Advertisement

Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory

, Volume 4, Issue 3–4, pp 215–237 | Cite as

Inscriptions as artifacts: Precolonial south india and the analysis of texts

  • Kathleen D. Morrison
  • Mark T. Lycett
Article

Abstract

This paper examines one assemblage of texts from southern India, stone inscriptions of the Vijayanagara period, and considers both how these texts have been studied and how that history of research has structured our understanding of the past. We ask how these texts might be interpreted differently, (1) under different conditions of sampling and recovery, with a specific focus on in-field locations of inscriptions, and (2) as sources of information combined with archaeological data. We suggest that traditional source-side criticism of texts might be profitably expanded routinely to include contextual analysis, such as archaeologists apply to studies of artifacts.

Key Words

texts sampling South Asia context 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References Cited

  1. Appadurai, A. (1978). Kings, sects, and temples in South India, 1350–1800 AD. In Stein, B. (ed.),South Indian Temples: An Analytical Reconsideration, Vikas, New Delhi, pp. 47–73.Google Scholar
  2. Appadurai, A. (1981).Worship and Conflict Under Colonial Rule, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  3. Bennet, J. (1984). Text and context: Levels of approach to the integration of archaological and textual data in the Late Bronze Age Aegean.Archaeological Review from Cambridge 3: 63–75.Google Scholar
  4. Bintliff, J. (ed.) (1991).The Annales School and Archaeology, Leicester University Press, Leicester.Google Scholar
  5. Breckenridge, C. A. (1976).Worship and Endowments in South India: The Case of the Sri Minaksi Sundaresvarar Temple, 1833–1922, Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Wisconsin, Madison.Google Scholar
  6. Breckenridge, C.A. (1985). Social storage and the extension of agriculture in South India 1350 to 1750. In Dallapiccola, A. L. (ed.),Vijayanagara: City and Empire, Franz Steiner Verlag, Wiesbaden, pp. 41–72.Google Scholar
  7. Chakrabarti, D. K. (1988).A History of Indian Archaeology from the Beginning to 1947, Munshiram Manoharlal, Delhi.Google Scholar
  8. Champakalakshmi, R. (1981). Peasant state and society in medieval South India: A review article.Indian Economic and Social History Review 18: 411–426.Google Scholar
  9. Cobb, C. R. (1991). Social reproduction and the Longue Duree in the prehistory of the midcontinental United States, In Preucel, R. W. (ed.),Processual and Postprocessual Archaeologies: Multiple Ways of Knowing the Past, Southern Illinois University Press, Carbondale.Google Scholar
  10. Comaroff, J. and Comaroff, J. (1992). Ethnography and the historical imagination. In Comaroff, J., and Comaroff, J. (eds.),Ethnography and the Historical Imagination, Westview, Boulder, CO.Google Scholar
  11. Deetz, J. (1987). History and archaeological theory: Walter Taylor revisited.American Antiquity 53: 13–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Dumond, L. (1970).Homo Hierarchicus: An Essay on the Caste System. (trans. M. Sainsbury), University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
  13. Fabian, J. (1983).Time and the Other: How Anthropology Makes Its Objects, Columbia University Press, New York.Google Scholar
  14. Filliozat, V. (1973).Epigraphie de Vijayanagar de debut a 1377, L'Ecole Francais d'Extreme Orient 91, Paris.Google Scholar
  15. Galloway, P. (1991). The archaeology of ethnohistorical narrative. In Thomas, D. H. (ed.),Columbian Consequences, Vol. 3. The Spanish Borderlands in Pan-American Perspective, Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC, pp. 454–470.Google Scholar
  16. Gopal, B. R. (1985a).Vijayanagara Inscriptions, Vol. 1, Directorate of Archaeology and Museums, Mysore.Google Scholar
  17. Gopal, B. R. (1985b).Vijayanagara Inscriptions, Vol. 2, Directorate of Archaeology and Museums, Mysore.Google Scholar
  18. Gopal, B. R. (1990).Vijayanagara Inscriptions, Vol. 3, Directorate of Archaeology and Museums, Mysore.Google Scholar
  19. Haekel, J. (1970). Source criticism in anthropology. In Naroll, R., and Cohen, R. (eds.),A Handbook of Method in Cultural Anthropology, Columbia University Press, New York, pp. 147–164.Google Scholar
  20. Heitzman, J. (1987). Temple urbanism in medieval South India.Journal of Asian Studies 46: 791–826.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hodder, I. (1987). The contribution of the long term. In Hodder, I. (ed.),Archaeology as Long-Term History, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 1–8.Google Scholar
  22. Karashima, N. (1984).South Indian History and Society: Studies from Inscriptions, A.D. 850-1800, Oxford University Press, Delhi.Google Scholar
  23. Karashima, N. (1992).Toward a New Formation: South Indian Society Under Vijayanagar Rule, Oxford and IBH, Delhi.Google Scholar
  24. Karashima, N. (1996). South Indian temple inscriptions: A new approach to their study. South Asia19: 1–12.Google Scholar
  25. Karashima, N., and Shanmugam, P. (1988).Vijayanagar Rule in Tamil Country as Revealed Through a Statistical Study of Revenue Terms in Inscriptions, Institute for the Study of Languages and Cultures of Asia and Africa, Tokyo.Google Scholar
  26. Karashima, N., and Shanmugam, P. (1989).Vijayanagar Rule in Tamil Country as Revealed Through a Statistical Study of Revenue Terms in Inscriptions, Part 2, Institute for the Study of Languages and Cultures of Asia and Africa, Tokyo.Google Scholar
  27. Knapp, A. B. (ed.) (1992).Archaeology, Annales and Ethnohistory, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  28. Krishnaswami Ayyangar, S. (ed.) (1919).Sources of Vijayanagara History, University of Madras, Madras.Google Scholar
  29. Kulke, H. (1995). Introduction: The study of the state in premodern India. In Kulke, H. (ed.),The State in India, AD 1000–1700, Oxford University Press, Delhi, pp. 1–47.Google Scholar
  30. Lightfoot, K. G. (1995). Culture contact studies: Redefining the relationship between prehistoric and historical archaeology,American Antiquity 60: 199–217.Google Scholar
  31. Little, B. J. (1994). People with history: An update on historical archaeology in the United States.Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 1: 5–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Lyman, L. L. (1994). Quantitative units and terminology in zooarchaeology.American Antiquity 59: 36–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Mauss, M. (1967).The Gift: Forms and Functions of Exchange in Archaic Societies (trans., I. Cunnison), Norton, New York.Google Scholar
  34. Michell, G. A. (1985). A never forgotten city. In Dallapiccola, A. L. (ed.),Vijayanagara City and Empire: New Currents of Research, Vol. 1, Franz Steiner Verlag, Wiesbaden, pp. 196–207.Google Scholar
  35. Morrison, K. D. (1995).Fields of Victory: Vijayanagara and the Course of Intensification, Contributions of the Archaeological Research Facility 53, Berkeley, CA.Google Scholar
  36. Morrison, K. D. (1996). Typological schemes and agricultural change: Beyond Boserup in precolonial South India.Current Anthropology 37: 583–608.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Morrison, K. D. (1997). Agriculture at the edges: Archaeology and history in the Vijayanagara hinterland. In Allchin, B. (ed.),South Asian Archaeology 1995, Oxford and IBH, Delhi (in press).Google Scholar
  38. Morrison, K. D., and Lycett, M. T. (1994). Centralized power, centralized authority? Ideological claims and archaeological patterns.Asian Perspectives 32: 327–350.Google Scholar
  39. Nilakanta Sastri, K. A. (1955).The Colas, University of Madras Press, Madras.Google Scholar
  40. Nilakanta Sastri, K. A. (1966).A History of South India, 3rd ed., Oxford University Press, London.Google Scholar
  41. Nilakanta Sastri, K. A. and Venkataramanayya, M. A. (eds.) (1946).Further Sources of Vijayanagara History, University of Madras, Madras.Google Scholar
  42. Ohnuki-Tierney, E. (ed.) (1990).Culture Through Time: Anthropological Approaches, Stanford University Press, Stanford CA.Google Scholar
  43. Palat, R. (1987). The Vijayanagara empire: Re-integration of the agrarian order of medieval South India. In Claessen, H. J. M., and van der Velde, P. (eds.),Early State Dynamics, E. J. Brill, Leiden, pp. 170–186.Google Scholar
  44. Parry, J. (1986).The gift, the Indian gift and the “Indian gift.”Man 21(3): 453–473.Google Scholar
  45. Patil, C. S. (1991). Epigraphical studies. In Devaraj, D. V., and Patil, C. S. (eds.),Vijayanagara Progress of Research 1987–88, Directorate of Archaeology and Museums, Mysore, pp. 15–34.Google Scholar
  46. Patil, C. S., and Balasubramaya (1991). Epigraphical studies. In Devaraj, D. V., and Patil, C. S. (eds.),Vijayanagara Progress of Research 1984–87, Directorate of Archaeology and Museums, Mysore, pp. 19–70.Google Scholar
  47. Raheja, G. G. (1988).The Poison in the Gift: Ritual, Prestation, and the Dominant Caste in a North Indian Village, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
  48. Sahlins, M. (1985).Islands of History, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
  49. Schiffer, M. B. (1987).Formation Processes of the Archaeological Record, University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.Google Scholar
  50. Schiffer, M. B. (1990). Review ofArchaeology as Long-Term History, American Antiquity 55: 423–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Schiffer, M. B., Sullivan, A. P., and Klinger, T. G. (1978). The design of archaeological surveys.World Archaeology 10: 1–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Schmidt, P. R., and Patterson, T. C. (eds.) (1995).Making Alternative Histories: The Practice of Archaeology and History in Non-Western Settings, School of American Research Press, Santa Fe.Google Scholar
  53. Sewell, R. (1982).A Forgotten Empire (Vijayanagar). Asian Educational Services Reprint, New Delhi.Google Scholar
  54. Shaffer, B. S., and Sanchez, J. L. J. (1994). Comparison of 1/8" and 1/4" mesh recovery of controlled samples of small-to-medium-sized mammals.American Antiquity 59:525–530.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Shanks, M., and Tilley, C. (1989). Questions rather than answers: reply to comments on archaeology into 1990s.Norwegian Archaeological Review 22: 42–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Sinopoli, C. M., and Morrison, K. D. (1995). Dimensions of imperial control: The Vijayanagara capital.American Anthropologist 97 (1): 83–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Srinivasan, P. R., and Reiniche M. (1990a).Tiruvannamalai: A Saiva Sacred Complex of South India, 1.1 Inscriptions, Institut Francais de Pondichery, Pondicherry.Google Scholar
  58. Srinivasan, P. R., and Reiniche, M. (1990b).Tiruvannamalai: A Saiva Sacred Complex of South India, 1.2 Inscriptions, Institut Francais de Pondichery, Pondicherry.Google Scholar
  59. Stahl, A. B. (1993). Concepts of time and approaches to analogical reasoning in historical perspective.American Antiquity 58: 235–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Stein, B. (1980).Peasant State and Society in Medieval South India, Oxford University Press, Delhi.Google Scholar
  61. Stein, B. (1989).Vijayanagara, The New Cambridge History of India, Vol. 1, Part 2, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  62. Stein, B. (1995). The segmentary state: Interim reflections. In Kulke, H. (ed.),The State in India, AD 1000–1700, Oxford University Press, Delhi, pp. 134–161.Google Scholar
  63. Sullivan, A. P. (1978). Inference and evidence in archaeology: A discussion of conceptual problems. In Schiffer, M. B. (ed.),Advances in Archaeological Method and Theory, Vol. 1, New York, Academic Press, pp. 183–222.Google Scholar
  64. Talbot, C. (1994). Political intermediaries in Kakatiya Andhra, 1175–1325.Indian Economic and Social History Review 31(3): 261–289.Google Scholar
  65. Taylor, W. W. (1948).A Study of Archaeology, Memoirs of the American Anthropological Association 69, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  66. Trigger, B. (1989). History and contemporary American archaeology: A critical analysis. In Lamberg-Karlovsky, C. C. (ed.),Archaeological Thought in America, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 19–34.Google Scholar
  67. Vansina, J. (1970). Cultures through time. In Naroll, R., and Cohen, R. (eds.),A Handbook of Method in Cultural Anthropology, Columbia University Press, New York, pp. 165–179.Google Scholar
  68. Wolf, E. (1982).Europe and the People Without History, University of California Press, Berkeley.Google Scholar
  69. Wood, R. (1990). Ethnohistory and historical method. In Schiffer, M. B. (ed.),Archaeological Method and Theory, Vol. 2, University of Arizona Press, Tucson, pp. 81–109.Google Scholar
  70. Wylie, A. (1985). The reaction against analogy. In Schiffer, M. (ed.),Advances in Archaeological Method and Theory, Vol. 8, Academic Press, New York, pp. 63–111.Google Scholar
  71. Wylie, A. (1992). Of “heavily decomposing red herrings”: Scientific method in archaeology and the ladening of evidence with theory, In Embree, L. (ed.),Meta-archaeology, Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht, pp. 269–288.Google Scholar
  72. Young, T. C., Jr. (1987). Since Herodotus, has history been a valid concept?American Antiquity 53: 7–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kathleen D. Morrison
    • 1
  • Mark T. Lycett
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of AnthropologyUniversity of ChicagoChicago

Personalised recommendations