34 Types of Megaliths

Srikumar M. Menon

1. Introduction

We have, in the previous chapter, already discussed megaliths and understood them to be the monumental constructions of pre and protohistoric cultures at many locations in the world. We have noted that the practice of erecting megaliths seem to have occurred at various points in time for different parts of the world.

The term megalith has come to be associated with a certain cultural practice of erecting sepulchres or memorial monuments to the dead and the term derives from Greek and means “built of large stones.” Indeed the very first megaliths that attracted the notice of archaeologists and antiquarians about two centuries ago were the large monumental constructions in stone. However, as we have seen, increasing understanding about megaliths and the cultures that authored them have shown us that not all megaliths are built of large stones and megalith form is closely related to the materials locally available for construction. For instance, in the lateritic regions of southern coastal Karnataka and Kerala, where there is a paucity of stone that lends itself to the manufacture of thin slabs, the form of megaliths undergoes a drastic change and one encounters the dramatic mushroom shaped kudakkals and the rock cut burial chamber scooped out of the soft laterite rock.

The objective of the megalith builder seems to have been the creation of a chamber within which the remains of the dead were to be placed. Sometimes, when no mortal remains are recoverable from a megalithic construction, it is presumed that the structure was meant as a memorial rather than an actual interment of the dead. It is not uncommon to encounter such “Blank” burials in the mortuary practices of various cultures. Such obviously death-related monuments that have no associated actual remains of the dead are seen in the cemeteries of Harappan settlements too.

There has been no systematic attempt to understand the origin and evolution of megalithic construction on the Indian subcontinent so far. As we have seen, paucity of proper dates for the nearly 3000 megalithic sites known today has resulted in an unreliable chronological framework onto which we may arrange these sites. However, judging by the distribution of various types of megalithic monuments at extensive sites like Hire Benakal in Karnataka, we could cautiously conjecture that the practice of erecting megaliths may have stemmed from early traditions of blocking up the sides of rock overhangs with smaller stones and cobbles to create a chamber to deposit the remains of the dead. However, such primitive-looking monuments probably continued to be built even after more elaborately conceived and executed megalithic forms were common, leading archaeologists to enquire whether this might be the manifestation of the existence of class in the societies that practiced megalithism – the elaborate constructions for the affluent class, while the more primitive forms continued to be built by those classes that were less affluent. Thus we see that a proper understanding of these monuments – their form, construction methods and their chronology can impart a great understanding of the kinds of societies that patronised their erection.

2. Objectives

In this chapter, we will take a look at the form of the various types of megaliths found in India. We will examine the nature of the material from which they are built and the manner of their erection.

We will also discuss the distribution of the various megalithic types commonly encountered in the Indian subcontinent.

3. Form in Megaliths

There are two aspects to be considered while deliberating about the form of megaliths. There is a part under the ground, which is revealed only by excavations and then there is the part that is readily visible to the eye – the surface markers, often of stone, which exhibit a great diversity in form. These two components may be encountered in various combinations. For instance, a cist burial, which is a stone-lined underground grave, may have either a cairn or a menhir or a boulder circle as a surface marker. Similarly, a boulder circle may mark the spot of a cist burial, or a pit burial which is an unlined grave or a burial incorporated in a terracotta container known as a sarcophagus.

3.1 What lies beneath – the underground component

The part of a megalith which lies under the ground could be a pit burial, a cist burial or an urn or a sarcophagus burial. Combinations of these are also encountered – a sarcophagus in an unlined pit, or even within a stone cist, is not uncommon. In this connection, it must be mentioned that the burials, wherever encountered in the context of megaliths, are usually secondary burials – wherein the excarnated (de-fleshed) bones, usually the skull and long bones, are interred. Primary burials are encountered more infrequently than secondary burials in megalithic sepulchres. Often, multiple burials are encountered within a single megalithic monument.

a. Pit burial – these are unlined pits into which the mortal remains of one or more dead persons are interred. These might be covered with any sort of lithic or other appendage, such as a simple earthen mound, or a cairn, or a boulder circle or a menhir.

b. Cist burial – These are pits lined with dressed stone slabs, to make a sort of stone box, usually rectangular in plan. The vertical slabs (also called orthostats), four of which are sometimes arranged in an interlocking manner such that inward collapse of the orthostats is prevented, form a chamber, within which the mortuary goods – both relics as well as grave goods, are placed. Dry-wall masonry of dressed stone blocks or cobbles is often found bolstering the chamber from outside, preventing outward collapse of the orthostats. Sometimes a circular or U-shaped hole, called a port-hole is found on one of the shorter orthostats. There is sometimes remarkable consistency in the orientation of the slab containing the porthole at some sites, but there is little evidence for consistency in orientation across sites at different locations. It is conjectured that the portholes were used either to add the remains of more individuals at a later date or to add votive offerings periodically. The observation that cists often have a “passage” consisting of two stone slabs flanking the porthole lends credence to this view.

It is interesting to note that the form of the cist burial is virtually identical with that of the dolmenoid cist and the dolmen, except for its underground location, as we will demonstrate below.

A cist burial near Bandipur in Karnataka which was exposed after the cairn covering it was disturbed by treasure seekers.

c. Urn burial – Sometimes the mortal remains of the dead are interred within terracotta urns of various sizes and shapes and buried with a marker such as a menhir or a cairn marking the spot of the burial. Unmarked urn burials are also sometimes encountered.

A large urn burial topped by a capstone and surrounded by a boulder circle on the surface is on display at the Thrissur Museum

A moving poem in the Tamil Sangam literature (a body of poetry by Tamil poets believed to originate in the period between 300BCE and 300CE) is structured as a lament of a lady whose husband has died addressed to a potter imploring him to make the burial urn large enough to accommodate the grieving widow, too, and provides insight that this burial practice was common in the Sangam Age.

d. Sarcophagus burial – A sarcophagus is a terracotta receptacle, with a lid and usually elongated and with “legs” that contains the mortal remains of the dead and is buried, sometimes within unlined pits or within stone cists. It is not uncommon to find sarcophagi that are shaped to resemble animals, like rams etc.

A multi legged sarcophagus excavated from Kudatini ashmound near Ballari is exhibited at the KRI museum of Karnatak University, Dharwad.

3.2 The surface markers

a. Menhir

Menhirs are the simplest megaliths, in terms of form. A menhir is a single stone – either unshaped or minimally altered natural boulders or quarried slabs of stone erected either to mark the spot of a burial or as a memorial.Menhirs may vary considerably in size – some of the small boulders erected as menhirs are only 60cm in height, such as some menhirs of the alignment at Vibhutihalli in Karnataka; whereas some large slab menhirs may be over 3m in height – such as the large menhirs at Nilaskal, Karnataka or Burzahom in Kashmir. At some places like Kerala and southern Karnataka, menhirs are encountered in sepulchral contexts, as markers for burials; whereas at other places, such as Maski in northern Karnataka, they are seen in non-sepulchral contexts leading archaeologists to conclude that they may be either sepulchral markers or simple memorials. It is possible that menhirs could have been earlier forms of hero-stones, which were put up in the medieval periods to commemorate those who died valorously. Possible references to menhirs as “nadukkals” in the Tamil Sangam literature support this view.

Sometimes, menhirs are found as part of an arrangement of several others in patterns known as stone alignments, which will be discussed separately below.

b. Boulder Circle

Boulder circles or stone circles are roughly circular arrangements of rocks or boulders, marking the spot of burials. The diameters of the circular arrangements as well as the sizes of the boulders comprising the circle can vary quite a lot. Very large boulder circles are seen in the Vidarbha region of Maharashtra state, with diameters exceeding 20m in many cases. The boulder circle with or without a cairn is the exceedingly dominant megalith type encountered in Vidarbha, though other megaliths like dolmens and menhirs are also present, but in relatively meagre numbers. Figure 7 shows a large boulder circle at the megalithic site at Junapani in Vidarbha.

Sometimes multiple boulder circles consisting of two, or even three concentric rings of boulders are also seen. At the megalithic site at Kyaddigeri near Aihole, A. Sundara reported multiple stone circles in 1975, but unfortunately the site is now destroyed.

c. Cairn

A cairn is a simple mound, usually of rubble mixed with earth, generally erected over a burial, which might be an unlined pit burial or a cist burial in which a chamber lined with stone slabs is constructed below the ground and covered with a capstone before heaping the cairn material over it. Cairns too come in various diameters and heights. Many of the cairns found outside the Buddhist monastery complex at Thotlakonda are small mound only a metre or so in diameter. Large cairns of up to 20m in diameter are commonly found in the Vidarbha region of Maharashtra.

Often cairns are associated with boulder circles lining their periphery. It is more of a structural requirement as it would be difficult to retain the shape of a mound the larger it becomes. Thus we see the large cairns of the Vidarbha region invariably having a retaining circle of large boulders along their periphery. A cairn at Bandipur in Karnataka was observed to have slabs driven into the ground one end in a circle to retain the infill material of the cairn (Figure 9). Cairn infill material usually depends on the locally available stone. The cairns shown in figures 8 and 9 have stone pieces mixed with earth as the infill material. In the laterite-rich regions of southern coastal Karnataka, chipped blocks of laterite are seen used as material for cairns at the site of BuddhanaJeddu in Udupi District.

d. Dolmenoid cist

A dolmenoid cist echoes the form of the cist; except that it is partially above the ground. There are four orthostats arranged, often in the interlocking manner, but part of it extending below the ground surface, to form a chamber and is surmounted by a heavy capstone. One of the orthostats usually has a porthole that might be circular or U-shaped. Outside the chamber, there is often a coursed masonry wall of stone blocks. This wall is covered by stone slabs with one end resting on the ground and the top end on the capstone. In this case, too, there is usually a passage made by two slabs flanking the porthole. Dolmenoid cists are usually low height and rarely exceed 1.2m in height. The porthole is just above the ground outside in most cases, though the bottom of the chamber within is below the ground level.

Most of these monuments as we see them today have been plundered by treasure seekers and antiquarians and hence it is very rare to find any sort of deposit within them. This has led several authors to surmise that they are non-sepulchral and purely memorial in nature. However, this kind of generalisation can be confirmed or refuted only by excavating several of these monuments at different sites.

e. Dolmen

Dolmens, too echo the form of the cist and the dolmenoid cist but for the fact that they are erected entirely above the ground. Some dolmens, however, have only three orthostats and the fourth side is left open. Usually found erected on rocky ground, they may occur singly but are found more often in clusters of monuments on rocky prominences. They are much larger in dimensions, too. Figure 12 shows some of the large dolmens in the central group of monuments at Hire Benakal in Karnataka. Dolmens are tall – over 2m in height, in the case of the monuments at Hire Benakal. At Hire Benakal, the granite orthostats comprising the sides of the dolmens are arranged in the interlocking manner and there are portholes on one of the orthostats – either circular, or semi-circular. There is no strict consistency in the directions these portholes face, at Hire Benakal.

However, there are other kinds of dolmens, too, like the low limestone dolmens of RajanKoluru in Karnataka, which do not exhibit the interlocking pattern to prevent inward collapse of orthostats. This type of monument is encountered at several other sites, too – like the sandstone dolmens of Meguti Hill at Aihole, Karnataka and the dolmens of Marayur and Bison Valley in Kerala, to quote just two examples. Interestingly, all these dolmens face exact cardinal south. The portholes, in all the cases they exist, are found on the southern orthostat and are crudely fashioned in comparison to the Hire Benakal dolmens.

Dolmens can be quite elaborately conceived and erected, as shown by the exquisitely crafted monuments at Mallasandram at Krishnagiri in Tamil Nadu. The chamber, which is bounded by four orthostats, is similar in style and execution to the dolmens of Hire Benakal. Outside the orthostats run a coursed masonry wall of dressed stone blocks. Outside this wall are arranged stone slabs, with tall round-topped slabs alternating with shorter, flat -topped ones. There are two such “slab-circles ” around the chamber, with the outer ring lower in height than the inner. At the megalithic site at Iralabanda and Mallelabanda in Andhra Pradesh, such monuments have up to six concentric rings of slabs around the central chamber, giving an impression of a “stone flower” with petals open!

Some dolmens also have a passage as found in cists and dolmenoid cists. The dolmen at Mallasandram, TN, has a tall stone flanking the porthole and acting as part of a passage. It’s counterpart on the other side of the porthole has been broken.

Dolmens have been defined by Morgan as “a stone monument of varying dimensions composed of vertical slabs set on end, one or more slabs forming the roof.” Though the monuments discussed above conform to this definition, there are several more which are loosely referred to by this name in the extensive literature on megaliths that they should be brought to the notice of the serious student of megalithic form.

At Hire Benakal, Aihole etc. in Karnataka and at Ettrapalli in Tamil Nadu and at many other sites throughout the subcontinent, one finds crude “dolmens” which consist of a capstone – a stone slab of irregular shape, raised on three or four small boulders. The gaps in the sides of this construction are filled with dressed stone blocks or rubble, often leaving an opening into the chamber thus created. Such monuments, which are not dolmens by strict definition, nevertheless strive to create the same kind of chamber in a more modest way A. Sundara has called these monuments Irregular Polygonal Chambers (IPC’s) in his book Early Chamber Tombs of South India published in 1975. Dr. Andrew Bauer, in his recent study of Hire Benakal and other prehistoric sites in the region, calls them “boulder supported dolmens ”, as opposed to the “slab supported dolmens” that we have already discussed above. Examples are seen at Hire Benakal.

Yet another variant on the dolmen theme is the Rock -shelter Chamber as it has been termed by A. Sundara. This type of monument takes advantage of overhanging rocks at various scales and creates a chamber by blocking sides of the overhang with stone blocks, and leaving an opening for access. An example of this type of monument is seen at Hire Benakal.

Though these could be classified as monument types different from dolmens, they are often referred to as dolmens in the extant literature; hence they are grouped under dolmens in this discussion. It is tempting to theorise an evolutionary sequence with rock-shelter chambers representing the earlier monuments, followed by IPC’ s and dolmens. However, it is quite possible that all three types of monuments were in vogue at the same time, and the conditions of their erection depended more on socio-economic aspects than technical limitation. Hence, until concrete evidence is obtained from dedicated studies focussed on understanding the evolution of form in megaliths, such ideas will remain mere speculation.

f. Stone Alignment

Stone alignments are arrangements of menhirs in patterns, usually in grids aligned to the cardinal directions. They occur in large numbers in northern Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh. The smallest of the grids may contain just three rows of three stones each, while the largest monument of this kind at Hanamsagar in Karnataka, consists in excess of 2500 stones. They are laid out usually on relatively flat terrain with intervals between stones in the row varying from 4.5m to 12m. The individual stones or menhirs that comprise the alignments are usually boulders from nearby hills rolled into position with either no or minimal alteration to their shape, although quarried slabs are also noticed less frequently. Most menhirs are less than 2m in height, though menhir heights of 4.5m have also been recorded.

F. R. Allchin has made a list of stone alignments in what is now northern Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh. Though many of the 43 alignments he recorded are roughly aligned to the cardinal directions, he also reported several that are aligned 15o to 20o east of north. He noticed two kinds of grids, one being a normal square grid and the other which he called a diagonal grid, in which alternate rows are offset by half the spacing between stones. The effect of this is that the rows are aligned in the cardinal as well as diagonal directions. The best examples are at Vibhutihalli and Hanamsagar respectively, both in northern Karnataka and both being diagonal grids. An extensive alignment at Hanamsagar is the best example.

This type of megaliths is quite different from the usual megalith types. In fact, initially it was difficult to relate them with megaliths because they did not have the usual accoutrements of megaliths like mortal remains of the dead or grave goods. It was only because they were found in association with known megalith types like cairns and stone circles at many of the sites that they were classified as megaliths. A Sundara, too mentions that there is a possibility that these monuments may not belong to the classical complex of megaliths.

The purpose for which these monuments were raised is currently unknown. Possible explanations have varied from markers for future graves to campsites for itinerant armies, prophylactic stones for the health of cattle and observatories for astronomical observations of the Sun, Moon and stars. However, at this stage of research, none of these explanations have been conclusively proven.

There are other types of stone alignments found in southern coastal Karnataka and Kerala. They consist of quarried slabs of various sizes or natural boulders of elongated cross section, arranged in rows. Figure 22 shows an alignment at Bison Valley in Kerala, situated on a shoulder of a hill. The individual slabs as well as the rows are oriented in the N-S direction in this case. The menhirs that comprise this monument are large, with the tallest slab measuring 3m wide and 6m high, with a thickness of 25-30cm.

In the case of the monument at Nilaskal, there are definite astronomical alignments incorporated in its layout. Many such pairings for sunrise and sunset on the longest as well as the shortest days of the year have been observed for this stone alignment. We do not know if this was meant to be an observing device for keeping time or merely a symbolic sightline of relevance to the culture that erected it.

Sometimes, another term – avenue is used in connection with arrangements of menhirs. For the purpose of this discussion, we treat both these terms interchangeably.

g. Endemic forms

Most of the megalith forms outlined above are found distributed at several locations throughout the subcontinent. In fact some forms, like the portholed dolmen, or the menhir, are quite common across many locations in the world. However there are some unique forms, dictated no doubt by limitations of locally available material, which are endemic to some parts of India.

For instance, in the region that stretches from southern coastal Karnataka to Kerala, we find the relatively soft, porous laterite rock in abundance. Laterite cannot be dressed to obtain thin slabs like granite, or even sandstone. The megalith builders of these regions, when confronted with the problem of erecting monuments in the spirit of megalithic monuments elsewhere, seem to have come up with ingenious solutions that are unique to this geographical region.

One of the megalith type encountered here is the rock-cut burial chamber. Figure 26 shows such a rock cut burial monument located at Kattankampal, near Thrissur in Kerala. Four rectangular chambers have been scooped from the laterite rock and symmetrically arranged around a sunken court, which provided access to these. Other such monuments located at Kandanasserry near Thrissur, are hemispherical in excavation and have a circular hole in the roof of the chamber, apart from a square opening from the sunken court. These chambers held cremated remains of bones etc. in urns that were placed on vessel stands inside.

Yet another unique endemic form found commonly in northern and central Kerala is the kudakkal or “umbrella stone”. This can be seen as an ingenious variation on the dolmen. Four curved and inclined clinostats – thick members made of laterite are assembled to make a tapering cone like structure, which is capped by an artistically carved capstone that is nearly hemispherical. The combined appearance of these members resembles an umbrella or a mushroom. Generally, these mark the spot of urn or pit burials. There is also the topikal or the hat stone, which is a hemispherical laterite capstone directly placed on the ground above a burial.

Apart from these, there are hood stones, multiple hood stones etc. that are encountered in this same region. All these endemic monument forms will be discussed separately in the next chapter.

4. Distribution of the various megalith types

All the megalith types enumerated and discussed above are found on the Indian subcontinent. However their distribution varies with geographical location within the subcontinent. Robert Brubaker has compiled locational data of the various megalith forms reported up to 1994. Cairns and stone circles are by far the most widely distributed monument type across the range of occurrence. As mentioned, they also form the most commonly occurring type in the Vidarbha region of Maharashtra, where other forms are sparingly encountered. Cists, dolmenoid cists and dolmens, too are widely distributed throughout the range where megaliths are found, though they seem to be less numerous than cairns and stone circles. Of course, whether a cist or a pit burial exists below a cairn can be verified only by excavation, therefore the above statement has to be taken in this context. Menhirs, though rarer than the above types, are also found across the range of megaliths, though they are seen in sepulchral and non-sepulchral contexts in different regions, as already noted. Stone alignments seem quite rare, though the range occupied by these have now been extended into southern Karnataka and Kerala, from earlier stated limits within Andhra Pradesh and northern Karnataka. There are also numerous reports of alignments from Jharkhand and Bihar and explorations may well change the known range of these megalithic features. Kudakkals, topikals and other endemic features seem limited to Kerala and rock cut burials are seen in southern coastal Karnataka apart from Kerala.

5.Discussion

The above account outlines the main forms that megaliths assume in the Indian subcontinent and broadly outlines their distribution. However, this forms only an introduction to this fascinating field of enquiry into the earliest monumental constructions in stone on the Indian subcontinent. A fastidious student of this subject has tremendous scope for understanding better the purpose of erection of the various megalith forms, possible evolution and development of these forms and adaptation to different geographical regions.

One of the problems that has vexed those who study megaliths is the remarkable similarity in the forms of megaliths in widely separated geographical regions, such as the similarity between megaliths such as portholed dolmens in India and Europe. Adding to this confusion is the different dates assigned to megaliths in these two regions. The European megaliths are dated to an earlier period and this had sparked off what is known as a “diffusion theory” of how the cultural practice had diffused from one region to another. Today, the archaeological community favours an alternative of independent origins for similar megalith forms at different places, but this certainly is a problem that merits a thorough investigation.

As discussed in the previous chapter, there is considerable uncertainty in the chronology of the Indian megaliths, with the standard view that the period of erection of megaliths coincided with the south Indian Iron Age being challenged in recent times. Given the paucity of reliable dates, it might be best to investigate this problem by minutely studying the monuments themselves. Comparative study of small details, like the form and workmanship of portholes and their variants, or the finished edges of the slabs of dolmens etc. contain clues of how the raw material was extracted and processed and is an important area that could at least partly help resolve theproblems of origin and evolution of megaliths. The relationship of megaliths to later architecture in the subcontinent is also an exciting line of enquiry worth following. It has been noticed quite early on that many Buddhist stupas and Jain temples are situated quite close to fields of megaliths. The case of the Amaravati stupa is only one of several instances where stupas are seen built very close to (and sometimes even on top of) pre-existing megaliths. Recent work has shown megaliths scattered among Hindu temples in the Malaprabha Valley in Karnataka, too. More such sites where later religious monuments are found in close proximity to megaliths must be studied and investigated for possible continuity in traditions of monument-building.

Attention had been called to the similarity in form of the cairn to the stupa. Stella Kramrisch, in her masterful study of the Hindu temple has also mentioned that the dolmen is the inspiration for the flat-roofed shrine. Recent work at sites in the Malaprabha Valley has shown that the early religious landscapes of the Valley were probably commemorative in nature, taking forward the tradition of the megaliths.

The student is encouraged to visit the sites and study megaliths and deliberate these lines of enquiry of origin of monument-building on the subcontinent.

6.Conclusion

In this chapter, we have seen the main forms of megaliths occurring on the Indian context in this chapter, and their broad distribution in the subcontinent. In the next chapter, we will cast a glance at some unique megalithic forms that are endemic to certain regions, like the megaliths of central and northern Kerala, which form a unique sub-group of their own.

Web links

• http://www.megalithindia.in/
• http://www.frontline.in/arts-and-culture/heritage/megalithic-wonder/article4265456.ece
• http://www.saigan.com/heritage/swaminathan/sittannavasal/megalith.html
• http://www.tifr.res.in/~archaeo/
• http://archive.archaeology.org/1005/etc/india.html
• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MAyJGi_Eg04
• http://www.megalithic.co.uk/

Bibliography

• Allchin, F. R. 1956. The Stone Alignments of Southern Hyderabad.Man Vol. 56: 133-136.
• Bauer, A. M. 2015. Before Vijayanagara: Prehistoric Landscapes and Politics in the Tungabhadra Basin. Manohar, New Delhi.
• Brubaker, R. 2001. Aspects of Mortuary Variability in the South Indian Iron Age. Bulletin of the Deccan College Postgraduate Research Institute, 60-61, Deccan College, Pune, 253-302.
• Menon, S. M. 2012.Ancient Stone Riddles: Megaliths of the Indian Subcontinent.Manipal University Press, Manipal.
• Moorti, U. S. 1994.Megalithic Culture of South India: Socio-Economic Perspectives.Ganga Kaveri Publishing House, Varanasi.
• Moorti, U. S. 2008. Megaliths, in Pearsall, D. M. (ed.), Encyclopedia of Archaeology. Academic Press, New York.
• Rao, B. K. G. 1972.The Megalithic Culture in South India.Prasaranga, University of Mysore, Mysore.
• Ruggles, C. 1999.Astronomy in Prehistoric Britain and Ireland. Yale University Press, New Haven and London.