The Role of Burial Monuments in Creation

of New Worldviews during the Early

Neolithic

Early Prehistory

David Bliss

08/20/2010

Introduction

The early Neolithic was a time of great change. Domestication of

plants and animals was replacing hunting and gathering as a way of

life and this brought about a new way of life for the people of

Northwest Europe. New technologies such as polished stone axes and

pottery were being used and traded along with new economies in

domesticated plants and animals. Along with these new technologies,

people were developing new ways of looking at the world. These

included new thoughts on community, land ownership, views on

themselves, their neighbors, and views on their ancestors. For the

first time, communities were stamping a physical mark on their world.

Communities were stamping a lasting physical mark on the world.

Burial monuments - as both community projects and the resting place

of their ancestors - strengthened the sense of community and

belonging to the land. There is a close relationship, in other words,

between burial monuments and the control (or ownership) of land.

These monuments made the people and their past part of the land they

now settled. This paper describes the burial monuments of the early

Neolithic and tries to explain, through examples, what the barrows

and chambered tombs tell us about how these early people viewed their

world, their past, and themselves. These burial monuments were the

precursors to later Neolithic megaliths and even more visible traces

of how they dealt with the dead..

Where and When

The study area for this paper is Northwest Europe which, by the

United Nations definition, includes present day Ireland and the

United Kingdom, the northern and western parts of France and Germany,

and the Benelux and Nordic countries (UN 2010).

The first Neolithic sites that we have evidence of in Europe are in

Greece – such as Franchiti Cave. At around 6000 BC, the inhabitants

were domesticating plants and animals, were using polished stone

axes, and using pottery. It is these elements, particularly

domestication of plants and animals that characterize the early

Neolithic people (Rutter 2000). These new technological advances

migrated to Northwest Europe through Spain, arriving in France around

4500 BC and continuing advancement to Britain around 4000 BC (Price

1996:103). In Britain, the early Neolithic lasted until around 3400

BC (EP 176). One characteristic that sets this period apart from the

previous Mesolithic period is the large burial monuments that were

constructed.

Burial Monuments

Evidence for monument building follows the timeline for transition to

farming and it was the early farmers who were building monuments (EP

178-181). The use of timber and earth as the main medium for

construction of Neolithic monumental tombs – timber decays easily and

stone is subject to plowing and construction - has led to the decay

and destruction of the majority of these monuments. Even so, these

monuments are some of the largest collections available today of

early Neolithic material remains (Midgley 2005:86). The monuments

were widespread across Northwest Europe, clustered in a number of

core areas such as the long mound concentration in the Carnac region

of Morbihan and passage graves in Brittany (EP 2006:181). Doubtless

there were once many more Burial Monuments that have fallen to

agricultural clearing and land development.

The construction of these monuments closely followed the development

of domesticating food sources in Europe. People saw the land and

themselves as linked in a way that farmers today do. Farming, unlike

a hunter-gather existence, also provided time for pursuits outside of

subsistence. The increased food production and technologies that

accompanied farming lead to increased populations that had the time

for pursuits outside of food and shelter. These burial monuments are

classified into two types – long barrows and chambered tombs.

Long Barrows

Long barrows comprise a trapezoidal mound flanked by the remains of

two ditches that are between 15 and 125 meters long, stand up to 5

meters, and number in the hundred in England and Scotland (EP

2006:183). Many of these mounds cover impressive timber features. The

mounds cover timber burial chambers. The barrows can be chambered and

can contain facades at the entrance. In the case of the West Kennet

Long Barrow, it contains both (below).

photo by Pete Glastonbury, with permission

The long barrows constructed during the early Neolithic fulfilled

roles beyond being resting places for the dead. These monuments were

intended to be visible statements in the landscape. This point is

enforced by the small percentage of a total monument that contained

burials (Smith & Brickley 2009:11). The types of mortuary remains

vary from cremated remains, disarticulated remains, bodies that had

been excarnated by leaving them in the open, and excarnation by prior

burial (Smith & Brickley 2009:46). For example, in the case of the

assemblage at Fussell's Lodge, it appears that the remains had been

subjected to a second burial – based on the lack of hand and foot

bones (Thomas 1991:114). Although the vast majority of long barrows

appear to have contained human remains, some do not – such as the

South Street barrow in Wiltshire.

Distribution of long barrow monumental cemeteries in Northwestern Europe. With permission

from Midgley.

Chambered Tombs

Chambered tombs contain chambers or cists of timber or stone,

usually, if not invariably covered by a mound and associated with the

deposition of human remains. They are found in a wide variety of

forms and have a greater distribution in the United Kingdom than Long

Barrows (EP 2006:184-185).

Many chambered tombs were for collective burials such as the Irish

Passage Graves of the Boyne valley. These are freestanding portal

tombs found in large numbers in Ireland (Arosio 2010). As with

variation in the types of burial monument, there is variation within

each type. For example, mounds or cairns may be circular or elongated

and may contain a single chamber or a whole series of chambers.

Below is an example of a chambered tomb from Newgrange in Ireland.

With permission from Knowth.com

When completed the tomb functioned like a modern crypt, being slowly

filled over the generations with the dead. The result was, in effect,

a home for the ancestors.

There is a wide variety of forms found - some free standing stone-

built chambers and others, including Severn-Cotswold chambered tombs,

such as Hazelton, have stone cairns with internal chambers. These

chambers are the stone equivalent of the wooden structures recorded

beneath earthen mounds.

Some of these mounds were used over a prolonged period of time. Le

Petit Mont passage grave suggests a period of around 1000 years of

activity. The original chamber tomb (also called a passage grave)

was first constructed ca. 4500 BC, with access available for

approximately 500 years. Around 4000 BC a massive pentagonal cairn

enclosed the original structure and a sequence of 5 revetment walls

was constructed (Bradley 1998:58).

Role in Creation of New Worldviews

It is not surprising that the burial monuments coincided with the

arrival of farming and a new way of life in Neolithic Europe. The

worldviews that the monuments helped create were specific to farming

and herding communities rather than the preceding hunting/gathering

communities. The following views were both shaped by burial monuments

and helped shape the development of the monuments. New ways of

looking at the world both helped drive the development of burial

monuments and were shaped by the act of building burial monuments and

the monuments themselves.

Tied to the Land

For the first time, Neolithic people are shaping the landscape

through these large burial monuments. The monuments helped the people

of Northwest Europe see themselves as part of the environment and

landscape. In effect, their ancestors WERE part of the environment

(at least their physical remains). The monuments were and still are

major elements of the landscape. Even today, the burial monuments are

the most visible remains from the early Neolithic. For example, the

passage grave Newgrange in Ireland stands 36 feet high and is 300

feet in diameter. It is one of the oldest man-made structures on

earth and serves as a reminder of how these people shaped the

landscape and felt they were a part of it (Austin 2009).

The idea that the people are tied to the land can be seen in

ethnoarchaeological studies as well. At the Merina communal burial in

Madagascar, people are buried in communal monuments. The people exert

considerable effort in building and maintaining communal tombs that

are regarded as a 'visible expression of stability and belonging

somewhere' (Ucko, 1969:268). These structures relate to the group and

represent the communities place in the environment - there is no

ancestor worship associated. This example is not an exact parallel

with Neolithic monuments, but there are similarities that can help

draw the conclusion about the worldviews in the Neolithic about being

tied to the land.

Certainly monuments show not only someone has invested the effort,

but also that they have been there for successive generations. This

is the foundation of establishing ideas on land ownership. Even in

societies today a sense of ancestral occupation establishes ownership

and family plots still dot the land in rural farming areas such as

the American Midwest and South.

Part of a Community

The Neolithic landscape saw small-scale face-to-face societies held

together, even when dispersed through the landscape, by a strong

sense of community. While population estimates for Neolithic

communities are difficult, it is usually agreed that they were larger

than during the Mesolithic. For example, estimates for the population

of the Boyne Valley in Ireland range from 1500-5000, with 3000 being

a popular figure (Austin 2009). The increased populations over the

Mesolithic would have been needed to supply the worker-hours needed

to construct large monuments.

The labor-intensive building of these monuments helped bring people

together and gave them a sense of community. These were monumental

tasks for the dispersed populations using rudimentary tools. The

amount of effort required to construct massive burial monuments using

stone axes and antler picks would have exceeded an immediate group's

capacity and required a community. For example, it is estimated that

15,700 worker-hours were expended in construction of the 100m long

West Kennet Long Barrow that houses an estimated 40 burials (Darvill

2010). Mike Parker Pearson estimates that it took 10,000 worker hours

to construct the long barrow at Willerby Wold in East Yorkshire (EP

2006:184).

Massive burial monument projects were a way to bring the people

together and provide a sense of community while at the same time,

providing an output that shows the world where their community’s

place is in it. This sense of community is important for farming

communities – in the early Neolithic and today. Today, farming

communities work together to accomplish greater food production and

trade than would be possible as individuals or families. Communities

combine to form cooperative ventures and community grain bins. That

same combined effort would have been needed for successful farming

and herding in the Neolithic.

Rites of Passage

The monuments and tombs within them may have played the role of 'rite

of passage' from this world to the next. The tombs within monuments

can be seen as a passageway 'ushering' the dead into the afterlife

(EP 191). At early Neolithic monuments, complex rites surrounding the

bodies are centered on facilitating the transition from the world of

the living to the dead. Practices appear to have transformed the dead

from fleshed corpses to disarticulated bones that were common in

assemblages from monuments at West Tump and West Kennet (Smith &

Brickley 2009:53). Excarnation by exposure was undertaken at sites

such as West Tump and Swell (Smith & Brickley 2009:51). Reincarnation

was a rite practiced as well at sites such as Fussel's Lodge (Smith &

Brickley 2009:46).

Bodies were arranged, rearranged, and had selective bones removed.

For example, at West Kennet, there is a disproportionate number of

skulls found versus other bones (Smith & Brickley 2009:71). Seeing

this passage as a transitional period shows that the descendants had

the view that there is a continuum – or timeline – rather than just

the point in time of now (EP 2006:191). The final burial then

“interrupted any flow of reciprocity between the living and the

dead”, separating the past from the present (Bradley 1999:151).

Similar views on rites of passage were witnessed in the rites of the

Huron Indians in North America. The Huron would excarnate the dead

over time and carry the bodies and remains to a large communal pit

for interring every decade or so (Smith & Brickley 2009:68). The

burial was the end of a complex rite of passage that can last up to

ten years.

Memory and Ancestry

Burial monuments helped people in the early Neolithic establish a

memory and ties to their ancestors. They were constant reminders of

the past and of the community's ancestors – the ancestors were seen

as their heritage. The sense of memory and that the Neolithic people

were part of a timeline is a view held by farmers. No longer did they

'live for the moment' as did the hunters and gatherers. Farmers have

to plan more for the future and think about an investment made now in

clearing and planting will result in future gains. This does not mean

this is not absent in hunters (burning for instance in encourage new

plant growth to bring in deer), but more part of the farmer’s view

and the reminders of this memory are the burial monuments.

The idea of memory and ancestry would explain why monuments often

have successive burials over time and were sometimes built on the

foundations of earlier dwellings. There is evidence that burial

monuments were built on top of former dwellings. At Balloy in the

Danube region, settlement of several houses was inhabited around 4700

BC. After years of abandonment, the Cerny culture created a large

ceremonial center and a causewayed enclosure on the site. At least 5

barrows were placed directly on top of the earlier houses oriented

exactly the same (Midgley 2005:88). This is not an isolated

occurrence - clearly the memory of the previous inhabitants was

important to these people.

XXXXscanxxxx

View of the Bodies Themselves

The bodies within monuments have provided evidence of how they were

viewed by the Neolithic people. The arrangement and rearrangement of

bodies was common and there is evidence for several permutations.

Many burial assemblages exhibit indications that human remains were

returned to and involved in various ongoing activities and process

subsequent to their disposition in monuments. Whilst evidence for

such continuing activity is most readily discernable in chambered

monuments, similar customs are also apparent in earthen long barrows

prior to the final covering of timber mortuary structures beneath

earthen mounds (M 111). Such practices appear to have been both

complex and varied with many subtleties and nuances that are simply

not accessible to modern investigators. On a broad level however, the

removal, circulation and redisposition of selected portions of burial

assemblages implies that human remains were regarded as a powerful

substance. Whilst the deceased had departed from their communities in

one sense, their presence and influences continued to be felt long

afterwards.

A sense of community is seen in treatment of the bones within the

burial monument. They mix bones all together. It is bones of the

community, not bones of the individual in the monolith. The fact that

no attempt was made to separate the bones suggests that the

descendants emphasized the community more than the individual (EP

2006:191). These burials indicate that a sense of community was

important whereas a sense of the individual was not. Burials contain

bones of many ancestors together as one (Smith & Brickley 2009:65).

IV. Problems with Interpreting Neolithic Views

The interpretations posed are based on the evidence of the monuments

themselves and other material evidence found within them. However,

there are problems with how certain we can be about the views of the

early Neolithic people.

We have small piece of the landscape - only what survived. The amount

of human bone recovered during the early Neolithic is relatively

small compared to other periods. The small amount of human remains

that survives only gives us glimpses of the human population at this

time and the part of the earlier Neolithic that is represented by

human remains only gives us glimpses into the society.

The archaeological record in general for this period is very

limited. We have monuments from the period, but we still know

relatively little about them and the people who built them. Compared

to other places and times in history, we rely much more on theory and

speculation.

Because the burial monuments and their contents are the most

prevalent sources of material remains for the early Neolithic, we

have the potential to put undue importance on burials and burial

monuments. The importance of the megaliths and reasons why they were

built can be over-emphasized and their role in creating the

worldviews of the early Neolithic people can be over-emphasized. They

need to be seen as the most prevalent material evidence we have, but

the importance we place on it may not reflect reality of the

Neolithic where it is possible other material culture that no longer

survives was far more important and influential in the daily lives of

Neolithic people.

There is often larger variation apparent between monuments and

between regions. This is the case at Cotswolds where, for example,

Sales Lot, West Tump, Adlestrop all exhibit different dispositional

practices despite being a day's walk of each other. Aside from

variation at a site like Cotswold, there is regional variation. For

example, chambered tombs may be stone or wood, and vary in shape and

size. There are many of these regional variations – such as the Irish

Passage Graves and Severn Cotswold (EP 2006:184-185). There is a

fair amount of variation between sites regarding the number of

individuals buried. Some contain numbers in the single figures and

other contain larger numbers of burials – such as at West Kennet.

This raises issues about the selection of individuals for burial from

the population (Smith & Brickley 2009:87).

Conclusion

Most archaeologists agree that burial monuments played important

social roles in Neolithic society by ‘fixing’ a community’s ancestors

in a particular place. Burial monuments were not just a place to put

the dead - indeed the bodies were often moved to monuments long after

death - they were the last step in rites of passage. They fixed

communities in the landscape and resolved claims about who owns what

and who farms where. Neolithic monuments helped shape new worldviews

in the early Neolithic - moving towards a concept of land ownership

to justify claims to specific areas and provide a sense of community.

Previous generations of hunter-gatherers did not view ancestors as an

important part of their belief system the way that farmers did (EP

190). A new view was emerging in farming communities of being 'tied

to' the land. Even today, we do the same – a burial is fixed to a

location and helps establish a connection with the place. By residing

in that place, the descendants strengthen or legitimize the living

community’s claim to the land and its resources.

The remains within burial monuments also provide evidence of how the

Neolithic people thought. Fragmentary parts of the deceased appear to

have formed part of a range of 'socially charged' material that were

seen as having intrinsic powers and qualities that could be used to

legitimize or sanctify current activities. In this way human remains

may have played a role in maintaining social cohesion or promoting

political or factional interests by bringing to bear the authority of

past generations on issues that were open to dispute. Whilst the

deceased has departed from their communities in one sense, their

presence and influences continued to be felt long afterward.

Bibliography

Arosio, P. and Meozzi, D. 2010. Dowth Passage Tomb.

www.stonepages.com/scottland/maesshowe.html

Austin, C. 2009.Irish Sites. http://merganser.math.gvsu.edu/myth/irish-

gal.html

Bradley, Richard 1998. The Significance of Monuments. London:

Routledge.

Darvill, T. 2010. Tour of West Kennett Long Barrow.

http://merganser.math.gvsu.edu/myth/irish-gal.html

EP. 2006. Early Prehistory Archaeology Workbook. Leicester: School of

Archaeology and Ancient History. University of Leicester.

Midgley, M. 2005. The Monumental Cemeteries of Prehistoric Europe.

Gloucestershire, UK. Tempus Publishing Ltd.

Price, D. & Gebauer, A. 1996. Last Hunters, First Farmers: New Perspectives on the

Prehistoric Transition to Agriculture. New Mexico, USA. School of American

Research Press

Rutter, J. 2000. The Southern Greek Palaeolithic, Mesolithic, and Neolithic Sequence at

Franchthi. http://projectsx.dartmouth.edu/classics/history/bronze_age/lessons/

Smith, M. & Brickley. M. 2009. People of the Long Barrows.

Gloucestershire, UK: The History Press

UN. 2010. Composition of Macro Geographical (Continental) Regions, Geographical Sub-

Regions, and Selected Economic and Other Groupings.

http://unstats.un.org/unsd/methods/m49/m49regin.htm

Thomas, J. 1991. Rethinking the Neolithic. New Studies in Archaeology.

Cambridge.Cambridge University Press

Ucko, P.J. 1969. Ethnography and Archaeological Interpretation of

Funerary Remains. World Archaeology. Volume 1, Number 2. London. Taylor

and Francis, Ltd.