Gua Tambun Prehistoric Rock Art: A Social Perspective Chaw Yeh Saw Centre for Global Archaeological Research (CGAR) Universiti Sains Malaysia [email protected] Hsiao Mei Goh Centre for Global Archaeological Research (CGAR) Universiti Sains Malaysia [email protected] Mokhtar Saidin Centre for Global Archaeological Research (CGAR) Universiti Sains Malaysia Abstract This study explores contemporary interpretations of Gua Tambun Prehistoric Rock Art in Peninsular Malaysia from a social perspective. It argues that interpretations of rock art by contemporary societies are poorly researched in Malaysian archaeological studies and that an examination into contemporary perceptions would advance rock art conservation from the grass-roots level. To date, more than 600 rock art images have been documented at Gua Tambun over three seasons of exploration since 1959. However, it is ironic to point out that interpretation s of Gua Tambun Rock Art are solely archaeologically​​ orientated and still socially under-represented. This reflects a “pattern of social exclusion” and further suggest s an urge to encourage the inclusion of local community in rock art interpretation. Given that i t is important not to undervalue the perception and attachment of the contemporary society towards the rock art, this study shed s light on the meanings that contemporary society give s rock art , specifically how contemporary society attaches meaning to the rock art through long-term social interaction with Gua Tambun. Keywords: Gua Tambun, social meaning, rock art conservation, prehistoric rock art 1.0 INTRODUCTION Interpretation of rock art has always been a debatable subject in the field of rock art studies (McNiven 2011; Solomon 2013; Pearce 2014; Biggs 2015; Lewis-Williams et al. 2015). The interpretation from the perspective of an archaeologist is often criticized as lacking validity or objectivity as it falls solely on the eyes of the beholder (Bednarik 2011, 2013, 2014). However, in most cases, the meanings and values of the heritage places or fabric were ascribed by the archaeologists or heritage professionals based on their own archaeological assessments (Bryne et al. 2003; Bednarik 2013). Bednarik (2013) stressed that researchers should be aware of political and cultural bias in rock art interpretation as this could directly or indirectly affect the conservation management of a particular rock art site. In other words, investigation into the perception and attachment of contemporary society towards the rock art plays a vital role in conservation and preservation efforts, as it is seen as an approach to make heritage more socially relevant and further encourages social involvement in long term heritage conservation (Goh 2016). Rock art research has been an emerging field of study in Malaysian archaeology since the 1950s (Matthews 1959; Dunn 1964; Adi 1990, 2007; Tan 2010; Mokhtar et al. 2011; Tan et al. 2011; Hamid 2014). However, the contemporary perception towards rock art has often been excluded and it is still under- represented in Malaysia. It is a common phenomenon where the archaeologist and heritage professionals in Malaysia conduct the process of ascribing meanings and values for an archaeological site without consulting and involving local communities who are the “traditional owners” of the heritage site (Goh 2014). For the case of Gua Tambun, the contemporary society’s perception is often excluded rather than being integrated into the interpretation process of the Tambun Rock Art. The lack of interaction among both parties creates a gap between the interpretations by society and the knowledge possessed by professionals. This gap of interpretations needs to be taken seriously for the sustainable development of future conservation and preservation efforts. We suggest that it is by bridging the gap between the perspectives of both the professionals and the contemporary society, we will be able to contribute to a more holistic conservation and preservation plan for the rock art. The function of a rock art site differs through time (McDonald 2013), especially when the site is no longer in use by the same cultural group who produced the rock art. In modern times, rock art sites lie in a more secular context, such as a tourist or heritage site (Tan et al. 2016). Tan et al. (2016) observed the contemporary functions of three rock art sites in northeast Thailand (Khao Chan Ngam in Nakhon Ratchasima Province, and Wat Phra Phuttabat Buaban and Phu Phra Bat in Udon Thani Province), and they noted that it is the landscape of the site and not the rock art itself which plays a bigger role to the continuous usage of the rock art sites. Most of the current inhabitants and users of the site were not aware of the presence and the significance of the rock art in modern times (Tan et al. 2016). On the other hand, McDonald (2013) stressed on the recursive roles of the rock art through time. She demonstrated how the Martu rock art helps to reinforce the mythology and beliefs of the Aboriginal people of the Australian Western Desert – even though the rock art was produced in a different time frame, the Aborigines tend to link them together and interpret them as a homogenous group. The original meaning and functions of the rock art have probably been distorted due to the repetitive usage of the site (McDonald 2013) and different cultural backgrounds between the original artist and the beholder (Domingo et al. 2016). By comparing and contrasting the archaeological analysis with ethnographical information obtained from local indigenous artists and elders, further interpretations on the social context of the rock art can be made (May and Domingo 2010). It is important for the researchers to adopt informed methods during the research process in order to obtain more in-depth interpretations of the rock art meanings (May and Domingo 2010; McDonald 2013; Domingo et al. 2016). Bednarik (2016) in his recent paper explained how the phenomenon of pareidolia affected the interpretations of rock art meaning. In other words, our previous experiences play a critical role when it comes to making sense of visual information (Bednarik 2016). In this paper, we analyse the interpretations provided by the contemporary society to gain insights into how they value this particular rock art site. 1.1 Background of Gua Tambun Gua Tambun is a limestone rock shelter situated at Gunong Panjang on the outskirts of the city of Ipoh and about 3 km away from the town of Tambun. Both Ipoh and Tambun were two major towns in the Kinta Valley (Fig. 25.1), in which the region played an important role during various major historical events, such as the blooming of tin mining sectors in the early 1900s, Japanese occupation from 1941- 216 1945 and the Malaysia Emergency Period from 1948-1960 (Khoo and Abdur-Razzaq Lubis 2005). Miners and mining companies from various backgrounds such as the Orang Asli1, Malay, Siamese, Chinese and Europeans were brought in to the region since the 18th century and this massively changed the demographic and landscape of the region (Khoo and Abdur-Razzaq Lubis 2005). Gunong Panjang was mined for its large iron ore deposit by Malaya Mining Company and then by Tambun Mining Company until the early 1960s (Tan 2011). Both Semai and Temiar tribes traditionally inhabited settlements in Perak (Faulstich 1984; Masron, Masami and Ismail 2013). According to the Department of Orang Asli Development (Jabatan Kemajuan Orang Asli or JAKOA), the former was the largest population of Orang Asli in Perak, with their settlements scattered at the Titiwangsa Range, covering the central and southern part of Perak (Masron, Masami and Ismail 2013). For the region where Gua Tambun is located, Faulstich (1984) stated that the land was previously inhabited by the Semai people. The Orang Asli used to be governed by their own customs and social order until they were captured as slaves by the Malays during the spread of the Malay settlements into the more remote area of the country (Carey 1976; Khoo and Abdur-Razzaq Lubis, 2005). The original population in the region underwent more drastic change during the Emergency period in Perak from 1948 to 1960 where the Orang Asli faced forced resettlements and air raids (Carey 1976; Khoo and Abdur-Razzaq Lubis 2005; Nah 2006). According to Tan (2010), there were still Orang Asli staying at Gunong Panjang during Matthew’s documentation of the site. However, there is no Orang Asli settlement in Gunong Panjang at the present day (Department of Orang Asli Development Kinta and Kampar, 2016, pers. comm.). These events led to a drastic modification to the demographic in the region over the past 100 years, thus making it rather difficult to identify the traditional ownership of the rock art in our current stage of research. Hence, in this paper, the “traditional owner” only refers to the residents who currently reside in the vicinity of Ipoh or Tambun town. “Social perspectives” refers to how the contemporary people perceive the meaning of the rock art and how they locate themselves in relation to the rock art. At present, Gua Tambun lies in the middle of a busy town. An expressway, a petrol station, residential areas, temples and a Royal Malay Army Regiment Camp (Kem Rejimen Askar Melayu Diraja Tambun) are found within a 2-km radius from Gua Tambun. The original iron ore mining site at the foothill of Gunong Panjang has been converted into a private polo field. A Hindu temple was built inside a small cave at the foothill and devotees still visit the temple to this day. The Gua Tambun Rock Art site is approximately 50 m above current ground level and can be easily accessed through a concrete staircase. It currently holds the oldest surviving red painting rock art site in Peninsular Malaysia, relatively dated to the Neolithic period between 2,500 and 4,000 years ago.