Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T03:27:05.582Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Houses of Commons, Houses of Lords: Domestic Dwellings and Monumental Architecture in Prehistoric Europe

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 April 2013

Richard Bradley
Richard Bradley*
Affiliation:
Department of Archaeology, School of Human and Environmental Sciences, University of Reading, Whiteknights, Reading RG6 6AB UK Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper is based on the 2012 Europa Lecture and discusses the relationship between the forms and structures of domestic buildings and those of public monuments. Its chronological scope extends between the Neolithic period and the Viking Age in western, northern and central Europe, with a special emphasis on the contrast between circular and rectilinear architecture. There were practical limits to the diameters of circular constructions, and beyond that point they might be organised in groups, or their characteristic outlines were reproduced in other media, such as earthwork building. By contrast, the main constraint on building rectangular houses was their width, but they could extend to almost any length. That may be one reason why they only occasionally provided the prototype for specialised forms of monument such as mounds or enclosures. Instead rectangular buildings played a wide variety of roles from domestic dwellings to ceremonial centres.

Résumés

Chambres des Communs, Chambres des Lords: Habitations domestiques et architecture monumentale dans l'Europe préhistorique, de Richard Bradley

Cet article repose sur la Conférence Europa de 2012 et discute des relations entre la forme et la structure des bâtiments domestiques et celles des monuments publics. Son échelle chronologique s’étend de la période néolithique à l’âge des Vikings en Europe occidentale, septentrionale et centrale avec une insistance particulière sur le contraste entre architecture circulaire et rectiligne. Il y avait des limites pratiques au diamètre des constructions circulaires, et ce point dépassé, s'organisaient peut-être en groupes, ou leurs aspects spécifiques étaient reproduits en d'autres matériaux, tels que dans la construction de fortifications en terre. Par contraste, la principale contrainte sur la construction de maisons rectangulaires était leur largeur, mais elles pouvaient s’étendre sur presque n'importe quelle longueur. C'est peut-être une des raisons pour lesquelles elles n'ont qu'occasionnellement fourni de prototype pour des formes spécialisées de monuments tels que des tertres ou des enclos. Au lieu de cela les bâtiments rectangulaires ont joué des rôles très divers, de l'habitation domestique au centre cérémoniel.

Zussamenfassungen

Unterhaus, Oberhaus: Wohngebäude und monumentale Architektur im prähistorischen Europa, von Richard Bradley

Dieser Beitrag basiert auf der Europa Lecture 2012 und diskutiert die Beziehung zwischen Formen und Strukturen von Wohngebäuden sowie von öffentlichen Monumenten. Seine zeitliche Spanne erstreckt sich vom Neolithikum bis zur Wikingerzeit in West-, Nord- und Mitteleuropa; ein Schwerpunkt liegt auf der Gegenüberstellung von Rund- und Rechteckbauten. Für die Konstruktion runder Gebäude bestanden Grenzen der Praktikabilität in Bezug auf ihre Durchmesser, darüber hinaus können sie in Gruppen zusammengestellt oder kann ihre charakteristische äußere Form in anderen Medien reproduziert worden sein, wie z.B. in Erdwerken. Im Gegensatz dazu bestand die wichtigste Konstruktionsgrenze für rechteckige Gebäude in ihrer Breite, ihre Länge dagegen konnte fast unendlich ausgedehnt werden. Dies mag ein Grund dafür sein, warum sie nur gelegentlich als Prototyp für spezialisierte Formen von Monumenten dienten wie Hügel oder Erdwerke. Stattdessen spielten rechteckige Bauten eine Vielzahl verschiedener Rollen, von Wohnbauten bis zu zeremoniellen Zentren.

Resumenes

Casas de los Comunes, Casas de los Lores: viviendas domésticas y arquitectura monumental en la Europa prehistórica, por Richard Bradley

Este artículo se basa en la Conferencia Europa de 2012 y analiza la relación entre las formas y estructuras de las edificaciones domésticas y las de los monumentos públicos. Su ámbito cronológico se extiende entre el Neolítico y la Época Vikinga en el oeste, norte y centro de Europa, con especial énfasis en el contraste entre la arquitectura circular y la rectangular. Existen límites prácticos para el diámetro de las construcciones circulares, más allá de los cuales éstas podrían organizarse en grupo o reproducir sus contornos característicos con otros medios, como las construcciones de tierra. Por el contrario, la principal limitación en la construcción de las viviendas rectangulares fue su anchura, aunque podían alcanzar casi cualquier longitud. Esto podría ser una de las razones por las cuales sólo ocasionalmente se diseñan prototipos de formas especializadas para monumentos como túmulos o recintos. Por otra parte, los edificios rectangulares tuvieron una amplia variedad de roles desde viviendas domésticas a centros ceremoniales.

Keywords

House societiesroundhouseslonghousesIrish royal centresBeowulfthe Táinhallshengesroundelstimber circles
Type
Articles
Information
Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society , Volume 79 , December 2013 , pp. 1 - 17
Copyright
Copyright © The Prehistoric Society 2013 

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

Arnoldussen, S. 2008. A Living Landscape. Bronze Age Settlement Sites in the Dutch River Area c. 2000–800 bc. Leiden: Sidestone PressGoogle Scholar
Ayán Vila, X. 2008. A round Iron Age: the circular house in the hillforts of the Northwestern Iberian Peninsula. e-Keltoi 6, 903–1003Google Scholar
Becker, K. 2009. Iron Age Ireland – finding an invisible people. In G. Cooney, K. Becker, J. Coles, M. Ryan & S. Sievers (eds), Relics of Old Decency. Archaeological Studies in Later Prehistory, 351–361. Dublin: WordwellGoogle Scholar
Biehl, P. 2007. Enclosing places: a contextual approach to cult and religion in Neolithic Central Europe. In D. Barraclough & C. Malone (eds), Cult in Context, 173–182. Oxford: OxbowGoogle Scholar
Bradley, R. 2007. The Prehistory of Britain and Ireland. Cambridge: Cambridge University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bradley, R. 2012. The Idea of Order. The Circular Archetype in Prehistoric Europe. Oxford: Oxford University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burrow, S. 2010. The formative henge: speculations drawn from the circular traditions of Wales and adjacent countries. In J. Leary, T. Darvill & D. Field (eds), Round Mounds and Monumentality in the British Neolithic and Beyond, 182–196. Oxford: OxbowGoogle Scholar
Burnez, C. 2010. Le Camp de Challignac (Charente) au IIIe millénaire av. J.-C. Oxford: British Archaeological Report S2165Google Scholar
Carsten, J., Hugh-Jones, S. (eds) 1995. About the House. Lévi-Strauss and Beyond. Cambridge: Cambridge University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Christensen, T. 2010. Lejre beyond the legend – the archaeological evidence. In H. Jöns, M. Schön & W.H. Zimmerman (eds), Siedlungs-und Küstenforschung im südlichen Nordseegebiet, 237–254. Rahden: Marie LeidorfGoogle Scholar
Corlett, C., Potterton, M. (eds) 2012. Life and Death in Iron Age Ireland. Dublin: WordwellGoogle Scholar
Coudart, A. 1998. Architecture et société néolithique: l'unité et la variance de la maison danubienne. Paris: Maison des sciences de l'hommeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
DeBoer, W. 1997. Ceremonial centres from the Cayapas (Ecuador) to Chillicothe (Ohio, USA). Cambridge Archaeological Journal 7, 225–253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dowling, G. 2011. The architecture of power: an exploration of the origins of closely spaced multivallate monuments in Ireland. In R. Schot, C. Newman & E. Bhreathnach (eds), Landscapes of Cult and Kingship, 213–231. Dublin: Four Courts PressGoogle Scholar
Edwards, N. 1990. The Archaeology of Early Medieval Ireland. London: RoutledgeGoogle Scholar
Eogan, G., Roche, H. 1997. Excavations at Knowth, 2. Dublin: Royal Irish AcademyGoogle Scholar
Fouéré, P. 1998. Deux grands bâtiments du Néolithique final artenacien à Douchapt (Dordogne). In A. D'Anna & D. Binder (eds), Production et identité culturelle. Actualité de la recherché, 311–328. Antibes: Éditions Association pour la promotion et la diffusion des connaissances archéologiquesGoogle Scholar
FitzPatrick, E. 2004. Royal Inauguration in Gaelic Ireland c. 1100–1600. Woodbridge: Boydell PressGoogle Scholar
Gibson, A. 2005. Stonehenge and Timber Circles. Stroud: TempusGoogle Scholar
Griffin-Pierce, T. 1992. Earth is my Mother, Sky is my Father. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico PressGoogle Scholar
Grogan, E. 2008. The Rath of the Synods, Tara, Co. Meath. Dublin: WordwellGoogle Scholar
Haggarty, A. 1991. Machrie Moor, Arran: recent excavations of two stone circles. Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland 58, 51–94Google Scholar
Hamerow, H. 2012. Rural Settlements and Society in Anglo-Saxon England. Oxford: Oxford University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harding, D. 2009. The Iron Age Round-house. Oxford: Oxford University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harding, D., Blake, I., Reynolds, P. 1993. An Iron Age Settlement in Dorset. Excavation and Reconstruction. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Department of ArchaeologyGoogle Scholar
Häusler, A. 1977. Die Bestattungssitten der frühen Bronzezeit zwischen Rhein und oberer Wolga, ihre Voraussetzungen und ihre Beziehungen. Zeitschrift für Archäologie 11, 13–48Google Scholar
Hills, C. 1997. Beowulf and archaeology. In R. Bjork & J. Niles (eds), A Beowulf Handbook, 291–312. Exeter: University of Exeter PressGoogle Scholar
Johnston, S., Campana, D., Crabtree, P. 2009. A geophysical survey at Dún Ailinne, County Kildare, Ireland. Journal of Field Archaeology 34, 385–402CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnston, S., Wailes, B. 2007. Dún Ailinne. Excavations at an Irish Royal Site, 1968 – 1975. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology & AnthropologyCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Joseph, F., Julien, M., Leroy-Langelin, E., Lorin, Y., Praud, I. 2011. L'architecture domestique des sites du IIIe millénaire avant notre ère dans le nord de la France. Révue Archèologique de Picardie numéro special 28, 249–273Google Scholar
Lambot, B. 2000. Essai sur l'organisation spatial des cimetières et structures funérairies à l’Âge du Bronze final III et au premier Âge du Fer en Champagne. In B. Dedet, P. Gruat, M. Py & M. Schwaller (eds), Archéologie de la mort, Archéologie de la tombe au premier Âge du Fer, 233–245. Lattes: CNRSGoogle Scholar
Laporte, L., Tinévez, J.Y. 2004. Neolithic houses and chambered tombs of Western France. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 14, 217–234CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lévi-Strauss, C. 1969. The Elementary Structures of Kinship. London: Eyre & SpottiswoodeGoogle Scholar
Lévi-Strauss, C. 1975. La voie des masques. Geneva: Albert SkiraGoogle Scholar
Lilliu, G. 1988. La civilità dei Sardi. Turin: Nuova EriGoogle Scholar
Ljungqvist, J. 2000. Den förhistoriska bebyggelsen i Gamla Uppsala. Förvannen 95, 154–163Google Scholar
Louboutin, C., Olivier, L., Constantin, C., Sidéra, I., Tresset, A., Farrugia, J-P. 1994. La Tricherie (Vienne). Un site d'habitat du Néolithique recent. In X. Gutherz & R. Joussaume (eds), Le Néolithique du Centre-Ouest de la France, 307–325. Poitiers: Association des archéologues de Poitou-CharenteGoogle Scholar
Lynn, C., McDowell, J. 2011. Deer Park Farms. The Excavation of a Raised Rath in the Glenarm Valley, Co. Antrim. Belfast: Stationery OfficeGoogle Scholar
Mallory, J. (ed.). 1992. Aspects of the Táin. Belfast: DecemberGoogle Scholar
Melicher, P., Nuebauer, W. (eds) 2010. Mittelneolithische Kreisgrabenlagen in Niederösterreich. Vienna: Österreichischer Akademie der WissenschaftenCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Midgley, M. 2008. The Megaliths of Northern Europe. Abingdon: RoutledgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Munch, G.S., Johansen, O.S., Roesdalhl, E. 2003. Borg in Lofoten. A Chieftain's Farm in North Norway. Trondheim: TapirGoogle Scholar
Näsman, U. 1999. The ethnogenesis of the Danes and the making of a Danish kingdom. Anglo-Saxon Studies in Archaeology and History 10, 1–110Google Scholar
Needham, S. 2005. Transforming Beaker culture in North-west Europe. Processes of fusion and fission. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 71, 171–217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Needham, S. 2012. Case and place for the British Chalcolithic. In M. Allen, J. Gardiner & A. Sheridan (eds), Is there a British Chalcolithic?, 1–26. Oxford: Prehistoric Society Research Papers 4Google Scholar
Neill, K. 2009. An Archaeological Survey of County Armagh. Belfast: Stationery OfficeGoogle Scholar
Newman, C. 1997. Tara: An Archaeological Survey. Dublin: Royal Irish AcademyGoogle Scholar
Newman, C. 1998. Reflections on the making of a ‘royal site’ in early Ireland. World Archaeology 30, 127–141CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Niles, J., Osborn, M. (eds) 2007. Beowulf and Lejre. Tempe: Medieval and Renaissance Texts and Studies 223Google Scholar
O'Sullivan, M. 2005. Duma na nGaill. The Mound of the Hostages, Tara. Bray: WordwellGoogle Scholar
Oswald, A. 1997. A doorway on the past. Practical and mystic concerns in the orientation of roundhouse doorways. In A. Gwilt & C. Haselgrove (eds), Reconstructing Iron Age Societies, 87–95. Oxford: OxbowGoogle Scholar
Parker Pearson, M., Sharples, N. 1999. Between Land and Sea. Excavations at Dun Vulan. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic PressGoogle Scholar
Parker Pearson, M. 2012. Stonehenge. London: Simon & SchusterGoogle Scholar
Peek, J. 1975. Inventaire des megaliths de la France. 4: Région Parisienne. Paris: CNRSGoogle Scholar
Petrasch, J. 1990. Mittelneolithische Kreisgrabenanlagen in Mitteleuropa. Bericht der Römisch-Germanischen Kommission 71, 407–564Google Scholar
Pollard, J. 2010. The materialization of religious structures at the time of Stonehenge. Material Religion 5, 332–353CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pollard, J., Robinson, D. 2007. A return to Woodhenge: the results and implications of the 2006 excavation. In M. Larsson & M. Parker Pearson (eds), From Stonehenge to the Baltic. Living with Cultural Diversity in the Third Millennium bc, 159–168. Oxford: British Archaeological Report S1692Google Scholar
Praud, I., Bernard, V., Martial, E., Palau, R. 2007. Un grand bâtiment du Néolitque final a Houplin-Ancoisne ‘La Marais de Santes’ (Nord, France). In M. Besse (ed.), Sociétés Néolithiques, des faits archéologiques au functionnements socio-economiques, 445–460. Lausanne: Cahiers d'archéologie romande 108Google Scholar
Pugin, A. 1841. The True Principles of Pointed or Christian Architecture. London: John WealeGoogle Scholar
Randsborg, K. 2008. Kings’ Jelling. Acta Archaeologica 79, 1–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roymans, N., Kortlang, F. 1999. Urnfield symbolism, ancestors and the land in the Lower Rhine Region. In F. Theuws & N. Roymans (eds), Land and Ancestors, Cultural Dynamics in the Urnfield Period and the Middle Ages in the Southern Netherlands, 33–61. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University PressGoogle Scholar
Ruggles, C. 1999. Astronomy in Prehistoric Britain and Ireland. New Haven: Yale University PressGoogle Scholar
Scarre, C. 2011. Landscapes of Neolithic Brittany. Oxford: Oxford University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schultz Paulsson, B. 2010. Scandinavian models: Radiocarbon dates and the origin and spreading of passage graves in Sweden and Denmark. Radiocarbon 52, 1002–1017CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sharples, N. 2010. Social Relations in Later Prehistory. Wessex in the First Millennium bc. Oxford: Oxford University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sheridan, A. 2004. Going round in circles. Understanding the Grooved Ware ‘complex’ in its wider context. In H. Roche, E. Grogan, J. Bradley, J. Coles & B. Raftery (eds), From Megaliths to Metal, 26–37. Oxford: OxbowGoogle Scholar
Stamper, J. 2005. The Architecture of Roman Temples. Cambridge: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
Stäuble, H. 1997. Die frühbronzezeitliche Siedlung in Zwenkau, Lankreis Leipziger Land. In J. Assendorp (ed.), Forschungen zur bronzezeitlichen Besidelung in Nord-un-Mittelrueopa, 129–147. Espelkamp: Marie LeidorfGoogle Scholar
Stout, M. 1997. The Irish Ringfort. Dublin: Four Courts PressGoogle Scholar
Svanberg, F. 2005. House symbolism in aristocratic death rituals of the Bronze Age. In T. Artelius & F. Svanberg (eds), Dealing with the Dead: archaeological perspectives on prehistoric burial ritual, 73–98. Stockholm: National Heritage BoardGoogle Scholar
Thomas, J. 2010. The return of the Rinyo-Clacton folk? The cultural significance of the Grooved Ware complex in later Neolithic Britain. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 20, 1–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tivénez, J-Y. 2005. Pléchâtel (Ille-et-Vilaine), La Hersonnais. Un ensemple de quatre bâtiments de Néolithique final dans la context des grands architectures de l'ouest de la France. In O. Buchsenschutz & C. Mordant (ed.), Architectures protohistoriques en Europe occidentale du Néolitqiue final à l'age du Fer, 315–329. Paris: Éditions du comitiés travaux historiques et scientifiquesGoogle Scholar
Trnka, G. 1991. Studien zu mittelneolithischen Kreisgrabenanlagen. Vienna: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der WissenschaftenGoogle Scholar
Vander Linden, M. 2012. The importance of being insular. Britain and Ireland in their north-western European context during the 3rd millennium bc. In M. Allen, J. Gardiner & A. Sheridan (eds), Is there a British Chalcolithic?, 71–84. Oxford: Prehistoric Society Research Papers 4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Victor, H. 2001. Bronsålderns kulthus – ett möte mellan profant och sakralt. In H. Bolin, A. Kaliff & T. Zachrisson (eds), Mellan sten och brons, 133–152. Stockholm: Stockholm Archaeological ReportsGoogle Scholar
Victor, H. 2002. Med graven som granne. Om bronsålderns kulthus. Uppsala: Department of Archaeology and Ancient History, Uppsala UniversityGoogle Scholar
Waddell, J. 2011. Continuity, cult and contest. In R. Schot, C. Newman & E. Bhreathnach (eds), Landscapes of Cult and Kingship, 192–212. Dublin: Four Courts PressGoogle Scholar
Waddell, J., Fenwick, J., Barton, K. 2009. Rathcroghan. Archaeological and Geophysical Survey in a Ritual Landscape. Dublin: WordwellGoogle Scholar
Wainwright, G. 1979. Mount Pleasant. London: Report of the Research Committee of the Society of Antiquaries of London 37Google Scholar
Wainwright, G. 1989. The Henge Monuments. London: Thames & HudsonGoogle Scholar
Wainwright, G., Longworth, I. 1971. Durrington Walls: Excavations 1966–1968. London: Report of the Research Committee of the Society of Antiquaries of London 29Google Scholar
Waterman, D. 1997. Excavations at Navan Fort 1961–71. Belfast: Stationery OfficeGoogle Scholar
Webley, L. 2008. Iron Age Households. Structure and Practice in Western Denmark 500 bc–ad 200. Moesgaard: Jutland Archaeological SocietyGoogle Scholar
Wilhelmi, K. 1990. Ruinen und Nordhorn. Zwischen Ussel und Ems: besondere Rechteck- und Quadratgräben der Eisenzeit. Helinium 30, 93–122Google Scholar