Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T06:08:38.508Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Rocks of Ages: Tempo and Time in Megalithic Monuments

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 January 2017

Chris Scarre
Chris Scarre*
Affiliation:
Durham University, UK
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Chronology remains a problematic area in prehistoric archaeology but the increasing number and precision of radiometric dates begin to suggest patterns that can be resolved down to the scale of individual lifetimes. The study of megalithic monuments has benefited from these developments but remains hampered by the indirect relationship between the materials that are dated and the structures themselves. Drawing on evidence from France, Scandinavia, and Iberia, it is nonetheless arguable that available patterns of dates suggest an event-like tempo to the construction of megalithic monuments, with large numbers being built within relatively short periods of time. This has implications for typological models and for the social context in which such monuments were designed and built.

La chronologie constitue toujours un sujet problématique pour l'archéologie préhistorique, cependant les progrès dans les datations radiométriques au niveau de leur précision de plus en plus haute nous permettent aujourd'hui de percevoir des régularités jusqu'à l'echelle de la durée de vie individuelle. L'étude des monuments mégalithiques a beaucoup profité de ce progrès scientifique mais elle se trouve toujours freinée par le caractère indirect du rapport entre les matériaux qui sont datés et les structures mégalithiques elles-mêmes. La considération de quelques séquences de la France, des pays scandinaves, et de la péninsule ibérique nous amènent à proposer que les datations maintenant disponibles laissent apparaître l'hypothèse selon laquelle la construction de monuments mégalithiques suivait un rythme non régulier, avec beaucoup de monuments construits pendant des périodes chronologiques assez reduites. Cette constatation apportera des implications significatives pour les séquences typologiques ainsi que pour le contexte social dans lequel des monuments ont été conçus et materialisés.

Zusammenfassung

Zusammenfassung

Chronologie ist nach wie vor ein problematisches Feld der Prähistorischen Archäologie, doch die steigende Zahl und zunehmende Präzision radiometrischer Daten beginnt Muster anzudeuten, die bis auf die Ebene individueller Lebensspannen aufgelöst werden können. Die Untersuchung megalithischer Monumente hat von diesen Entwicklungen profitiert, wird jedoch auch weiterhin von der indirekten Beziehung zwischen den datierten Materialien und den Strukturen selbst behindert. Auf der Basis von Daten aus Frankreich, Skandinavien und der Iberischen Halbinsel ist es dennoch denkbar, dass die verfügbaren Datenmuster ein ereignisförmiges Tempo der Konstruktion megalithischer Monumente, mit einer großen, in relativ kurzer Zeit errichteten Anzahl von Anlagen andeuten. Diese Beobachtungen haben Auswirkungen auf typologische Modelle und auf den sozialen Kontext, in dem derartige Monumente entworfen und errichtet wurden.

Keywords

AMS datingchronologymegalithic monumentsNeolithicpassage gravestypologydatations AMSchronologiemonuments mégalithiquesNéolithiquetombes à couloirtypologieAMS-DatierungChronologiemegalithische MonumenteNeolithikumGanggräberTypologie
Type
Articles
Information
European Journal of Archaeology , Volume 13 , Issue 2 , 2010 , pp. 175 - 193
Copyright
Copyright © 2010 Sage Publications 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alonso Matthías, F. and Bello Diéguez, J.M., 1997. Cronología y periodizacion del fenómeno megalítico en Galicia a la luz de las dataciones por Carbono 14. In Rodríguez Casal, A.A. (ed.), Neolítico Atlántico e as Orixes do Megalitismo: 507–520. Santiago de Compostela: Consello da Cultura Galega.Google Scholar
Arias, P., Armendariz, A. and Teira, L.C., 2006. The megalithic complex in Cantabrian Spain. In Rodríguez Casal, A.A. (ed.), The Atlantic Megaliths: 11–29. Oxford: Archaeopress (British Archaeological Reports, International Series 1521).Google Scholar
Atkinson, R.J.C., 1968. Old mortality: some aspects of burial and population in Neolithic England. In Coles, J.M. and Simpson, D.D.A. (eds), Studies in Ancient Europe. Essays Presented to Stuart Piggott: 83–93. Leicester: Leicester University Press.Google Scholar
Bailey, G., 2007. Time perspectives, palimpsests and the archaeology of time. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 26(2):198–223.Google Scholar
Barrett, J.C., 1999. The mythical landscapes of the British Iron Age. In Ashmore, W. and Knapp, A.B. (eds), Archaeologies of Landscape. Contemporary Perspectives: 253–265. Malden, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Boujot, C. and Cassen, S., 1993. A pattern of evolution for the Neolithic funerary structures of the west of France. Antiquity 67(256):477–491.Google Scholar
Bronk Ramsey, C., 2009. Bayesian analysis of radiocarbon dates. Radiocarbon 51(1):337–360.Google Scholar
Calado, M., 2006. Alentejo. Tomar: Centro Europeu de Investigação da Pré-Historia do Alto Ribatejo.Google Scholar
Carrera Ramírez, F. and Fábregas Valcarce, R., 2006. Datación directa de pinturas megalíticas de Galicia. In Carrera Ramírez, F. and Fábregas Valcarce, R. (eds), Arte Parietal Megalítico en el Noroeste Peninsular. Conocimiento y conservación: 37–60. Santiago de Compostela: Tórculo Edicións.Google Scholar
Criado Boado, F. and Fábregas Valcarce, R., 1989. The megalithic phenomenon of northwest Spain: Main trends. Antiquity 63(241):682–696.Google Scholar
Dehn, T., 2009. The megalithic building site. In Scarre, C. (ed.), Megalithic Quarrying. Sourcing, Extracting and Manipulating the Stones: 21–25. Oxford: Archaeopress (British Archaeological Reports, International Series 1923).Google Scholar
Dehn, T. and Hansen, S.I., 2006. Birch bark in Danish passage graves. Journal of Danish Archaeology 14:23–44.Google Scholar
Dehn, T. and Hansen, S.I., 2007. Examples of megalithic technology and architecture in Denmark. In Bloemers, J.H.F. (ed.), Tussen D26 en P14: Jan Albert Bakker 65 jaar: 17–31. Amsterdam: Amsterdams Archeologisch Centrum, Universiteit van Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Dehn, T., Hansen, S.I. and Kaul, F., 1995. Kong Svends Høj. Restaureringer og undersøgelser på Lolland 1991. Copenhagen: Nationalmuseet.Google Scholar
Dehn, T., Hansen, S.I. and Kaul, F., 2000. Klekkendehøj og Jordehøj. Restaureringer og undersøgelser 1985–90. Copenhagen: Nationalmuseet.Google Scholar
Dehn, T., Hansen, S.I. and Westphal, J., 2004. Jaettestuen Birkehøj. Restaureringen af en 5000 år gammel storstengrav. National museets Arbejdsmark 2004:153–173.Google Scholar
Dos Santos, A.P., 1994. Monumentos Megalíticos do Alto Alentejo. Lisbon: Fenda.Google Scholar
Dron, J.-L., Le Goff, I. and Lepaumier, H., 2003. Le fonctionnement des tombes à couloir en Basse-Normandie. In Chambon, P. and Leclerc, J. (eds), Les pratiques funéraires néolithiques avant 3500 av. J.-C. en France et dans les régions limitrophes: 259–286. Paris: Société Préhistorique Française.Google Scholar
Ebbesen, K., 1985. Fortidsminderegistrering i Danmark. København: Fredningsstyrelesen.Google Scholar
García Sanjuán, L.G., 2006. Funerary ideology and social inequality in the Late Prehistory of the Iberian South-West (c. 3300–850 cal BC). In Díaz-del-Río, P. and Sanjuán, L.G. (eds), Social Inequality in Iberian Late Prehistory: 149–169. Oxford: Archaeopress (British Archaeological Reports, International Series 1525).Google Scholar
García Sanjuán, L. and Wheatley, D., 2006. Recent investigations of the megalithic landscapes of Seville province, Andalusia: Dolmen de Palacio III. In Joussaume, R., Laporte, L. and Scarre, C. (eds), Origin and Development of the Megalithic Monuments of Western Europe: 473–484. Bougon: Musée des Tumulus de Bougon.Google Scholar
Gonçalves, V.S., 2006. Some questions about time, space and megalithic symbols in the centre and the south of Portugal. In Joussaume, R., Laporte, L. and Scarre, C. (eds), Origin and Development of the Megalithic Monuments of Western Europe: 485–510. Bougon: Musée des Tumulus de Bougon.Google Scholar
Hansen, S.I., 1993. Jaettestuer i Danmark. Konstruktion og restaurering. Copenhagen: Miljøministeriet.Google Scholar
Hedges, R., Pettitt, P., Bronk Ramsey, C. and Van Klinken, G.J., 1998. Radiocarbon dates from the Oxford AMS system: Archaeometry Datelist 26. Archaeometry 40(2):437–455.Google Scholar
Laporte, L., Joussaume, R. and Scarre, C., 2002. Le tumulus C de Péré a Prissé-la-Charriére (Deux-Sévres). Gallia Préhistoire 44:167–213.Google Scholar
Le Rouzic, Z., 1933. Morphologie et chronologie des sépultures préhistoriques du Morbihan. L'Anthropologie 43:225–265.Google Scholar
Lucas, G., 2008. Time and the archaeological event. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 18(1):59–65.Google Scholar
Lukis, W.C., 1869. On the various forms of monuments, commonly called dolmens, in Brittany, pointing out a progress in their architectural construction, with an attempt to reduce them to chronological order. In International Congress of Prehistoric Archaeology: Transactions of the Third Session which opened at Norwich on the 20th August and closed in London on the 28th August 1868: 218–222. London: Longmans, Green & Co.Google Scholar
Masset, C., 1997. Les Dolmens. Sociétés néolithiques et pratiques funéraires. Paris: Errance.Google Scholar
Midgley, M., 2008. The Megaliths of Northern Europe. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mohen, J.-P. and Scarre, C., 2002. Les Tumulus de Bougon. Complexe mégalithique du Ve au IIIe millénaire. Paris: Errance.Google Scholar
Persson, P. and Sjögren, K.-G., 1995. Radiocarbon and the chronology of Scandinavian megalithic graves. Journal of European Archaeology 3(2):59–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reimer, P.J., Baillie, M.G.L., Bard, E., Bayliss, A., Beck, J.W., Blackwell, P.G., Bronk Ramsey, C., Buck, C.E., Burr, G.S., Edwards, R.L., Friedrich, M., Grootes, P.M., Guilderson, T.P., Hajdas, I., Heaton, T.J., Hogg, A.G., Hughen, K.A., Kaiser, K.F., Kromer, B., McCokmac, F.G., Manning, S.W., Reimer, R.W., Richards, D.A., Southon, J.R., Talamo, S., Turney, C.S.M., Van Der Plicht, J. and Weyhenmeyer, C.E., 2009. IntCa109 and Marine09 radiocarbon age calibration curves, 0-50,000 years cal BP. Radiocarbon 51(4):1111–1150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scarre, C., 2001. Modelling prehistoric populations: The case of Neolithic Brittany. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 20(3):285–313.Google Scholar
Scarre, C., Arias, P., Burenhult, G., Fano, M.A., Oosterbeek, L., Schulting, R., Sheridan, A. and Whittle, A., 2003a. Megalithic chronologies. In Burenhult, G. (ed.), Stones and Bones. Formal Disposal of the Dead in Atlantic Europe during the Mesolithic-Neolithic Interface 6000–3000 BC: 65–111. Oxford: Archaeopress (British Archaeological Reports, International Series 1201).Google Scholar
Scarre, C., Laporte, L. and Joussaume, R., 2003b. Long mounds and megalithic origins in western France: recent excavations at Prissé-la-Charrière. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 67:235–251.Google Scholar
Schuldt, E., 1972. Die mecklenburgischen Megalithgräber. Untersuchungen zur ihrer Architektur und Funktion. Berlin: Deutscher Verlag der Wissenschaften.Google Scholar
Sheiudan, A., 1986. Megaliths and megalomania: An account, and interpretation, of the development of passage tombs in Ireland. Journal of Irish Archaeology 3:17–30.Google Scholar
Soler, L., Joussaume, R., Laporte, L. and Scarre, C., 2003. Le tumulus néolithique C de Péré a Prissé-la-Charrière (Deux-Sèvres): le niveau funéraire de la chambre mégalithioque 1 (phase II du monument). In Chambon, P. and Leclerc, J. (eds), Les pratiques funéraires néolithiques avant 3500 av. J.-C. en France et dans les régions limitrophes: 247–258. Paris: Société Préhistorique Française.Google Scholar
Sprockhoff, E., 1938. Die nordische Megalithkultur. Berlin and Leipzig: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Steelman, K.L., Carrera Ramírez, F., Fábregas Valcarce, R., Guilderson, T. and Rowe, M.W., 2005. Direct radiocarbon dating of megalithic paints from north-west Iberia. Antiquity 79(304):379–389.Google Scholar
Vafiadou, A., Murray, A.S. and Liritzis, I., 2007. Optically stimulated luminescence (OSL) dating investigations of rock and underlying soil from three case studies. Journal of Archaeological Science 34(10):1659–1669.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whittle, A. and Bayliss, A., 2007. The times of their lives: from chronological precision to kinds of history and change. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 17(1):21–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whittle, A., Barclay, A., Bayliss, A., McFadyen, L., Schulting, R. and Wysocki, M., 2007. Building for the dead: Events, processes and changing worldviews from the thirty-eighth to the thirty-fourth centuries cal. BC in southern Britain. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 17(supplement S1):123–147.Google Scholar
Whittle, A., Bayliss, A. and Healy, F., 2008. The timing and tempo of change: examples from the fourth millennium cal. BC in southern England. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 18(1):65–70.Google Scholar