History 2025 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) Neolithic site (ii) Mesolithic site (iii) Paleolithic site (iv) Neolithic site with stone artefacts (v) Site of Indus Valley Civilization (vi) Early Harappan site with a fire-pit (vii) Late Harappan site (viii) The Ochre Coloured Pottery (OCP) site (ix) Mesolithic site (x) Megalithic site (xi) Mahajanapada of South India (xii) Site of Buddha's Mahaparinirvana (xiii) Major Rock Edict of Asoka (xiv) Asokan Minor Rock Edict (xv) Commercial centre of the Mauryas (xvi) Saka-Kushan coin hoard (xvii) An inscription mentioning Ashvamedha Sacrifice (xviii) Site of Post-Mauryan period burnt brick house (xix) Terracotta craft centre of Post-Mauryan period (xx) Important port of the Pallava period

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) नवपाषाणिक स्थल (ii) मध्यपाषाणिक स्थल (iii) पुरापाषाणिक स्थल (iv) प्रस्तर कलाकृति युक्त नवपाषाणिक स्थल (v) सिंधु घाटी सभ्यता स्थल (vi) अग्निकुण्ड युक्त प्रारंभिक हड़प्पीय स्थल (vii) उत्तर हड़प्पीय स्थल (viii) गेहुँ रंग के मृद्भांड (OCP) स्थल (ix) मध्यपाषाणिक स्थल (x) महापाषाणिक स्थल (xi) दक्षिण भारत का महाजनपद (xii) बुद्ध का महापरिनिर्वाण स्थल (xiii) अशोक का प्रमुख शिलालेख (xiv) अशोक का लघु शिलालेख (xv) मौर्यों का व्यापारिक केन्द्र (xvi) शक-कुषाण सिक्कों का ज़खीरा (xvii) अश्वमेध यज्ञ वर्णित एक अभिलेख (xviii) मौयेंतर कालीन पकी ईंटों का गृह स्थल (xix) मौयेंतर कालीन टेराकोटा शिल्प केन्द्र (xx) पल्लवकालीन महत्वपूर्ण बन्दरगाह

Evaluate your answer to this question → See all 2025 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 followed by 30-word annotations for each. Allocate approximately 1.5 minutes per sub-part (30 minutes total), spending roughly 10-12 seconds on identification and 80-90 seconds on crafting the 30-word note. Structure each note as: Location name → Period/Culture → 1-2 defining features → Significance. No introduction or conclusion is required; present as serially numbered entries matching the map hints.

Key points expected

For (i)-(iv): Correctly identify Neolithic sites (Burzahom, Chirand, Koldihwa, Mehrgarh) with period-appropriate tool technologies and settlement patterns
For (v)-(vii): Distinguish Mature Harappan (Mohenjodaro, Harappa), Early Harappan with fire-pit (Kalibangan), and Late Harappan (Rangpur, Ropar) with their diagnostic traits
For (viii)-(x): Locate OCP site (Jodhpura), Mesolithic sites (Langhnaj, Birbhanpur), and Megalithic site (Brahmagiri, Maski) with associated material culture
For (xi)-(xii): Identify Mahajanapada (Avanti, Asmaka) and Mahaparinirvana site (Kushinagar) with their 6th century BCE-3rd century BCE contexts
For (xiii)-(xv): Distinguish Major Rock Edict (Dhauli, Girnar), Minor Rock Edict (Maski, Brahmagiri), and Mauryan commercial centre (Pataliputra, Taxila)
For (xvi)-(xx): Locate Saka-Kushan hoard (Brahmapuri), Ashvamedha inscription (Hathigumpha, Junagadh), Post-Mauryan sites (Sravasti, Mathura), and Pallava port (Mahabalipuram, Kaveripattanam)

Evaluation rubric

Dimension	Weight	Max marks	Excellent	Average	Poor
Chronology accuracy	20%	10	Correctly assigns absolute/relative dates for all 20 sites; distinguishes Early Harappan (c.3200-2600 BCE) from Mature (c.2600-1900 BCE) from Late (c.1900-1300 BCE); places OCP (c.2000-1500 BCE) and Megalithic (c.1000 BCE-100 CE) accurately; correctly sequences Mahajanapadas (6th-4th c. BCE), Mauryan (322-185 BCE), Post-Mauryan (c.185 BCE-300 CE), and Pallava (3rd-9th c. CE) periods	Correct broad chronological placement for 12-15 sites; some confusion between Early/Mature/Late Harappan or conflates Neolithic/Chalcolithic; minor errors in Mauryan/Post-Mauryan sequencing; omits specific dates but maintains relative period accuracy	Serious chronological errors such as placing Paleolithic sites in historical periods, confusing Mesolithic with Neolithic, or dating Mauryan edicts to Gupta period; multiple sites placed in wrong millennia; demonstrates fundamental misunderstanding of Indian archaeological periodization
Source & evidence	20%	10	Cites specific excavators (B.B. Lal for Kalibangan, Wheeler for Harappa, Soundararajan for Arikamedu); names diagnostic artefacts (Carnelian beads, Northern Black Polished Ware, Rouletted ware); references inscription content (Maski edict's 'Devanampiya', Hathigumpha's chronology); identifies coin types (Kushan gold dinaras, Saka copper)	Mentions generic material evidence (pottery types, tools) without specific excavator attribution; correctly identifies broad artefact categories (terracotta, coins) but lacks precision on typology; references some inscriptions by location without content details	Vague or incorrect evidence attribution; confuses archaeological cultures (calls OCP 'Painted Grey Ware'); invents non-existent evidence; misidentifies inscription types (calls Minor Rock Edict a pillar edict); no mention of material culture or diagnostic traits
Multi-perspective analysis	20%	10	Demonstrates regional variation awareness (Gangetic vs. Vindhyan Neolithic, Gujarat vs. Punjab Harappan); connects sites to broader processes (urbanization, state formation, trade networks); notes ecological/geographical determinants (riverine locations, coastal vs. inland); distinguishes elite vs. popular contexts (Ashvamedha inscription vs. craft centres)	Acknowledges some regional diversity (North vs. South India) without systematic comparison; mentions trade or state formation in general terms; notes geographical features without analytical connection to site significance; treats sites in isolation rather than as interconnected network	Homogenizes distinct regional cultures; ignores geographical and ecological factors entirely; presents sites as disconnected dots without processual understanding; fails to distinguish between political, religious, and economic functions of different site types
Historiographic framing	20%	10	Demonstrates awareness of interpretive debates (Harappan 'decline' vs. transformation, Aryan migration vs. indigenous origins, urban decay theories); cites alternative identifications where contested (Saka-Kushan attribution of hoards, multiple candidates for Mahajanapada boundaries); references changing excavation methodologies (from Cunningham to modern scientific techniques)	Mentions one or two major interpretive shifts (e.g., 'earlier believed to be destroyed by Aryans, now seen as gradual decline') without systematic engagement; acknowledges some sites have multiple identification hypotheses without elaboration; shows awareness that interpretations evolve but lacks specific historiographic detail	Presents all identifications as settled facts without acknowledging scholarly debate; uses outdated colonial terminology uncritically; demonstrates no awareness that archaeological interpretations change over time; treats map locations as fixed and uncontested
Conclusion & synthesis	20%	10	Creates implicit synthesis through consistent thematic organization across all 20 notes (e.g., grouping by subsistence mode, political function, or craft specialization); demonstrates mastery through cross-referencing (linking Post-Mauryan burnt brick to earlier Harappan techniques); shows comprehensive understanding of Indian archaeology's spatial and temporal breadth from Paleolithic to early medieval	Presents competent individual notes without strong thematic integration; some attempt at pattern recognition (noting multiple Mesolithic sites) but inconsistent; demonstrates adequate coverage of full chronological range but with uneven depth across periods	Fragmented, disconnected entries with no discernible organizational logic; severe gaps in chronological coverage (missing entire periods); repetitive or templated responses showing rote memorization without comprehension; fails to demonstrate command of Indian archaeology's developmental trajectory

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 →