Necropolis theory

Additional evidences and photos can be seen in the following link:
                     The name "Mohenjo Daro" itself means the "mound of the dead". The name of the place it self  is self explanatory and describing the nature of the place, but archaeologists are going to various lengths to prove otherwise. It was a necropolis not a metropolis as imagined by various archaeologists. Necropolis means city of burial, not a city meant for living persons. The new interpretation  that it was a necropolis would substantially alter various other interpretations in current usage. For example the standard view is that nearly 50,000 people could have lived in Mohenjo Daro at the prime of its existence. This is not an acceptable view, because 50,000 dead bodies can be accommodated in such a congested condition, but not 50,000 living people. Such a large number of people living in a crowded condition would have resulted in outbreak of epidemics and deaths in massive scale.

 American history professor Kenoyer states that it is doubtful that the building identified as granary was used for that purpose. He explains that it is simply a big hall. Careful observation of the pictures available at the web site ( shows that it looks more like a brick kiln than a big hall. Note that large numbers of bricks were used in construction of these burial tombs. For such a large scale consumption of bricks, bricks should have been ptoduced on industrial scale. Mohenjo Daro and Harappa were important places of those times, and it is likely that the mortuary business was carried out in industrial scale at that time. Note that the bricks extracted from these two places were used as ballast for the considerable length of the railway line during British period. The industry which survived here was funeral industry and business was mummification. Further, Kenoyer says that some ventilation pipe like structure exists which lead to the conclusion that it was a granary. The ventilation structure is essential in a brick kiln for proper burning of bricks, the granary depiction in various reconstructed pictures looks more like a brick kiln rather than a granary.

                                Storing grains in such large scale is a difficult job, the grains should be properly dried or it will rot within days of storage. Large scale insect attack will occur in granaries and control of rats will be next to impossible task in such large scale storage of grains, considering all these factors it can be safely concluded that the structure was definitely not a granary. In addition to that there is another doubtful factor that whether Indus people had any such huge surplus production of grains to store in such big granaries.

                               This interpretation may raise a doubt that no evidence for mummification is seen so far in the Indus valley artefacts. There is no evidence of mummies because the mummies crumble on exposure to light, and the grave robbers had played a significant role in robbing these mortuary temples. Eric George Wunderlich gives a detailed account on this issue, why no such mummies have been found in the palace structure at Crete. Arthur Evans had also wrongly concluded the Minoan funeral parlour as a “palace” because of the same reason that no mummies were found at the time of excavations. In this regard the explanations given by Eric Wunderlich are informative and enlightening and are applicable to the situation in Indus sites also.

 The photo of blocked drain
 in the web site ( shows that it is simply an entrance to the tomb. It is highly impossible that such huge drains of man’s height would have been built during those times. Even as on today, Indian cities are having only one or two feet diameter drainage pipes, in such a situation building six feet high drainage channels are absolutely ill-logical and without any requirement for such a facility. Most probably Harappans could have used open toilets as is practice in rural India even today. Not sophisticated toilet as imagined by some archaeologists.

        Photograph of the well shows that the parapet wall is starting from ground level and goes up to two storey level of the nearby building. (See the figure given here and compare the level of well and nearby wall ( well is not going down into earth, instead of that it is growing up towards sky. Most probably it is a circular burial tomb (or Shaft burial), but it looks like a well. Or simply it was the passage for the tombs in the lower level. Some wells are oval shaped some are heart shaped (web site - I am yet to see an oval shaped parapet wall of a well construction in any of the existing wells in India.

The potteries
 are also tailor made for funeral purpose, some of them show a protruding tube, meant for funnelling the sacrificial blood into ground. The “toilets” described by archaeologists seem to be “ordinary holes” meant for pouring blood into underground to nourish the dead in the underground burial chambers. Majority of Indus seals illustrate bull as the logo theme. It is probable that the animals depicted in the seals were sacrificed and as a proof the tokens were made. The tokens would have been attached to the mummies, so that the dead person’s soul can produce that evidence before the God of underworld (God of the dead); ensuring that deceased person’s soul received a good treatment in the other world. The current explanation that the seals were used as some kind token of identity of ownership of goods exchanged in trade does not seem to be accurate. Indus seals generally depict the date and month in which a person died. Some other seals show the date and month in which an important sacrifice or ritual was carried out. (Further details are under the chapter Astronomy and Calendar)

                     Many theories about decline of IVC are also wrong, because it never declined at all. Many of the cultural ideas depicted in Indus seals are still being practiced as on today. It looks like that as if Indus culture had declined, because of the deserted nature of excavation sites. The sites were looking deserted because they were burial places not living places, and those sites were meant as a shelter for ghosts of dead persons. A living place is a valuable real estate and it will never be deserted, generation after generation it will be rebuilt, this place was not rebuilt because it was a haunting place of ghosts and no one wants to live in such a place. The culture of building elaborate house of dead vanished with the arrival of Indo-Europeans, who were tomb raiders not tomb makers.

            At this juncture, a relevant question will definitely be raised, why no human bones are lying around, if these places were cemeteries?  No bones are being found because the tombs were raided by later day invaders, when mummies and bones were exposed to light and heat they get pulverized within days. But still there are lots of evidences of skeletons for a living city. (Figure 9.1. page 160 of the book “The Indus civilisation”, (L.Possehl, 2003). This location map shows that skeletons are strewn around all over the place, not restricted to any small location as normally expected. This shows that entire place was used as a burial ground and not merely a small enclosure within the site.

The Great bath is the only structure which had been properly identified so far. It is place for carrying out religious
 rituals. But only clarification required is that probably this great bath was used for funeral ceremony and not for other ceremonies. As per prevailing Hindu custom any funeral ceremony is conducted around a water body like sea shore, river or a pond. During the course the ceremony the person making sacrifices to the dead person is required to take bath frequently. He has to wash himself clean at the beginning of the ceremony, middle of the ceremony and finally at the end of the ceremony. Finally the offering is made to crow, and remaining offerings are thrown into water; final ashes of cremated body is washed into a water body. This great bath might have served such a purpose.

            It is likely that mummification would have been carried in this place. Mummifications would have brought lot of revenue to those professional physicians. Further as long as the mummy existed, it would have required regular poojas and animal sacrifices supposedly to sustain the mummies. All these activities would have sustained the mortuary temples of this place. Even though there is no evidence of mummification in Hindu culture as on today, but the remnants of that practice can be seen in present day rituals for the dead. After cremation of the body, the final ceremony is held only on 40th day, till then mourning period continues. How this period of 40 days of mourning is arrived at? It is simply because of the fact that it requires 40 days for a proper mummification of a body. Verifying the data available with Egyptian mummification techniques will show that it took exactly 40 days to properly preserve the body.

           Beating the breast to show their grief is a common practice in the cultures of Dravidians, Egyptians, and Minoans. It is likely that the same was followed in Indus valley also.  Circular platforms; originally explained as grinding plat forms are really meant as platforms for keeping the funeral jars (Pithoi) for safe keeping and everlasting journey into eternity.