people never fished [1].
• Bone counts show which animals were kept, not whether cattle were eaten or kept for milk and ploughing.
• Two sites whose dates barely overlap cannot stand for all of South India. A coastal trade town may also have eaten differently from inland villages.

Pot chemistry and bones together confirm an agro-pastoral base, with hunting and maritime trade added to it. The picture can be made firmer in three ways: the ASI testing many more types of vessels, labs using isotope methods to tell milk fat from meat fat, and matching the finds against Sangam literature. Such science-led archaeology serves the duty in Article 51A(f) to value and preserve India's composite cultural heritage.