Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-05T13:12:47.942Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Neolithic Landscape of the Carnac Region, Brittany: New Insights from Digital Approaches

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 February 2014

Corinne Roughley
Corinne Roughley
Affiliation:
Department of Archaeology, University of Cambridge, CB2 3DZ
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The typology and chronology of the Neolithic monuments of the Carnac region of Brittany have been much debated. However, the landscape of which they are a part has been under-researched, in part due to the difficulty of conducting landscape research in the field. Through complimenting fieldwork with digital approaches, this paper demonstrates that the Neolithic monuments were deliberately situated in distinct landscape settings. By investigating the characteristics of the locations of the various types of monuments, new insight can be shed on the ways in which the monuments were experienced and perceived.

Résumé

La typologie et la chronologie des monuments néolithiques de la région de Carnac en Bretagne ont donné cours à de nombreux débats. Cependant, le paysage dont ils font partie a été insuffisamment étudié, en partie à cause de la difficulté de mener à bien, sur le terrain, des recherches sur le paysage. En complétant la prospection au sol par des approches numériques, cette étude démontre que les monuments néolithiques étaient délibérément situés dans un cadre paysager spécifique. En examinant les caractéristiques des lieux ou se situaient ces divers types de monuments, on a pu apporter un nouvel aperç,u sur les différentes manières dont les monuments étaient vécus et perçus.

Zusammenfassung

Typologie und Chronologie der Neolithischen Denkmäler der Carnac Region in der Bretagne sind bereits umfassend diskutiert worden. Jedoch wurde die Landschaft, von der sie ein Teil sind, bisher unzureichend untersucht, was teilweise auf die Schwierigkeit zurückzuführen ist, dort Landschaftsuntersuchungen im Feld durchzuführen. Dieser Beitrag zeigt durch die Komplementierung von Feldarbeit mit digitalen Methoden, dass die Neolithischen Denkmäler ganz bewusst in die ausgeprägte Landschaft platziert wurden. Neue Erkenntnisse können durch die Untersuchung der Merkmale der Lage der verschiedenen Denkmalstypen gewonnen werden, und damit auch wie die Denkmäler erfahren und wahrgenommen wurden.

Résumen

La tipología y cronología de los monumentos neolíticos de la región de Carnac en Bretaña han sido muy debatidos. El paisaje del que forman una parte ha sido, sin embargo, poco investigado, en parte por la dificultad para llevar a cabo investigaciones de paisaje sobre el terreno. Este trabajo complementa trabajos de campo con métodos digitales, y demuestra que los monumentos neolíticos se emplazaron deliberadamente en distintos marcos del paisaje. A través de la investigación de las características de los emplazamientos de los distintos tipos de monumentos, podemos alcanzar una nueva perspectiva sobre los modos en los que los monumentos fueron experimentados y percibidos.

Type
Research Article
Information
Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society , Volume 70 , 2004 , pp. 153 - 172
Copyright
Copyright © The Prehistoric Society 2004

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

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Allen, M. 1997. Environment and Landuse: The economic development of the communities who built Stonehenge (an economy to support the stones). In Cunliffe, B. & Renfrew, C. (eds), Science and Stonehenge; Proceedings of the British Academy 92, 115–44Google Scholar
Ashmore, W. & Knapp, A.B. (eds). 1999. Archaeologies of Landscape: contemporary perspectives. Oxford: BlackwellGoogle Scholar
Bailloud, G., Boujot, C., Cassen, S. & Le Roux, C.-T. 1995. Carnac: les premiéres architectures de pierres. Paris: CNRSGoogle Scholar
Baldwin, J., Fisher, P., Wood, J. & Langford, M. 1996. Modelling Environmental Cognition of the View with GIS. In Third International Conference/Workshop on Integrating GIS and Environmental Modelling, Santa Fe, New Mexico, January 1996, http://www.sbg.ac.at/geo/idrisi/gis_environmental_modeling/sf_papers/fisher_peterPbaldwin.htmlGoogle Scholar
Barclay, A. & Hey, G. 1999. Cattle, cursus monuments and the river; the development of ritual and domestic landscapes in the Upper Thames Valley. In Barclay, A. & Harding, J. (eds), Pathways and Ceremonies: the cursus monuments of Britain and Ireland, 67–76. Oxford: OxbowGoogle Scholar
Barrett, J.C. 1994. Fragments from Antiquity. Oxford: BlackwellGoogle Scholar
Barrett, J., Bradley, R. & Green, M. 1991. Landscape, Monuments and Society. The Prehistory of Cranborne Chase. Cambridge: University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Basso, K.H. 1996. Wisdom sits in places: notes on a western Apache landscape. In Feld, S. & Basso, K. H. (eds), Senses of Place, 53–90. Santa Fe: School of American Research PressGoogle Scholar
Bathurst Deane, J. 1833. Observations on Dracontia. Archaeologia 25, 188–229Google Scholar
Blair, A. & Ronalds, F. 1834. Sketches at Carnac. LondonGoogle Scholar
Boujot, C. & Cassen, S. 1992. Le developpement des premiers architectures funeraires monumentales en France occidentale. Revue Archéologique de l'Ouest Supplement 2, 195–211Google Scholar
Boujot, C., Cassen, S. & Vaquero Lastres, J. 1998. Some abstraction for a practical subject: the neolithization of western France seen through funerary architecture. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 8(2), 193–206CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bradley, R. 1993. Altering the Earth. Edinburgh: Society of Antiquaries of ScotlandGoogle Scholar
Brophy, K. 2000. Water coincidence? Cursus monuments and rivers. In Ritchie, A. (ed.), Neolithic Orkney in its European Context, 59–70. Cambridge: McDonald InstituteGoogle Scholar
Burl, A. 1993. Front Carnac to Callanish: the prehistoric stone rows and avenues of Britain, Ireland, and Brittany. New Haven: Yale University PressGoogle Scholar
Cambrian Archaeological Association 1890. Report of Meeting in Brittany. Archaeologia Cambriensis 7 series 5, 43–80Google Scholar
Cassen, S. (ed.) 2000. Eléments d'architecture (Exploration d'un tertre funéraire á Lannec er Gadouer, Erdeven, Morbihan. Constructions et reconstructions dans le Néolithique morbihannais). Editions chauvinoisesGoogle Scholar
Cooney, G. 2000. Landscapes of Neolithic Ireland. London: RoutledgeGoogle Scholar
Cummings, V. 2002. Between mountains and sea: a reconsideration of the Neolithic monuments of southwest Scotland. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 68, 125–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Evans, I.S. 1998. What do terrain statistics really mean? In Landform Monitoring, Modelling and Analysis, 119–38. Chichester: WileyGoogle Scholar
Exon, S., Gaffney, V., Woodward, A. & Yortson, R. 2002. Stonehenge Landscapes: journeys through real and imagined worlds. Oxford: ArchaeopressGoogle Scholar
Ferrande, P.G. 1483. Grand Routtier et Pillottage, extracts published in Bulletin de la Société du Morbihan, 1912, 145–61Google Scholar
Fisher, P.F. (1994a). Stretching the viewshed. In Waugh, T.C. & Healey, R.G. (eds), Advances in GIS Research, 725–38. London: Taylor and FrancisGoogle Scholar
Fisher, P.F. (1994b). Viewshed operation: probable and fuzzy models. In Worboys, M.F. (ed.), Innovations in GIS, 161–75. London: Taylor and FrancisGoogle Scholar
Fisher, P., Farrelly, C., Maddocks, A. & Ruggles, C. 1997. Spatial analysis of visible areas from the Bronze Age cairns of Mull. Journal of Archaeological Science 24, 581–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fraser, S.M. 1998. The public forum and the space between: the materiality of social strategy in the Irish Neolithic. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 64, 203–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gaffney, V. & Leusen, M. van 1995. Postscript-GIS, environmental determinism and archaeology: a parallel text. In Lock, G. & Stancic, Z. (eds), Archaeology and Geographic Information Systems, 367–82. London: Taylor and FrancisGoogle Scholar
Gebhardt, A. & Marguerie, D. 1993. La transformation du paysage armoricain sous l'influence de l'Homme. Le Néolithique au quotidian: actes du XVIeme colloque interrégional sur le Néolithique, 19–24. Paris: Documents d'archéologie françhise 39Google Scholar
Gillings, M. & Goodrick, G.T. 1996. Sensuous and reflexive GIS: exploring visualisation and VRML. Internet Archaeology 1: http://intarch.ac.uk/journal/issuel/gillings/partl.htmlGoogle Scholar
Giot, P.-R., Marguerie, D. & Morzadec, H. 1994. About the age of the oldest passage-graves in western Brittany. Antiquity 68, 624–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Giot, P.-R., Monnier, J.-L. & L'Helgouach, J. 1998. Préhistoire de Bretagne. Rennes: Editions Ouest-FranceGoogle Scholar
Harding, J. 1999. Pathways to new realms: cursus monuments and symbolic territories. In Barclay, A & Harding, J. (eds), Pathways and Ceremonies: the cursus monuments of Britain and Ireland, 30–8. Oxford: OxbowGoogle Scholar
Hillier, B. 1996 Space is the Machine. Cambridge: University PressGoogle Scholar
Jones, A. 2000. Life after death: monuments, material culture and social change in Neolithic Orkney. In Ritchie, A. (ed.), Neolithic Orkney in its European Context, 127–38. Cambridge: McDonald InstituteGoogle Scholar
Kvamme, K. 1992. Terrain Form Analysis of archaeological location through Geographic Information Systems. In Lock, G. & Moffet, J. (eds), Computer Applications and Quantitative Methods in Archaeology, 127–36. Oxford: British Archaeological Report S577Google Scholar
Lambeck, J. 1997. Sea-level change along the French Atlantic and Channel coast since the time of the last Galcial Maximum. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 129, 1–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Le Roux, C.-T. 1979. Stone axes of Brittany and the Marches. In Clough, T.H. McK & Cummins, W.A. (eds), Stone Axe Studies, 49–56. London: Council for British Archaeology Research Report 29Google Scholar
Le Roux, C.-T. 1993. Des mégalithes et des paysages, in Les échelles du paysage: Paysages et espaces urbains, 49–60. Rennes: Ecole Régionale des Beaux-Arts de RennesGoogle Scholar
Le Roux, C.-T. 1997. Aspects non funeraires du megalithisme armoricain. Actas do Coloquio Internacional, 233–43 Santiago de Compestela: Universite de Saint-Jacques-de-CompostelleGoogle Scholar
Le Roux, C.-T. 1999a. Menhirs et Pierres dressées dans le paysage mégalithique armoricain. In Guilaine, J. (ed.), Mégalithismes de l'Atlantique a l'Ethiopie, 213–24. Paris: Editions ErranceGoogle Scholar
Le Roux, C.-T. 1999b. Reflexions autour d'une chronotypologie du megalithisme armoricain des Ve et VIe millenaires avant J.-C. In Guilaine, J. (ed.), Mégalithismes de l'Atlantique a l'Ethiopie, 41–56. Paris: Editions ErranceGoogle Scholar
Le Rouzic, Z. 1933. Premières fouilles au camp de Lizo. Revue Archéologique 12 (Series 6), 189–219Google Scholar
Lecornec, J. 1994. Le Petit Mont Arzon - Morbihan. Rennes: Documents archéologiques de l'OuestGoogle Scholar
Lecornec, J. 1996. L'Allée couverte de Bilgroix, Arzon, Morbihan. Bulletin mensuel de la société polymathique du Morbihan 112, 15–60Google Scholar
Llobera, M. 1996. Exploring the topography of the mind: GIS, social space and archaeology. Antiquity 70, 612–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Llobera, M. 2003. Extending GIS-based visual analysis: the concept of visualscapes. International journal of Geographical Information Science 17(1), 25–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
L'Helgouach, J. 1965. Les Sépultures Mégalithiques en Armorique (Dolmens à Couloir et Allées Couvertes). Rennes: Laboratoire d'Anthropologie PréhistoriqueGoogle Scholar
L'Helgouach, J. 1983. Les idoles qu'on abat (ou les vissicitudes des grandes steles de Locmariaquer). Bulletin de la Société Polymathique du Morbihan 99, 57–68Google Scholar
L'Helgouach, J. 1998. L'Ouest de La France. In Guilaine, J. (ed.) Atlas du Néolithique Européen, 653–688. Liège: Etudes et Recherches Archéologiques de l'Université de LiègeGoogle Scholar
L'Helgouach, J. & Cassen, S. 1990. La Table-des-Marchand. Gallia Informations Préhistoire et Histoire 3, 60–2Google Scholar
Lock, G. & Harris, T. 1996. Danebury revisited: an English hillfort in a digital landscape. In Aldenderfer, M. & Maschner, D. (eds), Anthropology, Space, and Geographic Information Systems, 214–40. Oxford: University PressGoogle Scholar
Lukis, W.C. 1868. On a remarkable chambered long barrow at Kerlescant, Carnac, Brittany, Journal of the British Archaeological Association 24, 40–4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lukis, W.C. 1872. On the stone avenues of Carnac. Wiltshire Archaeological Magazine 13, 78–91Google Scholar
Marguerie, D. 1992. Evolution de la Végétation sous l'impact Humain en Armorique du Néolithique aux Périodes Historique. Rennes: Université de Rennes IGoogle Scholar
Mauricet, A. 1877. L’Ile aux Moiness, ses monuments megalithiques. Bulletin de la Société Polymathique du Morbihan, 89–98Google Scholar
Mérimée, P. 1836 Notes d'un Voyage dans l'Ouest de la France. ParisGoogle Scholar
Merlet, R. 1974. Exposé du Système Solistial Néolithique, Reliant entres eux Certains Cromlechs et Menhirs dans le Golfe du Morbihan: Métrologie et Astronomie Préhistoriques. Rennes: Université de RennesGoogle Scholar
Miller, D., Morrice, J., Home, P. & Aspinall, A. 1994. Characterisation of landscape views. Proceedings of the Fifth European Conference and Exhibition on Geographic Information Systems, Utrecht, 1994, 223–32Google Scholar
Miln, J. 1881. Fouilles faites a Carnac (Bretagne). RennesGoogle Scholar
Morzadec-Kerfourn, M.-T. 1998. L'Evolution de la ligne de ravage. In Giot, P.-R., Monnier, J.-L. & L'Helgouach, J.Préhistoire de Bretagne, 437–40. Rennes: Editions Ouest-FranceGoogle Scholar
Renfrew, C. 1973a. Before Civilisation: the radiocarbon revolution and prehistoric Europe. London: PenguinGoogle Scholar
Renfrew, C. 1973b. Monuments, mobilisation and social organisation in Neolithic Wessex. In Renfrew, C. (ed.), The Explanation of Culture Change, 539–58. London: DuckworthGoogle Scholar
Roughley, C. 2001. Understanding the Neolithic landscape of the Carnac region: a GIS approach. In Stancic, Z. & Veljanovski, T. (eds), Proceedings of the Computer Applications and Archaeology Conference, 211–18. Oxford: British Archaeological Report S931Google Scholar
Roughley, C. 2002. Neolithic Monuments in the Southern Morbihan Landscape: GIS and Visualisation for Archaeological Interpretation. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of CambridgeGoogle Scholar
Roughley, C., Sherratt, A. & Shell, C.A. 2002. Past records new views: Carnac 1830–2000. Antiquity 76, 218–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ruggles, C. 1999. Astronomy in Prehistoric Britain and Ireland. Newhaven: Yale University PressGoogle Scholar
Scarre, C. 2000. Forms and landforms: the design and setting of Neolithic monuments in western France. In Ritchie, A. (ed.), Neolithic Orkney in its European Context, 309–20. Cambridge: McDonald InstituteGoogle Scholar
Scarre, C. 2001. Enclosures and related structures in Brittany and western France. In Darvill, T. & Thomas, J. (eds), Neolithic Enclosures in Atlantic North-West Europe, 24–42. Oxford: OxbowGoogle Scholar
Scarre, C. 2002. Contexts of monumentalism: regional diversity at the Neolithic transition in north-west France. Oxford Journal of Archaeology 21, 23–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schulting, R.J. & Richards, M.P. 2001. Dating women and becoming farmers: new palaeodietary and AMS dating evidence from the Breton Mesolithic cemeteries of Téviec and Hoëdic. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 20, 245–378CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sherratt, A. 1987. Of men and megaliths. The Ashmolean 12, 2–5Google Scholar
Sherratt, A. 1996. Settlement patterns or landuse studies? Reconciling reason and romance. Archaeological Dialogues 3(2), 140–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sherratt, A. 1998. Points of exchange: the later Neolithic monuments of the Morbihan. In Gibson, A. & Simpson, D. (eds), Ritual and Religion: essays in honour of Aubrey Burl, 119–38. Stroud: ThruppGoogle Scholar
Sherratt, A. & Roughley, C. forthcoming. The Megalithic Monuments of the Carnac Region, as revealed by British Investigations in the Nineteenth Century. Oxford: OxbowGoogle Scholar
Thom, A. & Thom, A. S. 1978. Megalithic Remains in Britain and Brittany. Oxford: ClarendonGoogle Scholar
Thomas, J. 1999. The Holywood cursus complex, Dumfries: an interim account 1997. In Barclay, A. & Harding, J. (eds), Pathways and Ceremonies: the cursus monuments of Britain and Ireland, 107–18. Oxford: OxbowGoogle Scholar
Thomas, J. & Tilley, C. 1993. The axe and the torso: symbolic structures in the Neolithic of Brittany. In Tilley, C. (ed.), Interprative Archaeology, 225–326. Oxford: BergGoogle Scholar
Tilley, C. 1994. A Phenomenology of Landscape. Oxford: BergGoogle Scholar
Tschan, A., Raczkowski, W. & Latalowa, M. 2000. Perception and viewsheds: are the mutually inclusive? In Lock, G. (ed.), Beyond the Map: archaeology and spatial technologies, 28–48Oxford: IOSGoogle Scholar
Wood, J. 1996. The Geomorphological Characterisation of Digital Elevation Models. Unpublished PhD Thesis, University of LeicesterGoogle Scholar