68. Pandavara kallu: Neolithic tombs

On the Bantwal –Belthangadi road, take a deviation at Madyanthar township off Uppinangadi cross road for about three kilometers, you shall reach Pandavara kallu, a site of archeological importance that forms a part of Badaga Kajekar village (Belthangadi taluk, Dakshina Kannada district.).
Archeological site
The name ‘Pandavara kallu’ (Stones of Pandava) has come from an odd group of stone structures consisting of erect slabs of granite, covered by flat slabs of granite. Eye witnesses inform that the structure was intact several years ago but now dilapidated with stone slabs scattered helter-skelter thanks to the intervention of land developers as well as irresponsible urchins. However, a local institution has put up a sign post declaring the area as historical monument.
Sasandiri
The structure was called 'Stones of Pandavas' because of their large size. Local people believed that Pandava brothers on exile came and lived in this village for some time, hiding inside these stone structure specially created by them.
But this assumption of local people may not be true. The structure is a megalithic burial structure called ‘dolmen’ or ‘Sasandiri’.(Sasan=burial ground or ‘Smashan’; diri=erected stone slabs) among Munda tribes.Similar Neolithic 'dolmen' burial structures have been reported from different parts of the world. Malini Srivastava (2007) in a research paper, available online, describes the ‘Sasandiri’ burial structures prevalent among Munda tribes of Chotanagapur.
Significance
The stone burial structure (Sasindiri) at Pandavara kallu is a vestige of Early Munda culture that predated the present Tulu culture and civilization. It was a general practice among the early tribes to bury the dead, before the arrival of Tulu immigrants, ca. 800-600BC, who introduced the custom of cremating the dead bodies. The notion of cremation of dead bodies was initiated during the cemetery H culture of Indus valley.
There could many more such vestiges, unreported and lying in various stages of preservation in other remote corners of the District. Those who can recognize such structures should make it a point to report them promptly to the archeologists/historians for further studies.

55. Identity of Neolithic south Indians

Who were the Neolithic tribes that inhabited south India in terms of ethnicity?
The archeological pre-history of human evolution is conventionally divided into (a) Paleolithic [=Old Stone Age] representing age characterized by use of primitive stone tools by the early human beings and (b) Neolithic [=New Stone Age] representing use of polished or refined stone tools like stone axes. In some areas an intermediate ‘Mesolithic’ [=Middle Stone Age] age has been recognized between the two.
Paleolithic usually refers to pre-LGM (Last Glacial Maxima, ca. 18,000-10,000 years ago) or prior to the Last major Ice Age on the Earth. Neolithic usually refers to post LGM evolution that heralded domestication of animals, farming, agriculture, and establishment of villages and also development of crafts such as pottery and weaving etc. Neolithic Age has been recognized at slightly different time periods at different places.
In the southern India, Paleolithic stone tools have been reported in association with volcanic deposits (formed out of the aerial spread of emanations from the massive Mt Toba volcanic eruption, in Sumatra, ca.74, 000 years before present) from the archeological excavations carried out in Jwalapuram (Kurnool district, Andhra Pradesh) and other areas. These suggest the existence of early human tribes in southern India since that estimated age.
Similarly, archeological evidences for the existence of Neolithic civilization have been excavated in the formations dated ca. 2800 to 1200 BC from several sites spread in Krishna and Tungabhadra river basins of Gulbarga (Budhihal, Watagal), Bellary (Sanganakallu, Hiregudda, Tekkalakota) and Bijapur districts.
Archeological data on Karavali sites are not reported adequately so far either due to paucity of studies or due to destruction by natural elements such as heavy rainfall, changes in river channels and fluctuation of sea levels.
The archeological excavations studies by Paddaya, Korisettar and others in peninsular India (parts of Eastern Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh) followed up with archeo-botanical studies by Dorian Fuller and others indicate a pastoral (ash mound culture) and agricultural society that was growing millets, tubers and pulses like urd, green gram, horse gram with minor wheat and, barley. The occurrence of rice granules associated with younger formations suggests that rice was introduced later around ca.800 BC in the area.
The above data reveals that the early human beings settled in South India since Paleolithic Ages and evolved agricultural-farming inhabitations during the Neolithic Age. The inhabitants grew pulses (Tovar, green gram, horse gram and black gram), millets, tubers with minor wheat and barley. The ethnic identity of these early Indians corresponds with the Early Munda lingual-cultural substrata described in the earlier posts. Secondly, the rice was generally unknown to them until it was introduced by early Dravidian immigrants around 800 BC or later.
Basic lingual-ethnic fabric of India
In spite of the fact that the present generation of Indians are admixtures of several ethnic groups, the study of constituent ethnic groups may be of some interest to those who look for our early roots.
Basically, three major lingual-ethnic groups have been recognized in India: (1) Austro-Asiatic (or Munda) (2) Dravidian and (3) Indo-Aryan.
Of these, the Austro-Asiatic/Munda ethnic group that arrived and settled in India sometime during early Paleolithic apparently evolved into several lines of hunting-farming-artisan communities, as understood from the spread of extant and remnants of Munda group of languages and cultures.
Early views held that Indo-Aryans invaded the country that was dominated by Dravidian natives. Subsequently, Prof. Michael Witzel and others, based on the linguistic analyses of Vedas proposed that early Dravidians also migrated into India like Indo-Aryans. Similarity of Indo-Aryan Vedic stanzas with those of Iranian Zend-Avesta suggests mutual influence. Similarly the presence of Dravidian borrowed words in Vedic texts suggests that speakers of Dravidian languages co-existed with Indo-Aryan Vedic sages.
(In the meanwhile, some orthodox patriots have resented the Indo-Aryan invasion /migration theories and have introduced counter-proposals of out-of-India emigrations.)
Southworth Hypothesis
Prof.Franklin Southworth (2006) attributes the recent Neolithic archeo-botanical remains reported in Southern India to Dravidians. Southworth correlated the said archeological finds with proto-Dravidian words and proposed that Dravidian tribes and languages originated around Godavari basin. He suggests that “Since languages of all three subgroups (of Dravidian languages) are found in eastern central India, in the lower Godavari River basin, it would be most economical to assume that Proto-Dravidian was spoken somewhere in that region.” Dorian Fuller also followed Southworth proposal of Neolithic Dravidian culture.
Obviously, the present distribution of Dravidian languages and culture in southern India has influenced the thinking of Southworth and Fuller. Munda inhabitations are almost absent in present southern India. Munda tribes are presently distributed around Chotanagapur region. Thus, Southworth and Fuller have overlooked the Munda undercurrent that assimilated with the Dravidian culture in south India.
Southworth, however, notes that the list of faunal remains and depictions compares favorably with those listed for Late Proto-Dravidan words, though canids, felids, bears, and primates (along with several smaller animals such as the mongoose, squirrel, porcupine have not been reported in the archaeological findings. Similarly, while chickens found in 21.7% of archeological sites, (Korisettar et al., 2001) are missing from the inventory of proto-Dravidian words.
Early Munda vestiges
These discrepancies reflect that the south Indian Neolithic archeological finds represent the early Munda ethnic culture, rather than Dravidian as proposed by Southworth. Assimilated remnants of early Munda language and culture have been found in present Tulu and other Dravidian languages and culture in the form of vestiges of Munda words, customs and legends (like that of King Bali).
Later arrival of Dravidians (post 800 BC) into the region is also reflected by finding of the rice grain remains in archeological formations younger than ca.800 BC, suggesting that the immigrant Dravidians introduced the rice cultivation in southern India.
®

49.Early Human settlements in South India

Recent archaeological excavations at Jwalapuram, in Kurnool district of Andhra Pradesh, by Dr. Michael Petraglia (University of Cambridge, U.K) in association with Prof.Kori Settar (Karnataka University) and Dr.Venkatasubbaiah (Kurnool, Andhra Pradesh) showed evidences for settlement of anatomically modern humans in southern India before 74,000 years ago. The eruption of the Toba volcano in Sumatra some 74,000 years ago was a major volcanic event in the human history. The ash thrown up high into the atmosphere by the volcanic explosion reached India and deposited as layers of volcanic tephra found at Jwalapuram excavations. Apparently, the early inhabitants of south India survived the volcanic eruption without pronounced devastation as assumed by earlier studies. (see also, Post. 38).
Excavations at Jwalapuram have unearthed fine stone flakes used tools for various purposes by the primitive human settlers. The stone tool assemblages used by early men at Jwalapuram were similar to those produced in Africa at the same time. Similar stone implements have been unearthed in Malaprabha river valley, Hunsigi and Baichbal valleys.
Neolithic Bronze Age South India
Archeological studies by Dorian Fuller (England) in association with Ravi Korisettar and. Venkatasubbaiah and revealed existence of numerous sites of the Neolithic cultures (2800 BC-1200 BC) spread in the Krishna and Tungabhadra river valleys of Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh. These ancient villages and settlements on the southern peninsula are roughly contemporaneous with the Bronze Age settlements of the Indus valley in Northwest India and Pakistan. Two important categories of Neolithic sites have been recognized: habitation villages and cattle-herd settlements.
Agriculture was the mainstay in the permanent habitation sites. Villages were located margins of granite hills, possibly in the vicinity of springs or river. The studies showed evidences for the cultivation of small millet-grasses (like brown-top millet, Brachiaria ramosa, and bristley foxtail grass, Setaria verticillata) and pulses [like urd (black gram,Vigna mungo), green gram (mung bean, Vigna radiate), and horsegram, Macrotyloma uniflorum]. These crop species are native to Southern India and were probably domesticated in the region. In addition there is evidence for the use of tuber foods. During the later Neolithic (from ca. 1800 BC) a number of other crops including Wheat (Triticum sp..) and Barley (Hordeum vulgare) were introduced from the northwest (Indus-Pirak region) and Hyacinth Bean (Lablab purpureus) and Pearl Millet (Pennisetum glaucum) of African Origin. Rice (Orizha sp.)is supposed to have been introduced at a later stage.
The 'ash mound' sites consist of large, heaped accumulations of burnt cattle dung, the largest about 8 meters in height and 40 meters in diameter. Archaeological evidence from a couple of the ash mounds indicates sites of ancient cattle penning where dung was allowed to accumulate and periodically burnt, perhaps in seasonal rituals. The ash mound sites were camps of groups linked to the agricultural production sites.