Who is Sushrut?

Sangraha Period 400 CE - 700 C

Sushruta, often referred to as the “Father of Indian Medicine” or the “Father of Plastic Surgery,” was an influential physician in ancient India.  Although he likely lived around the 7th or 6th century BCE (some even speculate as early as 1000 BCE), Sushtruta is still revered today for his influence in the critical development of Ayurvedic surgical procedures. [2]

While several different persons of the name Sushruta are mentioned in various Sanskrit sources, only one is described to have learned from a pupil of a Dhanvantari (an incarnation of Surya) and composed a treatise called Kalpaveda, which became the model of Sushruta’s Sushrutatantra, a medical work in one hundred chapters.  The same Sushruta is mentioned in the Agnipurana and Gaudapuranaas, again as a medical authority and pupil of Dhanvantari. [1]  It should also be mentioned that most scholars do not accept the claim that the physician Sushruta is associated with the Sushruta mentioned in the Mahabharata, the son of the sage Visvamitra. [2]

Sushruta’s work shares a wealth of medical techniques, but his own life and background still remains somewhat of a mystery; not even his birth name is known! The name “Sushruta” is actually an epithet meaning “renowned.”  Nonetheless, he is known to have practiced medicine in northern India along the banks of the Ganges River, near what is now Varanasi. As a revered healer and sage, his gifts are often believed to have come from the gods. It is worth noting that Sushruta may have been a contemporary of the also infamous Charaka, if not a successor.

THE SUSHRUTA SAMHITA

The Sushruta Samhita is the oldest known text of Ayurveda, and holds a place among the important trilogy of classic Ayurvedic texts along with Charaka Samhita and Ashtanga Hridayam. Its importance and distinction lies not only in its age, but in its content. (2) It is the only remaining text that describes shalya tantra, the practice of surgery. In fact, it is the oldest known document on surgery not only specifically within Ayurveda, but in the world. (3)

The author Sushruta is known as the “Father of Surgery”, and his work has been studied throughout the centuries, from the students of Ayurveda in ancient times all the way through to its more recent study by scholars of medicine in the Western world. Sushruta’s achievements in surgery as described in the text have been acknowledged and admired as great scientific achievements of the ancient world. (3)

The work of Sushruta in writing the Sushruta Samhita standardized and established the knowledge of surgical practices at the time. While Charaka Samhita outlines established medical knowledge and practices of the time, Sushruta Samhita includes detailed descriptions of how surgeries should be performed, from start to finish. Many of the chapters of the text are devoted to this, going through more than 300 surgical procedures, including plastic surgery reconstruction and the removal of cataracts. He also describes over 120 surgical instruments and more than 1,120 diseases, injuries, and conditions. He discusses treatments as well, including descriptions of over 700 medicinal herbs and their application and properties. (2)

SUSHRUTA’S CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE EVOLUTION OF AYURVEDA

Sushruta’s skill as a physician and teacher greatly advanced the practice of surgery. His contributions were numerous, significantly advancing the understanding of the human body. He developed different surgical techniques and tools, and, most notably, invented the practice of cosmetic surgery.

He advocated for and brought into practice the dissection of the human cadaver, enabling him to describe different parts of human anatomy such as the skin, muscles, bones, blood vessels, tissues, and special spots of surgical importance. Without refrigeration and preservatives, Sushruta accomplished dissection by placing the corpse in a cage to protect it from animals and immersing it in cold water, such as a running river or stream. He and his students would then check on it as it slowly decomposed layer by layer. [2]

Sushruta refined the practice of surgery through the fabrication of a wide variety of surgical instruments, naming each after the particular animal that the tool resembled, a practice which is still being adopted to this day. He was the first to introduce tubular instruments for the diagnosis of disease, the precursor of the “endoscopic instruments” of modern day medicine. He describes, in detail, the benefits and challenges, care and maintenance, and proper use of all instruments in the Sushruta Samhita.

His surgical specialty was rhinoplasty, the reconstruction of the nose. His master piece, the Sushruta Samhita, provides instructions on exactly how a surgeon should perform this revolutionary surgery:

The portion of the nose to be covered should be first measured with a leaf. Then a piece of skin of the required size should be dissected from the living skin of the cheek and turned back to cover the nose keeping a small pedicle attached to the cheek. The part of the nose to which the skin is to be attached should be made raw by cutting the nasal stump with a knife. The physician then should place the skin on the nose and stitch the two parts swiftly, keeping the skin properly elevated by inserting two tubes of eranda (the castor-oil plant) in the position of the nostrils so that the new nose gets proper shape. The skin thus properly adjusted, it should then be sprinkled with a powder of liquorice, red sandalwood, and barberry plant. Finally, it should be covered with cotton and clean sesame oil should be constantly applied. When the skin has united and granulated, if the nose is too short or too long, the middle of the flap should be divided and an endeavor made to enlarge or shorten it. (Sushruta Samhita, I.16)

The development of rhinoplasty in India was especially important due to the common practice of rhinotomy, the amputation of the nose, as a form of punishment. Sushruta’s timely development of this particular reconstructive surgery gave hope to those whom had been deformed, offering the possibility of returning to a life of normalcy.

Even if we may not know exactly who Sushruta was, his impact on Ayurveda and medicine at large is significant. He offered detailed insight into the historical practice of Ayurveda and laid the foundations for surgical techniques that are still in use today.

SOURCES

1. A History of Indian Medical Literature

2. https://www.ancient.eu/sushruta/

3. K. R. Srikantha Murty’s Translation of Sushrut Samhita

Indus Valley Civilization — Livelihood

Harappan Tiles

Historians believe that the economy of the Indus Valley Civilization was based on agriculture and the import of raw materials from other lands for use in local workshops. As is the case everywhere, the cities were connected with rural agricultural communities, and there is evidence that they grew sesame, wheat, barley, mustard, millet, cotton and field peas. They may have been the first civilization to grow cotton for clothing. source

It’s believed that agricultural goods: grain and other foodstuffs, lumber, cotton and livestock were traded, and that they were the mainstays of commerce. This is supported by the discovery of granaries. According to Gregory Possehl’s book, The Indus Civilization: A Contemporary Perspective, he posits that based on evidence of trade goods like carved seals for stamping (possibly for signing contracts), ornate beads, pottery, metal tools and carved gemstone handicrafts found as far afield as Mesopotamia, Central Asia, China, Iran, Afghanistan and Oman, it appears that Harappans were part of a vast maritime trade network, on which the economy depended. This theory is backed up by the discovery of a massive, dredged canal at Lothal, which is assumed to be a docking facility. source

One standard brick size was found in several cities, and Harappans used fired bricks for the extensive water collection and delivery systems they had, as well as for baths and underground sewage systems. They may have been the first civilization to create urban sanitation systems and to use wheeled transport. It appears that the far-flung communities participated in some kind of taxation system, based on standardized weights that were found. source Since we don’t understand the written language, it is impossible to know details about how the system worked, and historians can only speculate.

How did the Indus Valley Civilization End?

Mohenjo-Daro: The room with the so-called massacre victims is on the west side of the street (at the right edge of the photo).

Gregory L. Possehl in The Indus Civilization - A Contemporary Perspective summarizes various theories forwarded by previous authors on why and how the Indus Civilization ended, leading to the period from 1900 BC to the Iron Age (around 1000 BC), when there was essentially no habitation in Mohenjo-daro, Harappa and other urban centers, there was a disruption in the economy, luxury items like long barrel-cylinder beads, etched beads and inscribed stamp seals disappeared, the art of writing was no longer practiced, long-distance trade was reduced, and the distribution of human population shifted (reduction of population in the Sindh areas and an increase in population in the areas from Punjab to Rajasthan).

Theory 1: Wheeler’s Aryan Army

Rigveda conflicts can be viewed as between newly arrived Aryan warriors and the indigenous Indus peoples. Climatic, economic, political deterioration may have weakened it, but its ultimate extinction is more likely to have been completed by deliberate and large-scale destruction – a Late Period of Mohenjo-daro men, women and children appear to have been massacred there (Mackay 1937), but it has also been argued that the remains found are not of massacre victims but actually hasty interments.

Theory 2: Wearing out the Landscape

Ecological basis. Millions of tons of firewood went into baking millions of baked bricks for building and rebuilding Mohenjo-daro. This implies a widespread deforestation of the surrounding region. Contrary views argue that only 400 acres of gallery forest would have been needed for rebuilding Mohenjo-daro every 140 years.

Theory 3: Avulsion of the Indus River

Natural cause of dramatic shift in the course of the Indus River – led to abandonment of Mohenjo-daro, and by domino effect the rest of the Indus Civilization was eclipsed.

Theory 4: The Raikes/Dales Dam

A natural dam near Sehwan impounded the waters of the Indus River and caused heavy flooding (to a degree beyond normal behavior of a river), leading to disruption of Mohenjo-daro and other sites. This view is critiqued by the opinion that a natural dam could not have been formed by the sediments of the Indus Civilization because of its low structural integrity. It is also opposed by the view that an impounded Indus River was not sufficient to end the civilization.

Theory 5: The Lost Sarasvati

The waters from the Sarasvati and Drishadvati Rivers dried up, the Himalayan waters instead created the Yamuna river, possibly supported by tectonic upheaval – this happened at the expense of the greater Indus system. Alongside, a sociocultural cause was assumed to be occurring (like renewed settlement in northern Rajasthan with evolved technology), and together led to the demise of the Indus Civilization.

Theory 6: Climatic Change

Changing salinity in lakes would have affected agriculture, but because it would not necessarily imply changes in rainfall and because it was a dry-crop region, this theory does not hold much water.

Theory 7: Allchins’ Approach

Economic factors (decline of Mesopotamian trade), steady deterioration in climate (reduction in rainfall) and environment, uplift of the Himalayas due to tectonics causing change in course of the Indus system rivers. This view is countered by opinions that the foreign trade did not really get interrupted, alternatively that the trade decline wasn’t the cause but effect of the Indus Civilization decline; an additional argument against the Allchins’ approach is that Mohenjo-daro;s agriculture was geared towards and thrived in a desert climate, so that a reduction in rainfall was not an impactful natural cause.

“There is a historical awkwardness on two counts: There is a period of eclipse with a growth of human habitation; and a proposed aridity at a time when archaeological data indicate widespread dry cropping.”

Author Gregory L. Possehl’s forwards his hypothesis that the cause of the decline of the Indus Civilization was at its heart, its ideological core: nihilism, urbanization and sociocultural complexity (iconographic themes of ideology like figurines, pottery seals and other glyptic items, wasserluxus (construction of brick-lined wells, metropolitan drainage system and bathing platforms including the Great Bath)) and technological prowess  (baked-brick architecture, drainage systems, seal cutting, etching carnelian, drilling long carnelian bead stoneware bangles).  “Too much of a good thing” in an ideologically perfect, free-of-conflict sociocultural system can also be counterproductive, even destructive.

Source

Possehl, Gregory. The Indus Civilization: A Contemporary Perspective. Altamira Press. 2002

Indus River Valley Civilization — Societal Structure

While there is some debate over the existence of a caste system in ancient Harappa, many archaeologists theorize that there was a hierarchical social structure in place.  This view is supported by the architectural layout found in the walled cities.  “Within Harappa, walls separated one section of the people from another, which clearly shows how the caste system existed way back,”  said archaeologist, and Indologist. Dr. Jamkhedkar. source

The caste system is a hierarchy and it existed in India as far back as the Harappan civilization according to Dr. Jamkhedar.  The caste system had four main groups: the Brahmins consisting of priests and kings; the Kshatriyas, the warriors and aristocrats; the Vaishyas, cultivators, artisans and merchants; and the Shudras or peasants and serfs.  In addition, was the concept of Varna, which depended upon the person’s chosen profession. People from different varnas could live within a single family, while the caste system was hereditary and depended upon birth. The people of those times, he said, were free to choose their own varna which depended upon the education they pursued. He explained how the educated class, Brahmins had different kinds of sub-castes. Those who were to become kings had to fight to protect their kingdoms and ended up as Kshatriyas, the fighting class.  

Indus rulers appear to have governed their cities through the control of trade and religion rather than military might. There is no evidence of monuments built to commemorate the rulers and there is no indication of warfare and weapons. The rulers carried seals with animal symbols and wore ornaments of rare material. Each larger city was probably organized as a city-state. There is little evidence of hereditary monarchies. Numerous large buildings and public spaces in the lower town seem to indicate the presence of several distinct elite groups. Local leaders would have been responsible for the maintenance of well-planned streets and housing, wells and drainage facilities. source  Like so many of the mysteries of this society, the extent to which religion was a factor in the political rule of the Indus remains unclear.  

Commentaries on Charaka Samhita

Classical Period (450 BCE - 400 CE)

Introduction to Charaka Samhita

Many consider Charaka to be a redactor; restoring, rewriting, and filling in the gaps of the Agnivesa Samhita (46,000 verses), which is no longer in existence. (2) In this lineage, Agnivesa transcribed the teachings of Atreya Punarvasu and turned them into a text that would later be made available to the world thanks to Charaka. The Agnivesa Samhita is said to have been on the verge of perishing, or maybe just falling into disuse, at the moment that Charaka took on the great task of redaction. (1)

Charaka is believed to have flourished anywhere between the 2nd and 6th century BCE. (1, 2) Speculation still revolves around his existence as a singular person, or its existence as a collaborative effort. Commentators such as Vijnana Bhiksu, Sivadasa, and Bhavamisra (the author of the Bhavaprakasha), subscribe to the opinion that Charaka and author of Mahabhasya on Vyakarana Patanjali, are one and the same person. (1)

Who exactly the author is, or if, in fact, Charaka represents the work of a "school of thought," is unknown. It is possible that a group of scholars — maybe even followers of a man named Charaka — collaborated to complete this comprehensive work. (2)

Regardless, Charaka Samhita remains one of the most crucial (and highly studied) authoritative contributions to Ayurvedic medicine today. The work itself summarizes medical care in health and in disease by offering etiology, symptomatology and treatments. (1) This divine piece of Sanskrit writing is presented in the form of poetry, with meter and melody, to enhance one’s ability for memorization. It presents most of the theoretical foundations of Ayurveda while focusing on kayachikitsa (internal medicine). Charaka never discusses the upadoshas of pitta or kapha, but does describe the 5 sub-types of vata. (2)

Commentaries on Charaka Samhita

The practice of writing commentaries on the classical texts of Ayurveda began during the Sangraha period. This was the age of the reign of the Gupta Kings, often considered the golden age of Indian history. During this time many treatises of different disciplines were reexamined and redacted to update them for the new era.

Previously, many volumes of text had been written focusing on different specialties in medicine. With such a large body of work, it was difficult for students and practitioners to thoroughly learn and incorporate this knowledge through studying the texts. Thus, the practice of creating concise “handbooks” began. These were commentaries on the classical texts that covered the essentials of all of the eight branches of Ayurveda. This tradition of creating compilations of information from the classical Ayurvedic texts is believed to have begun with Vagbhata, who wrote his treatises Ashtanga Hridayam and Ashtanga Sangraha during this time. Both texts incorporate the writings of Charaka and Sushruta in a new layout meant to be easier to use for practitioners at the time.

Charaka Samhita has over 60 different known commentators, in addition to some anonymous commentators. The various commentators of the Charaka Samhita compiled commentaries based in their own education and personal bias. Some authors wrote word for word translations, analyzing each compound in comparison to other commentators, while others picked through the verses and selected information which they perceived to be genuine to be included in the commentary.

Here, we describe some of the more well-known commentators and their commentaries.

Bhattara Harischandra wrote Charakanyasa, which is the oldest commentary on Charaka Samhita. It was written around the turn of the 4th century, C.E. This commentary is well regarded in the medical world, and is also praised for its prose in the literary world. Many scholars consider it the best commentary, but unfortunately the complete text is not available.

Swami Kumara’s commentary is known as Panjika, and is believed to have been written around the 5th century C.E. Only a small portion of the text was preserved, and little is known about the author, other than that he was Shaiva based on the invocation... in his commentary. (He starts with an invocation to Lord Shiva).

He is a good example of how many of the commentators are intertwined. Before writing his commentary, he consulted Hariṣcandra’s commentary, which he also quoted frequently throughout his writings. He was later quoted by Jejjata in his commentaries. These connections help historians to place authors in their context in the timeline of Indian history.

Shivadas Sen wrote the commentary called Tatvachandrika or Tattvapradīpikā in the 15th century C.E. Again, the full text is not available. We know that he was trained in Ayurveda and other sciences by his father to whom he repeatedly refers in the Sūtrasthāna of Charaka Samhitā , and may have been a devotee of Vishnu. At the end of his third commentary Shivadas Sen wrote of his long lineage dating back to Sāisena, a famous poet who lived at the court of Śikharevśara.

Jejjata wrote the commentary Nirantarapada Vyakhya. His background is not entirely clear; some mention Mahajanupati as his teacher, while others identify his teacher as Vagbhat. It is debated whether his was Hindu or Buddhist.

His is the most popular commentary on Charaka Samhita after Charakanyasa. It was written in the 6th century C.E., and only a few sections of the work are still available. In his commentary, Jejjata is especially concerned with determining which verses of Charaka Samhita can be regarded as genuine, and actually rejects those verses that he does not perceive as genuine.

Chakrapanidutta is quite famous among the commentators of Charaka Samhita. Indeed, his work on his commentaries of both Charaka and Sushruta Samhita earned him the honorifics 'Charaka Chaturanana' and 'Susruta Sahasranayana'.  His commentary is called Āyurveda Dīpikā, and is one of the few that is still available in its complete form. Historians have determined the date of writing to be in the 11th century C.E.

In his commentary, Chakrapani is not interested in psychopathology because in his opinion the text is devoted to internal medicine (kayachikitsa). He does not admit blood as a dosha and expresses doubt regarding the relationship between pitta and agni. He understood the concepts of poshya or sthayi and poshaka or asthayi dhatu, gave a limited role to samprapti, and made an important remark regarding the clay-like color of the stools in obstructive jaundice. He was of the opinion that animals may be killed if required for the preservation of health or the curing of disease.

Chakrapani’s philosophical views were aligned with the later stages of Nyāya, Vaiśheṣhika, and Saṃkhya. Because of this, it is apparent that in his commentaries, he is critical of Charaka and attempts to reconcile statements found in Charaka Samhita with Nyāya doctrines. One example of this is that Chakrapani did not accept yukti as a separate pramāṇa like Charaka did.

Yogendranath Sen is one of the more recent commentators on Charaka Samhita. He was born in 1871, and his commentary Charakopaskāra was originally published in incomplete form in 1920. He studied Ayurveda under his father, who was a pupil of Gangadhara, and eventually became known as one of the foremost Ayurvedic physicians of India.

His commentary covers only the first chapter of the Sutrasthana to the 13th chapter of the Chikitsasthana. Unlike many of the other commentaries, it was written in simple sanskrit, and it follows Charaka word for word while analyzing each compound of each word. He also sometimes agrees with and comments on some of the writings of Chakrapanni and Gangadhara, sometimes synthesizing their views or offering his own view.

Kaviraj Jyotishchandra Sarasvati was a Bengali author who wrote the commentary is called Charaka Dīpikā, and was published only up to the sutrasthana. Throughout his commentary, he repeatedly refers to the views of Gaṇāthasena and contradicts Kaviraj Gananath Sen.

Some of the best pearls of these commentaries can be found in the last two volumes of P.V. Sharma’s English translation of Charaka Samhita.

Reference

1. Narayanaswamy, V. Origin and Development of Ayurveda. College of Indian Medicine, Madras - India. Ancient Science of Life, Vol. 1, No. 1. July 1981. Pp 1-7

2. https://www.ayurveda.com/resources/articles/the-ancient-ayurvedic-writings

3. A Handbook of the History of Ayurveda (Revised and Illustrated), by Dr. R. Vidyanath and Dr. K. Nishteswar

4. A History of Indian Medical Literature by G. Jan Meulenbeld

Ancient Leftovers: The diet and agricultural practices of the Indus Civilization

Pre-Vedic (2600–1900 BCE)

“The ability to produce and control agricultural surpluses was a fundamental factor in the rise of the earliest complex societies and cities.” (4)

The Indus Society

The Indus Valley Civilization, or Harappan Civilization was one of the great early complex societies of the bronze age.  The Indus dominated a land area larger than either ancient Egypt or Mesopotamia, covering much of today’s northeast Afghanistan to Pakistan and northwest India. Between 3300–1300 BCE, it was the most widespread of three early cradles of civilisation of the Old World. (3) Harappa, one of the largest Indus cities, was located in modern day Pakistan. (3)

The Indus society began to flourish around the same time that the ancient Egyptians built their pyramids and Mesopotamians constructed the first great cities.(3) During its peak, between 2600–1900 BCE, Indus cities are believed to have maintained a population of some 40,000 within large and carefully planned urban centers.(1) The Indus cities are noted for their urban planning, baked brick houses, elaborate drainage systems, water supply systems, and clusters of large  building non-residentials. The expansive region across which Indus settlements were distributed was both geographically and culturally variable, creating equally similar variations in Indus subsistence practices. (4)

Diet Overview

The foods and cooking of the Indus civilization laid the groundwork for the modern-day “curry” dishes of South Asia. The Harappans incorporated a variety of foods into their diet, including grains and pulses, vegetables, fruits, and animal products, as well as a variety of seasonings and spices still used in South Asia today. (2) Current research suggests that diet and agriculture focused primarily on the raising of cattle, goat, and sheep, supplemented by cultivation of wheat and barley supported by winter rains. (3)

Of legumes and pulses, the Harappans were known to grow and cultivate lentils, chickpeas, peas, green gram (mung beans), and black gram (urad dal). (2) Their staple grains included wheat and barley; millet was also cultivated in certain regions, especially Gujarat. They used wheat and barley to make breads, and they may have also cooked them in water as a gruel or porridge.

Though rice is a modern staple in this region, its status as a staple grain during this time is unclear. Researchers previously thought that rice farming did not take prevalence until the end of the Indus era; rather, rice farming was developed in China and brought to the region around that time. (1) There is evidence that during this time, wild rice was cultivated as animal fodder. (2) However, in some areas researchers have found large quantities of rice, enough to suggest that it was preferred over wheat or barley. (3) This also suggests that rice farming may have developed in tandem with rice cultivation in China, rather than afterward. (1)

Regarding this, Dr. Jennifer Bates notes, "We found evidence for an entirely separate domestication process in ancient South Asia, likely based around the wild species Oryza nivara. This led to the local development of a mix of 'wetland' and 'dryland' agriculture of local Oryza sativa indica rice agriculture before the truly 'wetland' Chinese rice, Oryza sativa japonica, arrived around 2000 BC." (1)

It is believed that the Harappans ate a variety of local fruits, including dates, jujube, grapes, figs, and possibly mango. Cultivated vegetables include a variety of brassica and brown mustard greens, and possibly okra and capers. A variety of herbs, spices, and seasonings were also available and likely cultivated, though evidence is lacking. Notably these include coriander, sugarcane, garlic, turmeric, ginger, cumin, and cinnamon. (2) Ginger, garlic, and turmeric are considered to be key ingredients in cooking. (3)

The Harappans raised cattle for meat, but they also raised chickens, buffaloes, sheep, and goats. They also hunted game, namely a variety of wildfowl, deer, antelope, and wild boar. Their diet also included fish and shellfish from local rivers and lakes and the sea. Fish were eaten fresh, or sometimes dried or salted, as evidenced from the discovery of marine fish remains far inland. (2)

For oil, sesame was used, and possibly flaxseed oil as well. (2) Excavation of Indus sites has resulted in the discovery of tandoori-style ovens used for cooking.(3) This is an extraordinary discovery showing the roots of modern-day Indian cuisine in the Bronze Age. Tandoori ovens are used in many popular dishes such as tikka masala and for the traditional preparation of naan. They have spread across the world with the Indian diaspora, and thus can be found even in small towns in the UK and United States.

Agricultural Practices

In 2016, a public release from the University of Cambridge confirmed new archaeological findings about the Indus Civilization. The research reveals ways in which Indus populations utilized complex strategies for multi-cropping based on season, which also involves a critical awareness of varying watering regimes.  Before other other civilizations were varying their crops seasonally, the Indus people were favoring rice, millet and beans in the summer; and wheat, barley and pulses in the winter. Radiocarbon dating even shows evidence of horsegram crops as far back as 2580 BC, and rice as far back as 2430-2140 BC. Not only were these agricultural practices increasing dietary variety, but also providing the opportunity for organization of labor and provisioning throughout the year.  Beyond the benefits to an individual community, this variety of crops may have been responsible for the establishment of ancient urban cities, as produce from regional growers was transported to markets for trade. (1)

Pre-Vedic India offers glimpses into the subtle wisdom of Ayurveda in its clever affinity for seasonal eating, as well as the use of a variety of grains and pulses, such as urad dhal. The notion of seasonal eating, also called ritucharya, is emphasized in the ancients texts of ayurveda (Charak Samhita, 200 BCE).

Whether perusing the classical texts of Ayurveda, opening a modern Ayurvedic cookbook or sitting down to a curry or tandoori dish in Denver or Darwin Australia, Mumbai or Birmingham UK, we are still experiencing the ingredients and cooking methods of ancient Harappa.

SOURCES

1. Rice farming in India much older than thought, used as 'summer crop' by Indus civilization. EurekAlert! The Global Source for Science News. https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2016-11/uoc-rfi111816.php. Published November 20, 2016. Accessed February 2, 2018.

2. What kinds of things did the Indus people eat?. Harappa.com. https://www.harappa.com/answers/what-kinds-things-did-indus-people-eat. Accessed February 2, 2018.

3. The Origins of Curry in the Indus Civilization. Harappa.com. https://www.harappa.com/blog/origins-curry-indus-civilization. Published May 30, 2016. Accessed February 2, 2018.

4. Petrie C, Bates J, Higham T, Singh R. Feeding ancient cities in South Asia: dating the adoption of rice, millet and tropical pulses in the Indus civilisation. Antiquity. 2016;90(354):1489-1504. doi:10.15184/aqy.2016.210.