The end of Monumentality, interpret the apparent changes that occur at the end of the Neolithic period (c.

2400
2000 cal BC), Neolithic Studies Karl-James Langford 16013044

Module Title NEOLITHIC STUDIES UV4110077

Student No. 16013044
Assignment No. 2
Question in full The end of Monumentality, interpret the apparent changes that
occur at the end of the Neolithic period (c. 2400 2000 cal BC)

Word count 2200

Date submitted 7 April 2017

Checklist
Answer explicitly addresses the question?
Structure: Introduction, Middle section, Conclusion?
Citations in the text using the Harvard referencing system?
All cited sources are listed alphabetically in full in the bibliography?
All images are appropriately captioned and referenced?
Images have been formatted to minimise file size?
Word count is within 10% of the target length?
Document has been spell checked and proof read?
File saved as a Word (.doc) or rich text file (.rtf) with the filename format
Student number_module initials_assignment number?

The University of the Highlands and Islands recognises that plagiarism, where deliberately engaged in,
is unacceptable and is considered serious academic malpractice. Students are responsible for
ensuring the work they submit is their own. If you have any queries you should contact the module
leader or your Personal Academic Tutor before submitting your assessment.

Declaration
This assessment is entirely my own work, and all internet and conventional
sources which I have used have been fully acknowledged and attributed.

I understand that this document may be subject to a plagiarism check.

The end of Monumentality, interpret the apparent changes that occur at the end of the Neolithic period (c. 2400
2000 cal BC), Neolithic Studies Karl-James Langford 16013044

STUDENT HAS A DYSLEXIA STICKER

See
Kathryn Sclater
University of the Highlands and Islands | Orkney College
UHI | East Road | Kirkwall | Orkney | KW15 1LX
Tel: +44 (0)1856 569275
kathryn.sclater@uhi.ac.uk
The end of Monumentality, interpret the apparent changes that occur at the end of the Neolithic period (c. 2400
2000 cal BC), Neolithic Studies Karl-James Langford 16013044

Karl-James Langford 16013044

UNIVERSITY OF Highlands and Islands
M. Litt Archaeology of the Highlands and Islands
September 2016 intake module 2 assignment 2
Date of completion: 7 April 2017

Name of Student: Karl-James Langford

Number: 16013044
Module of Assignment: Neolithic Studies
The end of Monumentality, interpret the apparent changes that occur at the end of the Neolithic period (c. 2400
2000 cal BC), Neolithic Studies Karl-James Langford 16013044

Introduction
As can be seen in later periods, Monumentality (Osbourne 2014)
leads to a cultural shift towards the more mundane i.e. broch
building to Pictish architecture as in Dockrill (2010) or similarly
regarding the dramatic changes on Easter Island (Hunt 2006), the
Neolithic is not an exception to this rule in-fact this is best
demonstrated particularly in the British Late Neolithic.

Where in-fact the late British Neolithic sees itself rejecting the
construction of earthen monuments (i.e. henges), stone
monuments: stonehenge monuments, so-called burial chambers,
circus monuments, long barrows, and the like for the more mundane
focussing on a less Monumental way of life towards the levels of
material cultural in regards to ceramics (and of note Beaker
pottery) and the sense of place within the landscape as in Ingold
(1993) and the building of more established settlement.

There was also towards the end of the Neolithic 4100 years ago, the
introduction of a metallurgical material created from the very stone
that the monuments had been created from. This new age of copper
and bronze would be detected as change with the landscape, in
greater de-woodestation/de-forestation and artefactual goods within
a burial context alongside that of the beaker.
The end of Monumentality, interpret the apparent changes that occur at the end of the Neolithic period (c. 2400
2000 cal BC), Neolithic Studies Karl-James Langford 16013044

The end of Monumentality

The most significant events within the Neolithic period regarding a
physical structural context can be seen in two stages: body disposal
and ancestor worship. These events are represented by bank
barrows, avenues and of course causewayed enclosures. A second
stage regarding Monumentality (Sherratt 1990) in the form of
earthen henges, circus, timber circles, wooden burial chambers and
large stone built monuments (stone circles, chambered sites, and
passage graves); many being used at different times; for long or
short periods, and in some regions different purposes. The latter and
the former came to a gradual; but for some archaeologists a
dramatic end, sometime towards the conclusion of the Neolithic
Period circa 4100 years ago (Dyer 2002).

Why did Monumentality have to come to an abrupt end; after-all it

had seemingly dominated a period of over 2000 years of human
history? Human history is dominated by change, whatever form it
takes, whether it is sudden or evolving, our ancestors would have
eventually exhausted their understanding of what can be the
animate perceived meaning of a glacial stone, or what can be
understood by erecting a standing stone or for that matter what can
be done with a burial chamber (Hingley 1986); although a simplistic
notion of the author, true enough Monumentality was over. Some
writers see the closing rites of burial chambers in Britain over
different times as evidence of the end of the Neolithic such as
indicated at Barclodiad y Gawres (Powell 1956). Moving forward was
to look towards determining a new future. That form of future was
The end of Monumentality, interpret the apparent changes that occur at the end of the Neolithic period (c. 2400
2000 cal BC), Neolithic Studies Karl-James Langford 16013044

more utilitarian, and from an historical time travellers way of

looking at things, seemingly more basic in-house and insignificant
and far less monumental.

Even the stone axes, beautiful as objects of wonder and of purpose

in cutting down trees (Bradley 2005) did not stand in the way of this
change. There was tobe something more-hardier and long lasting
(Cummings 2002). Expending a great deal of time creating a stone
axe, sourcing the material then honing and creating a cutting edge;
that would be soon dispensable after a few chops of the wood, was
to become history.

Although much of what we can see throughout the Neolithic are the
time capsules of Monumentality, we must be careful not to forget
the settlements that have been detected, not in any way as-much
as those identified through the Bronze Age, but nevertheless worth
considering. Settlements throughout the Neolithic, those few that
have been detected, seem not to have great spans of use as we see
sites have in the Bronze to Iron Ages or for that matter the Medieval
into the Modern period. At Barnhouse; discovered and then
excavated by Colin Richards in 1984 (Richards 2003), we see just
400 years of use between 5000 to 4600 years ago, where
occupation of the site ended abruptly. For the same short period of
use for a settlement can be said about Gordon Childe excavated
evidence at Skara Brae (Childe 1931) 5180 to about 4500 years ago
and with Durrington Walls 4525 and 4470 years ago (Bradley 2016),
also both sites come to an abrupt halt. In a way, the Neolithic had
times of temporality within its settlements, where people did not
stay within a landscape for the living for vast periods of time. That
was all to change.
The end of Monumentality, interpret the apparent changes that occur at the end of the Neolithic period (c. 2400
2000 cal BC), Neolithic Studies Karl-James Langford 16013044

Moreover, the Neolithic had dedicated a large tract of former

inhabitable landscape over to the dead and their ancestors. Taking
up too much space, our ancestors must have started to realise that
growing crops and settling down permanently, was more pertinent
than erecting a huge mound (Silbury Hill) on a place where they
could have easily have grown a crop to feed the living (Chan 2016).

The more utilitarian Neolithic

What has now arrived sometime around 4400 years ago is the more
mundane, the more utilitarian, the more people friendly culture of
creating pottery; that can not only contain food, useful to cook with
but something to also hold the human remains of our loved ones.
This change has a homogenous effect not just in Britain but across
Europe (Mille & Carozza 2009). Creating pottery out of clay into
something as solid as stone must have been magical, although
pottery had been around for thousands of years, now Beaker
pottery (Clarke 1962) was stronger; decorated and had a longer
shelf life. Not just to focus on this one piece of material cultural, so
true of ceramics can be inferred with a new skill towards the end of
the Neolithic that of creating from the very stone that our ancestors
had created the monuments from. Stone had a new use that copper
can be obtained from, and then with a little introduction of another
mineral; also from stone, that being tin in turn an amalgam of the
two creating Bronze.
The end of Monumentality, interpret the apparent changes that occur at the end of the Neolithic period (c. 2400
2000 cal BC), Neolithic Studies Karl-James Langford 16013044

The ability to be able to cut down trees using new technology

thanks to copper and bronze tools gave our Neolithic ancestors new
skills; to plant new and exciting crops introduced from elsewhere
(Jones 2000), to hollow out wood to make boats, and thus using
some of this timber to create new settlements (Bradley 2014) that
could accommodate a growing population as cause and effect of the
latter. In-fact the Neolithic had given way to a new age: The Bronze
Age. There were also new animals being introduced offering an even
more diverse agricultural landscape.

In a new period of change, were our ancestors truly leaving behind

their notions of the taskscape (Ingold 1993), forgetting everything
that had gone before and starting a new? The answer is no. What
had gone before in nearly 2000 years of history within the Neolithic
that was still fixed within the landscape, was that late Neolithic
people were surrounded by their ancestors, they couldnt but
remember them. For a thousand more years archaeologists detect
at sites such as Tinkinswood Vale of Glamorgan (Ward 1915), Bryn
celi ddu Anglesey (Daniel 2013), Stonehenge Wiltshire (Darvill
2012); evidence of material cultural within the context of the
monument that had been laid down generations after the end of the
Neolithic period (circa 4100 years ago). In other words, they didnt
leave behind the monuments, they simply had a different
phenomenological approach to them (Barrett 2009), a more
approachable and at times undetectable connection with them.

In-fact in reality, Monumentality may have not come to such an

abrupt end after all, it just slowly gave way to the new way of doing
things, but to archaeologists boundaries have to be available for us
to explain the idea of change, but Ingold (1993) would argue that
there is no such thing as change but the landscape and taskscape
continually interchanging.
The end of Monumentality, interpret the apparent changes that occur at the end of the Neolithic period (c. 2400
2000 cal BC), Neolithic Studies Karl-James Langford 16013044

However, there can be argued by some writers that monumental

buildings are directly related with power and the ability to control
the less fortunate (Osbourne 2014:5), and it could be said that
without these Monumental structures, society has lost the control of
the elite. But there was some control detected in the landscape with
the new mortuary practices. Large circular mounds at the very end
of the Neolithic around 4100 bp (Robertson-Mackay 1980 and Coles
1965) indicate just that, new ways the powerful could add their
mark to the landscape. In many of these new large mounds only a
small number of those that made up society could be attested, and
if burial practice was just to represent the powerful, then the small
numbers buried in them would be a testament to this fact (Thomas
2000 and Petersen 1972). And yet again as through the Neolithic the
disposal of the dead had no differentiation between inhumation or
cremational burial within this transitional period; a time of more
elaborate burial deposits (Barrett 1990).

Conclusion
The landscape was used differently throughout the beginning to the
end of the Neolithic thats basically the only major change
throughout the period. Transformation occurred at different times
and places, and maybe much of what we do see as change was in-
fact reinventing the wheel. Monumentality just interchanged with
the evolving human consciousness it was just seen differently by
people that were culturally different and over a long-time period.
Our ancestors still loved those that had gone before and had a place
The end of Monumentality, interpret the apparent changes that occur at the end of the Neolithic period (c. 2400
2000 cal BC), Neolithic Studies Karl-James Langford 16013044

for them, and burying their mortal remains in urns at burial sites
was their new way of keeping them close.

It was the same landscape that saw a migration from understanding

that people needed to display their sense of place or power by
making bold statements, such as Stonehenge or Maes Howe; then at
the end of the Neolithic to something of utility such as the beaker
pot. The taskscape (Ingold 1993) was to become revolutionised not
in one instance but at a number of times by our ancestors. Our
forefathers saw that utility ruled over them rather than a hell belt
class of people that wanted to control them with Monumental
archaeology. It is not to be stated that the aristocracy was gone, but
they still existed to be buried in less grand earthen mounds or stone
cists.

The end of Monumentality saw changes in tools that at different

places, at heterogeneous times created a choice between remaining
in a Stone Age and use of beautiful polished axes, or to metal that
came out of the stone that they had used to build their monuments
with. The copper axes and adzes caused not only our ancestors over
time to clear vast tracts of upland and lowland landscapes, but to
intensify agriculture with new crops; this was the revolution at the
very end of the Neolithic.

And finally, the revolution didnt leave the Monuments behind, it

absorbed them. The monuments were kept close
phenomenologically and couldnt be forgotten and nor could their
relatives memory. In real terms Ingold (1993) is correct that the
landscape is never about space its about the various experiences
that the sense of taskscape offers, the Neolithic never truly ended it
was always there, just given a new name.
The end of Monumentality, interpret the apparent changes that occur at the end of the Neolithic period (c. 2400
2000 cal BC), Neolithic Studies Karl-James Langford 16013044

Bibliography

Barrett, J.C., 1990. The monumentality of death: the character of Early Bronze Age mortuary
mounds in southern Britain. World Archaeology, 22(2), pp.179-189.
The end of Monumentality, interpret the apparent changes that occur at the end of the Neolithic period (c. 2400
2000 cal BC), Neolithic Studies Karl-James Langford 16013044

Barrett, J.C. and Ko, I., 2009. A phenomenology of landscape A crisis in British landscape
archaeology?. Journal of social archaeology, 9(3), pp.275-294.

Bradley, R., 2014. The prehistoric settlement of Britain (Vol. 6). Routledge.

Bradley, R., 2016. The dark side of the sky: the orientations of earlier prehistoric monuments
in Ireland and Britain. The Archaeology of Darkness, p.51.

Bradley, R. and Edmonds, M., 2005. Interpreting the axe trade: production and exchange in
Neolithic Britain. Cambridge University Press.

Chan, B., Viner, S., Pearson, M.P., Albarella, U. and Ixer, R., 2016. Resourcing Stonehenge:
Patterns of human, animal and goods mobility in the Late Neolithic. Moving on in Neolithic
Studies: Understanding Mobile Lives, p.28.

Clarke, D.L., 1962. Matrix Analysis and Archaeology with particular reference to British
Beaker Pottery. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society (New Series), 28, pp.371-382.

Childe, V.G., Bryce, T.H. and Watson, D.M.S., 1931. Skara Brae: A Pictish Village in Orkney.
Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner & Company, Limited.

Coles, J.M., Simpson, D.D.A. and Denston, C.B., 1965. The Excavation of a Neolithic Round
Barrow at Pitnacree, Perthshire, Scotland. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society (New
Series), 31, pp.34-57.

Cummings, V., 2002. Experiencing texture and transformation in the British Neolithic. Oxford
Journal of Archaeology, 21(3), pp.249-261.

Daniel, G.E., 2013. The prehistoric chamber tombs of England and Wales. Cambridge
University Press.

Darvill, T., Marshall, P., Pearson, M.P. and Wainwright, G., 2012. Stonehenge remodelled.
Antiquity, 86(334), pp.1021-1040.

Dockrill, SJ. et al 2010 Excavations at Old Scatness, Shetland, Vol 2: The Pictish Village and
Viking Settlement.

Dyer, J., 2002. Ancient Britain. Routledge.

The end of Monumentality, interpret the apparent changes that occur at the end of the Neolithic period (c. 2400
2000 cal BC), Neolithic Studies Karl-James Langford 16013044

Hingley, R., 1996. Ancestors and identity in the later prehistory of Atlantic Scotland: the reuse
and reinvention of Neolithic monuments and material culture. World Archaeology, 28(2),
pp.231-243.

Hunt, T.L. and Lipo, C.P., 2006. Late colonization of Easter island. Science, 311(5767),
pp.1603-1606.

Ingold, Tim. "The Temporality of the Landscape." World Archaeology 25, no. 2 (1993): 24-174

Jones, G., 2000. Evaluating the importance of cultivation and collecting in Neolithic Britain.
Plants in Neolithic Britain and beyond, 79, p.84.

Mille, B. and Carozza, L., 2009. Moving into the metal ages: The social importance of metal at
the end of the Neolithic period in France. Metals and Society, studies in honour of Barbara S.
Ottaway. Habelt. Bonn, pp.143-171.

Osborne, J.F. ed., 2014. Approaching monumentality in archaeology. SUNY Press.

Petersen, F., 1972. Traditions of multiple burial in later Neolithic and Early Bronze Age
England. Archaeological journal, 129(1), pp.22-55.

Powell, T.G.E. and Daniel, G.E., 1956. Barclodiad Y Gawres: The Excavation of a Megalithic
Chamber Tomb in Anglesey, 1952-1953. Liverpool University Press.

Richards, C., 1996. Henges and water: towards an elemental understanding of monumentality
and landscape in late Neolithic Britain. Journal of material culture, 1(3), pp.313-336.

Richards, C., 2003. Dwelling among the monuments: an examination of the Neolithic village
of Barnhouse, Maeshowe passage grave and surrounding monuments at Stenness, Orkney.

Robertson-Mackay, M.E., 1980, December. A Head and Hooves Burial beneath a Round
Barrow, with other Neolithic and Bronze Age Sites, on Hemp Knoll, near Avebury, Wiltshire. In
Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society (Vol. 46, pp. 123-176). Cambridge University Press.

Sherratt, A., 1990. The genesis of megaliths: Monumentality, ethnicity and social complexity in
Neolithic northwest Europe. World Archaeology, 22(2), pp.147-167.
The end of Monumentality, interpret the apparent changes that occur at the end of the Neolithic period (c. 2400
2000 cal BC), Neolithic Studies Karl-James Langford 16013044

Ward, J., 1915. Tinkinswood Burial Chamber, Vale of Glamorgan. Archaeologia Cambrensis,
15(6), p.253.

Thomas, J., 2000. Death, identity and the body in Neolithic Britain. Journal of the Royal
Anthropological Institute, 6(4), pp.653-668.