Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu MK Stalin released a report titled ‘Antiquity of Iron: Recent Radiometric Dates from Tamil Nadu’ on 23 January at the Anna Centenary Library, Chennai. In front of an assembly of archaeologists and experts, he declared that the Iron Age began on Tamil soil.
Stalin’s declaration was backed by multiple radiometric dates from over five sites, one of which yielded a date of c.3345 BCE, roughly corresponding to the mid-4th millennium BCE. In the north Indian context, this period corresponds to the Early Harappan period. Weeks before this announcement, the state government hinted at the early dates of the Iron Age in the state, suggesting that the Iron Age of southern India co-existed with the Bronze/Copper Age of the subcontinent.
Besides the political theatrics, the archaeological investigations noted in this 80-page report result from hard work done by an army of archaeologists and experts in the Tamil Nadu State Department of Archaeology, the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) and various universities. It should be studied and tested with an open mind and academic vigour.
There is no doubt that it’s a turning point in History and if it’s true will place India’s Iron Age the earliest in the world. But to fully understand these claims, it is important to decode the findings.
Unveiling the Iron Age – key findings
Multiple sites in Tamil Nadu were investigated over five years, and the report presents evidence. The first site that yielded an earlier chronology was Mangadu (Rajan et al. 2017: 52-59). An iron sword from a disturbed cist at Mangadu, located in Mettur taluk of Salem district, yielded dates from c.1604 to 1416 BCE, with c.1510 BCE as the mean value. After this, Sivagalai, Adhichanallur and Mayiladumparai were excavated in 2021.
At Mayiladumparai, the excavations revealed a range of significant artefacts including microliths, Neolithic celts, Neolithic tool-polishing grooves, iron objects, and Iron Age burials. Samples for dating were collected from the Iron Age level (Locality 4, Trench 1), which also yielded important ceramic types such as Black and Red Ware and Iron tools. The samples, taken from the depths of 120 cm and 140cm, were located near Neolithic polishing grooves and rock art. The AMS C14 (Accelerated Mass Spectrometry) dating of two samples provided dates of c.1615 BCE and 2172 BCE, respectively (Rajan et al 2022).
Around the same time, the archaeological site of Adhichanallur was being re-excavated by both ASI and the State Department of Archaeology. Recognised as an important ancient trade port and capital of Sangam Age Pandyas, Adhichanallur is one of the iconic sites identified by the Union Government.
The Iron Age habitational mound at the site, spanning about 50 acres, was identified across two areas—one within the Vellur-Adichanallur tank and another within the present-day Adichanallur village. Excavation at this habitational mound unearthed Black and Red Ware, Black Polished Ware, White painted Black and Red Ware and Red Ware. Iron implements from the 7th layer, three phases of floor levels, and 933 graffiti-bearing potsherds. A charcoal sample collected in association with iron from the 4th layer was dated to c. 2060 BCE (4010± 30 BP).
Archaeologically, the area around Adhichanallur is highly significant. And about 15 km west of it lies another key site – Sivagalai, which was simultaneously excavated between 2019-2022. The site has eight localities, three burial mounds and five habitational mounds. At the habitational mound known as Valappalanpillai-thiradu, a trench (Trench A1) was laid, dating to c.685 BCE. At one of the burial mounds Sivagalai-parampur, a total of 24 trenches were excavated, which yielded 160 urns—nine Black and Red Ware urns and 151 Red Ware urn burials.
According to the investigators, the Red Ware urns are chronologically earlier than the Black and Red Ware urns. The size of the urns varies from large to small with a maximum height of 115cm, a breadth of 65 cm and a thickness of 4.5cm. Iron objects were placed both inside and outside the urns, with more than 85 iron implements recovered during the excavation.
As per the reports, a total of four AMS dates were received from the samples collected from the burials. In Trench A2, Urn no. 3, which contained an intact urn with skeletal remains, an iron object, and paddy grains, the AMS dating of the paddy grains yielded a date of c. 1155 BCE.
The OSL samples from the same urn were consistent with the AMS dates, dating to c.1248 BCE. Similarly, two ceramic samples from Urn no. 5 were dated to 1836 BCE and 2450 BCE, roughly calibrated to 2199 and 2142 BCE, respectively. However, three other dates, falling between 2983 BCE and 3345 BCE, were obtained from samples associated with iron objects. These samples were taken from Trench c3/1, A2 (Urn no.1) and B3 (Urn no. 10).
During the press conference, Stalin highlighted evidence of iron smelting in Tamil Nadu dating back to as early as the 4th millennium BCE. Supporting this claim, the report mentions furnaces excavated and explored at sites like Kodumanal. Here, a circular furnace base measuring 115 cm in diameter was found at a depth of 65 cm, directly on natural soil. This discovery included iron slag, burnt clay embedded with slag, a tuyere piece with a vitrified mouth, and a granite slab, all of which are a fascinating find. It was suggested by the investigators that the temperature in this furnace could go as high as 1300°C. However, based on its construction and associated evidence, the furnace is dated to the 5th century BCE.
Also read: Iron Age in India began over 4,000 years ago. Tamil Nadu’s Mayiladumparai revises research
Beyond radiometric dates – questions that remain
Dates are just one aspect of the archaeological investigation. Early dates without proper context serve no purpose in academia. It is the archaeological context, when combined with dates, and other scientific evidence, that presents a holistic picture of the past. Regarding the question of the Iron Age in India, recent evidence from Tamil Nadu marks a significant shift.
The majority of sites now date to the mid-third millennium BCE, which has opened new avenues of research. These dates, mostly around 2500 BCE, correspond to iron artefacts discovered at various archaeological sites in Tamil Nadu. It is a turning point in Indian archaeology, establishing the earliest known antiquity of iron technology in India and worldwide.
However, these findings raise many questions: How were these iron artefacts spread or traded to other contemporary sites? What’s the relationship between Iron Age and Bronze Age cultures? Most importantly, since the sites have yielded a very broad bracket in terms of the dates spanning over thousands of years, did the culture remain the same?
However, these findings raise many questions: How do we place the cultural evolution of the Iron Age along with associated material remains? Since at Sivagalai, the burials have yielded dates which span two thousand years – Urn no. The first one yields a date of 3259 BCE and Urn no. 3 is dated to 1155 BCE, what are the changes observed in burial practices, material remains and subsistence pattern, as no culture would remain static, materially for two thousand years?
At Adichanallur, large quantity of bronze is found along with iron dated to roughly 2060 BCE, how do we re-evaluate the relationship between Iron Age and Bronze Age cultures? And most importantly, how were these iron artefacts spread or traded to other contemporary sites across southern India? Since similar dates are yielded from neighbouring states as well, how do we understand the regional exchange and if we have noted regional variations?
These questions will take time to answer, but further investigations in the near future will likely provide important insights. For now, it’s clear that history isn’t a neat, linear progression. The traditional Three Age system—Stone, Bronze, and Iron—just might not be the right lens for understanding the subcontinent’s past. As evidence mounts, our history is becoming more complex and intertwined than we once thought. The story of the Iron Age in India, it seems, is much older—and far richer—than we ever imagined.
Disha Ahluwalia is an archaeologist and research fellow at the Indian Council Of Historical Research. Views are personal. She tweets @ahluwaliadisha.
(Edited by Ratan Priya)