History 2021 Paper I 50 marks 30 words Compulsory Write short notes

Q1

Identify the following places marked on the map supplied to you and write a short note of about 30 words on each of them in your Question-cum-Answer Booklet. Locational hints for each of the places marked on the map are given below seriatim: (i) Paleolithic site, (ii) Mesolithic site, (iii) Neolithic site, (iv) Neolithic-Chalcolithic site, (v) Harappan site, (vi) Proto-historic and historic site, (vii) Inscriptional site, (viii) Jain monastic site, (ix) Coin hoard, (x) Paleolithic site, (xi) Terracotta site, (xii) Rock-cut caves, (xiii) Ancient learning centre, (xiv) Political and cultural centre, (xv) Buddhist site, (xvi) Ancient port, (xvii) Early historic site, (xviii) Ivory hoard, (xix) Buddhist monastic centre, (xx) Temple complex. (50 marks)

हिंदी में प्रश्न पढ़ें

आपको दिए गए मानचित्र पर अंकित निम्नलिखित स्थानों की पहचान कीजिए एवं अपनी प्रश्न-सह-उत्तर पुस्तिका में उनमें से प्रत्येक पर लगभग 30 शब्दों की संक्षिप्त टिप्पणी लिखिए। मानचित्र पर अंकित प्रत्येक स्थान के लिए स्थान-निर्धारण संकेत क्रमानुसार नीचे दिए गए हैं: (i) पुरापाषाणकालीन स्थल, (ii) मध्यपाषाणकालीन स्थल, (iii) नवपाषाणकालीन स्थल, (iv) नवपाषाणकालीन-ताम्रमयुगीन स्थल, (v) हड़प्पाकालीन स्थल, (vi) आधि-ऐतिहासिक एवं ऐतिहासिक स्थल, (vii) अभिलेखीय स्थल, (viii) जैन विहार स्थल, (ix) सिक्कों का ज़खीरा, (x) पुरापाषाणकालीन स्थल, (xi) मृण्मूर्तिकला स्थल, (xii) शैल्यकृत गुफाएँ, (xiii) प्राचीन विद्या केन्द्र, (xiv) राजनीतिक एवं सांस्कृतिक केन्द्र, (xv) बौद्ध स्थल, (xvi) प्राचीन बन्दरगाह, (xvii) प्रारम्भिक ऐतिहासिक स्थल, (xviii) हाथीदाँत का ज़खीरा, (xix) बौद्ध संघाराम केन्द्र, (xx) मन्दिर संकुल। (50 अंक)

Evaluate your answer to this question → See all 2021 History questions

Directive word: Write short notes

This question asks you to write short notes. The directive word signals the depth of analysis expected, the structure of your answer, and the weight of evidence you must bring.

See our UPSC directive words guide for a full breakdown of how to respond to each command word.

How this answer will be evaluated

Approach

The directive 'write short notes' demands precise identification of 20 map locations with 30-word annotations for each. Structure as serially numbered entries (i-xx) with site name, precise geographical location (river/region/state), chronological period, and one defining archaeological significance—no introduction or conclusion required.

Key points expected

Correct identification of all 20 sites matching locational hints (e.g., Bhimbetka for Paleolithic, Bagor for Mesolithic, Burzahom for Neolithic)
Precise geographical anchoring using river systems, modern states, or landmark references (e.g., 'Sohan valley, Punjab' for Paleolithic)
Accurate chronological placement with cultural phase specificity (e.g., distinguishing Early/Mature/Late Harappan for site v)
Archaeological evidence cited per site type: tools for Paleolithic, pottery for Neolithic-Chalcolithic, inscriptions for site vii, coin denominations for hoards
Recognition of site multiplicity where hints overlap cultures (e.g., Inamgaon as Neolithic-Chalcolithic, Prabhas Patan as ancient port and temple complex)

Evaluation rubric

Dimension	Weight	Max marks	Excellent	Average	Poor
Chronology accuracy	20%	10	All 20 sites placed in correct archaeological periods with precise dating (e.g., 'Late Acheulian, c. 1.5 lakh BP' for Paleolithic; 'Mature Harappan, 2600-1900 BCE'); no anachronistic associations	Broad period correctness but vague dating (e.g., 'ancient' instead of specific phase); minor errors in 3-4 site chronologies	Fundamental chronological confusion (e.g., labeling Neolithic site as Paleolithic); multiple sites placed in wrong cultural phases
Source & evidence	20%	10	Each 30-word note names specific excavator, year of discovery, or key find (e.g., 'Robert Bruce Foote, 1863' for Paleolithic; 'Punch-marked coins, 182 hoard' for site ix); evidence directly supports site classification	Generic mention of 'tools found' or 'coins discovered' without specificity; missing excavator names or key artifact details	No archaeological evidence cited; conflates site types (e.g., describes rock-cut caves as 'temples' without Buddhist/Jain specificity)
Multi-perspective analysis	20%	10	Notes capture functional diversity within single sites (e.g., Nalanda as 'monastic university with Mahayana-Vajrayana curricula'; Arikamedu as 'Indo-Roman port with Mediterranean amphorae'); regional variations acknowledged	Single-dimension description per site; misses interconnections (e.g., describes Sanchi only as 'stupa' not 'Mauryan-Hellenistic synthesis')	Monolithic treatment ignoring site complexity; no recognition of cultural transitions (e.g., Neolithic-Chalcolithic overlap)
Historiographic framing	20%	10	Deploys current archaeological consensus (e.g., 'post-Harappan Chalcolithic' not 'Aryan invasion' for site vi); cites ASI classification or recent excavations (e.g., Keezhadi for site xvii); avoids colonial-era misattributions	Outdated but not discredited terminology; misses recent reinterpretations (e.g., still uses 'Pre-Harappan' instead of 'Early Harappan')	Perpetuates obsolete frameworks (racial theories, diffusionist models); no awareness of historiographical shifts in Indian archaeology
Conclusion & synthesis	20%	10	Implicit spatial-temporal patterns emerge through consistent formatting: north-south distribution of Paleolithic sites, riverine clustering of Harappan settlements, Deccan-Rocky Mountain cave concentration; cumulative portrait of Indian archaeology's diversity	Disconnected entries with no locational logic; inconsistent depth across 20 sites (some 15 words, others 40)	Incomplete serial coverage (sites missing); gross word limit violations; illegible map markings affecting identification verification

Practice this exact question

Write your answer, then get a detailed evaluation from our AI trained on UPSC's answer-writing standards. Free first evaluation — no signup needed to start.

Evaluate my answer →