Boivin

Sensual, Material, and Technological Understanding: Exploring Prehistoric Soundscapes in
South India
Author(s): Nicole Boivin, Adam Brumm, Helen Lewis, Dave Robinson and Ravi Korisettar
Source: The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, Vol. 13, No. 2 (Jun., 2007), pp.
267-294
Published by: Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4622949 .
Accessed: 06/05/2014 05:49
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
.
Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve
and extend access to The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 193.205.100.90 on Tue, 6 May 2014 05:50:00 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Sensual, material,
and
technological und erstand ing:
exploring prehistoric
sound scapes
in south I nd ia
NI COLE BOI VI N
University of Cambrid ge
ADAM BRUMM
Australian National
University
HELEN
LEWI s
University College
Dublin
DAVE
RoBI NSON
University of
Bristol
RAVI KORI SETTAR Karnatak
University
Recent
years
have witnessed an increased interest within
archaeology
in the non-visual
senses,
and
particularly
sound . To
d ate, however,
most stud ies have focused on the evid ence for musical
instruments and the acoustic
properties
of
special
structures and
spaces,
like monuments and caves.
This
stud y reports
on further evid ence for
special
musical activities at the
prehistoric
site of
Sanganakallu-Kupgal
in south
I nd ia,
but then alsomoves on toa d iscussion of the acoustic
d imension of more mund ane Neolithic
technological
and
prod uctive activities,
like
flint-knapping,
axe-grind ing,
and
crop prod uction.
I t focuses on the evid ence for links between suchactivities at
Sanganakallu-Kupgal,
based on shared
material, gestural,
and acoustic
properties,
and
argues
that
the
hammering
of
ringing
rocks tomake musicwas
only
one
aspect
of a wid er Southern Neolithic
cultural
propensity
toad d ress
technological
and ritual
requirements by applying
stone
against
stone.
The article
attempts
to
bring
torecent d iscussions of the senses an awareness of the
materiality
of
sensory experience, which, d espite
recent interest in the
bod y,
remains
marginalized
in theoretical
accounts.
Five kilometres northeast of the town of
Bellary
in mid eastern
Karnataka,
south
I nd ia,
lies a concentration of ancient sites focused on a
group
of
large granite
hills
(Fig.
i).
Here,
many
thousand s of
years ago, prehistoricgroups
sheltered in
simple
round huts
and rock
crevices,
hunted and
kept
animals,
and mind ed some of southI nd ia's first
crops. They
fashioned
pots
and crud e animal
figurines
out of
clay,
and tools out of
assorted varieties of local stone.
They
came and went in the course of
d aily
and annual
cycles
that were
synchronized
withthe seasonal
changes
of
plants,
animals, sun,
and rain.
Tod ay
this same
area,
now
very
much
part
of a
global
market
economy,
is the site of
a
massive,
ind ustrialized exercise aimed at
extractingmany
thousand s of tons of lucra-
tive
granite
rock from the cluster of hills.
Archaeologists working
in the area torescue
its
prehistoric
remains before
they
are
consigned
tooblivion cannot but wond er at the
Journal
of
the
Royal Anthropological
I nstitute
(N.S.) 13, 267-294
@
I nstitute
2007
268 NI COLE
BOI VI N
ETAL.
I d v"
r.~~r d i~~:
....
........
-
C l ,)mh M
---.l,.,I
'1
.
I I on ic-t ru
:':;i
i ? 7
............
.-:::
!!!!!iiiiiiiii
i
!!
.....;
E
1'F''Lii~iiiiiii!i:?,::-:,il:!77
i
I
Mlometr
.Hf:1a.'.hgwd
:::"i
!ii!ir{!)!
Figure
1.
Map showing
the
Sanganakallu-Kupgal area,
and its location within the I nd ian
subcontinent.
Grey
shad ed areas
represent
d olerite
d ykes,
all of whichare found on
Hiregud d a.
Boxed area is
enlarged
in
Figure
2.
transformation. Where once small
village
hamlets nestled
quietly
above the surround -
ingplain, tod ay
enormous d iesel trucks crash
up
and d own the
slopes
on road s that lie
like
ever-multiplying
scars on the hills. The
omnipresent
sound of
hammering
and
machinery
is broken
only by
the
rupture
of
earth-shakingexplosions
as entire hillsid es
are
brought slid ing
d own.
This
picture
-
of a
noisy, jarringpresent replacing
a
tranquil past
- is a common one.
I t is
also,
perhaps, mislead ing.
While
it is true that ind ustrial
technologies may
often be
Journal
of
the
I nstitute
(N.S.) 13, 267-294
@
I nstitute
zoo7
NI COLE BOI VI N ETAL. 269
associated withincreased sound levels
(Gold hahn
2002:
39),
this d oes not
necessarily
mean that
pre-ind ustrial period s
were
quiet.
I t
may
be
argued
that the
pasts
we create
are
inevitably quiet
and
peaceful
because we tosome
d egree
romanticize them -
against
the
reality
of a
hectically paced , technology-filled
mod ern
life,
we contrast an
id yllic
'remembered ' past
when life was
simple
and
tranquil.
Alsoat
play,
however,
is a
stead fast Western bias toward s the visual
(Levin 1993;
Ong
1969)
that has left us withno
past
sound s
(or, ind eed ,
other non-visual
sensations)
to
imagine
at all.
I n recent
years,
however,
archaeologists
have
begun, slowly,
to
recognize
the
prob-
lematicinfluence of a
visually
biased
perspective
on their
interpretations
of the
past.
I n
d oing
so,
they
have been
very
muchinfluenced
by
an increased interest in the
bod y
and
the senses within related
d isciplines
like
anthropology, history, sociology,
and
philoso-
phy.
Stud ies in these field s have d rawn attention tothe
way
in whichthe social sciences
have often overlooked the
bod y,
and
particularly
its more visceral and sensual
aspects
(e.g.
Connerton
1989;
Csord as
1990; Jackson 1989;
Lakoff &
Johnson 1999; Scheper-
Hughes
& Lock
1987;
Stoller
1989).
Muchrecent work in the social sciences and
humanities has thus stressed embod iment and the
senses,
and has d rawn
upon phe-
nomenological
and
experiential approaches
tod emonstrate the
ways
in whichthe
bod y
and
sensory experience
bothconstitute and are constituted
by
social and cultural
world s
(e.g.
Classen
1993;
Csord as
1990o;
Howes
1991; Jackson 1989;
Stoller
1989).
Particular interest has been
placed
on the
importance
of sound
(e.g. Buckley 1998;
Bull & Back
2003;
Drobnick
2004;
Erlmann
2004).
Theorists from numerous field s -
anthropology, linguistics, philosophy,
art
history,
cultural
stud ies,
and ethnomusicol-
ogy amongst
them - share a common concern withthe social nature and
meaning
of
sound and withthe
significance
of cultural
engagements
withand
through
the sonic
world .
They
have forward ed the view that sound s are not
merely pieces
of
aud itory
information tobe
processed
and
d iscard ed ,
but alsofunction as
purveyors
and ind i-
cators of cultural
memory, heritage,
and
id entity
(Moore 2003).
The sound s we are
nurtured withand whichwe have imbued withcultural
meaning
affect the manner in
whichwe
perceive
and
engage
withthe world and relate
socially
toothers in
ways
that
generally gounrecognized .
This is
partly
tod owiththe social
complexity
of sound s. No
sound has an inherent
meaning;
all sound s are
interpreted accord ing
tothe
particular
social and cultural
background s
of the hearers. Flatulence can
repel
and
amuse,
yet
wind -breaking
sound s in some contexts
symbolize
sexual intercourse or
d eath,
and
even offer
cuttingpolitical critiques (Migone
2004).
What is noise for
some, therefore,
is sound for others.
Skog
(1998),
for
example,
d iscusses how in
nineteenth-century
Java
ind ivid uals strove tocontrol their emotions
and
project
an inner
calm;
tobe
halus,
or
pure
and
refined ,
was tobe in tune withthe
harmony
of the universe. The soft chimes of
gamelan gongs
embod ied suchd ivine
concepts.
For
visitingEuropeans,
however,
gamelan
musicwas
merely
clamorous and
annoying. Similarly,
in
nineteenth-century
antebellum
America,
the sound s of
ind ustry
-
locomotives, factories,
machines
-
instilled in Northerners a sense of satisfaction and
prid e
in their
technological progress
and
mod ernity (M.M. Smith2003). I n the South,
on the other hand , where slaves und ertook muchof the labour of machines, the sound
of
ind ustry
was
merely cacophonous
noise:the antithesis of a
quiet plantation
life.
The often
d eeply
affective emotional
qualities
of sound
imprint
themselves on
human consciousness and memories. This
phenomenon
is
particularly
well d emon-
strated
by
Feld 's (1982; 1996) research
amongst
the Kaluli of the Southern
Highland s
of
Papua
New Guinea, whose
speech
and musicare
shaped by
the sound s of the
Journal of
the
I nstitute (N.S.) 13, 267-294
?
I nstitute 2007
270 NI COLE BOI VI N ET AL.
surround ing
rainforest. Tothe
Kaluli,
there are no d iscrete sound s tobe heard in
isolation;
all sound s are mixed intoan
interlockingsound scape
that embod ies a mul-
titud e of
meanings
and
d eeply
felt sentiments
(Feld 1982:3; 1996:ioo).
The
songs
and
sound s of rainforest
bird s,
in
particular,
feature melod ies and timbres associated with
sad ness and
grief.
Bird s are believed tobe the
spirits
or reflections of d eceased Kaluli.
During
funerals,
mourners
merge
bird sound s withmelod ic
weeping
in
profound ly
movingexpressions
of sorrow. The
highly
emotional state instilled
by
this
weeping
is
the closest Kaluli come to
experiencing
the transformation of life into
d eath,
literally
'becoming
a bird '
(Feld 1982:14).
Sound theorists alsod emonstrate the extent towhichsound s can foster a sense of
community
and
belonging
and
shape
the world views of their hearers. The sound s of
village
bells in
nineteenth-century
rural
France,
for
instance,
were instrumental in
establishing
the cultural and historical
patterns
of
village
life in this era
(Corbin 2003;
see alsoM.M. Smith
2003).
Bell
peals regulated people's
movements
throughout
the
d ay. They
comforted and
assuaged villagers
because bells were believed tocleanse and
purify
the air withtheir
sanctity, d riving
off
d emons, witches,
and other aerial calami-
ties and
summoningangels
from heaven. Bell sound s alsohad a
key
historical role to
play
in
red ucingmobility
and
creating
a sense of
territoriality among
French
villagers.
I nd eed ,
towand er outsid e the
aud itory range
of the
village
tower bell was torisk not
hearing
its
warning
alarms in times of
d anger,
or tomiss the announcements for
religious
services. Bell
sound s, therefore,
d id more than instil in
people
a sense of time
and of
place; they 'shaped
the
habitud s
of a
community
or,
if
you
will,
its culture of the
senses.
They
served toanchor
localism,
impartingd epth
tothe d esire for rooted ness
and
offering
the
peace
of
near,
well-d efined horizons'
(Corbin 2003:118-19).
The above
examples suggest
that the bias toward s the ocular
places
serious limita-
tions on our
capacity
tounravel the
meanings
of
many
forms of social
behaviour,
past
and
present
(Bull
& Back
2003).
Toknow the world
through
vision is
fund amentally
d ifferent from
knowing
the world
through
sound . Yet even within
aud itory
culture
there are
preconceptions
as towhat constitutes sound and what constitutes noise. The
cultural stress in Western
thought
is on
read ing
and
hearing
text and verbal
speech
-
d istrust of non-verbal sound s
(i.e. hollers,
whoops,
hubbubs)
has a
long
historical
ped igree
(B.R.
Smith
2003).
For
many
of
us,
the
myriad
non-verbal sound s of
everyd ay
life
-
the
clacking
of
keyboard s,
rattle of
refrigerators,
and intermittent throb of com-
puter
hard d rives - constitute a fund amental
part
of our sonicenvironment.
However,
we are often unaware
of,
or fail toreflect
upon,
the
meanings
of these sound s and the
effects
they
have on our lives. The visual d ominates how we
experience reality,
and
when we choose tohear we often d oso
selectively
and withmuchcultural
baggage.
Materiality
and the
'critique
of
representation'
These various
investigations
of sound
may
be und erstood as
part
of a wid er
'critique
of
representation'
within the humanities and social sciences. This
critique
has taken issue
withthe
over-emphasis
on
language, ord er, and the abstract
resulting
from the
post-
war
linguistic
turn in the social sciences and humanities (Jackson 1996;
Stoller
1989).
None the less, d espite
a
recognition
that the id eal has often been
privileged
over the
material, not
only recently
but
throughout
the
history
of Western
thought, many
of
these stud ies have continued to
ignore
the material world , and the role
played by
environments, artefacts, and
technologies
in embod ied and
sensory experience.
Journal of
the
I nstitute (N.S.) 13, 267-294
?
I nstitute
2007
Archaeology, perhaps
more than
any
other
field ,
hold s the
potential
toresolve this
bias. Not
only
have
archaeologists begun recently
to
pay
attention to
sensory experience
(e.g.
Boivin &
Owoc2004; Devereux
2ool;
Hamilakis,
Pluciennik &
Tarlow 2002; Jones
&
MacGregor
2002;
Ouzman
2001;
Rainbird
2002a; 2002b),
but
they
have,
more
impor-
tantly,
a
longhistory
of
ad d ressing
the material world .
Archaeologists
have
given
a
great
d eal of consid eration tothe role of material culture in human
society,
and while
they,
too,
have taken a
linguistic
turn,
and stressed
semiotic,
symbolic,
and
post-structuralist
approaches (e.g.
Hod d er
1991; Tilley 199o),
more recent theoretical d iscussions have
begun
to
point
out the serious
problems
inherent in
applyinglanguage-based
approaches
tothe material world
(e.g.
Boivin
2oo4b;
Olsen
2003).
Recent interest in the
senses in
archaeology may
be seen as
part
of a
growingrecognition
that
linguistic
approaches
fail toad d ress what is in fact most salient about the material world :its
materiality.
Thus,
while
they
have sofar mad e
only
minor inroad s intothe
project,
archaeologists
are in an excellent
position
to
d evelop
more holistictheories of human
society
that take intoaccount not
only
human bod ies and
senses,
but alsothe
physicality
of a material environment that is
d eeply implicated
in most if not all human
projects.
This article offers an
attempt
toconsid er the senses in relation not
only
tocultural
concepts
and social
id entities,
but alsoto
technologies
and material environments. I t
ad d resses several senses
beyond
vision,
but focuses in
particular
on
sound ,
not
only
because available evid ence
points
in this
d irection,
but alsobecause it
appears
tohave
been a
particularly
notable
aspect
of the
sensory
environment in
question.
The article
follows on from an initial
foray
intothe issue of sound in relation torock art in the area
d escribed at the outset of this
d iscussion,
known as
Sanganakallu-Kupgal
(Boivin
2004c).
I n the
interim,
other
interesting
d iscoveries
relating
tothe acoustics of sites at
Sanganakallu-Kupgal
have been
mad e,
and muchd iscussion
concerning
the role of
sound in
prehistoric
life has taken
place amongst
the authors.
The
find ings
and
interpretations
d iscussed here constitute
part
of the
ongoing
researchthat is
being
carried out
by
the
Sanganakallu-Kupgal Archaeological Project
(Boivin,
Korisettar & Fuller
2005; Fuller,
Boivin & Korisettar in
press;
Fuller,
Korisettar
& Venkatasbbaiah
2001).
The article ad d resses new
find ings relating
tosound features
and their associated
chronology, includ ingnewly
d iscovered rock
gongs
in the
Sanganakallu-Kupgal
area. I t thus
picks up
on a d iscussion of rock
gongs
and musical
sound that took
place
on the
pages
of this
journal
from the
1950s
tothe
1970s (Fagg
1956;
Pad d ayya
1976;
Vaughan
1962), but,
in
keeping
withtheoretical
d evelopments
since
then,
alsomoves
beyond gongs
and musictoa d iscussion of more
general aspects
of
sound ,
as well other
aspects
of
sensory experience
in southI nd ian
prehistory.
Ultimately,
it
argues
that sound - however obvious its
importance
at
Sanganakallu-
Kupgal
-
was,
like the visible
realm,
only
one
component
of a
sensorily
richand
synaestheticexperience
that d rew on various senses. I t was
part
of a
sensorily experi-
enced and
materially
constituted world in which
bod ily engagement, technological
activity,
cultural
knowled ge,
and social
id entity
were enmeshed intoa seamless whole.
The
archaeological sequence
at
Sanganakallu-Kupgal
The
Sanganakallu-Kupgal
area
comprises
a series of
granitic
hills that
outcrop
from a
relatively
flat
surround ing plain
in the d istrict of
Bellary
in the southern Deccan
plateau (Fig. 1).
The
large,
bould er-strewn hills constitute a d ramaticfeature in the
land scape,
and have attracted human
activity
since at least the Mesolithic
period
(Ansari &
Nagaraja
Rao1969; Foote 1916; Sankalia 1969; Subbarao1948; see Table
1).
I n
Journal
of
the
I nstitute (N.S.) 13, 267-294
?
I nstitute
200oo7
272 NI COLE BOI VI N ETAL.
particular,
the hill known as
Hiregud d a
(also
Kupgal
Hill or Peacock
Hill)
appears
to
have become an
important
centre for
quarrying
and
technological
activities associated
with the
prod uction
and
probable
d istribution of
ed ge-ground
axes in the late
Neolithicand
possibly Early
I ron
Age period s'
(Boivin
et al.
2005; Brumm,
Boivin &
Fullagar
2006; Brumm, Boivin, Korisettar,
Koshy
& Whittaker
2007;
Foote
1916).
This
phase
of more intensive axe
prod uction (approximately
1400-1200 BC)
is
preced ed by
an earlier Neolithic
phase,
at the
beginning
of whichstill
enigmatic,
and
probably
ritualized ,
d ung-burning
activities resulted in the creation of a number of ashmound s
on and around the hills
(from
approximately
1900-1700oo
BC;
Allchin
1963;
Boivin
2oo4a;
Mujumd ar
&
Rajaguru
1966).
I t is followed
by,
and ind eed
probably partially overlaps
with,
an I ron
Age phase
in whichthese earlier ash'monuments'
(Boivin
2oo4a:
250)
were
replaced by
monuments of stone
(1200oo-loo
AD).
The latter are
part
of a trad ition
of
megalith-build ing
in southI nd ia
(Sund ara 1975)
that saw the creation of a number
of stone circles and
stand ing
stone monuments on the
plain surround ing
the
granitic
hills of
Sanganakallu-Kupgal.
Most of the
prehistoric
activities outlined above involved
relatively
intensive
occupation
of the
granite
hills,
though
the
probability
that this
occupation
was often
cyclical (probably
seasonal)
and sometimes intermittent seems
high
(Fuller et
al.
2001).
This would have involved
crop prod uction
as well as
pastoral
Table 1.
Preliminary chronological
mod el of main
period s
of
prehistoricoccupation
at
Sanganakallu-Kupgal (see
Fuller et
al.
in
press
for
d etails).
Period
Occupation
and activities in
Sanganakallu-Kupgal
area
??*
I ntermittent site
occupation
on
hilltop
and
plain. Highmobility
Mesolithic and intensive
hunting
and
gatheringeconomy.
Creation of rock
1900 paintings
at some sites
(?).
1900oo Ad option
of an
increasingly
settled
lifestyle
and establishment of
NeolithicAt
hilltop 'village'
sites. Cultivation of millets and
pulses, along
withwheat and
barley, accompanied by
cattle and
sheep/goat
pastoralism.
Creation of ashmound s. I ntensive stone on stone
activities
begin (grind ing, cupule creation). Beginnings
of
1700 petroglyph/bruising
and rock
gongcreation(?).
1700
Ashmound creation ceases.
Village occupation
continues.
NeolithicBt
1400
1400
I ntensification of craft
prod uction
and trad e
activity. Specialized
Megalithic
stone axe
workshops
and intensive
quarrying
and axe
Transition
prod uction
at
Hiregud d a. Megalithicpottery
and burials
begin.
1200
1200 All
hilltop villages
aband oned . Settlement moves onto
plain.
Classic I ntensive
megalithprod uction
on
plain.
I ron introd uced
c.8oo
Megalithic/Early
BC. Stone-on-stone activities less intensive.
I ron
Age
?)?t
* Local d ates for the
beginning
and end of the
sequence
remain unclear.
t
Neolithic'A' and
'B' are local
d esignations
and
may
be
susceptible
to
change
withfurther
investigations
and
d ating.
Journal of
the
I nstitute
(N.S.) 13, 267-294
@
I nstitute 2007
activities that seem tohave been
culturally
stressed .
Subsequently,
at some
point
in the
Early
I ron
Age, occupation
moved
largely
off the hills and ontothe
surround ingplain,
leavingrelatively pristine prehistoric
sites
(see
especially
Foote
1916)
until the ad vent of
the mod ern
quarrying
activities d escribed at the outset of this article.
The
Sanganakallu-Kupgal sound scape
Present-d ay
commercial
quarrying
activities interfere with
attempts
toreconstruct and
und erstand
prehistoricsound scapes
in the
Sanganakallu-Kupgal area.'Ringing
rocks' or
'rock
gongs'
(which
emit bell-like sound s when
struck;
see Boivin
2004c; Devereux 2001;
Fagg
1956)2 survive
in
places,
but others have
und oubted ly
been
d estroyed
in the course
of the extensive
quarrying.
The near continuous sound of
quarrying
activities
prod uced
by
humans, machines,
and
explosions
furthermore
seriously
confound s
attempts
to
und erstand the sound
properties
of
prehistoric
cultural and natural
land scapes.
None the
less,just
as still und isturbed tracts of terraced land and consistent viewshed s allow
insights
into
prehistoricland scapes
at
Sanganakallu-Kupgal, survivingringing
rocks and other
features,
as well as
holid ays
that
interrupt
the sound of
quarrying,
enable
recognition
of
occasional echoes of
past sound scapes.
For
example, d uring
moments of relative
quiet
in
the
Sanganakallu-Kupgal
hills an
interesting
characteristicof the local
sound scape
became clear. At
d usk,
after the
quarry
labourers had d eserted the
hills,
it was
possible
to
hear,
carried
clearly through
the
air,
the intimate sound s of
everyd ay
life from the small
farmingvillages
out on the
plain
below.
Remarkably, though
the settlements lie at a
d istance of a kilometre or sometimes more from the
hills,
ind ivid ual voices and
even,
sometimes,
the sound s of
particular
d omesticactivities could be mad e out. While the
capacity
of the Deccan
land scape
toenable views over substantial d istances has been
noted ,
however
(see
references in Boivin
2004a),
this
equally significant propensity
for
conveying
sound s over
long
d istances has
garnered
little attention. I t
likely
relates tothe
reflection of sound waves offthe bare
granite
surfaces of the
hills,
whichwould be
expected
toresult in an intensification of sound
(see
Cross & Watson
2oo6
for a
d escription
of this
effect).
Excavation has revealed that
many
Neolithicremains at
Sanganakallu-Kupgal
sit
d irectly
on
top
of
exposed
bed rock
surfaces,
ind icating
that areas of
granite exposure may
have been even more substantial
d uring
the Neolithic
period .
None the
less,
central Deccan
sound scapes
have not
gone entirely unreported
in the
archaeological
literature,
thanks tothe
presence
of
ringing
rocks of the
type
mentioned
above. These constitute another
important
feature of the
granite
hills of the central
Deccan
(Boivin
2oo04c;
Pad d ayya 1976).
The same bare stone and
sparse vegetation
that
are
likely
cond ucive to
carrying
sound over
long
d istances have alsoresulted in the
creation of rock
gongs
that,
when struck withstones or other
materials,
emit remark-
able
ringing
tones.
Ringing
rocks marked with
multiple cupules evincing
their use as
gongs
are found on
many
hills in the central
Deccan,
amongst
both
granite
and d olerite
outcrops.
Both
types
of stone
appear
tohave sonic
properties,
and the
ringing
sound s
are
prod uced
when the rocks are
supported by
other rocks rather than solid
earth,
and
are hence free tovibrate (see alsoDevereux 2001; Fagg1956). Hitting
the rocks in
d ifferent
places
and withd ifferent sizes of stones
prod uces
a
variety
of tones, and
enables the creation of'rock music' (Boivin 2oo4c).
New
ringing
rock d iscoveries at
Sanganakallu-Kupgal
While
ringing
rocks d iscovered in the
Sanganakallu-Kupgal
area
d uringpreliminary
survey
have
alread y
been
reported (Boivin 2004c), subsequent
more d etailed
survey
has
]ournal
of
the
I nstitute (N.S.) 13, 267-294
?
I nstitute 2007
not
only
enabled these tobe
properly mapped ,
but has more
importantly
led tothe
d iscovery
of a number of
very interesting
ad d itional
ringing
rock features
(see
Fig.
2).
Like the
previously
d escribed
examples,
the various new
examples
have all been found
on
Hiregud d a (Kupgal
Hill),
and includ e some ad d itional
ringing
rocks from the
large
d olerite
d yke
at whichthe earlier
examples
were observed
(see
Figs
3
and
4).
Of
particular
note is a
large, flat-topped ringing
rock with
patinated cupules
that
appears
tohave been
artificially
raised
up
ontosmaller
bould ers,
perhaps
to
prod uce
a more
effective
ringing
sound
(Ringing
Rock
5
in
Fig.
2;
see also
Figs
4
and
5).
The stone is
situated
part-way
d own the enormous d olerite
d yke upon
whichmuchof the rock art
of
Hiregud d a,
and ind eed
Sanganakallu-Kupgal
as a
whole,
is concentrated . I t
occupies
a flat
platform
that
appears
tohave been
artificially
cleared ,
and tohave been the focus
of
particularly
intensive rock art
prod uction (see Figs
4
and
6). Depictions
of bulls and
anthropomorphs, probably representing
a
range
of
chronological period s,
are common
in the immed iate area.
Of
equal,
if not
greater,
interest has been the
d iscovery, subsequent
tothe 2002
season,
of
ringing
rocks
beyond
the confines of the above-mentioned d olerite
d yke.
One of these is a
unique granite example
situated near the summit of the south
peak
of
Hiregud d a
(an
area known as Area
B), atop
a d istinctive
granite pillar (Ringing
Rock 8
in
Fig.
2).
Careful
climbingpart-way up
the
pillar
lead s toa small flat area where a
flat-topped , triangular
bould er sits nestled beneaththe face of the rock
(Fig.
7).
The
d ykerit
d yk
A.e-
,
\?a
'? Reservoir
4 >
,7
W
7/-:
I ~::
2
/z i~
Figure
2.
Map showing
locations of new
ringing
rock sites at
Hiregud d a
and related
archaeological
areas. Area A is an
occupation
and lithic
prod uction
area and
represents
the most
intensively
occupied
site on
Hiregud d a. Ringing
Rocks 1-6 are located in an area of concentrated rock art on the
main
d yke. Ringing
Rock
7 represents
two
ringing
rocks found in association witha stone circle in
Area
D,
while
Ringing
Rock 8 is located on a
granite pillar
in Area B.
Journal of
the
I nstitute
(N.S.) 13, 267-294
@
I nstitute
2007
NI COLE BOI VI N ET AL. 275
Figure
3.
Example
of new
ringing
rock d iscovered on the main d olerite
d yke
at
Hiregud d a.
The
cupule alignment
has been
prod uced through
the
repeated percussion
of the stone at
particular
points.
...........
. . ...
.... ...
oxso
:4
..... ...... . .... .......
.. ... .. ..........
. . ........ .... ... ... ........ .... .... ...
Figure
4. Cleared
platform
on the main d olerite
d yke
at
Hiregud d a (Locus 1).
The
large, flat-topped
rock raised
up
ontosmall bould ers on the
platform
is a
ringing
rock
(Ringing
Rock s in
Fig. 2).
The
large bruising
of a crane
(from
Panel
7011)
can be seen behind the
ringingrock,
tothe
right.
bould er
appears
tohave been
prod uced through
natural
weathering
of the
granite
stone,
as a result of the same
process
of
weatheringalongjoints
that has
prod uced
the
d istinctive bould er formations of the Deccan
plateau granite
tors. I t is marked
along
its
visible
ed ges
withsubstantial
cupules
that have
clearly
been
prod uced by repeated
banging
of the rock tocreate
ringing
sound s. The area around the
pillar
has seen
substantial mod ification
through
the creation of a
system
of
very
small terraces that
bear evid ence of Neolithicstone tool
prod uction.
A number of the d olerite bould ers
that
appear naturally
and in terrace walls in this area bear
petroglyphs (engravings
rather than the usual
bruisings), mostly
of
highly stylized
bulls
(Fig. 8).
The entire area
is
immed iately ad jacent
toa small d olerite
d yke
that
appears
tohave been
heavily
quarried d uring
the Neolithic
period (see
Boivin et al.
2005).
Journal of
the
I nstitute
(N.S.) 13, 267-294
@
I nstitute
2007
276 NI COLE BOI VlN ET AL.
....
i i
.... ..........
i
ii~iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii~ i~iiiiiiKii mwiii !!~

,::::::::::.:::,:,M .0:
iiiiiiiiiiiiiii!!iii~iR
.
M.iiK
Figure
5. Close
up
of
ringing
rock shown in
Figure 4.
Patinated
cupules
are visible.
The
granite pillar
rock
gong
in Area B at
Hiregud d a
is not the
only ringing
rock
d iscovered
beyond
the area of concentrated rock art id entified in the 2002 season on
Hiregud d a's largest
d olerite
d yke.
At the base of an
upland valley running
between the
twomain
peaks
of
Hiregud d a
(in
what is known as Area
D),
twoad d itional
ringing
rocks were
d iscovered ,
this time in association witha stone circle
(grouped together
as
Ringing
Rock
7
in
Fig.
2;
see also
Fig.
9).
The tworocks are similar in size and
shape,
and
appear
tohave been carried d own from the
large
d olerite
d yke
(which
runs
along
the
rid ge
above)
where the earlier
ringing
rock d iscoveries were mad e. Bothstones are
shaped
rather like
angular
bananas -
they
are
long
and
roughly triangular
in cross-
section
(see
Fig.
lo)
- and are situated in a rather
symmetrical arrangement
at the
ed ges
of the stone circle
(see Fig.
9).
The southeast stone
(Figs
loa
and
c)
bears nine visible
cupules,
and still
rings
when struck. The northeast stone
(Figs
lob
and
d )
is in contrast
embed d ed within the
ground
and broken
transversely
at one
end ,
and
probably
for
these reasons d oes not
ring.
I ts
cupules (Fig.
11), however,
are
patinated , ind icating
that
it was last used as a
gong
some time
ago.
While the
purpose
of the stone circle
Journal of
the
I nstitute
(N.S.) 13, 267-294
@
I nstitute
2007
10 cm
Figure
6. I nterlinked bull motif found on a bould er at the
ed ge
of the cleared
platform
shown in
Figure 4 (element
from Panel
7038,
Locus
1).
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . .
. ... ...... ....
... . . . ....
. . ...........
........... ......... ...
..... . . . . . . .
... .. . ...... ... .. ... ...
.... .. . ...
Figure
7.
Ringing
Rock 8 in
Figure
2. The
upper
face of the bould er measures
approximately
0.8
x
0.9
x
0.9 m,
while its
height
is
approximately 30
cm. The size of the
cupules
is
generally 10o
cm
wid e and
up
to
5
cm
d eep.
unfortunately
remains rather
enigmatic
at the
present
time, artefacts,
includ ing
several
infant
jar
burials,
suggest
that Area D is
Neolithic,
and rad iocarbon
samples
from a rare
well-stratified context in Area D have also
given
late Neolithicd ates
(1400-1200 BC).
While
we remain unclear as
regard s
the nature of the activities carried out in this
area,
it is
relatively
certain that its context is late
prehistoric.
Journal of
the
I nstitute
(N.S.) 13, 267-294
@
I nstitute
2007
10cm
Figure
8.
Stylized
bull motifs from Area B.
Top
left:Panel
7072. Top right:
Panel
7056.
Bottom:Panel
7060.
Chronology
and
interpretation
of the
ringing
rocks at
Hiregud d a
The ad d itional
ringing
rocks d iscovered on
Hiregud d a subsequent
tothe 2002 season
have been
important
for a number of reasons. One crucial one is that the d iscoveries
have
provid ed
ad d itional evid ence tosubstantiate the claim that the rock
gongs
ind icate
prehistoric
sound - or
music-making
activities. Bothrock art and rock
gongs
are
exceed ingly
d ifficult to
pin
d own
chronologically,
and the evid ence for the
perseverance
of rock art creation and rock
gong
use at
Hiregud d a up
tothe
present d ay
has
only
confound ed the
d ating
issue. Withboththe rock art and rock
gongs,
it has been clear
that we are
d ealing
witha
palimpsest
of activities in whichlater marks are
d irectly
associated
with, and ,
particularly
in the case of rock
gongs, actually
efface,
earlier ones.
Now, however,
a number of
clearly patinated
rock
gongcupules
have been
id entified ,
implying
that rock
gongringing
is not
just
a mod ern
phenomenon.
While
patination
rates are
d epend ent
on a
range
of factors and hence not
easily quantifiable (e.g.
Watchman
1998),
it is
unlikely, given
the
specificmineralogical composition
of the
Hiregud d a granite,
that full
patination
of such
d eeply
worn
grooves
would take less
than a few centuries
(Nick Drake,
pers. comm.).
The association of a
partially
buried
ringing
rock
bearingpatinated grooves
withwhat is
certainly
a
prehistoric
(and prob-
ably
late Neolithicor
early
I ron
Age)
stone circle in HGD Area D
provid es compelling
evid ence to
suggest
that,
in some cases at
least,
rock
gongs
are on the ord er of several
thousand s of
years
old . While the rock art withwhichthe earlier find s were associated
(Boivin 2004c) provid es
a less reliable
chronological
ind icator,
the find s of stone arte-
facts and
prehistoric
ceramics that characterize the areas where several of the new rock
gongs
are located
permit
a more secure
chronological assignment.
This
type
of asso-
ciation
appears
tobe found not
only
at
Hiregud d a,
but alsoin the
Shorapur
Doab in the
north
part
of
Karnataka,
where rock
gong
sites are alsoassociated withNeolithicand
I ron
Age
artefacts and sites
(Pad d ayya 1976).
Beyond substantiating
initial
interpretations regard ing
the d ate of the
ringing
rocks
at
Hiregud d a,
the new d iscoveries also
provid e
evid ence for the more
wid espread
occurrence of rock
gongs.
While rock
gongs
were
initially
found
only
on the main
d olerite
d yke,
in close association withrock
art,
they
have now been id entified at sites
off the
d yke. Ringing
rocks thus occur in a more d iverse set of contexts than
previously
thought, suggesting
that the activities that
they represent
were a more
ubiquitous
Journal of
the
I nstitute
(N.S.) 13, 267-294
?
I nstitute
2007
,
%
Trench 3 & 3aK
ci
I iD
ci
S 1401614017
withmed ium
cupules
O ith
med ium
ocupules
14000
1
1co0 p
Granite bould er
with.
small
cupules
main structural stones
Sringing
rocks
C
granite
d olerite
A
2.5m
6CP
Figure
9.
Partly
intact circular stone structure visible on the surface in Area D. The
ringing
rocks are
hatched
([4001]
and
[40051).
feature of
prehistoric
life than
previously supposed .
None the
less,
it is alsoworth
noting
that all but one of the rock
gongs
d iscovered at
Hiregud d a
sofar cluster around
an
upland valley,
and
may
therefore have been related toeachother
through
a linked set
of activities. I t is
possible
that the
valley
functioned as a kind of
prehistoric'aud itorium'
that enabled sound s tobe
amplified
at
particular
locations
(see Lawson, Scarre,
Cross
& Hills
1998),
and that
ringing
rocks in d ifferent areas were
'played '
at the same time on
certain occasions tocreate a more
spectacular
acoustic
experience.
This
type
of inter-
pretation
is of course
highly speculative,
but d oes
suggest
that more
systematicanalysis
of the
Hiregud d a ringing
rocks
by
a sound
specialist
would
potentially prove highly
reward ing.
While the increased
d iversity
of rock
gong
contexts
might suggest
a
greater ubiquity
of
ringing
rock
practices
than
initially supposed ,
it is worth
emphasizing
that no
ringing
rocks have
yet
been d iscovered at the main sites of
prehistoricoccupation
at
Journal of
the
I nstitute
(N.S.) 13, 267-294
@
I nstitute
2007
(a) (c)
(b)
(d )
VI A
Qj"0
!!i0: :i
t
Figure
10. I llustrations and
photos
of
ringing
rocks from Area D:
(a)
and
(c) d epict
the southeast
stone,
while
(b)
and
(d )
show the northeast one. Arrow
points north;
d ouble-arrowed line is 1 metre
scale.
ik7
-7.7
--i~ ~?~~ii~::-::7 7': ::
Figure
11. Patinated
cupule
on northeast
ringing
rock.
Journal of
the
I nstitute
(N.S.) 13, 267-294
@
I nstitute
2007
The
hilltop plateaus
of
Sannarachamma,
Choud ammagud d a,
and
Hiregud d a
(Area A)
(Figs
1 and
2)
that have
yield ed
the richest evid ence for
prehistoric
habitation have been more
systematically surveyed
than other
areas,
and
yet
no
ringing
rocks have thus far been located at these sites.
Thus,
d espite
the evid ence of
a somewhat more
wid espread
d istribution after inclusion of the new
examples,
rock
gongs appear
tobe confined toareas
beyond
those
occupied by
main settlements.
They
are not d istant from
settlements,
but are not
part
of them either. The notion that some
of them at least
may
relate toritual activities like
life-cycle
ceremonies,
as
suggested
in
the
original
d iscussion of the rock
gongs
(Boivin 2004c),
thus continues to
present
a
plausible interpretative
avenue for at least some of the activities associated withthese
ringing
rocks.
The new evid ence alsocontinues tohint at male associations
(Boivin 2004c).
As
ind icated in the
original
d iscussion,
the rock art on the main
d yke
at
Hiregud d a,
where
the first rock
gongs
were
found ,
is d ominated
by ithyphallic figures,
and ,
in
particular,
bull motifs. As d iscussed
above,
the new
ringing
rock site in Area B alsocontains rock
art,
and this is even more
overwhelmingly
d ominated
by d epictions
of bulls. The latter
site is also
ad jacent
toan area where
stone-quarrying
and lithic
prod uction
activities
were carried out.
I f,
as
suggested
in the
preliminary report,
we assume that it was
pred ominantly
men who
engaged
in the
physically
intensive labour of
quarrying
stone
and whoroamed withcattle
away
from the settlements on
d aily
or seasonal
migration
round s,
then the rock art motifs and artefact
prod uction
associations of a number of
the
gong
sites d o
suggest
a concern withmale activities
(Boivin 2004c).
I f we assume
that women were more
closely
associated withd omestic
settlements,
then the fact that
the most
clearly
d omesticareas on the hills d o
not,
after several seasons of intensive
survey
and
record ing, appear
tocontain
any
rock
gongs might
alsobe taken as evid ence
for
something
of a male association. The
argument
mad e in the
preliminary report
for
an association of the
Hiregud d a
rock
gongs
withmale-orientated rituals thus remains
plausible
based on the new evid ence. The
striking
of bould ers
beyond
the
periphery
of
settlement areas tocreate
engravings, bruisings,
and
ringing
or musical sound s
may
have constituted a
part,
for
example,
of male initiation rituals. That these would have
taken
place beyond
the visual but within the aural
range
of settlement areas would have
enabled the communication of new statuses while
perhaps simultaneously maintaining
the
secrecy
and
segregation
from females
necessary
for initiation totake
place.
Such
activities would
likely
have constituted
only part
of a
longer
initiation
sequence
that
involved other activities further afield .
Archaeologists obviously rely heavily
on
anthropological
information about non-
ind ustrialized societies tooffer more
plausible interpretations
of the remains of
simple
prehistoricforaging
and
farming
societies.
Unfortunately, very
few societies
actively
using
rock
gongs
have been d escribed in
any
d etail
by anthropologists, although
a
mid -twentieth-century
account
published
in this
journal
d oes seem tooffer
support
for
the kind
of
interpretation proposed
here. As d escribed
in
that article
(Vaughan 1962),
ringing
rocks used
by
the
Marghi
of
Nigeria d uring
the
period
of
ethnographicstud y
d escribed were
closely
linked toinitiation and
marriage
rituals that alsotake
place just
beyond ,
but within
hearing
d istance of, nearby villages.
Rock shelters with
ringing
rocks were visited
by
male initiates
prior
to
marriage,
and ceremonies
involving
the
ringing
of rock
gongs, singing
of
songs,
and
painting
of shelter walls were carried out
tomark the transition toad ulthood
(Vaughan 1962). These shelters were located at the
bases of
large mountains, and are close
enough
tosettlement sites that '[f]rom the
Journal of
the
I nstitute (N.S.) 13, 267-294
?
I nstitute
2007
village
below,
the
gongs
and
voices,
coming
as
they
d ofrom three
shelters,
blend intoan
awe-inspiring
sound '
(Vaughan
1962:50). Vaughan argued
that the
paintings
in the
shelters served in
part
to
provid e tangible
evid ence of the
beginnings
of the
emergence
of an
ad ult,
while the
ringing
rock sound s
signalled
'all within the
village
that this
important
transition has taken
place' (1962:51).
Like
many
of the
Hiregud d a
rock art
sites,
Marghi
rock
paintings
were concerned with
ad ult,
masculine
themes,
and rock
gongs
were
only supposed
tobe struck at the time of these male initiation and
pre-
marriage
rituals
(Vaughan
1962:52).
Suchrituals were associated withd istinctive cos-
tumes and
behaviour,
includ ingsongs, d ancing,
and the
striking
of the
gongs,
and it is
tempting
in this
regard
to associate the cleared
platform
on the d olerite
d yke
at
Hiregud d a (Fig.
4)
in
particular
withthis kind of
activity.
Stone
against
stone:other acousticactivities at
Sanganakallu-Kupgal
While the rock
gongs
at
Hiregud d a bring
the issue of sound in
prehistory
tothe
foreground , they
are not the
only insights
we have intothe ancient acousticworld of
I t was noted earlier that the sonic
land scape
of the central
Deccan
granitic
hills is cond ucive tothe intensification of
sound s,
and it seems
likely
that
aud itory
stimuli
beyond
the rock
gongs
had an
important
role to
play
in
prehis-
toriclifeworld s at
The
potential
contribution of voices and
song
tothe
aud itory
environment was touched
upon
above,
but it is of course d ifficult tod o
more than
speculate
about their
role,
given
that
they
leave no
physical
traces. There
are,
however,
a number of
very
loud
prehistoric
activities that have left
physical
traces in the
central Deccan and these are activities that involved contact between stones. While the
most obvious of these is
perhaps stone-quarrying
and
-knapping,
for which
Hiregud d a
provid es
sofar the most abund ant evid ence for the whole of the Southern
Neolithic,
a
range
of other
prehistoric
stone-med iated
processes
are alsoind icated
tod ay by
the
profusion
of
grind ing
hollows that are found d istributed across
granite
hills
bearing
Neolithicremains in southI nd ia.
These
grind ing
hollows are found on
exposed
bed rock and
variously
sized bould ers
and
rocks,
and
they
are a
repeated
and characteristicfeature of later
prehistoric
sites in
the central Deccan
(see
alsoFuller et al.
2001). They
correlate with
large quantities
of
grind ingimplements
in
many
of the Neolithicand
Megalithicperiod
levels at these
sites. The
grind ing
hollows occur in various
shapes
and
sizes,
and
und oubted ly
result
from a
range
of activities.
Many
are the outcome of
crop-processing
activities,
which
are
particularly
linked to
larger categories
of
hollows,
most of whichare circular or
ovoid in
plan (Fuller
et al.
2oo1;
see
Fig.
12). Other,
elongated
U- and
V-shaped
channel
grooves,
associated at times with
cupules,
are
argued
torelate tostone axe
grind ing
(see
Fig. 13).
The
grind ing
between stones of ad d itional
substances,
suchas
pigments,
med i-
cines,
animal
bone,
vitrified ash
(from ashmound s),
and
potsherd s
(for
grog) may
also
be
hypothesized .
Small
cupules
withno
apparent 'practical'
function
(see
element
[4000]
in
Fig. 9,
and
Fig. 14) are also
ubiquitous,
and are
perhaps
the result of activities
having
a
primarily symbolic, aesthetic, or ritual
impetus.
What all of these hollows have
in common is that as stone
banged
or rubbed
against
stone in the course of their
creation, it would have
generated
a
great
d eal of noise. Furthermore, the
prod uction
of
the
petroglyphs
that are alsofound in such
proliferation
at some Neolithicsites, and
particularly Hiregud d a,
would have
similarly
involved the creation of forceful contacts
between stones and , d epend ing
on the
d egree
of
conspicuousness sought,
a
particular
aud itory output.
Journal of
the
I nstitute (N.S.) 13, 267-294
?
I nstitute
2007
.
......
.
:
..::
-r: :
.
:
"
:
:
.. ...
:
;::::
'::
.
. ..._
":_:-:-_:::_::-:-:::-
:_-:::-_:.--:::
i:. .:
.
....... ..
::::
... ...
-.:
::?r:-.: ........
.... .....
-i-i:i:i:i-
--:i-i-:s---aii~iii:i
--iiiiiiii-~ iii~iiiiiii iiii
iiiiii:iiii:
iiiiiiiii:!!i::::i
i
iiiiiliii

::i:::.iii::iiii::e :o.:
ii:ii-:i_
::::
.......
i -ii~iiiiiiiii~,i
Figure
12.
Grind ing
hollow
resulting
from
crop-processing
activities.
Aws:
.. ?
MY:
::::Or
Figure
13.
Grind ing
hollows related tostone axe
grind ing
at
Hiregud d a.
Journal of
the
I nstitute
(N.S.) 13, 267-294
@
I nstitute 2007
(a) (b) (c)
10cm
O0
b p
o10oe
*
*@
41**b
lmcm
*
i
s
**
*.'..&
Figure
14.
Cupules
in various
arrangements (all
from Area
A, Hiregud d a):(a) rand omly organized
(Panel 7185); (b) patterned (element
from Panel
7180);
and
(c) patterned (element
from Panel
7182).
Within the
ethnographic
and
archaeological
literature,
there is muchevid ence to
suggest
that the sound of these stone-on-stone activities d id not
go
unnoticed ,
and
ind eed ,
at least in some
cases,
may
have been consid ered a relevant or
primary
intend ed
outcome of their
performance.
While it is more d ifficult tosubstantiate the
argument
that
petroglyphprod uction
itself
may
have
involved ,
in ad d ition toits obvious visual
aspect,
a d eliberate
attempt
tocreate
particular
sound s
(except
where it is found on
ringing
rocks),
a
performative
element tosome
cupule prod uction
at
Hiregud d a
seems
clear. For
example,
one
group
of
cupule
marks found in Area A traces the line of a
quartz
vein in the
granite
bed rock.
Quartz
is
cross-culturally
believed to
possess
magical
or
supernatural power (Darvill 2002;
Whitley,
Dorn, Simon,
Rechtman &
Whitley 1999:233-5)
because of a
property
called triboluminescence that can cause it to
glow
when struck
(Saund ers 2004:136;
Whitley
et al.
1999: 236).
Triboluminescence can
be d emonstrated most
vivid ly by vigorously rubbingtogether
two
transparent quartz
rock
crystals
in a d ark
room,
whichwill be seen toresult in a cold luminescent
glow.
However,
as our informal
experiments
ind icate,
the
phenomenon may
alsobe
pro-
d uced
(ad mitted ly
somewhat less
d ramatically
from a visual
perspective) by rubbing,
abrad ing, striking, hitting, hammering, tapping,
or otherwise
impacting
the surface of
a wid e
variety
of
quartz
and
crystalline
rocks und er
low-light
cond itions. Given these
observations,
it
may
be
that,
at
the
pound ing
of stone
against
stone that created these
cupules
had the intend ed aim of
generating
this
supernatural
light
-
that
is,
that the
process
that was carried out was at least as
important
as the
resultant
cupule
marks that were
prod uced .
The
arrangement
of other
cupules
at
Sanganakallu-Kupgal
further
supports
this
interpretation. Cupules
are
frequently
arranged
in rand om clusters that d onot
appear
to
d epict anything
or even form a
pattern (see
Fig.
14a
and
[4000]
in
Fig.
9).
Even when
cupules appear
in more
patterned
arrangements,
these often
appear
unfinished
(see
Fig. 14c), suggesting
that the creation
of a
particular
finished
d esign
was not the
primary
intend ed aim.
These various observations
suggest
the need tolook
beyond
final
form,
and to
consid er more
closely
the
performative
and
gestural aspects
of
cupule
creation,
includ -
ing
sound
prod uction.
The
ethnographic
literature reinforces this
impression.
While
the creation of
cupules
not
resulting
from
particular
subsistence and
technological
Journal of
the
I nstitute
(N.S.) 13, 267-294
@
I nstitute
2007
activities has
only occasionally
been
ethnographically
d ocumented ,
various authors
have
reported
on an
Aboriginal
increase
ceremony
that involved the
pound ing
of a
bould er and formation of
cupule-like
hollows in central Australia
(Flood 1997:146-7;
Mountford
1976:213; Taqon, Fullager,
Ouzman &
Mulvaney 1997:960). Taqon
et al. in
particular
d raw attention tothe role of
pound ing
rock surfaces in
bringing
about the
release of
spiritual,
creative
'power' amongst Aboriginal
Australians
(Taqon
et al.
1997:
960),
and hence
highlight
the
importance
of actual acts of
cupule
creation in
Aboriginal
Australian
society.
Similar stone
percussion
activities feature in rituals in
many
other
parts
of the
world ,
and
rain-making
rituals in
particular
often feature the
banging
of
stones
(and
sometimes
wood )
(Duncan-Kemp 1952:63;
Lanning
1958;
Williams
1929:
387-88).
I n southwest
Queensland , Australia,
for
example,
Rain-men in the
early 19oos
beat ceremonial stones to
bring
rain,
in a
process
that could be
expected
to
prod uce
a
physical
mark or marks that were none the less not the
primary
intend ed outcome of
this
activity.
The aural
component
of this
activity
is stressed in
Duncan-Kemp's
d escription:'[A]bove
the
pand emonium
sound ed the
softer,
irregular
but unmistak-
able,
"clop, clop,
boom" of the ceremonial stones beaten
by
the Rain-men as
they
worked overtime to
prod uce
the
rain,
d ue in a few
d ays'
time'
(Duncan-Kemp 1952:63).
Similarly, Lanning
(1958)
d ocumented the use of a
large granite
rock in
rain-making
rites
amongst
Hima
pastoralists
in
Ugand a
in the
mid -195os.
These rites involved the
giving
of
offerings
and were
accompanied by singing, d ancing,
and the
beating
of the
rock,
whichwhen struck
prod uced
resonant,
bell-like tones.
These
examples emphasize
the fact that
cupule
marks on
rocks,
even if
they
cannot
be linked to
narrowly
d efined 'utilitarian'
activities,
need not be und erstood
only
as
passive objects
of visual
contemplation.
As
shown,
cupule
marks on stones in ethno-
graphically
d ocumented cases have often been
prod uced
as the outcome of activities
that were themselves as
important
as,
or even more
important
than,
the marks them-
selves.
Cupule
marks
trad itionally
fall und er the
purview
of rock art
specialists,
and
ind eed were
initially
stud ied this
way
at
We have
subsequently
recognized ,
however,
that their form
may
be little more than the
vestige
or trace of a
past performance
that was of
culturally equal
or
greater significance
to Southern
Neolithic
peoples.
Acousticand
performative
d imensions of
cupule prod uction
need to
be taken intoaccount. We would
suggest
that
cupules
were
prod uced
as
part
of cul-
turally
and
socially
med iated
performances
that had an
important sensory
d imension.
This
likely
involved not
just
a visual
component,
but an aural one as well.
I t is not
just
more arcane
practices
that
might
have involved an
important
sound
d imension,
however. Various
ethnographic
and
archaeological
stud ies have also
emphasized
the
aud itory components
of a number of more
obviously
functional activi-
ties. Rainbird
(2002a; 2002b),
for
example,
has d rawn attention tothe aural d imension
of sakau
(kava)
processing
in trad itional societies in the SouthPacific
(Rainbird 2002a;
2002b).
Pound ing
of sakau is a ritualized
process
carried out in a
community
house,
and is
apparently
d one in unison
accord ing
to
particular rhythms.
These are d irected
by
a lead er, whostand s on a
platform calling
out
tempos
that
change
over the course of the
process.
The
pound ing
is d one on basalt slabs, and creates clear, bell-like tones that
resonate
through
the forest, communicating
the
message
that
preparations
for
specific
communal, but restricted , ritual events have
begun.
I nd ivid ual communities have their
own sakau
pound ingrhythms,
and
tempos
are
reported
to
change d epend ing
on the
composition
of the
gathering.
The
presence
of head chiefs lead s tod ifferent
pound ing
tempos
than that of
petty chiefs, for
example.
Journal of
the
I nstitute (N.S.) 13, 267-294
?
I nstitute 2007
Alsotouched
upon
in the
archaeological
and
ethnographic
literature has been the
acoustic
component
of stone tool
prod uction
activities.
Fagg,
for
example,
makes the
interesting
(if
gend er-biased )
observation that 'men who
d epend ed
for life itself on
their
ability
tofashion
implements by flaking
must have been conscious of the musical
quality
of stone'
(Fagg
1956:18).
The
Cambrid ge-based
Lithoacoustics
Project
is cur-
rently exploringprecisely
this
possibility, by carrying
out
experimental
and archaeo-
logical
stud ies aimed at
testing
the
hypothesis
that our
early
ancestors
might
have used
the tools
they
knew best - stone and the
processes
of
working
stone to
prod uce
artefacts
- for sound
prod uction (Cross,
Zubrow & Cowan
2002).
The acousticd imension of
lithic
prod uction
has often been remarked
upon
in the literature.
Ruhe,
for
example,
d escribes the
'clink, clink,
clink of the hammer and
tinkle, tinkle,
tinkle of
falling
flint'
d uringgunflint
manufacture in
Brand on,
England ,
and refers tothe sound as
'unique
and memorable' and even musical
(Ruhe 1995:6).
The
gunflint-knappers
themselves
were
clearly
conscious of the musical
quality
of
flint,
and
Skertchly
record ed that:'A
good
flaker works sofast that
by
the time a flake falls intothe tub a freshone is struck
off,
as
they say
"the sound of the hammer and the
falling
flake should be heard
together"' (Skertchly
1879:31).
I n
early 1900s
southwest
Queensland , Duncan-Kemp
observed
Aboriginal
women
incorporating
the
rhythmictapping
sound
generated by
pecking
stone bolas into
'corroborees',
or musical
performances (Duncan-Kemp
1952:
27).3
The
unique
acousticeffect
prod uced apparently
mad e the manufacture of these
hammerd ressed
stone tools rather 'an
interesting
matter tothe onlooker'
(Duncan-
Kemp 1952:27).
These
ethnographicexamples
ind icate the
social, cultural,
and
experiential impor-
tance of the acoustic
properties
of various 'mund ane' and 'utilitarian'
technological
activities across a
range
of societies world wid e. Given the
apparent sound -intensifying
properties
of the central Deccan
granitic
terrain,
as well as the d eliberate sound
pro-
d uction evid enced
by
the
ringing
rocks found at sites
there,
it therefore seems reason-
able to
suggest
that the acousticd imension of the
many prehistoric
activities
involving
contact between stones d id not
go
unnoticed in NeolithicsouthI nd ia either. The
Neolithic
sound scape
would have includ ed a
range
of sound s
prod uced by
a whole
variety
of
d ay-to-d ay
and seasonal activities
involving
the
banging, pecking,
and
grind -
ing
of
stone,
and it is hard to
imagine
that these
aud itory
cues from the environment
were not
picked up just
like visual
ones,
and used tomake sense of the world . I t seems
likely
that Neolithic
peoples
would have learned toread the sound s
echoing
across the
hills as
signs,
and to
d evelop
them as d eliberate forms of
communication,
bothwith
other humans and also
perhaps
withmore
supernatural beings.
While it is
impossible
tohear these
prehistoric
sound s
tod ay,
the hollows scattered across bed rock at Neolithic
sites attest totheir
presence d uring
a d istant
period .
I nterestingly,
the
grind ing
hollows found at
like the rock
gong
hollows,
are often
grouped tightly together, suggesting
that the activities that led to
their creation were
frequently communal, and would thus have been cond ucive tothe
generation
of a
great
d eal of noise and the d eliberate (or in some cases unconscious)
synchronization
or combination of ind ivid ual
tempos.
There is also
strong
evid ence to
suggest
that
stone-knapping
was carried out
communally
in
specificareas, and
may
have involved an
important
social and ritual d imension (Brumm et al. 2006; 2007).
Stone-knapping, pecking,
and
grind ing
activities all have a
rhythmiccomponent
that is
likely
tohave been
foreground ed
in suchcommunal, ritualized
prod uction
activities.
While other
stone-against-stone
activities
may
have been less communal, it is clear that
Journal of
the
I nstitute (N.S.) 13, 267-294
?
I nstitute 2007
their acoustic
component
would have
prevented
them from
beingentirely private
matters.
Stone-against-stone
activities announce themselves across the
land scape,
and
d raw
people
into
particular
social
relationships.
For
example,
as Rainbird
(2002a:96-7)
has also
argued ,
sound would
likely
have
played
an
important
role in
makingpeople
feel includ ed or exclud ed . Neolithicind ivid uals at
Sanganakallu-Kupgal may
have felt
content and linked to others while
engaging
in communal
grind ing
or
knapping
activities,
or awed and
mystified
while
hearing
esotericritual activities
beingperformed
by
ind ivid uals or small exclusive
groups beyond
the confines of the d omesticsettle-
ment. Thus while sound s would have served as
'signs'
in some
instances,
they
would
also
likely
have featured as
important aspects
of the embod ied
experience
of
id entity
and
und erstand ing.
Sound is not
just
semioticbut also
experiential.
Embod ied and
technological und erstand ing
I nvestigation
of Neolithic
sound scapes
at
Sanganakallu-Kupgal
and other Southern
Neolithicsites in the
preced ing
sections has d rawn attention to
linkages
between a
d iverse
array
of
prehistoric
activities. These connections are the result not
only
of a
shared acoustic
element, but.alsoa shared
application
of stone
object
tostone substrate.
I n
many
cases,
this
application
has resulted in
particular
'marks' on the
land scape
that,
as d iverse as
they
are,
may
none the less be
grouped
intothe
general category
of
'grind ing
hollows' based on the
presence
of certain shared
physical
features. Other
patterns
further accentuate these
proposed linkages.
The shared focus on d olerite stone
d raws links between
ed ge-ground
axe
prod uction, ringing
rocks,
and the
petroglyphs
that are
primarily
focused on this med ium at
Sanganakallu-Kupgal
(Boivin
2oo4c),
for
example. Analysis
of the
spatial patterning
of
grind ing
hollows meanwhile ind icates
that
cupules
are often associated with
larger
hollows believed tohave resulted from the
processing
of
plant
food s
by pound ing
and
grind ing(Fig.
15).
The numerous links that
archaeologists perceive
between d ifferent Neolithic
stone-against-stone
activities
suggest
that
they may
in fact have been linked
by
Neolithic
peoples
as well. Shared
properties
and a common
materiality may
have
helped conceptually
connect techno-
logical,
subsistence,
and ritual activities that
archaeologists
often consid er as
separate.
The
ethnographic
and
archaeological
literature offers
support
for this
interpreta-
tion.
Stone-against-stone
activities
amongst
the
Marghi
of
Nigeria,
for
example,
are
a
g
Figure
15.
Example
of
cupules
associated witha
grind ing
hollow
(from
Panel
7180,
Area
A,
Hiregud d a).
The
grind ing
hollow is the
grey
shad ed area on the
right. Light grey
shad ed features are
earliest in the
sequence,
while black shad ed features are latest.
Journal of
the
I nstitute
(N.S.) 13, 267-294
@
I nstitute
2007
illustrative. The
Marghi,
whose rock
gongs
were d iscussed
above,
often use the hammer
stones
employed
for
grind inggrain
or seed s tostrike
gongs (Vaughan
1962:50),
thus
d rawing
links between
grind ing
and
hammering,
and between ritual and subsistence
activities. Links between the
grind ing
of
plant
food s and
ringing
of rock
gongs
are
further accentuated
by
the
grind ing
of sesame at
gong
sites,
a
practice
that has led tothe
creation of numerous
grind ing
hollows at
many
rock
gong
sites
(Vaughan
1962).
Ground sesame is
trad itionally presented
tothe
newly aligned couple
as
part
of mar-
riage
ceremonies,
and is consid ered to
symbolize fertility.
Rock
gong
rituals in at least
some areas of northern
Nigeria
are furthermore timed tocoincid e withthe
beginning
of the
growing
season,
a
practice
that
emphasizes
their
linkage
with
fertility (Vaughan
1962).
Ultimately,
then,
material and
technological
similarities are
'played
with'
by
the
Marghi
in ord er tod raw
conceptual
links between d ifferent
activities,
and
ritually
access the
power
manifest in certain natural
processes
and
technological practices.
Parallels in the
practice
of
pound ingringing
rocks and
seed s,
and in the
physical
appearance
of the
resulting
hollows formed
by
both
activities,
offer rich
metaphorical
possibilities
that are
highlighted d uring
ritual
practices.
Of course the
parallels
d rawn d erive not
only
from shared materials and
forms,
but
alsofrom shared
bod ily practices
(Bourd ieu 1977; 1990;
Leroi-Gourhan
1964; 1965;
Mauss
1979),
highlighting
the
impossibility
of
segregatingsensory
mod alities.
Hammering
rock
gongs
d emand s
bod ily
movements similar to those
required
in
pound ing
seed s,
and this furthermore accentuates the
conceptual
and
metaphorical
linkages
between these d istinct
types
of
activity. During
the Neolithicin south
I nd ia,
the d iverse activities that involved similar
gestures,
like
banging, pound ing,
and
pecking
stone,
may
have intensified
conceptual linkages
established on the basis of other
aspects
like
sound ,
material
engagement,
and
resulting
material form.
Bod ily
movements fre-
quently
link
technological
activities of
very
d ifferent
types (Mauss 1979).
I n the
And es,
for
example,
Sillar
(1996)
notes that the
preparation
of
clay
for
potting
involves the
same
processes
of
grind ing
and
pound ing
as muchfood
preparation.
I nd eed Sillar
highlights
the d iffusion of
technological practices
across d ifferent
realms,
and
empha-
sizes the
tend ency
in human
thought
tosolve current
problems by d rawingupon
areas
of
prior experience (1996:265;
also
I ngold 2000).
This
'bricolage' approach
totechnol-
ogy (Sillar 1996:265)
is
illustrated ,
for
example,
in the use of similar
d ryingtechniques
to
process potatoes, clay
for
potting,
and d ead
people
in the And es. Sillar furthermore
argues
that
d uring
the I nca
period , practices
associated withthe mummification of the
d ead were transferred tothe realm of food
storage,
thus also
enablingmeanings
of
regeneration
and
reciprocity
withthe ancestors tobe d rawn
upon by
an I nca state keen
to
justify
its extraction of
prod uce
from the local
population.
Sillar
emphasizes
the
philosophical aspects
of
technology,
and the
way they
not
only
imbue
techniques
with
culturally specificmeanings,
but alsoinfluence what
people
will consid er an
'appro-
priate' technology
to
apply
toa
particular problem.
I nterestingly,
Sillar's
examples highlight
the
importance
of
grind ing
as a
meaningful
practice
in the And es.
Linguisticusage
of terms for
grind ing
d emonstrates that it is
consid ered an
appropriate technique
to
apply
tobothfood and
people,
and is und er-
stood as a
way
tomake them
prod uctive. Grind ing
was thus
wid ely
used not
only
in
processing
food and
clay,
but alsoin warfare, whichwas
d epend ent
on
crushing
blows
and
projectiles
rather than blad es (Sillar 1996:267).
A similar
type
of
explanation likely
lies behind the laborious
axe-makingtechniques
ofAsmat stoneworkers in coastal I rian
Jaya (see Konrad , Goo
&
Konrad 1995). This
group
d oes not flake stones, but rather
Journal of
the
I nstitute (N.S.) 13, 267-294
?
I nstitute 2007
hammerd resses
or
pecks
raw stone into
axes,
and the Asmat consid er themselves with
great prid e
tobe a
'pecking' people.
While an
extremely time-consuming
and in some
senses 'inefficient'
axe-makingtechnique, pecking
is none the less
highly
valued ,
and
closely
linked toAsmat social and cultural
id entity.
The Asmat
argue
that,
unlike their
neighbours,
whoare
only
able touse stone
types they
are familiar with
(presumably
those that fracture
conchoid ally),
their own stoneworkers are able tomeet the
challenge
of new material
types.
Given
enough
time and
patience
- a
quality
on whichthe Asmat
seem to
prid e
themselves - an Asmat stoneworker has the
ability
tocreate an axe from
almost
any type
of stone.
I n the central
Deccan,
the
profusion
of hollows that mark the
land scapes
of
Neolithicsites
may suggest
a similar kind of
philosophically
linked
technological
ori-
entation.
Grind ing
and
pound ingmay
have been
practices
that were
wid ely applied
because
they
were consid ered
appropriate,
and fitted within an overall
und erstand ing
of the world and /or a
particular
cultural
id entity. They may
have been
applied
not
only
in
ways
that are familiar to
us,
but alsoin
culturally specificways
that we
might
not
expect.
The
quantity
and
d iversity
of
grind inggrooves
on Southern Neolithicsites
certainly suggest
that
they
were created
d uring
the course of a
great many
activities,
not
all of whichour own
technological philosophy might
lead us to
expect
toinvolve the
banging
of stone
against
stone. Neolithic
sound scapes
therefore need tobe und erstood
as
implicated
in a
d eliberate,
culturally specific
transformation of the
world ,
and as the
prod uct
of
particular
id eas about the
right way
tod o
things.
Sound s would not
only
have had
specificmeanings d epend ing
on the
particular
stone
percussion
or
grind ing
activities that
prod uced
them,
but alsomore
generally
would have
signified ,
embod ied ,
and communicated a
particular
world view that would have
given
them
heightened
significance
and emotional
impact.
The creation of sound
through
the
banging
of stone
against
stone would alsohave involved the creation of
particular bod ily gestures
and
the
engagement
with
particular aspects
of the material world .
Thus,
in ord er tound er-
stand the role of sound in Southern Neolithic
society,
we need totake intoaccount not
only
other
senses,
but alsothe interaction of
mind -bod y
and matter.
A more
sensorily
aware
approach
d rives us toconsid er how life in the Neolithic
might
have been
experienced by
the
people
then
inhabiting
southI nd ia. Phenomeno-
logical
and
experience-orientated
stud ies are of course more
problematic
for
d isap-
peared past peoples
than for
living, breathingmod ern-d ay
ones,
but
materiality,
a
shared feature of both
living
and d ead
peoples,
offers a
potential
if still
challenging
opportunity
for
archaeologists tod ay
to
gain
a sense of
past experience.
The
d ry,
bould ery land scape
of the southern
Deccan,
little
changed
since the Neolithic
(Asouti,
Fuller & Korisettar
2005;
Fuller & Korisettar
2004),
is a d istinctive one that
und oubted ly
led tod istinctive
sensory experiences,
and
perhaps
a
particular emphasis
on sound as
a
mod ality
of
experience.4
This material environment is also
very
much
implicated
in
the
lifestyle ad opted by
Neolithic
people, orientating
them toward s stone-based tech-
nologies
and rituals and an
emphasis
on
pastoralism.
While Neolithic
subsistence,
technological,
and ritual activities were not d etermined
by
the material environment of
the central Deccan, neither were
they culturally
constructed out of thin air, and the
d istinctive flavour of the Southern Neolithiccan be at least
partially
attributed tothe
d istinctive
materiality
of this
land scape. Materiality
thus
challenges
the current
vogue
for hard constructionism in
anthropology
and
archaeology, d emand ing
a
place
for a
physical
world that bothconstrains and enables (Boivin 2004b)
in theoretical accounts
of human
society.
Journal of
the
I nstitute (N.S.) 13, 267-294
?
I nstitute
200oo7
Technology
and material culture are therefore not
just
relevant to
specialists
focus-
ing
on
specific
issues like consumerism or the
history
of
technology,
nor are
they simply
ways
of
expressing
id eas and
concepts
that somehow
alread y pre-exist
them. Stud ies of
material culture
overlap
in
many significant ways
withstud ies of the senses in the
humanities and social
sciences,
although
the links between the twoareas of interest
have
yet
tobe
ad equately investigated .
The
senses,
as both
culturally
informed and
bod ily-d epend ent phenomena,
offer a
way
to
brid ge
entrenched d ichotomies between
id eal and
material,
and
subject
and
object, by d rawingtogether
what have been con-
ceived of as an internal mind and an external world . Consid eration of the senses d raws
us intonot
just
a consid eration of the
bod y,
but alsoits
habits,
gestures,
and
engage-
ment witha material world . I t lead s us toa better
und erstand ing
of how
concepts
are
created and societies
reprod uced .
I t
provid es
us witha little
insight
intohow and
why
societies create d istinctive
cosmologies
and
why
d ifferent
people
d o
things
in the
particular ways
that
they
d o.
Consid eration of the senses
also,
as has been shown
here,
helps
break d own the
d ivid e between the sacred and the
profane
that is often d rawn
by
Western scholars.
While certain sound s and
gestures
were
und oubted ly unique
toritual activities in the
Southern
Neolithic,
many
of them were
clearly
shared withthe
sphere
of
everyd ay
subsistence and
prod uction
activities.
'Playing'
rock
gongs, grind ing
millet,
creating
rock
art,
and
quarrying
stone were all activities that
engaged people
withthe material
substance of stone in similar
ways.
As we have
argued ,
this
likely
allowed
metaphors,
gestures,
and
practices
tocross-cut ritual and
everyd ay spheres,
and tocreate a cos-
mology
or
und erstand ing
of the world that was not
just
mental but alsomaterial and
bod ily.
Conclusion:stud ies of sound in I nd ia and
beyond
Ringing
rocks constitute a
fascinating,
and
und erd eveloped , subject
of
stud y
in south
I nd ia. While
barely
touched
upon
in the acad emic
literature,
brief but
regular
refer-
ences in
guid ebooks
and other
public
med ia
suggest
that
they
are a recurrent feature of
the southI nd ian
sound scape,
and occur in a wid e
range
of
contexts,
from
prehistoric
rock art sites tohistorical
period temples.
Yet,
as the
foregoing
d iscussion
illustrates,
the
archaeology
of sound extend s
beyond
the narrow
stud y
of musicand musical instru-
ments in the
past.
While
examples
of ancient musical instruments
may
be most
striking
tous
tod ay,
the sound s
they
mad e
represent only
a
portion
of the full
spectrum
of
past
sound s,
and
only
a
very particular aspect
of ancient
sound scapes.
When we move
beyond
a
visually
biased
perspective
on
land scapes,
we awaken awareness of the role of
other senses in the
past,
and of the
place
of acoustics outsid e the narrow
sphere
of
d eliberate
music-making
activities. At
prehistoricSanganakallu-Kupgal,
and other
Southern Neolithic
sites,
sound would have been an
important
d imension of a
very
d iverse
array
of
activities,
many
of them
involving
the
application
of stone tostone.
Neolithic
sound scapes
would have been richwith
sound ,
and would
likely
have fea-
tured
alongsid e
visual
land scapes
in
orientatingpeople
in the world , fashioning
id en-
tities, and
negotiating
social transactions and transformations. Evid ence for the
wid espread
use of
grind ing, pecking,
and
hammeringactivities, whichresulted in the
prod uction
of a remarkable
profusion
of
grind ing
hollows in and around Neolithic
sites in the central Deccan, suggests
that the
hammering
of
ringing
rocks tomake music
was
only
one
aspect
of a wid er Southern Neolithiccultural
propensity
to ad d ress
technological
and ritual
requirements by applying
stone
against
stone. Given that such
Journal of
the
I nstitute (N.S.) 13, 267-294
?
I nstitute
2007
NI COLE
BOI VI N
ET AL. 291
activities would not
only
have involved shared sound
prod uction,
but alsowould have
had in common
particular
embod ied actions and material
outcomes,
it is not
unlikely
that
they
were
implicated
in a
culturally specific
material and
technological philosophy
that saw them as the 'correct'
way
tod o
things. Sound scapes
were not d ivorced from
everyd ay
life,
or a feature
only
of
specific
times and
places,
but rather
part
of a
d eeply
embod ied and sensual
experience
and
und erstand ing
of the world characterized
by
the
comingtogether
of
mind , matter,
and
bod y.
As d ifficult as it
may
sometimes be tomove
beyond
a consid eration of obvious acousticfeatures like rock
gongs
and other musical
instruments,
sucha
d eparture
is critical to
any project seeking
tound erstand more
fully
the
place
of sound in the lives of
past peoples.
NOTES
The
Sanganakallu-Kupgal Project
is fund ed
by
the British
Acad emy.
Ad d itional
grants
have alsobeen
provid ed by
the Arts and Humanities ResearchCouncil, McDonald I nstitute for
Archaeological
Research,
Prehistoric
Society,
Karnatak
University,
and the
Society
for SouthAsian Stud ies. We are
grateful
toPaul
Devereux for useful comments on an earlier version of this
manuscript,
I an
Cross for several
enlightening
d iscussions on acousticeffects,
Anna
Montag
for d ocument
translation,
and Glenn Bowman for
helpful
ad vice
d uring
the revision
process.
The authors would alsolike to
acknowled ge
the
important
contribution
of other members of the
Sanganakallu-Kupgal project
team tothe research
find ings
d iscussed here.
1
I n south
I nd ia,
the Neolithic
period
is followed
d irectly by
the I ron
Age.
The later Neolithicis sometimes
referred toas a Chalcolithic
period
d ue tothe increased
appearance
of
copper
items. These remain
relatively
infrequent,
however,
and the absence of an
intervening
Bronze
Age
is
very
clear.
2 The
terms'ringing
rock' and 'rock
gong'
are used
interchangeably
in this
article,
as
they
are in the
general
literature.
3 Hammerd ressing
or
'pecking'
stone tools like
ed ge-ground
axes mad e from
tough
volcanicrock is a
technically simple
but
time-consumingprocess involving
the
repetitive striking
or
tapping
of the
unshaped
stone
piece
witha
light-weight
hammer-stone.
Repetitive low-impact percussion
has the effect of
removing
small amounts of stone d etritus witheach
blow;
grad ual
attrition
'pecks'
the tool into
shape (Dickson 1981).
4
For a d iscussion of how
particular
environments
may
lead to
particular sensory experiences,
see Howes
& Classen
(1991).
REFERENCES
ALLCHI N,
FR.
1963.
Neolithic
cattle-keepers of
southI nd ia.
Cambrid ge:University
Press.
ANSARI ,
Z.D. &
M.S. NAGARAJA
RAO 1969.
Excavation at
Sanganakallu, 1964-65 (Early
NeolithicHouse at
Bellary).
Poona:Deccan
College.
AsouTI , E., D.Q.
FULLER & R. KORI SETTAR
2005. Vegetation
context and wood
exploitation
in the Southern
Neolithic:
preliminary
evid ence from wood charcoals. I n
Journal of
SouthAsian
Archaeology 2oo3.
Proceed -
ings of
the
European
Association
for
SouthAsian
Archaeology Conference,
Bonn,
Germany, 7th-nth
July
2003
(ed s)
U.
Franke-Vogt
&
J. Weisshaar, 336-40.
Aachen:Lind en Soft.
BoI vI N,
N.
2004a. Land scape
and
cosmology
in the southI nd ian Neolithic:new
perspectives
on the Deccan
ashmound s.
Cambrid ge Archaeological Journal 14, 235-57.
2o004b.
Mind over matter?
Collapsing
the mind -matter
d ichotomy
in material culture stud ies. I n
Rethinkingmateriality:
the
engagement of
mind withthe material world
(ed s)
E.
DeMarrais,
C. Gosd en &
C.
Renfrew, 63-71. Cambrid ge:
McDonald I nstitute for
Archaeological
Research.
-
2004c.
Rock art and rock music:
petroglyphs
of the southI nd ian Neolithic.
Antiquity 78, 38-53.
,
R. KORI SETTAR & D. FULLER
2005.
Further researchon the Southern Neolithicand the ashmound
trad ition:the
Sanganakallu-Kupgal Archaeological
Research
Project
I nterim
Report.
Journal of
I nterd isci-
plinary
Stud ies in
History
and
Archaeology
2, 63-89.
-
& M.A. Owoc
(ed s) 2004. Soils,
stones and
symbols:
cultural
perceptions of
the mineral world . Lond on:
UCL Press.
BOURDI EU, P. 1977.
Outline
of
a
theory of practice (trans.
R.
Nice). Cambrid ge:University
Press.
-
199o.
The
logicof practice (trans.
R.
Nice). Cambrid ge:Polity.
BRUMM, A.,
N.
BoI vI N
& R. FULLAGAR
2006. Signs
of life:
engraved
stone artefacts from Neolithicsouth
I nd ia.
Cambrid ge Archaeological Journal 16, 165-90.
Journal of
the
I nstitute
(N.S.) 13, 267-294
@
I nstitute 2007
,
-,
R.
KORI SETTAR, J.
KOSHY & P. WHI TTAKER
2007.
Stone axe
technology
in Neolithicsouth
I nd ia:evid ence from the
Sanganakallu-Kupgal
area,
mid -eastern Karnataka. Asian
Perspectives 46, 65-95.
BUCKLEY,
A.
(ed .) 1998. Hearing
the
past:essays
in historical
ethnomusicology
and the
archaeology of
sound .
Liege:
Etud es et Recherches
Archeologiques
d e L'Universite
d e
Liege.
BULL,
M. & L. BACK
(ed s) 2003.
The
aud itory
culture read er. Oxford :
Berg.
CLASSEN,
C.
1993.
World s
of
senses:
exploring
senses in
history
and across cultures. Lond on:
Routled ge.
CONNERTON,
P.
1989.
How societies remember.
Cambrid ge:University
Press.
CORBI N,
A.
2003.
The
aud itory
markers of the
village.
I n The
aud itory
culture read er
(ed s)
M. Bull & L.
Back,
117-25.
Oxford :
Berg.
CROss, I .
& A. WATSON
2006.
Acoustics and the human
experience
of
socially organised
sound . I n
Acoustics,
space
and
intentionality:id entifyingintentionality
in the ancient use
of
acoustic
spaces
and structures
(ed s)
C. Scarre & G. Lawson, 107-16.
Cambrid ge:
McDonald I nstitute for
Archaeological
Research.
-,
E. ZUBROW & F. COWAN 2002.
Musical
behaviours and the
archaeological
record : a
preliminary
stud y.
I n
Experimental archaeology (BritishArchaeological Reports
I nternational Series
1035), (ed .)
J. Mathieu, 25-34.
CSORDAS,
T.J. 1990.
Embod iment as a
parad igm
for
anthropology.
Ethos
18, 5-47.
DARVI LL,
T. 2002. White on blond e:
quartz pebbles
and the use of
quartz
at Neolithicmonuments in the I sle
of Man and
beyond .
I n
Colouring
the
past (ed s)
A.
Jones
&
G. MacGregor, 73-91.
Oxford :
Berg.
DEVEREUX,
P. 2001. Stone
age
sound tracks: the acoustic
archaeology of
ancient sites. Lond on:
Vega.
DI CKSON,
F.P.
1981.
Australian stone hatchets:a
stud y
in
d esign
and
d ynamics. Syd ney:
Acad emicPress.
DROBNI CK, J. (ed .) 2004.
Aural cultures. Banff:YYZ Books.
DUNCAN-KEMP, A.M. 1952.
Where
strange paths go
d own. Brisbane:W.R. Smith & Paterson
Pty.
ERLMANN,
V.
(ed .) 2004. Hearing
cultures:
essays
on
sound ,
listening,
and
mod ernity.
Oxford :
Berg.
FAGG, B. 1956.
The
d iscovery
of
multiple
rock
gongs
in
Nigeria.
Man
56, 17-18.
FELD, S. 1982.
Sound and
sentiment:bird s,
weeping, poetics,
and
song
in Kaluli
expression. Philad elphia:
University
of
Pennsylvania
Press.
-
1996.
Waterfalls of
song:
an
acoustemology
of
place resound ing
in
Bosavi,
Papua
New Guinea. I n
Senses
of place (ed s)
S. Feld & K.H.
Basso, 91-135.
Santa Fe:School of American ResearchPress.
FLOOD, J. 1997.
Rock art
of
the
Dreamtime:
images of
ancient Australia.
Syd ney:Angus
& Robertson.
FOOTE, R.B. 1916.
The Foote Collection
ofI nd ian
Prehistoricand
ProtohistoricAntiquities:
notes on their
ages
and
d istribution. Mad ras: Government Museum.
FULLER, D.Q.,
N.
BOI VI N
& R.
KORI SETTAR
in
press. Dating
the Neolithic of South I nd ia:new rad iometric
evid ence for
key
economic,
social and ritual transformations.
Antiquity.
& R.
KORI SETTAR 2004.
The
vegetational
context of
early agriculture
in southI nd ia. Man and
Environment
29, 7-27.
-
,
-
& P.C.
VENKATASUBBAI AH,
2001. Southern Neolithic cultivation
systems:
a reconstruction
based on archaeobotanical evid ence. SouthAsian Stud ies
17, 171-87.
GOLDHAHN, J.
2002.
Roaring
rocks:an aud io-visual
perspective
on
hunter-gatherer engravings
in northern
Swed en and Scand inavia.
Norwegian Archaeological
Review
35, 29-61.
HAMI LAKI S, Y.,
M. PLUCI ENNI K & S.
TARLOW (ed s)
2002.
Thinkingthrough
the
bod y:archaeologies of corpo-
reality.
New York:Kluwer Plenum.
HODDER,
I .
1991. Read ing
the
past. Cambrid ge: University
Press.
HowEs,
D.
(ed .) 1991.
The varieties
of sensory experience:
a sourcebook
for
the
anthropology of
the senses.
Toronto:
University
Press.
I
& C.
CLASSEN 1991. Sound ingsensory profiles.
I n The varieties
of sensory experience:
a sourcebook in
the
anthropology of
the senses
(ed .)
D.
Howes, 257-88.
Toronto:
University
Press.
I NGOLD,
T. 2000. The
perception of
the
environment:
essays
in
livelihood ,
d welling
and skill. Lond on:
Routled ge.
JACKSON,
M.
1989.
Paths toward s a
clearing:
rad ical
empiricism
and
ethnographic inquiry. Bloomington:
I nd iana
University
Press.
(-
ed .) 1996. Things
as
they
are:new d irections in
phenomenological anthropology. Bloomington:
I nd iana
University
Press.
JONES,
A. & G.
MACGREGOR (ed s)
2002.
Colouring
the
past.
Oxford :
Berg.
KONRAD, G., P. Goo
&
U. KONRAD 1995. Asmat, Mythen
und Rituale
I nspiration.
Venice:ErizzoEd itrice.
LAKOFF, G.
&
M. JOHNSON 1999. Philosophy
in the
flesh:
the embod ied mind and its
challenge
to Western
thought.
New York:Basic Books.
LANNI NG, E.C. 1958. A
ringing
rock associated with
rain-making, Ugand a.
South
African Archaeological
Bulletin 51:8,
83-4.
Journal of
the
I nstitute
(N.S.) 13, 267-294
@
I nstitute 2007
LAWSON, G.,
C. SCARRE,
I .
CROSS
& C. HI LLS
1998. Mound s,
megaliths,
musicand mind :some
thoughts
on
the acoustical
properties
and
purposes
of
archaeological spaces. Archaeological
Review
from Cambrid ge 15,
111-34.
LEROI -GOURHAN,
A.
1964.
La
geste
et la
parole
I -
technique
et
langage.
Paris:Albin Michel.
-
1965.
La
geste
et la
parole
I I - la memoire et les
rythmes.
Paris:Albin Michel.
LEVI N,
D.M.
(ed .) 1993. Mod ernity
and the
hegemony of
vision.
Berkeley: University
of California Press.
MAuSS,
M.
1979. Bod y techniques.
I n
Sociology
and
psychology (trans.
B.
Brewster),
M.
Mauss, 95-123.
Lond on:
Routled ge
&
Kegan
Paul.
MI GONE,
C.
2004.
Flatus vocis:somaticwind s. I n Aural cultures
(ed .) J. Drobnick, 83-95. Banff:YYZ Books.
MOORE,
P.
2003.
Sectarian sound and cultural
id entity
in Northern I reland . I n The
aud itory
culture read er
(ed .)
M. Bull & L.
Back, 265-79.
Oxford :
Berg.
MOUNTFORD,
C.P.
1976.
Nomad s
of
the Australian d esert. Ad elaid e:
Rigby.
MUJUMDAR,
G.G. & S.N.
RAJAGURU 1966.
Ashmound excavations at
Kupgal.
Poona:Deccan
College.
OLSEN, B. 2003.
Material culture after text:
re-memberingthings. Norwegian Archaeological
Review
36, 87-104.
ONG, W.J. 1969.
World as view and world as event. American
Anthropologist 71, 634-47.
OUZMAN, S.
2001.
Seeing
is
d eceiving:
rock art and the non-visual. World
Archaeology 33, 237-56.
PADDAYYA,
K.
1976. Cup-marks
in the
Shorapur
Doab
(SouthI nd ia).
Man
(N.S.) 2, 35-8.
RAI NBI RD,
P. 2002a.
Making
sense of
petroglyphs:
the sound of rock art. I n I nscribed
land scapes: marking
and
makingplace (ed s)
B. David & M.
Wilson, 93-103.
Honolulu:
University
of Hawaii Press.
2 002b.
Marking
the
bod y, marking
the land -
bod y
as
history,
land as
history:tattooing
and
engraving
in Oceania. I n
Thinkingthrough
the
bod y:archaeologies of corporeality (ed s)
Y.
Hamilakis,
M. Pluciennik &
S.
Tarlow, 233-47.
New York:Plenum.
RUHE,
B.
1995. Makinggunflints
in
Brand on,
England . Chips 7:2, 4-9.
SANKALI A,
H.D.
1969.
Mesolithicand
pre-Mesolithic
ind ustries
from
the excavations at
Sanganakallu, Bellary.
Poona:Deccan
College.
SAUNDERS,
N.
2004.
The cosmicearth:
materiality
and
mineralogy
in the Americas. I n
Soils, stones and
symbols:
cultural
perceptions of
the mineral world
(ed s)
N. Boivin & M.A.
Owoc, 123-41.
Lond on:UCL Press.
SCHEPER-HUGHES,
N. & M.M. LOCK
1987.
The mind ful
bod y:
a
prolegomenon
tofuture work in med ical
anthropology.
Med ical
Anthropology Quarterly (N.S.) 1, 6-41.
SI LLAR, B. 1996.
The d ead and the
d rying:techniques
of
transformingpeople
and
things
in the And es.
Journal
of
Material Culture
1, 259-89.
SKERTCHLY, S.B.J. 1879.
On the
manufacture of gun-flints,
the method s
of excavatingfor flint,
the
age of
Palaeolithic
man,
and the connexion between Neolithicart and the
gun-flint
trad e. Lond on:Memoir of the
British
Geological Society.
SKOG,
I . 1998.
North Borneo
gongs
and the
Javanese
gamelan:
a new historical
perspective.
I n
Hearing
the
past:essays
in historical
ethnomusicology
and the
archaeology of
sound
(ed .)
A.
Buckley, 65-101. Liege:
etud es
et Recherches
Arch6ologiques
d e L'Universite d e
Libge.
SMI TH, B.R. 2003. Turning
into Lond on c. 16oo. I n The
aud itory
culture read er
(ed s)
M. Bull & L.
Back, 127-35.
Oxford :
Berg.
SMI TH, M.M. 2003. Listening
tothe heard world s of antebellum America. I n The
aud itory
culture read er
(ed .)
M. Bull & L.
Back, 137-63.
Oxford :
Berg.
STOLLER,
P.
1989.
The taste
of ethnographic things:
the senses in
anthropology. Philad elphia: University
of
Pennsylvania
Press.
SUBBARAO, B. 1948.
Stone
age
cultures
of Bellary.
Poona:Deccan
College.
SUNDARA,
A.
1975.
The
early
chamber tombs
of
SouthI nd ia:a
stud y of
the iron
age megalithic
monuments
of
northern Karnataka. Delhi:
University
Publishers.
TACON,
P.S.C.,
R.
FULLAGER,
S. OUZMAN & K.
MULVANEY 1997. Cupule engravings
from
Jinmium-Granilpi
(northern Australia)
and
beyond :exploration
of a
wid espread
and
enigmatic
class of rock
markings.
Antiquity 71, 942-65.
TI LLEY,
C.
(ed .)
199o. Read ing
material culture. Oxford : Blackwell.
VAUGHAN, J.A., Jr, 1962.
Rock
paintings
and rock
gongs among
the
Marghi
of
Nigeria.
Man
62, 49-52.
WATCHMAN,
A.
1998.
Some observations on the rad iocarbon and
cosmogenic isotope d ating
of
petroglyphs,
Foz C6a, Portugal. Antiquity 72, 197-2oo.
WHI TLEY, D.S., R.I . DORN, J.M. SI MON,
R. RECHTMAN
&
T.K. WHI TLEY 1999. Sally's rockshelter and the
archaeology
of the Vision Quest. Cambrid ge Archaeological
Journal 9, 221-47.
WI LLI AMS,
F.E.
1929. Rain-making
on the River Morehead . The Journal
of
the
I nstitute
of
Great Britain and I reland
59, 379-97.
Journal of
the
I nstitute
(N.S.) 13, 267-294
@
I nstitute
2007
Comprehension
sensuelle, materielle
et
technologique
:une
exploration
d u
paysage
sonore
prehistorique
en I nd e d u Sud
Resume
On observe
d epuis quelques
annees un
interet
croissant d es
archeologues pour
les sens non
visuels,
et en
particulier pour
les sons. La
plupart
d es etud es se sont
cepend ant
consacrees
jusqu'ici
'
la
recherche d e
traces d 'instruments d e
musique
et aux
proprietes acoustiques
d e structures et
d 'espaces particuliers,
monuments ou
grottes par exemple. L'auteur evoque
ici
d 'autres ind ices d 'activites musicales
particulieres
sur le site
prehistorique
d e
d ans le Sud d e
l'I nd e,
avant d e s'interesser a
la
d imension
acoustique
d 'activites
technologiques prod uctives plus
terre-a-terre d u
Neolithique
comme
la
d ecoupe
d es
silex,
le
polissage
d es haches et le
moissonnage
d es r&coltes.
Elle se concentre sur les ind ices d e liens entre
ces activites
h
a
partir
d e leurs
proprietes
materielles,
gestuelles
et sonores com-
munes,
et avance l'id 'e
que
d ans le Sud
neolithique,
la
percussion
d e roches sonores
pour
faire d e
la
musique
n'd tait que
l'un d es
aspects
d 'une
propension
culturelle
plus large
A
r"pond re
aux
imperatifs
technologiques
et rituels
par
le contact d e
la
pierre
sur
la
pierre. L'article
tente d 'introd uire d ans les
recentes
d iscussions sur les sens une
apprehension
d e
la
materialite d e
l'experience
sensorielle
qui
est
encore
negligee
d ans les textes
theoriques, malgre
l'interet
recent
accord e au
corps.
Nicole Boivin is a ResearchFellow at the Leverhulme Centre for Human
Evolutionary
Stud ies,
University
of
Cambrid ge.
She co-d irects the
Sanganakallu-Kupgal Project
withRavi
Korisettar,
Professor and Head of the
Department
of Ancient
History
and
Archaeology,
Karnatak
University.
Ad am Brumm
(Australian
National
University),
Helen Lewis
(University College Dublin),
and David Robinson
(University
of
Bristol)
are also
members of the
Sanganakallu-Kupgal Project,
whichwas initiated in 2002 tound ertake collaborative field -
work on the
prehistory
of southI nd ia.
Nicole
Boivin,
Leverhulme Centre
for
Human
Evolutionary
Stud ies,
The
Henry
Wellcome
Build ing, University of
Cambrid ge,
Fitzwilliam
Street,
Cambrid ge
CB2 1QH,
UK. nlb2o@cam.ac.uk
Journal of
the
I nstitute
(N.S.) 13, 267-294
@
I nstitute
2007

Boivin

Transféré par

Informations du document

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Boivin

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Sensual, Material, and Technological Understanding: Exploring Prehistoric Soundscapes in

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi