DOCSLIB.ORG

IEEE Paper Template in A4 (V1)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
IEEE Paper Template in A4 (V1) INFOKARA RESEARCH ISSN NO: 1021-9056 A STUDY ON THE STRUCTURAL PATTERNS OF MEGALITHS IN DHARMAPURI AND KRISHNAGIRI DISTRICTS G. Karthick 1, Dr.P.Venkateswaran 2 1 Ph.D Research Scholar, PG & Research Department of History, Govt Arts College For Men-Krishnagiri. 2Assistant Professor, PG & Research Department of History, Govt Arts College For Men- Krishnagiri. 1 [email protected] Abstract— Some systematic studies on the structural Patterns of Megaliths in Dharmapuri and Krishnagiri district reveal certain significant architectural features of the Megalithic monuments. The Megaliths in general may be grouped in to two types one the Primary structure and the other being the Multifaceted type. Each one of these types has certain peculiar architectural characters. Each has variants constituted with few additional features predominantly set-upped outwardly. Here I made an attempt to reveal the structural patterns of Megalithic monuments in Dharmapuri and Krishnagiri districts. Keywords- Megaliths, Structural patterns, Dharmapuri, Krishnagiri. I. INTRODUCTION In Dharmapuri and Krishnagiri district, sites with Megalithic monuments occur both in Iron Age as well as in Early Historic context. With only three Megalithic burials were excavated each on at Mayiladumparai, Vadamalaikunda and Modur amongst more than 5000 monuments existed allover two districts. The number was almost near to nil in terms of excavation. A cist was excavated in Vadamalaikunda and in other two cases cairn circle was involved. With minimum data available from threes excavations it make difficult to differentiate these two categories of monuments, viz., Iron Age Megalithic monuments and Early Historic monuments and the structural characters of the monuments. Moreover Nearly 90% of the Iron Age sites continued in their occupation and got transformed into Early Historic. There is hardly any cultural gap between these two periods. The surface observations made through intensive explorations provided a good picture on the typology of these monuments but fail to reveal hidden nature. The accumulated knowledge obtained through said three excavations in these two districts and particularly from disturbed sites, helped to some extant to understand the subterranean nature of these monuments. The internal chronology of the Megaliths is a difficult problem though the radiocarbon dates are useful for determining the overall-chronological span of the megaliths; on radio carbon dates were available in these two districts. Summarizing the evidence from the research carried out so far, the Megaliths of the study region can be tentatively dated from the end of the second millennium BCE to the beginning of the Christian era. II. MAJOR KINDS OF MEGALITHS Many kinds of burial structures of the Megalithic culture were identified in various explorations. Recent study taking consideration of all available structure revealed by excavations and disturbed structures found in explorations the structures were classified into two major groups with its sub divisions. They are: the Primary or Core or Simple structures and the Multifaceted structures. The multifaceted structures are outward set-ups encircling the simple structures. Generally the outward look of a burial drives it distinctive name. Volume 8 Issue 11 2019 1851 http://infokara.com/ INFOKARA RESEARCH ISSN NO: 1021-9056 I.Primary or Core or Simple Burial Structures Barrow or Pit, Urn, Sarcophagus and cist constitutes the Primary or Core or Simple Burial structures. They are individual and exclusive in nature. From the findings the Primary or Core or Simple burial structures were buried with the body of the dead, bones, burial or memorial objects and other burial objects. The Primary /Core / simple structure usually found beneath the ground level. And they were non- visible commonly disturbed. Whereas the Multifaceted structures like Dolmen, Dolmenoid cist, Cairn circle, Cairn heap, Menhir, Anthromorphic have risen upon any one of the primary burial structures, visible above the ground level. Most of upper structures form the support and decorative architecture. Excluding the Anthropomorphic all other types are present in Dharmapuri and Krishnagiri districts. II.Multifaceted Burial structures Dolmen, Dolmenoid cist, Cairn circle, Cairn heap circle and Menhir have risen as a superstructure above the primary burial structures are classified as Multifacedted megalithic burials. In this type, the primary structure act as a central element beneath the ground where super structures have risen, thus forming a Multifaceted burial structure. III. THE STRUCTURES OF PRIMARY BURIAL The structures of primary burials are the Barrow or Pit, Urn, Sarcophagus and Cist. As said earlier they are individual and exclusive in nature. They are found in various measurements the Urn and Sarcophagus were earthen wares; the cist was box like structure arranges by four either natural or dressed stone slabs. The Cist based on their shape they are three types such as slab cist and Dolmen cist. And third being the Dolmenoid Cist. The third one was named by B. Narasimaiah; because of its half buried and half exposed above ground level nature. The Cist structure was constructed by four orthostates or upright stone slab kept in clockwise or anti- clockwise i.e. ‘Svastika pattern’ direction on a floor slab and was enclosed by a cap stone. It is constructed ensuring each slab slightly projecting beyond the length of the other and thus affording a strong bond and also preventing collapse. Usually a porthole noticed at the center or at the top of the eastern orthostate. The ‘slab cist’ was nothing but the cist pattern described above. The slab cist usually refers cist built with dressed orthostates. So far five variants of Cist structure were noticed. They are: 1. Cist with passage’ 2. Transepted cist, 3. Cist with subsidiary cists, 4 Cist with Benches and and 5. Cist with chambers. However the last four structures were not exposed so far in Dharmapuri and Krishnagiri districts. IV. CIST WITH PASSAGE One passage was constructed in front of the porthole of cist by placing three vertical slabs. Two slabs placed on either side of the porthole at right angle to the eastern orthostate and the third one against these two slabs. In most of the cases they were not raised from the bottom of the pit. The pit was closed by boulders or sand up to the bottom portion of the porthole and a base slab placed in the passage. Then the vertical passage slabs were placed as stated above. V. THE TYPES OF MULTIFACETED STRUCTURES In the Multifaceted structures were made with a combination of primary structures and with additional structures and superstructures using boulder stone and slab stones; which gave them a multifaceted look or a complex structure. 1. Dolmen It was major type of Megalithic burial found in Krishnagiri. There are many variants are identified in Dolmen structure. Their structure varies place to place and with availability of raw materials. Simple Dolmens, Dolmen encircled by single or multiple slab circles, Dolmen with passage types are variants in the tract. Volume 8 Issue 11 2019 1852 http://infokara.com/ INFOKARA RESEARCH ISSN NO: 1021-9056 2. Simple Dolmen Simple Dolmen type was made of four orthostates placed in clockwise or anti-clockwise direction to form a box-like structure similar to a Cist; but placed above the ground level; and arranged with or without a porthole on the east; and covered by a capstone. 3. Dolmen encircled by single or multiple stone or slab circles In the variant the whole of Dolmen structure is encircled by either by stone or by a rectangular slab circle. When the circle is made with stone it is called ‘Dolmen encircled by stone circle’; when the circle is made with slabs it is called slab circle. The number of circles may vary from one to three. When it is more than one circle the outer circle is small in height than the next inner circle. The whole structure looks like a fortification wall. The slab structure is set-up like a wall or stone railing either continuously or at regular intervals or four cardinal points. To avoid any inward or outward collapse of the vertical slabs or orthostates rectangular brick-shaped stone blocks were placed in number of courses in the gap between the slab circles and dolmen covering half the size of the dolmen. 4. Sub - Variant A sub variant in ‘Dolmen with slab circle’ type is found in Mallachandram and Maharajakadai in present Krishnagiri district. In this sub-variant had single or double slabs of the inner circle rose above the height of the dolmen. In each slab circle, slabs with rectangular or flat top and slab with semi-circular top slab always occupy the cardinal points. The slab standing against the eastern orthostate of the dolmen also had round portholes identical to the porthole of the dolmen. Generally this particular kind of dolmen may belong to some important person of the society. These Dolmen are of special types. Around these in specific intervals stone fence or stone wall shaped slab stones will be constructed in circles. They will be like prahara or pragaram in temples. Some stone cist have outer slab stones higher than the inner ones. To prevent these slab stones from falling little rectangle shaped slab stones were arranged on either sides up to half of the height of slab stones. When one such cist is seen as a whole it is look like a fort with a wall or a temple with a pragaram. 5. Dolmen with passage In this type, a passage, an additional architectural feature is noticed in front of the porthole, i.e., on the eastern side in simple dolmen. These passages were developed similar to that of a Cist type placed below the ground level. Generally the passage lies between the dolmen and the circle. 6. Dolmenoid Cist The Dolmenoid cist, the chamber is made with dressed slabs or unhewn stones which are partly buried and partly above ground capped by a single or multiple capstones.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Pottery Technology As a Revealer of Cultural And
    Pottery technology as a revealer of cultural and symbolic shifts: Funerary and ritual practices in the Sion ‘Petit-Chasseur’ megalithic necropolis (3100–1600 BC, Western Switzerland) Eve Derenne, Vincent Ard, Marie Besse To cite this version: Eve Derenne, Vincent Ard, Marie Besse. Pottery technology as a revealer of cultural and symbolic shifts: Funerary and ritual practices in the Sion ‘Petit-Chasseur’ megalithic necropolis (3100–1600 BC, Western Switzerland). Journal of Anthropological Archaeology, Elsevier, 2020, 58, pp.101170. 10.1016/j.jaa.2020.101170. hal-03051558 HAL Id: hal-03051558 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-03051558 Submitted on 10 Dec 2020 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 58 (2020) 101170 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Journal of Anthropological Archaeology journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jaa Pottery technology as a revealer of cultural and symbolic shifts: Funerary and ritual practices in the Sion ‘Petit-Chasseur’ megalithic necropolis T (3100–1600 BC,
    [Show full text]
  • Neolithic and Earlier Bronze Age Key Sites Southeast Wales – Neolithic
    A Research Framework for the Archaeology of Wales Key Sites, Southeast Wales, 22/12/2003 Neolithic and earlier Bronze Age Key Sites Southeast Wales – Neolithic and early Bronze Age 22/12/2003 Neolithic Domestic COED-Y-CWMDDA Enclosure with evidence for flint-working Owen-John 1988 CEFN GLAS (SN932024) Late Neolithic hut floor dated to 4110-70 BP. Late Neolithic flints have been found at this site. Excavated 1973 Unpublished: see Grimes 1984 PEN-Y-BONT, OGMORE (SS863756) Pottery, hearth and flints Hamilton and Aldhouse-Green 1998; 1999; Gibson 1998 MOUNT PLEASANT, NEWTON NOTTAGE (SS83387985) Hut, hearth, pottery Savory 1952; RCAHMW 1976a CEFN CILSANWS HUT SITE (SO02480995) Hut consisting of 46 stake holes found under cairn. The hut contained fragments of Mortlake style Peterborough Ware and flint flakes Webley 1958; RCAHMW 1997 CEFN BRYN 10 (GREAT CARN) SAM Gml96 (SS49029055) Trench, pit, posthole and hearth associated with Peterborough ware and worked flint; found under cairn. Ward 1987 Funerary and ritual CEFN BRYN BURIAL CHAMBER (NICHOLASTON) SAM Gml67 (SS50758881) Partly excavated chambered tomb, with an orthostatic chamber surviving in a roughly central position in what remains of a long mound. The mound was made up peaty soil and stone fragments, and no trace of an entrance passage was found. The chamber had been robbed at some time before the excavation. Williams 1940, 178-81 CEFN DRUM CHAMBERED TOMB (SN61360453,) Discovered during the course of the excavation of a deserted medieval settlement on Cefn Drum. A pear-shaped chamber of coursed rubble construction, with an attached orthostatic passage ending in a pit in the mouth of a hornwork and containing cremated bone and charcoal, were identified within the remains of a mound with some stone kerbing.
    [Show full text]
  • How to Tell a Cromlech from a Quoit ©
    How to tell a cromlech from a quoit © As you might have guessed from the title, this article looks at different types of Neolithic or early Bronze Age megaliths and burial mounds, with particular reference to some well-known examples in the UK. It’s also a quick overview of some of the terms used when describing certain types of megaliths, standing stones and tombs. The definitions below serve to illustrate that there is little general agreement over what we could classify as burial mounds. Burial mounds, cairns, tumuli and barrows can all refer to man- made hills of earth or stone, are located globally and may include all types of standing stones. A barrow is a mound of earth that covers a burial. Sometimes, burials were dug into the original ground surface, but some are found placed in the mound itself. The term, barrow, can be used for British burial mounds of any period. However, round barrows can be dated to either the Early Bronze Age or the Saxon period before the conversion to Christianity, whereas long barrows are usually Neolithic in origin. So, what is a megalith? A megalith is a large stone structure or a group of standing stones - the term, megalith means great stone, from two Greek words, megas (meaning: great) and lithos (meaning: stone). However, the general meaning of megaliths includes any structure composed of large stones, which include tombs and circular standing structures. Such structures have been found in Europe, Asia, Africa, Australia, North and South America and may have had religious significance. Megaliths tend to be put into two general categories, ie dolmens or menhirs.
    [Show full text]
  • Stone-Cist Grave at Kaseküla, Western Estonia, in the Light of Ams Dates of the Human Bones
    Estonian Journal of Archaeology, 2012, 16, 2, 91–117 doi: 10.3176/arch.2012.2.01 Margot Laneman STONE-CIST GRAVE AT KASEKÜLA, WESTERN ESTONIA, IN THE LIGHT OF AMS DATES OF THE HUMAN BONES The article discusses new AMS dates of the human bones at stone-cist grave I at Kaseküla, western Estonia, in the context of previously existent radiocarbon dates, artefact finds and osteological studies. There are altogether 12 radiocarbon dates for 10 inhumations (i.e. roughly a third of all burials) of the grave, provided by two laboratories. The dates suggest three temporally separated periods in the use life of the grave(s): the Late Bronze Age, the Pre-Roman Iron Age and the Late Iron Age. In the latter period, the grave was probably reserved for infant burials only. Along with chronological issues, the article discusses the apparently unusual structure of the grave and compares two competing osteological studies of the grave’s bone assemblage from an archaeologist’s point of view. Margot Laneman, Institute of History and Archaeology, University of Tartu, 18 Ülikooli St., 50090 Tartu, Estonia; [email protected] Introduction The main aim of this article is to present and discuss new radiocarbon (AMS) dates of the human bones collected from stone-cist grave I at Kaseküla, western Estonia. The stone-cist grave was excavated by Mati Mandel in 1973 with the purpose of specifying the settlement history of the region (Mandel 1975). So far it has remained the only excavated stone-cist grave in mainland western Estonia (Mandel 2003, fig. 20). Excavation also uncovered a Late Neolithic settlement site beneath the grave, which was further investigated by Aivar Kriiska in 1997 (Kriiska et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Megalithic Astronomy in South India
    In Nakamura, T., Orchiston, W., Sôma, M., and Strom, R. (eds.), 2011. Mapping the Oriental Sky. Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Oriental Astronomy. Tokyo, National Astronomical Observatory of Japan. Pp. xx-xx. MEGALITHIC ASTRONOMY IN SOUTH INDIA Srikumar M. MENON Faculty of Architecture, Manipal Institute of Technology, Manipal – 576104, Karnataka, India. E-mail: [email protected] and Mayank N. VAHIA Tata Institute of Fundamental Research, Mumbai, India, and Manipal Advanced Research Group, Manipal University, Manipal – 576104, Karnataka, India. E-mail: [email protected] Abstract: The megalithic monuments of peninsular India, believed to have been erected in the Iron Age (1500BC – 200AD), can be broadly categorized into sepulchral and non-sepulchral in purpose. Though a lot of work has gone into the study of these monuments since Babington first reported megaliths in India in 1823, not much is understood about the knowledge systems extant in the period when these were built – in science and engineering, and especially in mathematics and astronomy. We take a brief look at the archaeological understanding of megaliths, before making a detailed assessment of a group of megaliths in the south Canara region of Karnataka State in South India that were hitherto assumed to be haphazard clusters of menhirs. Our surveys have indicated that there is a positive correlation of sight-lines with sunrise and sunset points on the horizon for both summer and winter solstices. We identify five such monuments in the region and present the survey results for one of these sites, demonstrating their astronomical implications. We also discuss the possible use of megaliths in the form of stone alignments/ avenues as calendar devices.
    [Show full text]
  • ARC 112 History of Architecture II
    Prehistoric Architecture Dr. Zeinab Feisal Stone Age period When? Where? How did we know about it? What about social characteristics & Believes? Architecture of the civilization. Stone Age period Occurred before invention of written records No written record from the prehistoric period How did we know about it? Information is gathered from scientific studies of prehistoric objects Many academic disciplines are interested in studying human civilization- archeology, paleontology, anthropology etc The disciplines study prehistoric objects They provide information about civilizations based on studies Early Stone Age (or Paleolithic) Up to 9000 BC New Stone Age (or Neolithic) Stone Age STONE AGE 9000 BC to 3000 BC Stone Age period Not restricted to any particular geographical region Occurred in different locations, Usually close to sources of food, near rivers Stone Age period Life style differed between the Early Stone Age period and the New Stone Age Period Each of the two periods will be examined independently to understand the people and their society Nomadic, always on move Move about in search of food, water, and good climate Got their food through food gathering, hunting and fishing Usually move about in small bands of less than 15 persons Not much is known about their beliefs GOT THEIR FOOD THROUGH FOOD GATHERING, HUNTING AND FISHING GOT THEIR FOOD THROUGH FOOD GATHERING, HUNTING AND FISHING People stopped wandering and settled down in permanent settlements Discovered art of farming and animal husbandry Period
    [Show full text]
  • Megaliths and Geology: a Journey Through Monuments, Landscapes and Peoples
    Megaliths and Geology Megálitos e Geologia MEGA-TALKS 2 19-20 November 2015 (Redondo, Portugal) Edited by Rui Boaventura, Rui Mataloto and André Pereira Access Archaeology aeopr ch es r s A A y c g c e o l s o s e A a r c Ah Archaeopress Publishing Ltd Summertown Pavilion 18-24 Middle Way Summertown Oxford OX2 7LG www.archaeopress.com ISBN 978-1-78969-641-7 ISBN 978-1-78969-642-4 (e-Pdf) © the individual authors and Archaeopress 2020 Financial support for the meeting Mega-Talks 2 has been provided by the project Moving megaliths in the Neolithic (PTDC/EPH-ARQ/3971/2012), funded by FCT (Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia, Portugal) and the Municipality of Redondo (Portugal). All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the copyright owners. This book is available direct from Archaeopress or from our website www.archaeopress.com Contents Introduction: Megaliths and Geology: a journey through monuments, landscapes and peoples ........................... iii Moving megaliths in the Neolithic - a multi analytical case study of dolmens in Freixo-Redondo (Alentejo, Portugal). Rui Boaventura, Patrícia Moita, Jorge Pedro, Rui Mataloto, Luis Almeida, Pedro Nogueira, Jaime Máximo, André Pereira, José Francisco Santos & Sara Ribeiro ............................................................... 1 Funerary megalithism in the south of Beira Interior: architectures, spoils and cultural sequences. João Luís Cardoso .................................................................................................................................................................. 25 A look at Proença-a-Nova’s Megalithism (Beira Baixa Intermunicipal Community, UNESCO Global Geopark Naturtejo, Portugal).
    [Show full text]
  • Megaliths in Ancient India and Their Possible Association to Astronomy1
    MEGALITHS IN ANCIENT INDIA AND THEIR POSSIBLE ASSOCIATION TO ASTRONOMY1 Mayank N. Vahia Tata Institute of Fundamental Research, Mumbai, India And Manipal Advanced Research Group, Manipal University Manipal – 576104, Karnataka, India. E-mail: [email protected] Srikumar M. Menon Faculty of Architecture, Manipal Institite of Technology Manipal – 576104, Karnataka, India. E-mail: [email protected] Riza Abbas Indian Rock Art Research Centre, Nashik (a division of Indian Numismatic, Historical and Cultural Research Foundation), Nashik E-mail: [email protected] Nisha Yadav Tata Institute of Fundamental Research, Mumbai, India E-mail: [email protected] Abstract The megalithic monuments of peninsular India, believed to have been erected in the Iron Age (1500BC – 200AD), can be broadly categorized into sepulchral and non-sepulchral in purpose. Though a lot of work has gone into the study of these monuments since Babington first reported megaliths in India in 1823, not much has been understood about the knowledge systems extant in the period these were built – in science and engineering, especially mathematics and astronomy. We take a brief look at the archaeological understanding of megaliths, before taking a detailed assessment of a group of megaliths (in the south Canara region of Karnataka state in South India) that were hitherto assumed to be haphazard clusters of menhirs. Our surveys have indicated positive correlation of sight-lines with sunrise and sunset points on the horizon for both summer and winter solstices. We identify 5 such monuments in the region and present the survey results for one of the sites, demonstrating the astronomical implications. We also discuss the possible use of the typologies of megaliths known as stone alignments/avenues as calendar devices.
    [Show full text]
  • Island Meditation Parkland Features Stonehenge-Like Monuments
    Island Meditation Parkland features Stonehenge-like Monuments (SEATTLE, Washington) - On a 72-acre parcel logged 20 years ago, forest, streams, ponds, and a peat bog have found new life as "Earth Sanctuary." A 500-year master plan for its restoration now guides the future of this Whidbey Island nature reserve and meditation parkland north of Seattle. More than 4,000 plants from 60 native species are being planted in the first phase of the plan, according to Dan Borroff, the project's award-winning landscape designer. The remarkable project created by a remarkable visionary, Chuck Pettis, has the environmental goal of restoring the landscape's old growth forest, wetlands, and streams - as well as providing habitat for the greatest possible diversity of bird and animal species native to Whidbey Island. See http://www.EarthSanctuary.org. "Earth Sanctuary is designed to restore wholeness to the human spirit, as well as to the natural environment" says Pettis, noted for his megalithic Stonehenge-like environmental artworks, as well as his writings. Visitors, on a reservation basis, are welcome to walk the two miles of Earth Sanctuary's forested paths and to meditate at the sites of the environmental artworks. The stone structures, designed as focal points for meditation, include a labyrinth, a dolmen, and a stone circle. In Borroff's view, planning for human response - both emotional and intellectual - is an integral part of good design. He describes his plant placement choices as "enhanced environmentalism." Borroff believes that the project will "nurture our spirit and transform and re-empower our passion for the land." Pettis, author of Secrets of Sacred Space: Discover and Create Places of Power ($20, Llewellyn), has financed the entire project with personal funds.
    [Show full text]
  • Kd Lald`Fr;K¡
    Megalithic Cultures c`gn~ik’kkf.kd laLd`fr;k¡ Dr. Anil Kumar Professor Ancient Indian History and Archaeology University of Lucknow [email protected] [email protected] Introduction According to V. Gordon Childe the term ‘Megalith’ is derived from two Greeks words, megas means large and lithos means stone and originally introduced by antiquaries to describe a fairly easily definable class of monuments in western and northern Europe, consisting of huge, undress stones. In other words, the Megaliths usually refer to the burials made of large stones in graveyard away from the habitation area. Meadows Taylor believed that resemblances of the east and west were not merely accidental and that “the actual monuments of celto-scythian tribes are found in India and being examined are found to agree in all respects with those of Europe.” James Fergusson argued that they were all “erected by partially civilized races after they had come in contact with the Romans.’ He also stated that it was difficult to comprehend “how and when intercourse could have taken place which led to their similarity.” People like Dubreuil argued an Aryan origin for the megaliths. Elliot and Perry saw the south Indian megaliths and monumental stone architecture as one of the elements reflecting a manifestation of the Egyptian archaic civilization as far back as 1923. In 1872, Fergusson brought out his excellent work entitled “Rude Stone Monuments in all Countries: their age and uses. This first attracted the attention of scholars. Types of megaliths The megaliths are, indeed, among the most widespread remains of stone both in time and space.
    [Show full text]
  • New Discoveries and Documentation of Megalithic Structes in Juffain Dolmen Archaeological Field, Jordan
    Mediterranean Archaeology and Archaeometry, Vol. 18, No 1, (2018), pp. 175-197 Copyright © 2018 MAA Open Access. Printed in Greece. All rights reserved. DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.1161357 NEW DISCOVERIES AND DOCUMENTATION OF MEGALITHIC STRUCTES IN JUFFAIN DOLMEN ARCHAEOLOGICAL FIELD, JORDAN Atef Shiyab1, Kennett Schath, Hussein Al-jarrah, Firas Alawneh2, Wassef Al Sekheneh1 1Faculty of Archaeology and Anthropology-Yarmouk University, Irbid, Jordan. 2Department of Conservation Science, Queen Rania Faculty of Tourism & Heritage, Hashemite University, P.O. Box 330127 Postal Code 13115 Zarqa, Jordan Received: 02/01/2018 Accepted: 02/02/2018 Corresponding Author: Firas Alawneh ([email protected]) ABSTRACT The research presented here is about documentation, analysis and sharing new discoveries of Juffain mega- lithic field. Using Geographic information system (GIS) to produce topographical maps is the basis for the conservation and the development of a Dolmen Heritage Park. A previous survey with Perugia University, was performed in 2016, which provide insight about the high density of megalithic structures and study of structure distribution. While collecting data for a topographical map, of the structural types there are two different categories, single and centers. Single structures are those that stand alone they are, D, Dolmens; TU, Tumulus; T, Tomb; PA – Patio, W – Wall, CA – Cave, CIS - Cistern, S – Silo, P – Press, QS – Quarry Stone, C – Circle and SS – Standing Stone. Five major stunning discoveries relating to the dolmen culture is found. In rank of Importance, here are the discoveries: (1) borders and boundaries, show that each of the dolmen groups stand alone, (2) domestic meeting places point to a sedentary society, (3) quarries and cup hole cen- ters demonstrate a high scale of distribution of central places, and (4) ritualistic centers indicates a higher level of human relationship.
    [Show full text]
  • Prehistoric Western Art 40,000 – 2,000 BCE
    Prehistoric Western Art 40,000 – 2,000 BCE Introduction Prehistoric Europe was an evolving melting pot of developing cultures driven by the arrival of Homo sapiens, migrating from Africa by way of southwest Asia. Mixing and mingling of numerous cultures over the Upper Paleolithic, Mesolithic and Neolithic periods in Europe stimulated the emergence of innovative advancements in farming, food preparation, animal domestication, community development, religious traditions and the arts. This report tracks European cultural developments over these prehistoric periods, Figure 1 Europe and the Near East emphasizing each period’s (adapted from Janson’s History of Art, 8th Edition) evolving demographic effects on art development. Then, representative arts of the periods are reviewed by genre, instead of cultural or timeline sequence, in order to better appreciate their commonalities and differences. Appendices identify Homo sapien roots in Africa and selected timeline events that were concurrent with prehistoric human life in Europe. Prehistoric Homo Sapiens in Europe Genetic, carbon dating and archeological evidence suggest that our own species, Homo sapiens, first appeared between 150 and 200 thousand years ago in Africa and migrated to Europe and Asia. The earliest archeological finds that exhibit all the characteristics of modern humans, including large rounded brain cases and small faces and teeth, date to 190 thousand years ago at Omo, Ethiopia. 1 IBM announced in 2011 that the Genographic Project, charting human genetic data, supports a southern route of human migration from Africa via the Bab-el-Mandeb Strait in Arabia, suggesting a role for Southwest Asia in the “Out of Africa” expansion of modern humans.
    [Show full text]