The Monumental Cemeteries of Prehistoric Europe, by MAGDALENA S. MIDGLEY
2005. Stroud, Tempus. 133 pp text, 38 line-drawings, 23 colour plates. ISBN 0 7524 2567 6 (£ 19.99)
Ever since Childe, Hawkes and Piggott, prehistorians have made the connections
between the emergence of earthen long barrows and long cairns in the British
Neolithic and the already-developed long barrows of the North European Plain.
But because the typological method underpinning Childean diffusionism required
formal parallels rather than similarities in landscape context, the latter has
been consistently underplayed for the Continental barrows. Moreover, the very
fact that there are sometimes quite large clusters of long barrows forming
cemeteries (the author stipulates a dozen or more barrows are needed to form a
cemetery!) makes the European examples special, not least in their landscape
context. It is Magdalena Midgley’s merit to have added to her already
impressive skills in typology, inter-cultural comparisons and constructional
analysis - evidenced in her earlier long barrow book (1985) and her ‘TRB
culture’ volume (1992) – a broad landscape approach and an enhanced interest in
symbolic practices. Put these elements together with the highly professional
and beautifully produced Tempus format and we have a fascinating short book
that seeks to set a new agenda for studies of earthen long barrow cemeteries.
The author structures the book around the contrasts between three differing
types of societies – complex Atlantic-fringe foragers, going under the names of
Ertebølle, Swifterbant, Téviecien, etc. (6th – 5th millennia cal BC); the
earliest farmers on the loesslands of North Central Europe – the
Linearbandkeramik communities (early 5th millennium cal BC), who were in
interaction of different kinds with the foragers for 500 years or more; and
those later (late 5th millennium cal BC and later) societies who created the
monumental cemeteries from some kind of fusion of the traditions of the other
two societies. In the first two chapters, broad, sweeping canvasses of these
three types of societies are painted, while in the next chapter, mortuary
practices are defined among late foraging and earliest farming communities. It
is in the fourth and fifth chapters that Midgley builds a detailed
characterisation of the monumental barrow cemeteries – first at the level of
barrow construction, then at the level of individual burials. In the final
chapter, the threads are inter-woven to produce a richly ornamented tapestry of
Mesolithic and Neolithic lifeways on the North European plain.
What is new to this reviewer is the range of new, excellently excavated
evidence for French barrow cemeteries, accumulated in the two decades since
Midgely’s 1985 book. Since the author is herself involved in one of the
excavation projects, she is in an excellent position to provide an
authoritative account of the new evidence. Another strong point in the book is
the discussion of the complexity of many of the Northern Mesolithic burials,
whose seated burial positions, timber-lined graves and dietary preferences of
the deceased for fish make them closely comparable to the Iron Gates
Mesolithic. It will be intriguing to see if the preliminary results of the
Skateholm analysis suggesting that the dead were indeed related individuals is
confirmed!
The discussion of the landscape contexts of the monumental cemeteries should be
central to the book. Indeed, Midgely does identify two contrasting cemetery
locations – liminal to settlements, often on floodplain islands or hills, and
on old fields or even settlements (there is a classic case of an earthen long
barrow built on top of a destroyed LBK long-house at Balloy). The asymmetrical
layout of the barrows is convincingly related to visual reasons – ie, the ways
that processions approached a focal point in a barrow. But one feels that the
author is most at home in the thick of the excavation data and the
constructional detail of this monument type, that can now be seen to develop
coevally - in parallel - with megalithic sites in Brittany. It is clearly
probable that totem poles and, in some cases, standing stones had been erected
at a early stage of the mound construction. Far from Piggott’s ‘unchambered
long barrows’, recent excavations have convincingly shown the existence of
complex chambers, characterised in detail by the author. Intriguingly, there
were few acts of burials before the building of the barrows, some of them being
cremated, just as some of the timber chambers were deliberately burnt. One of
the most interesting conclusions was the identification of not only material
from different parts of the landscape but also old material from previous
settlement deposits deliberately embedded into the body of the mound.
Frustratingly, however, these key observations are presented with little
attempt to draw the appropriate social inferences in terms of ancestral and
wider landscape relations. The symbolic makes a regular appearance but the
social is still largely absent.
Set aside these strengths, some less promising aspects of the book should also
be noted. In the account of the Late Mesolithic, there is no real attempt to
assess shell-middens as monuments in the landscape. There is, of course,
enormous size variation in Atlantic shell-middens and some of the Oronsay
examples could hardly be designated ‘monumental’. However, several of the
Portuguese shell middens in the Muge can be seen from over 1 km and the
quantity of shells, animal bones and fishbones required to create a 3-metre
high mound – similar to a medium-sized Balkan Neolithic tell – implies repeated
feasting practices over centuries. Some of the Ertebølle middens, notably the
type-site, are also large enough to be considered as landscape monuments: what
are the implications for the development of linear barrows? Another Mesolithic
oversight is the lack of reference to Newell and Constandse-Westermann’s (1988)
outstanding research on Mesolithic social structure, trade and exchange,
mortuary practices and cultural identities, innovative work that should form
the basis of any discussion of the Atlantic Mesolithic. Finally, it is not at
all clear how foragers contributed to the postulated synthesis with early
farmers that was to produce the monumental cemeteries.
The development of cemeteries of individual, non-monumental burials in the LBK
period is discussed but the origins of these important collective markers
receives little discussion, beyond rather vague allusions to concepts of
personhood and corporate identity. Is the emergence of fixed cemeteries in the
LBK, anchoring kinship relations between long-term but small-scale (hamlet- or
homestead) settlements, a parallel to the Skateholm foraging model, where a
permanent cemetery created temporal continuities for mobile, seasonal hunting
and gathering groups? And how does this LBK mortuary development relate to Amy
Bogaard’s (2004) identification of fixed-plot permanent agriculture as the main
LBK arable strategy? (Clearly, this work was published too late for Midgley to
discuss).
Turning to the monumental cemeteries, what this reviewer missed was a sense of
social time in relation to the mortuary sequence. A basic concept, such as the
châine opératoire, would be useful here, but even more valuable is Laurent
Olivier’s (1999) perspective on the multiple senses of time built into the
Hochdorf Iron Age mortuary barrow. The elements of an operational chain
approach are there – but Olivier’s insights would make this come alive through
the integration of techno-time with social time.
In the end, what is missing from this book are the people. In an auto-critique
of her Balkan Neolithic research, Ruth Tringham once famously confessed that,
when she thought about the people she studied, all she could picture was: ‘a
lot of faceless blobs’ (Tringham 1991: 94). Here, in Northern Europe, we have a
few people buried in these earthen long barrows and we have a sense of a
multiplicity of other social practices while the mound was heaped over these
(presumably special) individuals. But where are the other people? What about
foragers meeting with farmers to negotiate gift exchanges to prevent further
armed raids on LBK stockades? Who were the people using the 6.5-litre bowls
deposited as grave goods after communal eating and drinking? Where are the
processions forming at some distance from the cemetery, the boat(wo)men
carrying the processing group across the flood-waters to the high ground, the
ritual specialists who decided to create a mound over a long-dead house? And,
above all, the people to see the monumental mounds from afar? The peopling of
the monumental cemeteries seems one step too far for Midgley, who remains with
the material and, to her credit, the symbolic.
So how new is the agenda set in this book? There are important, and largely
acknowledged, debts to Bradley, Hodder and Whittle, all of whom have
investigated the humans peopling these landscapes of early European prehistory
and whose research has created the possibilities for Midgley’s new
interpretations. All three scholars have developed creative interpretations of
the close relationships between LBK houses of the living and those later houses
of the dead incorporated into the monumental barrows. Bradley in particular has
realised the significance of the monumentality of the LBK long-house itself in
inserting a new scale of structure into the habitus of early farmers, while
Whittle has generated new insights into the scale of LBK settlements and their
places in their largely wooded landscapes. To these major contributions,
Midgley has added significant interpretations of the symbolic practices related
to burial and mound-building in these monumental cemeteries, as well as new
insights into their landscape settings. The notion that the key element of
monumental cemeteries was commemoration rather than burial per se is an
important conclusion and one with wide-ranging ramifications, only some of
which are explored here. The author merits our thanks for moving the debate on,
even though largely within the frameworks created by earlier scholars.
John Chapman
Durham University
References Bogaard, A. 2004. Neolithic farming in Central Europe
. London: Routledge.
Constandse-Westermann, Trinette, and Raymond Newell, 1988 Patterns of
extraterritorial ornaments dispersion: an approach to the measurement of
Mesolithic exogamy. Supplemento della Rivista di Antropologia LXVI,
75-126.
Midgley, M. 1985. The origins and function of the earthen long barrows of
Northern Europe. Oxford: British Archaeological Reports, International
Series 259.
Midgley, M. 1992. TRB culture. The first farmers of the North European Plain
. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Olivier, L. 1999. The Hochdorf ‘princely’ grave and the question of the nature
of archaeological funerary assemblages. In Murray, T. (ed.), Time and
archaeology . One World Archaeology No. 37. London: Unwin Allen,
109-138.
Tringham, R. 1991. Households with faces: the challenge of gender in
prehistoric architectural remains. In Gero, J. and Conkey, M. (eds.), Engendering
archaeology . Oxford: Blackwell, 93–131.
Review Submitted: September 2005
The views expressed in
this review are not necessarily those of the Society or the Reviews
Editor.
|