Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

An Encyclopaedia of Indian Archaeology v1.c9.s17: 4.17 Megalithic

An Encyclopaedia of Indian Archaeology v1.c9.s17

Language
English

4.17 Megalithic

v1.c9.s17.1

Megaliths in India, particularly in peninsular India, include a variety of sepulchral and commemorative monuments which are either built of large stones, rude or chiselled or else associated with a somewhat homogeneous group of the black-and-red ware [11.15.3] and an equally homogeneous group of iron tools and weapons. By and large they are collective burials in which post-exposure bones of more than one person are found buried. They occur in cemeteries located in waste land often overlooking a tank or a river valley and cultivated fields. However in a number of examples they are neither built of large stones, nor associated with the black-and-red ware and iron implements; nor do they contain post-exposure bones of several persons. Still when single examples are taken one or the other diagnostic trait is present; otherwise the monument is not qualified to be included under the category of megaliths.

v1.c9.s17.2

*Distribution.* Except for the plains of Punjab, the Indo-Ganga divide, the Ganga basin, the deserts of Rajasthan and parts of n. Gujarat, megaliths are located practically all over India. However they are concentrated in peninsular India, in the states of Tamil Nadu [4.17.9], Kerala [4.17.10], Karnataka [4.17.8] and Andhra Pradesh [4.17.7]; Maharashtra comes next, followed by Madhya Pradesh [4.17.6], Uttar Pradesh [4.17.2, 3], n.-e. Rajasthan [4.17.2], the Kashmir valley (menhirs [see below] only) [4.17.1] and Ladakh [4.17.1].

v1.c9.s17.3

*Peninsular India*. The pottery associated with the megaliths of peninsular India is uniformally distributed. The black-and-red ware with a characteristically crackled appearance, probably due to salt-glazing, and with a large number of individualistic shapes, is almost universally found in the s. Indian megaliths. The important types include: the tulip-shaped vase; funnel-shaped lid, sometimes with ring terminals; elongated vase with carinated shoulder and long tapering body; and bowl with carinated body and almost pointed base. These types are also found in red or black wares associated with the black-and-red ware. These associated wares have also a few of their own characteristic types, e.g., the hour-glass-shaped ring-stand, three- or four-legged jar, chalice, small- to medium-sized globular vessel, etc. The wares are largely wheel-turned, thick in section, not very well-fired, slipped and sometimes burnished. Apart from these which are practically universal in distribution, there are a few wares which are regional. Thus in the Coimbatore megaliths the associated red ware is found painted in white in concentric wavy lines round the shoulder of the pots treated with a red slip. The paintings are characteristically coated upon by a russet coloured wash; the ware is hence known as the Russet-coated Painted Ware [11.22]. Similarly in the Tirunelveli graves some of the pots of black ware and black-and-red ware have been found with white paintings. The patterns are linear, consisting of dots arranged in groups of slanting lines. As some of the wares are regional in distribution, so also are some of the pottery types, although the regions and types do not coincide with natural geographical boundaries. Thus by and large the chalice is found in the Tamil Nadu and Andhra Preadesh megaliths alone.

v1.c9.s17.4

The Rouletted Ware [11.21] of Roman imitation (1st century A.D.) is found mixed with the russet-coated painted ware, which latter is found in some Cochin graves. In Pondicherry the Megalithic black-and-red ware has been found mixed with the so-called ARIKAMEDU ware of the 1st century A.D. At BRAHMAGIRI and CHANDRAVALLI the russet-coated painted ware has been found overlapping with the preceding balck-and-red ware. At SENGAMEDU the black-and-red ware deposit is as much as 3 m thick, the uppermost levels yielding the Rouletted Ware. At HALLUR the black-and-red ware overlaps with the preceding Neolithic ware [11.1.5]. At TEKWADA in the upper Deccan the Chalcolithic Jorwe Ware [11.11] is found in a simple pit burial along with the Megalithic black-and-red ware.

v1.c9.s17.5

Bronze objects are largely concentrated in the graves of Dt Tirunelveli although they have been sporadically found further n., at SULUR, SANUR, KUNNATTUR, etc. Interestingly enough, bronze lids similar to those found in the Tirunelveli graves are also found in the graves of KHAPA near Nagpur and have a characteristically common feature: they are crowned with a group of birds in the round.

v1.c9.s17.6

Shell objects decorated with linear patterns are more often found in the graves of Dt Chingleput than in those of other regions. So also terracotta animal figurines and stone objects like querns and pestles [6.19].

v1.c9.s17.7

Iron objects typical of the megaliths include flat celts with two fastening rings, socketed and barbed arrowheads with comparatively long blades, tridents, long swords and lances, spearheads and spikes, wedges, bill-hooks, sickles [6.23], hoes, horse-bits [16.17], etc. Of these flat celts with rings, hoes [6.9] with sockets prepared by turning the flanged ends inside, long swords with or without mid-rib, tridents and horse-bits are the diagnostic types. Most of them are found from Nagpur to Tirunelveli; e.g., celts with two cross-rings are found in the megaliths of JUNAPANI as well as in the urn burials of ADICHANALLUR. Similarly tridents are found both in the caves of Cochin on the w. coast and in the burial urns of Tirunelveli on the e. coast. One may not however imagine that all these types of tools are found everywhere. In fact most of them have only a regional distribution but their regions often across several geographical boundaries—a fact which shows that these items migrated with the people of all sorts to lands they moved in. Hoes, for example, are found in the e. coast sites to the sites in Coimbatore in the w.—a vast region easily divisible in two or three geographical areas.

v1.c9.s17.8

*Chronology*. The black-and-red ware of Megalithic association is found overlapping at the lower end with the Neolithic-Chalcolithic wares, dated from 1000 to 700 B.C. (¹⁴C dates of the Jorwe Ware) and at the upper end with the Russet-coated painted and Rouletted wares of A.D. 100. Although on this basis the megaliths themselves have often been dated between 1000 B.C. to A.D. 100 time-bracket, yet sometimes valid objections have been raised against this proposition since so far there is a total absence of any ¹⁴C date obtained on any material coming directly from within the Megalithic graves themselves.

v1.c9.s17.9

¹⁴C dates place the Megalithic culture within the time-bracket of 1000 B.C. (HALLUR) and A.D. 1000 (PYKARA), although amongst a number of tribal people in n.-e., e. and s. India megaliths, mostly as commemorative monuments, are still erected. However the period of their maximum popularity appears to be 700 years, between 600 B.C. and A.D. 100 as may be made out by the concentration of ¹⁴C dates and the relative chronology based on archaeological data. The ¹⁴C dates are as follows: HALLUR, 1105 ± 108 B.C., 955 ± 100 B.C.; TAKALGHAT, 615 ± 105 B.C., 555 ± 100 B.C.; PAIYAMPALLI, 640 ± 105 B C., 210 ± 100 B.C.; KATIA, 270 ± 105 B.C.; and HALINGALI, 80 ± 100 B.C.

v1.c9.s17.10

From a cist at SULUR comes copper coin identified as an Eran coin datable to 3rd-2nd century B.C. A silver coin of Augustus (23 B.C. to A.D. 14) has been found along with a punch-marked coin [3.1] in a megalith in Dt Coimbatore.

v1.c9.s17.11

*Types.* For the Megalithic types in peninsular India the most recommended classification is the one of Krishnaswami, 1949. In the light of some subsequent criticism of Krishnaswami's classification a slightly modified version is proposed here.

v1.c9.s17.12

(1) Dolmenoid cist (or dolmen): It is a box-like chamber made of completely rude or partially dressed stones which may be fully or partially overground or underground. Krishnaswami divides them into three subtypes designated as D1, D2 and D3. They denote three different stages of the visibility of the monument, but N.R. Banerjee has rightly pointed out that there is probably 'no real distinction between types D2 and D3, differential exposure by erosion and deliberate or casual removal of the covering cairn heap being the cause of the present exposed appearance of monuments' (*AI* 15, 1959, p. 7). Thus the major portion of D1 is sunk underground rising only 50 cm above ground; in D2 the monument is fully overground: in D3 the entire chamber is underground. Dolmenoid cists when surrounded by a cairn circle enclose an area varying from 3 to 48 m in diameter. The e. orthostat of the cists may have been a port-hole or the e. side may have a closed or open passage replacing the port hole. The best examples of this type exist in Dt Chingleput where they are found entombing one to five terracotta sarcophagi [12.9], sometimes zoomorphic in shape. Thus the one from SANKAVARAM, Dt Cuddapah, resembles a ram and another from PALLAVARAM, Dt Chingleput, an elephant.

v1.c9.s17.13

(2) Slabbed cist (or cist): It is a general term for cists of different types made of stone slabs—granitic or lateritic. They are usually encircled by one or more stone circles and covered with cairn stones, completely or partially. They usually measure 2 m in length and the same in height. In a number of examples the e. upright carries a port-hole usually of a size ranging from 10 to 50 cm in diameter through which a man could insert his hand, maybe to lower the bones and offerings. It is called a 'port-holed cist'. In most of the underground port-holed cists the portals are found covered by an additional external slab. Not only that, the portals are approached from the outside by a lined passage, also sealed from outside. At BRAHMAGIRI the orthostats are found arranged in a oversailing fashion forming the pattern of a svastika. The cists are surrounded by one or more drystone wallings of several courses.

v1.c9.s17.14

Childe has very significantly observed: 'Just because the port-hole is not confined to any one narrow class of megalithic tomb, it seems to me a highly specialized trait suitable for defining a generalized “megalithic” culture if any such exists' (*AI*, 4, 1947-8, p. 10).

v1.c9.s17.15

In Pudukottai port-holed cists are 'approached through a slabbed antechamber as large as the main cist' and are therefore called 'transepted cists', a term adopted from the plan of a Christian church.

v1.c9.s17.16

'According to local custom or the nature of the subsoil the cist may be built on the natural surface, or partially or completely below it. Thus in the Hyderabad region they are often deeply buried; the BRAHMAGIRI cists were half-buried; whilst in a large megalithic cemetery in the jungle near SAVANDURG, twenty-two miles [about 35 km] west south-west of Bangalore, there are free-standing port-holed “dolmens” intermingled with identical port-holed cists at all stages of submersion below the natural surface down to capstone level.' (Wheeler, 1969, pp. 155-6.)

v1.c9.s17.17

(3) Chambered tomb and long barrow: In recent years in n. Karnataka megaliths of a particular group have been called 'chambered tombs' although basically they belong to the major category of dolmenoid cists. The rationale behind this term, and also another term 'long barrows' used for a kind of cairn circles, is that they have some distant resemblance with similar monuments on the European continent, France and England in particular. Although this stand of Sundara, 1975, who, after Burgess, 1874, has been using the former term extensively may not be shared by all, still it cannot be doubted that the dolmenoid cist developed a vast variety of subtypes in n. Karnataka. Although collectively called 'chambered tombs' they contain cists in forms like Greek and Latin cross: first burial pits are dug in the fashion of a cross and then they are lined with stone slabs; quite often a long passage or shallow pit is also dug from the periphery of the circle (or rectangle) of stones enclosing this monument to the central cist or chamber, which may sometimes be trapezoidal also, and is then lined with stone slabs. The whole monument is then generally covered with slabs, and then again by cairn stones. In a number of examples slabs are replaced by crude stones. The term 'long barrow' is applied for a long cairn of heaped up stones concealing below it two to four cists sometimes found collectively demarcated by a circle or rectangle of stones; when the cist is single the cairn or barrow is somewhat rectangular. The term 'barrow' has been used again and again (Banerjee, 1965) but not accepted by others (Krishnaswami, 1949) because terms like 'round barrow' and 'long barrow' are applied to an extremely elaborate and imposing class of monuments in England which stand quite apart from their supposed Indian counterparts.

v1.c9.s17.18

**Fig. 20.** Megalithic types: 1, menhir—Kerala; 2, dolmenoid cist (or dolmen)—Tamil Nadu; 3, *topi-kal*; 4, kundan-kudai (or hood-stone)—Kerala; 5, cairn-circle—Tamil Nadu; 6, multiple hood-stone—Kerala; alignment (series of menhirs)—Assam; urn-burial—Tamil Nadu

v1.c9.s17.19

Fig. 21. Megalithic types: 11, rock-cut cave—Kerala; 12, port-hole cist—Karnataka; 13, trancepted cist; 14, sarcophagus within a dolmenoid cist—Tamil Nadu

v1.c9.s17.20

(4) Pit circles: In this class of Megalithic monuments a pit is dug to a depth of 2 to 4 m and is encircled on the ground by stone circles. In some of the excavated ones at BRAHMAGIRI the rim of the pits is approached from the e. by a short shallow ramp which is closed by a non-functional door slab backed by lime, the whole exactly resembling the ramp, functional door and lime packing of the cists. It has been suggested that they were macerating pits of more than one corpse (Wheeler, in *AI*, 4, 1947-8, p. 197), but this has been doubted (Banerjee, 1956, pp. 27-8).

v1.c9.s17.21

(5) Cairns with urns: This type, mainly found in the Pudukottai region, inters one or more urns with a cairn heap at the top.

v1.c9.s17.22

(6) Non-lithic urn burials: These are much simpler and less ritualistic than the other megalithic types in that the funerary objects including bones are kept in a pyri-form urn buried underground. In spite of the absence any lithic appendage in the form of underground stone chamber or stone circles on the ground they have to be classed as megaliths by virtue of the identity or similarity of their ceramic and metallic contents with those of other megalithic types. They are common in Dt Tirunelveli, the type site being ADICHANALLUR.

v1.c9.s17.23

(7) Kerala types: They have been dealt with in detail below [4.17.10]. To repeat, the types are: (i) *topi-kallu* (hat stone or umbrella stone); (ii) *kundan-kudai-kal* (handleless umbrella stone); (iii) multiple hood stone; and (iv) rock-cut cave. Aiyappan, 1923-4, has mentioned the occurrence of sarcophagi and pyriform urns in the caves at FEROKE, Dt S. Malabar.

v1.c9.s17.24

(8) Memorial stones: Added to the sepulchral monuments listed above there are 'menhirs'—upright single stones 1 to 3 m in height. Sometimes they are reported to have been planted over a few funerary pots containing bones, although the excavation at MASKI has yielded nothing. When several menhirs are arranged in rows of three or more they form an ‘alignment’. When two or more alignments are arranged parallel to each other they are an ‘avenue’. All these monuments ‘seem to suggest commemorative and perhaps magical prophylactic functions for the stones.’ Menhirs are widespread, occurring not only in peninsular India but in the Kashmir valley [4.17.1], Chota Nagpur [4.17.4] and e. India [4.17.5].

v1.c9.s17.25

*Megaliths in Tamil literature.* Ancient Tamil literature is not devoid of references to megaliths in the form of burial grounds and urn burials, in addition to cremation. Thus in the *Maṇimekhalai* there is mention of those who cremated, those who cast away or exposed the dead to the elements or animals, those who laid the body in pits dug into the ground, those who interred the body in pits in subterranean callars or vaults and those who placed the body inside a burial urn and inverted a lid over it (Srinivasan, 1946).

v1.c9.s17.26

*N. India and Pakistan.* What applies to megaliths of peninsular India does not necessarily apply to the megaliths of n. India and Pakistan, where they are not largely associated with a homogeneous group of pottery nor metallic objects, modes of the disposal of the dead and sepulchral monuments. Such types as port-holed cists and rude stone dolmens with opening to the e., etc., are usually absent. The sepulchral monuments generally included in the category of megaliths are cairn burials and cist burials, i.e., heaps of loose stones placed over a pit and comparatively small box-like structures raised over a pit, sometimes covered with cairn stones, respectively. At a few places such as BURZAHOM in the Kashmir valley [4.17.1] menhirs have been located. In the Vindhyan hills some pits are carved in the rocks. In the Mirzapur region some are associated with iron and a kind of dull red as well as grey ware and some are claimed to have been associated with copper and Chalcolithic pottery [4.17.3]. In Baluchistan and Sind and in rare examples in the hills of Rajasthan some dry rubble structures are also included in megaliths. In the Himalayas such as at Leh [4.17.1] and several places in Tibet and the hills of Dehra Dun simple slabbed cists, sometimes with collective burials, are located. These monuments too have been included in the category of megaliths. In Gujarat sometimes within a circle of stones a cairn burial is found such as at AMRELI. Similarly, near Karachi in Sind cists with a couple of suspected examples of port-holed type have been reported. However, except the simple Iron Age cists of KOTIA in Dt Mirzapur, which may be dated to the 3rd century B.C., none of the n. Indian and Pakistan megaliths has as yet been dated precisely, although some of the cairn burials of Baluchistan may belong to the broad time-bracket of the 1st and 8th centuries A.D. The picture that emerges from these details is that the megaliths of n. India are extremely varied both in structural details and associated culture complex. On the present showing they appear of somewhat later in date than the peninsular megaliths, except perhaps the Chalcolithic Vindhyan ones [4.17.3]. Does it show that the sources of inspiration for the two groups were different? We do not exactly know.

v1.c9.s17.27

Whence came the urge of erecting megaliths in India? Scholars by and large look towards w. Asia for the answer although hardly any one appears to have hit the point. Thus, Childe, 1947-8, and Wheeler, 1947-8, vaguely point out some general kind of architectural similarities, particularly the presence of port-holes, between the Indian and n. Iranian, Caucasian and Palestinian megalithic graves; Fürer-Haimendorf, 1945, and Ruben, 1939, have located the origin of the Indian megaliths, particularly those of s. India, which the latter feels started on the Malabar coast, in the port-holed cists and dolmens of the e. Mediterranean coast. Gordon, 1958, Gupta, 1972, and Ramachandran, 1969-70, quote the parallels in cairns, cists and rock-cut underground caves in the s. Arab countries; Gupta even favours the Gulf of Oman area as the immediate source or spring-board for the Indian megaliths. Heine-Geldern, 1965, and Leshnik, 1969, stake the claims of the C. Asian nomads as the authors of Indian megaliths, while Asthana, 1974, includes the cairn circles and cists of the Gandhāra graves amongst the earliest forms of megaliths on the Indian borderlands. Banerjee, 1965, pleads the case of the Baluchistan cairns for locating the original source for the Indian megaliths, and Allchin, 1968, and Soundara Rajan, 1969, take the Indian megaliths ‘as a developing complex with several streams of influence combining in them.’ Obviously the evidence is extremely slender and theories are generally based on some formal similarities in architectural features and rarely on pottery and tools and weapons. In fact the most difficult aspect of the problem is the chronological and spatial gap between the w. Asian and Indian examples: while most of the typical megaliths of India belong to the Iron Age of post-1000 B.C. date, most of the typical w. Asian megaliths end around 1500 B.C., i.e., during the last phase of the Bronze Age. It is as yet not certain when and how the iron technology developed in India, the theory of its Greek origin around 500 B.C. proposed by Gordon, 1958, and Wheeler, 1969, having long been rejected since at sites like HALLUR and ATRANJIKHERA iron is dated to 1000 B.C. But whether it has an indigenous origin [cf. 4.16] or had a two-way entry into India, one overland and the other maritime, from w. Asia is as yet to be established on independent grounds. Similarly typical megalithic types are practically absent between the Gulf of Oman and Sind—in fact between Palestine and Caucasia and the s.-w. coast of Indian peninsula. Some, like Allchin, who try to fill up the gaps take recourse to just a few atypical monuments and objects, such as three-legged pots, and therefore cannot be fully relied upon. The same observation applies to a black-and-red ware found by Lal in the cairn burials of Tumas in Nubia, Egypt (Lal, 1961-2, 1963), since as against the plain and painted black-and-red ware of India the Egyptian wares are often highly decorated with incised geometrical designs and human figures, and these are dated to the pre-Iron Age of pre-1000 B.C.; moreover whereas the Nubian burials are single complete interments the Indian megaliths are generally collective and post-exposure.

v1.c9.s17.28

It is sometimes held that the people responsible for the Indian megaliths were of the Dravidian group as there is a marked overlap between the distributional area of s. Indian megaliths and the Dravidian-speaking people (Fürer-Haimendorf, 1954, and also as in a couple of examples the skulls from ADICHANALLUR appear to belong to these people (Zukerman, 1930). But the evidence is not at all conclusive; claims have also been made that several skulls belong to the Iranian group (Sarkar, 1960). It is therefore possible that the original megalith-builders came to India in two groups—one following the sea-route from the Gulf of Oman to the s.-w. coast of India, and the other following the land-route from Iran to the Vindhyas. Hence the difference between the n. and s. groups of the Indian megaliths.

v1.c9.s17.29

Aiyappan, A., 1923-4, in *Quarterly Jour. Mythic Soc.*, 23, pp. 299-314. Allchin, B. & R., 1968, *Birth of Indian Civilization*, Harmondsworth. Asthana, S., 1974, in *Indian Prehistory 1974*, Pune; in press, in *Purātattva*, 9-10. Banerjee, N.R., 1956, in *AI*, 12, pp. 21-34; 1965, *Iron Age in India*, Delhi. Burgess, J., 1874, *Report on the First Season's Operations in the Belgaum & Kaladgi Dts*, ASI, New Imperial Series. Childe, V.G., 1947-8, in *AI*, 4, pp. 4-13. Dikshit, K.N., 1969, in Narain, A.K., ed., *Seminar Papers on the Problems of Megaliths in India*, Varanasi von Furer-Haimendorf, C. 1945, in *Man in India*, 25, pp. 73-86; 1954, in *Indo-Asian Culture*, 2, 3, p. 238. Gordon, 1958, *Prehistoric Background of Indian Culture*, Bombay. Gupta, S.P., 1970-1, in *Purātattva*, 4, pp. 4-18 (for Gulf of Oman megaliths); 1972, *Disposal of the Dead & Physical Types in Ancient India*, New Delhi. Gururaja Rao, B.K., 1972, *Megalithic Culture in s. India*, Mysore. Heine-Geldern, R., in Banerjee, 1965, op. cit. Krishnaswami, V D., 1949, in *AI*, 5, pp. 35-44 (for megalithic types). Lal, B.B., 1961-2, in *IAR 1961-2*, p. 70; 1963, in *Illustrated London News*, 20 April, pp. 579-81. Leshnik, L.S., 1969, in *Man*, 5, 3, pp. 498-9 (for Nagpur burials). Ramachandran, K.S., 1969-70, in *Purātattva*, 3, pp. 107-9, 1971, *Bibliography on Indian Megaliths*, Madras. Ruben, W., 1939, in *Internationales Archiv fur Ethnographie*, 37, supplement, Leiden, pp. 154-65. Sarkar, S., 1960, in *Bull. Dept. of Anthropology*, 9, 1. Sharma, Y.D., 1956, in *AI*, 12, pp. 83-115 (for rock-cut caves in Cochin) Soundara Rajan, K.V., 1969, in Narain, A.K., ed., *Seminar Papers on the Problems of Megaliths in India*, Varanasi. Srinivasan, K.R , 1946, in *AI*, 2, pp. 9-16. Srinivasan, K.R., & Banerjee, N.R., 1953, *AI*, 9, pp. 103-15. Sundara, A., 1977, *Chamber Tombs of Karnataka*, New Delhi. Wheeler, R.E.M., 1947-8, in *AI*, 4, pp. 180-310 (for excavation at Brahmagiri & Chandravally); 1969, *Early India & Pakistan*, London. Zukerman, 1930, in *Bull. Madras Government Museum*, New Series, 2, 1, pp. 1-24 (for Adichanallur skulls). For sites see respective entries in vol. II.—S.P. GUPTA

v1.c9.s17.30

*4.17.1 N.-w. region.* The Megalithic culture of the Kashmir valley is post-Neolithic, a single type of monuments, viz. menhirs [4.17], being known. The monuments are roughly semicircular in shape, constructed of a group of upright stones, and are to be found at BURZAHOM, SHADIPUR, BEGAGUND, GOFKRAL HARIPARIGOM, PAMPUR, WAZTAL and BRAH. Excavation at BURZAHOM has revealed that these upright stones were buttressed with rubble. The megaliths are not associated with burials; at best they are memorials. Associated with the Megalithic level at BURZAHOM is found black burnished pottery, coarse in fabric and low in polish. Besides a wheel-made red ware of coarse fabric is predominant. The miniature vase is the characteristic shape in the red ware. A straggling continuation of polished stone axes and bone tools from the preceding Neolithic culture [4.6.1] forms part of the cultural matrix.

v1.c9.s17.31

The megaliths in the Leh valley are quite different from those in the Kashmir valley. The grave is a cist or underground chamber built of dry (?) masonry wall of undressed stones, with steps leading into it. The chamber measures 1·8 × 2·28 m. In depth it is more than 1·8 m. The cist is covered with multiple rectangular undressed capstones, each measuring 2·28 m × 30 cm. The chamber contains fractional multiple burial. The cranial remains—as many as 20 skulls in one grave—are found placed on wooden shelves and belong to a dolichocephalic people. The attendant pots contained bones other than skulls. All the pots are handmade and their forms include: the jar with slight flaring rim; jar with slight flaring rim having flat loop handle/handles connecting the rim and the shoulder just below the rim; loop-handled bowl; and bowl without handle. Pots painted in red pigment and incised decorations, viz. spirals, ladders, zigzag bands, etc., are present though their frequency is negligible. Besides these the graves also contain a few bronze weapons similar to those used in the ritual devil dance of the Himalayan tribes, bead pendants, buttons, a spouted vessel, a bracelet and a seal bearing a cross and circlet design—all of bronze. In the absence of any datable material it is difficult to determine the age of these graves.

v1.c9.s17.32

Francke, A.H , 1914, *Antiquities of Indian Tibet*, New Imperial Series, ASI, 38, Calcutta, 1, pp. 64-74. For other sites see respective entries in vol. II.—K.S. RAMACHANDRAN

v1.c9.s17.33

*4.17.2 N. region.* Megalithic remains, variously described as cairns, cists, cromlechs or stone circles, have been reported from a few places in n. India—near Bharatpur, Jaipur and Nagaur in Rajasthan, in the hilly parts of Delhi and around Fatehpur Sikri near Agra and at Devidhura in Dt Almora in Uttar Pradesh.

v1.c9.s17.34

At KHERA, 6·5 km to the west of Fatehpur Sikri, seven cairns varying in diameter between 1 and 3 m were discovered on the ridge of a hill, apart from traces of several others near by. These cairns, composed of small boulders and rubble, were roughly four-sided in shape, with generally sloping sides, and surmounted at the top either by slabs of stone or by remains or fragments of slabs. The two round-topped cairns that were examined covered ‘a shallow, oblong or trough-shaped cavity’ excavated in the solid rock of the hill. Remains of ashes of calcined bones mixed with earth and fragments of charred wood were found inside these hollow chambers (Cunningham, 1878, pp. 13-5). Seven cairns have now been located, or relocated, on the hill (Singh, 1970, p. 138).

v1.c9.s17.35

Fig. 22. Leh graves: 1-6, pottery; 7-9, bronze weapons

v1.c9.s17.36

Remains of stone circles and side slabs of 'cromlechs' have also been reported from RUP-BAS or Rup-Vas in Bharatpur and on the slopes of a hill about 4 km e.-n.-e. of Rup-Bas (Cunningham, 1878, 16-9). At JAGNER, 29 km to the s. of Fatehpur Sikri between Rup-Bas and Bayana, were also noticed cairns or heaps of stones (*ibid*., p. 38). The cairns, numbering 30, at SATMAS, 3 km to the n.-e. of Jagner, have been described as of three types: (1) round-topped or tumulus-shaped solid cairns having below the ground level a shallow sepulchral chamber; (2) flat-topped four-sided cairns with a slab of stone on top and a square chamber above the ground; (3) cromlech cairns, the four side-walls of which were made of rubble and covered with either one or two large stones and having a square-sided oblong trough or sepulchral chamber hollowed out in the rock. The maximum diameter of the round-topped cairns was from 3 to 3·65 m and the chamber underneath was generally 1·52 m in length. The flat-topped cairns were 1·37 m in height and between 1·52 and 1·82 m in length at top. The chamber below was rather small, the mean size being about 0·7 m in height and about 0·6 m in diameter. The cromlech cairns measured on an average about 2·0 m in length, 1·22 to 1·52 m in breadth and 1·22 to 1·37 m in height. Fragments of bones and ash were found in some of the cairns and cromlechs (*ibid*., pp. 33-9). A small rectangular enclosure made of four slabs without any other lithic appendage has now been discovered (Singh, 1970, p. 139).

v1.c9.s17.37

Oblong cairns built out of boulders and having a sepulchral chamber below were also noticed at MACHARI (also spelt Machadi) or Sanchari, 35·4 km s. of Alwar and Tontpur (exact location not known, *ibid*., pp. 88-9). At the latter site were found remains of a human skeleton placed inside the chamber in an extended position (*ibid*., pl. III).

v1.c9.s17.38

Remains of four stone circles and a monolithic pillar, 6·4 m in length, were reported from DEOSA (or Devanasa or Daivasa), 51·5 km to the e. of Jaipur on the Jaipur-Agra road at the foot of a hill. The diameter of these stone circles ranged from between 4·87 and 7·31 m. To the w. of the stone circles near Deosa were found several cairns and a large mound of earth, some of which contained fragments of calcined bones and ash. In one cairn were found the fragment of a stone knife or dagger, a stone ball and a quartz object. The large domical earthen mound, which was 3·65 m in height, 30·48 m in length and 16·15 m in breadth, contained ash and human bones placed inside pots, besides a long bone and jaw of some animal, perhaps horse (*ibid*., pp. 104-8). Singh, 1970, p. 139, located the cairns and a menhir at the site. Some circles have also been reported at KUCHERA near Nagaur in Rajasthan. They vary in diameter from 3·65 to 4·57 m (Cunningham, 1887, p. 49).

v1.c9.s17.39

Cromlechs, cairns and stone circles have also been reported from the hilly parts of Delhi (Cunningham, 1871, p. xxx). No information on their exact location is available.

v1.c9.s17.40

Small granite and 'slate' cromlechs were noticed near the Devidhura temple, 29 km s.-e. of Almora. These remains consist of 'large granitic rock affording level surface of several feet square, respectively about 4 ft, 2½ ft and 1 foot above the ground. Each of these rocks exhibits a group of basons. They are generally about 6 to 8 inches in diameter and perhaps a foot in depth.' Similar remains in the vicinity consist of what have been referred to as 'cromlechs' or 'dolmens', one of which is a cairn of fairly large size, about 15 m square, having a flight of about 20 or more steps leading to a small natural cave within the cairn. However in view of their use as shrines the evidence of these being megaliths is normally discounted (Henwood, 1856, pp. 204-5; Nautiyal, 1969, pp. 77-8).

v1.c9.s17.41

Cunningham, A., 1871, *ASI-R*, 1, *1862-5*, Simla, p. xxx; *ibid*., 4, *1871-3*, Calcutta, pp. 13-5, 17, 33-9, 104-8 (report by A.C.L. Carlleyle); 1874, *ibid*., 6, Calcutta, *1871-2, 1872-3*, p. 214 (report by same); 1887, *ibid*., 23, Calcutta, pp. 49-50 (report by H.B.W. Garrick). Gupta, S.P., 1972, *Disposal of the Dead & Physical Types in Ancient India*, Delhi. Henwood, 1856, in *Edinburgh New Philosophical Jour.*, N.S., pp. 204-5 (cited by Nautiyal and Wheeler, below). Nautiyal, K.P., 1959, *Arch. of Kumaon (including Dehradun)*, Varanasi, pp. 77-8. Singh, P., 1970, *Burial Practices in Ancient India*, Varanasi. Wheeler, R.E.M., 1947-8, in *AI*, 4, pp. 301-3. For sites see respective entries in vol. II.—B.M. PANDE

v1.c9.s17.42

*4.17.3 Vindhyan region.* 'Cairns' and 'sepulchral mounds' have been known in Dt Mirzapur for more than a century. Le Mesurier, 1867, excavated one of the cairns near Chunar which contained a perfect 'kist', empty but covered by a capstone. During the explorations in Dt Mirzapur Cunningham's party also noticed sepulchral mounds and cairns (Cunningham, 1865). Fresh attempts to examine the megaliths in s. Uttar Pradesh have been recently made, in the sixties, by the Allahabad and Banaras universities. The Kaimur and Vindhyan ranges of the area are a rich source of sandstone, sometimes found in the form of natural slabs, which could be used for the construction of these monuments. Recent investigations have revealed megaliths in a considerably large area covering parts of Dts Varanasi, Mirzapur, Allahabad and Banda. The region lying between the Karamnasa and Chandraprabha in Dt Varanasi is particularly rich in megalithic monuments.

v1.c9.s17.43

Besides, monuments are also found at the foot of the small hills of the region, e.g. around the HATHINIA hill and the BHADAHWAN Pahar. In Dt Mirzapur most of the sites are situated on the banks of the Jirgo, Belan and other small streams and their vicinity. The JANGALMAHAL area, lying south of Chunar, has proved to be the richest site, with hundreds of monuments, the concentration being near the villages BANIMILIA and BAHERA on the Jirgo. The s. part of Dt Allahabad is almost equally rich in megaliths, the sites being located mostly on the banks and neighbourhood of the river Belan and its tributaries the Seoti, Tundiari and Gorma, KOTIA, MANDO and DAIYA being the more important of the sites. Habitation sites of the megalithic people are also noticed at a few places. Though the adjoining Dt Banda has not been fully explored, some megalithic sites have already been found in its part, located mostly within a radius of nearly 15 km from Manikpur.

v1.c9.s17.44

Excavations have been conducted at only three sites so far. They are: KAKORIA near Hathinia hill in Chakia tahsil of Dt Varanasi, BANIMILIA-BAHERA near Jirgo dam in Chunar tahsil in Dt Mirzapur and KOTIA on the right bank of the Belan in Dt Allahabad. While they have revealed some cultural traits of the Vindhyan megalith-builders, the picture is still incomplete, and a reliable chronology also is yet to be worked out. It may be tentatively held that the megaliths of this region belong to two phases. The monuments of the first two excavated sites, KAKORIA and BANIMILIA-BAHERA, may be assigned to a pre-Iron Age, since no iron objects were found in the megaliths or the habitation area. At KOTIA on the other hand there is a definite association of iron with the structures, which may thus be said to belong to the early Iron Age. There is only one ¹⁴C date (270 B.C. ± 105) available from KOTIA. The fragmentary pottery associated with the two groups of megaliths looks somewhat similar but differs in fabric and shapes. Thus the KAKORIA complex is characterized by an ill-fired red pottery and black-and-red and all-black wares. At BANIMILIA-BAHERA the associated pottery includes an ill-fired dull red ware occasionally coated with red slip, an overfired red ware, blackslipped ware and black-and-red ware. However globular pots in red ware and bowls in black ware and black-and-red ware seem to be the preferred shapes. The characteristic wares of the Kotia culture are the black-and-red ware, red ware and a dull black or grey ware of thick fabric. The important shapes include the bowl, dish, carinated vessel, knobbed lid, large elliptical storage jar, etc. [See 11.15.1.]

v1.c9.s17.45

Two types of megaliths, viz., cairn circle and cist circle, exist at KAKORIA, the orientation of the longer axes being both n.-s. and e.-w.; for both, a pit was dug into the natural soil. The cist circles were lined with stone pieces, three to four on one side, without port-hole. The floor of the cist was also made of stone pieces. Red sand was laid on the pit floors of a few cairn circles, though it was not a general practice. The grave goods, not uniformly arranged, included pottery, beads, microliths and, in one case, a gold ring. Skeletal material in a fragmentary condition was recovered from a few tombs only. The cists were sealed by capstones, but not the cairn circles.

v1.c9.s17.46

The megaliths of BANIMILIA-BAHERA differ fundamentally from those of the Kakoria complex in at least one respect. None of the four excavated tombs was found associated with any type of pit, the whole structure standing overground in all cases. Besides the longer axis was always oriented e.-w. Microliths were found on the surface of the ancient humus but did not form grave goods. Two types of megaliths were recognized at and around BANIMILIA-BAHERA: 1, cairn chamber: subtype A, the walls of the chamber being made of upright slabs without capstone, and subtype B, the chamber being made of dressed stones and carrying capstone; and 2, cairn circle (not excavated). Only pottery formed the grave goods, and one tomb only yielded fragments of bones.

v1.c9.s17.47

The three megalithic types at KOTIA are: 1, cist, both unicameral and multicameral; 2, cairn cist; and 3, cairn circle. The cist of the first type was not enclosed by a cairn, although the chambers themselves were covered with small stone pieces. The large multicameral examples (one of them measuring 5·86 × 4·26 m) resembled to some extent the transepted cists of s. India. Human bones were extremely rare in the KOTIA megaliths. However many of them yielded remains of domestic animals like the sheep, pig and cattle including *Bos indicus*, while in one of the structures were found pieces of tortoise and rodent. Some animal bones bear cut marks and some others are partly charred. These indicate rituals associated with the dead.

v1.c9.s17.48

The Megalithic sites of Dt Banda seem to represent the s.ward extension of the Kotia culture. They also indicate the possibility that the two megalithic types—cairn cist and unicameral and multicameral cists without cairn—might have been associated with two groups of people within the same culture complex. There are only cairn cists at Kalwaliya Maholiya and cists without cairn at Zirah. Pottery from both the sites appears to be the same and resembles that of KOTIA.

v1.c9.s17.49

Among the habitation areas excavated so far, the one at KAKORIA revealed a two-room mud structure. Other finds include microliths, ill-fired red pottery, beads of stone and terracotta, sling-stone and copper ring. The habitations of the other two excavated sites yielded only pottery. Since none of the habitations is large, the megalith builders of s. Uttar Pradesh should be presumed to have lived in small groups only. Their economy might not have been very different from that of the tribals.

v1.c9.s17.50

Cunningham, A., 1865, *ASI-R*, 1, Simla, p. xxx. Gupta, S.P., 1972, *Disposal of the Dead & Physical Types in India*, Delhi, pp. 170-6. Le Mesurier, H.P., 1867, in *Proc. Asiatic Soc. Bengal*, pp. 164-5. Singh, P.,. 1970, *Burial Practices in Ancient India*, Varanasi, pp. 134-7. For sites see respective entries in vol. II.—P.C. PANT

v1.c9.s17.51

*4.17.4 Chota Nagpur region*. The Megalithic tradition was a live one in the Chota Nagpur region until very recent times. A village called Chokahatu, Dt Ranchi, contains thousands of tombs, mostly of the dolmen or cromlech form, where burials used to take place as late as the second half of the 19th century. It is usually believed that the Mundas are responsible for this practice which was brought by them from outside India, but this lacks archaeological corroboration.

v1.c9.s17.52

A Megalithic site excavated at KHUNTITOLI, Dt Ranchi, yielded evidence of a pit dug within a larger pit, containing grave goods including pottery and personal ornaments. The whole pit was filled with earth with a capstone supported on boulders placed over part of it. The jars were of plain red colour as distinct from the black-and-red ware of the s. Indian megaliths. Many of them contained human bones and it will not be unreasonable to conclude that this was an example of post-cremation communal burial. The burial contained a few beads of agate, coral, red paste, copper and bronze and a copper-bronze bangle but not iron nor any datable object.

v1.c9.s17.53

Some of the Megalithic burial sites are situated close to the so-called Asura sites [14.4] assignable to the early centuries of the Christian era. But what relation, if any, these habitation sites had with the burial ones is not known since the cultural equipment of the Asura sites does not tally with the objects from the excavation of a neighbouring Megalithic site.

v1.c9.s17.54

*Dt Gazetteer, Ranchi. IAR 1965-6*, p. 10. Ray, S.C., 1915, in *Jour Bihar & Orissa Res. Soc.*, I pp. 229-53. 1920 in *ibid.*, 6 pp. 393-423 von Furer-Haimendorf, C., 1945, in *Man in India*, 25, pp. 73-86.—S.C RAY

v1.c9.s17.55

*4.17.5 E. region*. The states of Assam, Arunachal, Nagaland, Meghalaya, Mizoram, Manipur and Tripura form an area where the Megalithic culture not only belongs to an undated past but also to the living present (Roy, 1963). Mills, 1933, writes: ‘An archaeological characteristic of Assam of worldwide fame is its wealth of megaliths. Indeed, it is one of the few places in the world where monuments of this type are still erected. Some of the old ones are of great age and interest.’ Though the Megalithic monuments of the Khasi Hills were reported as early as 1872 (Godwin-Austen, 1872), till now no serious attempt has been made to study this important group of monuments.

v1.c9.s17.56

Megalithic structures are to be found over all the highest parts of the hill-ranges. The largest concentration of them is to be seen in Khasi and Jaintia Hills of Meghalaya (Gurdon, 1914, pp. 144-55), with Laitkor, Umstow, Nongkrem, Laitlyngkot and Nartiang as some of the important sites. In the Angami area of Nagaland there are innumerable megaliths, among which the decorated monoliths of Dimapur are of great interest. Megalithic monuments also occur in large numbers in the Naga-inhabited areas of Manipur, Mikir Hills and n. Cachar Hills (Hutton, 1929; Haimendorf, 1939, pp. 24-31).

v1.c9.s17.57

Structurally the megaliths are divisible into (1) menhirs, (2) cromlechs, and (3) dolmeniod cists, of which the first are memorial stones and the last two are ossuaries where the bones of the dead are deposited. Menhirs are erected when the ceremony of depositing bones in the ossuaries is completed. They are large upright stones varying in height between 60 cm and 4·30 m; but in exceptional cases, e.g. the great monoliths at Nartiang, they are over 8 m in height and about 80 cm in thickness. The dolmens are composed of a flat table-stone resting on stone supports or uprights. The largest table-stones are to be seen at Nartiang in Jaintia Hills and at Laitlyngkot in Khasi Hills. The Laitlyngkot stone measures 8·69 × 4·20 m and that at Nartiang 5·03 × 4·50 m.

v1.c9.s17.58

None of these megaliths have been dated absolutely or archaeologically. All that can be said is that while some of the structures are of prehistoric age, a substantial number of them are of recent dates. For want of excavated data it is not possible to know the cultural equipment of their builders. On the basis of structural and cultural affinities, the e. Indian Megalithic culture appears to be closely linked with those of s.-e. Asia and the Pacific islands on the one hand and those of Orissa, Chota Nagpur [4.17.4] and c. India [4.17.6] on the other (Fürer-Haimendorf, 1945; Choudhury, 1966).

v1.c9.s17.59

Choudhury, P.C., 1966, *History of Civilization of the People of Assam to the 12th Century A.D.*, Gauhati, pp. 57-72. Godwin-Austen, H.H., 1872, in *Jour. Royal Anthropological Inst.*, I, pp. 122-43. Gurdon, P.R.T., 1914, *The Khasis*, London, pp. 144-55. Hutton, J.H., 1929, in *Antiquity*, 3. Mills, J.P., 1933, in *Jour. Assam Res. Soc.*, 1, 1, pp. 3-6. Roy, D., 1963, in *Anthropos*, 58, 3 & 4, pp. 520-6. von Furer-Haimendorf, C., 1945, in *Man in India*, 25, pp. 73-86; 1939, *Naked Nagas*, London. pp. 24-31.—T.C. SHARMA

v1.c9.s17.60

*4.17.6 C. region*. Megalithic burials of different types have been located on a large scale in peninsular India. As far back as 1823 Babington published an account of the Megalithic tombs in the Malabar region [4.17.10]. However it was only in 1879 that Rivett Carnac took notice of the Megalithic stone circles at JUNAPANI near Nagpur, then included in the C. Provinces but now in the n.-e. part of Maharashtra. The investigations were furthered by scholars like Glasfurd, Pearse, Carey, Hislop, Temple, Lyall, Blanford and others. The megaliths of c. India would include those located in the Dts of the present State of Madhya Pradesh and those now incorporated in the State of Maharashtra. In terms of Dts, c. India thus defined in this context would comprise Dts Nagpur, Wardha, Bhandara, Chanda, Balaghat, Jabalpur, Sagar, Damoh, Mandla, Seoni, Hoshangabad, Narasingpur, Betul, Chhindwara, Raipur, Bilaspur, Durg, Amravati, Akola, Buldana and Yavatmal. This region has the Satpura and Vindhyan ranges and the major river is the Narmada. Here have been located hundreds of Megalithic stone circles, most of them in Dts Nagpur, Bhandara, Chanda, Wardha and Amravati, at present forming part of Maharashtra.

v1.c9.s17.61

A distinctive feature of the c. Indian megaliths is that only one type of Megalithic burial, viz., the stone circle with cairn filling, is available in this vast region except the singular example of a dolmen at PIMPALGAON in Dt Bhandara. In Madhya Pradesh stone circles have been reported from Dts Seoni, Raipur and Durg, while in Dt Bastar, which is the s.-e. boundary of Madhya Pradesh and which is the land of the Gonds, megalithism is a living tradition.

v1.c9.s17.62

The material culture associated with the c. Indian megaliths has been known from the excavations of some of the typical sites like JUNAPANI, MAHURJHARI, TAKALGHAT, KHAPA and NAIKUND. Of these JUNAPANI has nearly 300 stone circles whereas TAKALGHAT and NAIKUND are both habitation and burial sites. Another noteworthy site from the point of view of the number of Megalithic monuments is DHANORA³, about 80 km s. of Raipur, where 500 stone circles have been noted. Another site of similar magnitude is Simareea, about 24 km from Rewa, where for several km one sees flattish mounds or barrows surrounded by parallelogrammatic enclosures. It may however be mentioned that an exhaustive documentation of the Megalithic monuments in c. India has not yet been done but it is certain that the region is full of them.

v1.c9.s17.63

Nor have systematic excavations of the c. Indian megaliths been carried out yet, only six sites having so far been excavated. As early as 1891 Carey excavated a few stone circles at KHAIWARA, 24 km w. of Avri in Dt Wardha, which yielded a type of coarse red ware, horse teeth, copper bells, copper ear rings, a gold ring and an iron axe with cross-ring fasteners. In 1879 Rivett-Carnac tapped a few stone circles at JUNAPANI, about 13 km w. of Nagpur, which gave a variety of objects of iron comprising of daggers, flat axes with cross-ring fasteners, hoes, rings or bracelets, horse bits and chisels with long blades and pointed tangs possibly covered with wooden handles. Hunter excavated MAHURJHARI, about 10 km w. of Nagpur, in 1933, but got mostly antiquities of the early historical period as he did not touch the stone circles.

v1.c9.s17.64

During the last decade and a half, i.e. 1965-80, a number of Megalithic stone circle sites have been excavated with significant results including ¹⁴C dates. For instance the site of JUNAPANI was excavated in 1962 by the ASI. The three excavated stone circles gave, besides badly crushed human skeletal remains, micaceous red pottery, a sherd painted in black over a red surface, typical Megalithic black-and-red ware [11.15.2, 3] iron objects comprising axes, daggers, spears, lances, horsebits and chisels and copper objects like bells and anklets, along with a few gold-plated objects.

v1.c9.s17.65

As compared to JUNAPANI, the excavations at TAKALGHAT-KHAPA, MAHURJHARI and NAIKUND, all in the Vidarbha area of Maharashtra, proved more rewarding and significant. Of these the first two and the last were found to be both habitation and burial sites, while MAHURJHARI was only a burial site having as many as 70 stone cirlces with cairn filling. TAKALGHAT-KHAPA, excavated in 1968-9 by the Nagpur Univ., gave evidence of rectangular houses with mud-plastered walls and lime-coated floors with a bedding of rammed clay. The pottery, beads and metal objects were identical in the habitation area of TAKALGHAT and the burial area of KHAPA. The stone circles of KHAPA gave very fragmentary human bones along with bones of the horse and ornaments of copper sheet to be mounted on leather base and placed on the face and flanks of the horse.

v1.c9.s17.66

MAHURJHARI on the other hand yielded in the excavations carried in 1970-2 and again in 1975-6 no habitational remains but as many as 13 human skeletons, generally oriented n.-s. with the legs to the s. In some cases two persons were buried close to each other, whereas in one case the skeleton was found to have been without legs—possibly lost in a skirmish—and with a dagger with iron blade and copper hilt placed on the chest of the body. Along with the dead were found buried objects of daily utility like a cauldron and nail-parers of iron; objects of agricultural use like hoe; objects for woodwork like chisels, adzes, scrapers and nails; and objects of offence like lances, daggers, swords and spears. Objects of copper comprised dishes and conical lids capped by figures of birds, bells and anklets. Beads of carnelian, some etched, crystal, agate and gold were also buried. The pottery, which was mostly the black-and-red ware, comprised shapes like the bowl with conoidal base, squat hour-glass-like stand, dish and lid with conical top capped by figures of ram or a cock or birds. While no generalizations could be made regarding the human skeletal data it was noted that they belonged to an age-group ranging between 18 and 45.

First 66 of 128 passages. Read on

Linked texts (61)