This chapter presents solicited feedback from established Caucasus scholars on their ideas for further research priorities.

This chapter covers the shift in metal procurement sites from the Carpatho-Balkans to the Caucasus during the Eneolithic of Europe, and the apparent demographic changes that resulted; the relationship to the Kura-Araxes phenomenon and the Khirbet-Kerak wares of Palestine; examines influences from the Near East and Anatolia on sites such as Leilatepe (Azerbaijan), Tekhuta (Armenia), Berikldeebi (Georgia), and Trialeti (Georgia); and describes the advent of steppe influences in the form of kurgan and wagon cultures.

This chapter reviews the faunal and paleobotanical characteristics of the Pleistocene Caucasus and their appeal to Miocene apes; the significance of H. erectus georgicus for models of hominin dispersal out of Africa; possible routes for hominin movements across the Caucasus mountains; the Lower Paleolithic sites of Kurtan and Nor Geghi I; Acheulean tool assemblages; geographic-cultural divisions during the Middle Paleolithic of the Caucasus; and local Mousterian industries.

With local domestication, a theme from Chapter 6, rice becomes something to consider – was it domesticated in India or not, and how does the Indus play a role in this narrative? By carefully exploring the types of evidence available (biogeographies, genetics, archaeological and archaeobotanical), Chapter 7 takes a methodical approach to this highly disputed topic.

While the book intends to show how the Indus archaeobotanical field is far from sparse and the poor handmaiden of other Bronze Age regions, it is important to acknowledge the state of the data set, and Chapter 3 heads up issues and areas we must work on before diving into the rest of the book. The dispersal of data across regions, the nature of the reported remains and the methods used to collect them are clearly defined in this early chapter so no shocks or surprises are found in the rest of the book.

The book is introduced by outlining a straw man: the Indus had a core of wheat growing, a periphery of millets, and there are very little data to use to explore anything further. The simplicity of this straw man, that it is a straw man, is quickly knocked down and the premise of the book is set up to show that the Indus archaeobotanical field is vibrant and detailed and that we have long moved beyond this old, tired straw man.

Indus agriculture has typically been seen as a binary: winter or summer, based on seasonal rains. In Chapter 12, the implications of binarism on models of Indus complexity are questioned and multi-cropping and farmer agency are brought to the fore.

Using the combined skills of macrobotanical and microbotanical remains, it has been recognized that cereals and pulses, the typical staple foods, were not the only Indus foods exploited and we must broaden our thinking to the less densely found but also ubiquitous ‘other things’. These fruits, oilseeds, vegetal plants and spices made the Indus a vibrant food scene.

Continuing with millets, the even less commonly explored small millets are dived into with detailed exploration not only of the overidentified Eleusine, the more discussed foxtails and broomcorn, but also wild and weedy native species. The question of local Indus domestication processes is considered.

With the preliminary background defined, the first two taxa of interest are explored in Chapter 4: wheat and barley. These crops have formed much of the Indus agricultural discussions, and so the origins of these – how they get to the Indus and what happens when they are in the Indus – is focused on.

Cereals were not the only crop Indus peoples were growing and eating, and pulses formed a significant proportion of their food. Tropical pulses are of particular interest as these link the subcontinent in narratives of trade and domestication.

To move beyond a wheat/barley-dominated discussion, the less-explored millets become the focus of the next two chapters. Splitting them into ‘big’ and ‘small’, Chapter 5 looks at how Sorghum and Pennisetum have been used to make arguments about African–Indus contact and Late Harappan changes in cropping, and whether the data support this.