Current Science

Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription Access

Unravelling the Hidden Truth from Vigukot in the Great Rann of Kachchh, Western India by Surface and Sub-Surface Mapping


Affiliations
1 Department of Earth Sciences, Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur, Kanpur 208 016, India
2 Civil Engineering Department, L. D. College of Engineering, Ahmedabad 380 015, India
3 Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur, Kanpur 208 016, India
4 Department of Geology, Utkal University, Vani Vihar, Bhubaneswar 751 004, India
5 Archaeological Survey of India, Agra Circle, Agra 282 002, India
 

The Vigukot Fort is in ruins lying along the northern fringe of the Great Rann of Kachchh, Gujarat, India This settlement is located on the left bank of the palaeochannel of the Nara river – a tributary of River Indus. We conducted Real Time Kinematics and Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR) surveys for surface and subsurface. The digital elevation model (DEM) reveals an average elevation ranging from 2 to 4 m from mean sea-level. Two elevated areas: EA1 (site 1) and EA2 (site 2) represent residential areas in the township. EA1 located on higher ground (3–4 m amsl) in the eastern portion comprised of a housing complex of larger dimensions. Two rooms with an area of 650 and 250 sq. ft respectively, possibly indicative of living rooms attached with a courtyard suggest that highranked authorities occupied this portion of the township. EA2 with low-elevation (3 m amsl) marked by a smaller residential complex may be indicative of a trade complex along the western flank of the township. On the basis of 3D GPR survey we infer two levels of settlement at EA1 and one level of settlement at EA2. EA1 remained as a residential complex as reflected from both the levels, whereas EA2 was a trading complex close to the main gateway G1. Probably two scenarios prevailed: (1) Both areas flourished likewise at the first level and might have got disturbed by an earthquake; later EA1 may have been reoccupied while EA2 was left to be an open trading complex at the second level (recent). (2) During the first level of occupancy, EA1 was probably a residential complex (having enclosed walls), and EA2 might be the trading complex (with partially enclosed walls lying opposite to G1). Both the areas were affected during the disaster, and the second level of occupancy EA1 was rebuilt and occupied, whereas EA2 was used without renovation. Moreover, the 1819 earthquake probably destroyed both the areas completely and led to their abandonment.

Keywords

Ground Penetrating Radar Survey, Regression of Settlements, Surface and Subsurface Mapping.
User
Notifications
Font Size

  • Danino, M., Effects of colonization on Indian thought. In Seminar on Decolonization and its Cultural Problems, organized by N. V. Krishna Wariyar Memorial Trust, Tripunithura, 1999, pp. 9–10.

  • Panhwar, N. A., The Indus Flood 2010, Centre for Environment and Development, 2011.

  • Wynne, A. B., The geology of Kutch. Mem. Geol. Survey India Part-1, 1872, IX, 29–47.

  • Gaur, A. S., Vora, K. H., Sundaresh, Murali, R. M. and Jayakumar, S., Was the Rann of Kachchh navigable during the Harappan times (mid-Holocene)? An archaeological perspective. Curr. Sci., 2013, 105(11), 1485–1491.

  • Oldham, T. A., Catalogue of Indian earthquakes from the earliest time to the end of AD 1869. Mem. Geol. Surv. India, 1883, 19, 163–213.

  • Oldham, R. D., The Cutch (Kachh) Earthquake of 16 June 1819 with a revision of the great earthquake of 12 June 1897. Mem. The Geol. Surv. India, 1926, XLVI, 71–147.

  • Quittmeyer, R. C. and Jacob, K. H., Historical and modern seismicity of Pakistan, Afghanistan, North-western India and South-eastern Iran. Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am., 1979, 69, 773–823.

  • Johnston, A. C. and Kanter, L. R., Earthquakes in stable continental crust. Sci. Am., 1990, 262, 69–75.

  • Malik, J. N., Sohoni, P. S., Karanth, R. V. and Merh, S. S., Modern and historic seismicity of Kachchh peninsula, western India. J. Geol. Soc. India, 1999, 54, 546–550.

  • Rajendran, C. P. and Rajendran, K., Characteristics of deformation and past seismicity associated with 1819 Kutch earthquake, northwestern India. Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am., 2001, 91(3), 407–426.

  • Juyal, N., The Great Rann of Kachchh: the largest saline Marshland in India. In Landscapes and Landforms of India, World Geomorphological Landscapes (ed. Kale, V. S.), Springer Science + Business Media, Dordrecht, 2014, pp. 231–237.

  • Roy, B. and Merh, S. S., Gemomorphology of the Rann of Katch and climatic changes. In Ecology and Archaeology of Western India (eds Agrawal, D. P. and Pande, B. M.), Concept Publishing Company, Delhi, 1977, pp. 195–200.

  • Malik, J. N., Michio, M., Prashant, M., Chandrashekhar, B. and Fumio, K., First active fault exposure identified along Kachchh main land fault: evidence from trench excavation near Lodai village, Gujarat, western India. J. Geol. Soc. India, 2008, 71, 201–208.

  • Malik, J. N., Gadhavi, M. S., Kothiyari, G. Ch. and Satuluri, S., Paleo-earthquake signatures from the South Wagad Fault (SWF), Wagad Island, Kachchh, Gujarat, western India: a potential seismic hazard. J. Struct. Geol., 2017, 95, 142–159.

  • Bilham, R., Lodi, S., Hough,S., Bukhary, S., Khan, A. M. and Rafeeqi, S. F. A., Seismic hazard in Karachi, Pakistan, uncertain past, uncertain future. Seismol. Res. Lett., 2007, 78(6), 601–613.

  • Rajendran, C. P., Rajendran, K., Thakkar, M. and Goyal, B., Assessing the previous activity at the source zone of the 2001 Bhuj earthquake based on the near-source and distant paleoseismological indicators. J. Geophys. Res.: Solid Earth, 2008, 113(5), 1–17.

  • Bilham, R., Slip parameters for the Rann of Kachchh, India, 16 June 1819, earthquake, quantified from contemporary accounts. Geol. Soc., London, Spec. Publ., 1998, 146(1), 295–319.

  • Nelson, C., Notice of an earthquake and a probable subsidence of the land in the district of Cutch, near the mouth of Koree, or the eastern branch of the Indus in June 1845. Geol. Soc. London, Q. J., 1846, 2, 103.

  • LeGrand Jacob, G., Extracts from a journal kept during a tour made in 1851 through Kutch, giving some account of the alum mines of Murrh, and of changes effected in 1845 by a series of earthquakes, that appear hitherto to have escaped notice. Trans. Bombay Geogr. Soc., 1858–May 1860, 25, 56–66.

  • Mandal, P., Estimation of static stress changes after the 2001 Bhuj earthquake: implications towards the northward spatial migration of the seismic activity in Kachchh, Gujarat. J. Geol. Soc. India, 2009, 74, 487–497.

  • Malik J. N., Sohoni, P. S., Merh, S. S. and Karanth, R. V., Active tectonic control on alluvial fan architecture along the Kachchh Mainland Hill Range, western India. Z. Geomorphol., 2001, 45(1), 81–100.

  • Levy, T. E. and Smith, N. G., On-site digital archaeology: GIS-based excavation recording in southern Jordan. In Crossing Jordan, North American Contributions to the Archaeology of Jordan (eds Levy, T. E. et al.), Equinox, London, 2007, pp. 47–58.

  • Conyers, L. B. and Leckebusch, J., Geophysical archaeology research agendas for the future: some ground penetrating radar examples. Archaeol. Prospect., 2010; doi:10.1002/arp.379.

  • Conyers, L. B., Ground-penetrating radar for anthropological research. Antiquity, 2010, 84, 175–184.

  • Sravanthi, S., Malik, J. N. and Vikrama, B., Ground penetrating radar investigations at Ahichhatra: an attempt to identify buried subsurface structures. In 14th International Conference on Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR). IEEE, Shanghai, China, 2012, pp. 625–630.

  • Streich, R. and van der Kruk, J., An efficient vector migration algorithm for imaging conventional 3D GPR data. In Eleventh International Conference on Ground Penetrating Radar, Columbus, Ohio, 2006, vol. 2.

  • Basile, V., Carrozzo, M. T., Negri, S., Nuzzo, L., Quarta, T. and Villani, A. V., A ground-penetrating radar survey for archaeological investigations in an urban area (Lecce, Italy). J. Appl. Geophys., 2000, 44, 15–32.

  • Davis, J. L. and Annan, A. P., Ground penetrating radar for highresolution mapping of soil and rock stratigraphy. Geophys. Prospect., 1989, 37, 531–551.

  • Neal, A., Ground penetrating radar and its use in sedimentology: principles, problems and progress. Earth-Sci. Rev., 2004, 66, 261–330.

  • GSSI, Geophysical Survey Systems, Inc., RADAN 6.0 User’s manual, 2005.

  • Fisher, S. C., Stewart, R. R. and Jol, H. M., Ground penetrating radar (GPR) data enhancement using seismic techniques. J. Environ. Eng. Geophys., 1996, 2, 89–96.

  • Burnes, A., Narrative of a voyage on the Indus: from sea to Lahore. In Account J. India Cabool, Tartary and Persia, A. Spottiswoode, New-Street-Square, London, 1833, vol. 3, pp. 306–332.

  • Nigam, R. and Hashimi, N. H., Has sea level fluctuations modulated human settlements in Gulf of Khambhat (Cambay)? J. Geol. Soc. India, 2002, 59, 583–584.


Abstract Views: 385

PDF Views: 175




  • Unravelling the Hidden Truth from Vigukot in the Great Rann of Kachchh, Western India by Surface and Sub-Surface Mapping

Abstract Views: 385  |  PDF Views: 175

Authors

Javed N. Malik
Department of Earth Sciences, Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur, Kanpur 208 016, India
Mahendrasinh S. Gadhavi
Civil Engineering Department, L. D. College of Engineering, Ahmedabad 380 015, India
Sravanthi Satuluri
Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur, Kanpur 208 016, India
Saurav Kumar
Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur, Kanpur 208 016, India
Santiswarup Sahoo
Department of Geology, Utkal University, Vani Vihar, Bhubaneswar 751 004, India
Bhuvan Vikrama
Archaeological Survey of India, Agra Circle, Agra 282 002, India

Abstract


The Vigukot Fort is in ruins lying along the northern fringe of the Great Rann of Kachchh, Gujarat, India This settlement is located on the left bank of the palaeochannel of the Nara river – a tributary of River Indus. We conducted Real Time Kinematics and Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR) surveys for surface and subsurface. The digital elevation model (DEM) reveals an average elevation ranging from 2 to 4 m from mean sea-level. Two elevated areas: EA1 (site 1) and EA2 (site 2) represent residential areas in the township. EA1 located on higher ground (3–4 m amsl) in the eastern portion comprised of a housing complex of larger dimensions. Two rooms with an area of 650 and 250 sq. ft respectively, possibly indicative of living rooms attached with a courtyard suggest that highranked authorities occupied this portion of the township. EA2 with low-elevation (3 m amsl) marked by a smaller residential complex may be indicative of a trade complex along the western flank of the township. On the basis of 3D GPR survey we infer two levels of settlement at EA1 and one level of settlement at EA2. EA1 remained as a residential complex as reflected from both the levels, whereas EA2 was a trading complex close to the main gateway G1. Probably two scenarios prevailed: (1) Both areas flourished likewise at the first level and might have got disturbed by an earthquake; later EA1 may have been reoccupied while EA2 was left to be an open trading complex at the second level (recent). (2) During the first level of occupancy, EA1 was probably a residential complex (having enclosed walls), and EA2 might be the trading complex (with partially enclosed walls lying opposite to G1). Both the areas were affected during the disaster, and the second level of occupancy EA1 was rebuilt and occupied, whereas EA2 was used without renovation. Moreover, the 1819 earthquake probably destroyed both the areas completely and led to their abandonment.

Keywords


Ground Penetrating Radar Survey, Regression of Settlements, Surface and Subsurface Mapping.

References





DOI: https://doi.org/10.18520/cs%2Fv113%2Fi10%2F1906-1917