t n e n d 6 s
s e s t me u
i 2 1 u d s D3 f l n a n o
o
h o n r wn a m A t
o d .
n e S ipped
l k r t d u , s n d
n 6 s a e e a h s d c n w d to s 3 e e e F
a h eb t l .L. n a R u
h of V D
t h s
t u r s of i xt o o t
s , g e s l s s o y r l l e t e m o c a b e
. e h a r b m n i h e a o d n c h h r t d c
ati
A f e l v t . o a a
t i a c h o u 4 l t x ur 5 t i p u b e s e
o s e c i s s i i
h
h h t t e t
f o tom f h h l t o o
alit
p
y o s g s t i
d e lt t h u u c m o t s T l s
e o l r a w c t
i he t, a p g t g n
3 n o e n i l n 2011. i
Accordingly, we know surprisingly little of the fabric of the settlement landscape of the Funnel Accordingly, we know surprisingly little of the fabric of the settlement landscape of Thanks to the rich contents of the burial chambers and the evocative and tangible above-ground Thanks to the rich contents of the burial chambers and the evocative and tangible above-ground still very scarce Studies of the settlements of the communities that built these megalithic tombs are s Passage graves and the Funnel Beaker Culture Passage graves and the d Valt o i l i r i t c r
o aeo c s o h a
mp p p c y r o o c t re tend to be equated to settlement sites. Despite systematic excavation of a few of such sites, clear-cut house tend to be equated to settlement sites. Despite systematic excavation of a few of such ‘recognised’ based on plans have yet to be uncovered in Drenthe. This means that settlements can only be We have little in- Beaker Period (c. 3400-2850 cal BC, despite the prominent funerary sites of that period. to several tens formation on what happened in the direct vicinity, from the base of the covering mound it is spared from of meters beyond it, of the megaliths. As this zone is considered a scheduled monument, to treat the construction works – amongst which archaeological excavation. It was therefore decided deterioration. This particular plot is situated directly south of the scheduled monument that comprises the deterioration. This particular plot is situated D36 and D37. The stripping of the topsoil next to this megalithic passage graves, known as hunebedden, twins’ (Valther tweeling), reached as close as 10 m from the stone pair of graves, known locally as the ‘Valthe around the originally present covering mound is protected by law, settings. This is relevant, as a zone of 25 m graves. even if it is situated outside the area formally designated as the ‘reserve’ for the passage century; initially this The megalithic passage graves of Drenthe have witnessed excavation since the 17th Due to the contents consisted of antiquarian interests, and only later concerned attention by archaeologists. and other int tools, early of the passage graves, such as well-preserved pottery, polished stone and int axes culture of the builders archaeologists targeted these sites and we are relatively well-informed on the material century. Human of these megalithic tombs since the dawn of professional archaeology in the early 20th graves elsewhere, it remains have rarely been uncovered, but due to comparisons with megalithic passage were deposited became clear that these were communal burial locations in which various individuals collectively. ) period is heritage the Hunebedden themselves represent, the Funnel Beaker Culture (Trechterbekercultuur and history books. one of the few archaeological periods that holds its ground in national Dutch education the views we However, their long research history also means that they have long, and overly, dominated have of Funnel Beaker Period societies. comprising pottery and if compared to studies of the funerary (megalithic) sites. Various surface scatter sites Due to an administrative mishap, the topsoil of a plot of high archaeological value at the Hunebedweg in Due to an administrative mishap, the topsoil was stripped in the fall of 2011. Although the plot was scheduled Valthe (province of Drenthe, The Netherlands), program, it was never intended that the topsoil would be re- for work as part of a ecological restructuring B a and D37. This mistake o ered the opportunity to conduct a thorough to conduct the opportunity This mistake o ered and D37.
- s e n
j h d k o e at - e i - xcavation
1 i t c st
e a e e d k b r alithi 1 ) o s d g o e . r j
a n ’ h , i s d r i a t 9 f 9 a e d
u r n : c
l p a m g r -
)
e e o ) 2 n
t 1 p n o 0 ,
b o r m e r e e r al - e 8 o s
n v a
s a 5 e o 1 r S e e i s a s m l h i d o u d r 7 8
r e
r r r l e v v k v 2 . . d o r O st 20 o v u r o
4
9 & u u
‘ e p e e i
er a e r o e n
e g 9 e
n n n
t , L s e l k g 1 5 d s i u , k d n u ’ c
g e h a
s 1
a
a d
w h g
st t i g e n r 1 s
s f n , e ks
c e e d E i e k e t
i v e
p , a a ( ) i Wi
l r i e e . n . s
, h
r a o
r
r b . d g m n i . r h d n
s
k
9 e t n . o N
s 7 . n b
.
j
e 0 p rotoco
i t
J H s e cul a e o e i E m n e n 2 .
k u . . m e
l . V d 2 b l M g 6 1
. c
n n r
r n r p J J
d A r e b e e b u v , e a r
6
W n 0 ( 8 e a u e n a n H M
P olar n
e A a r : :
t - d c a D e a d e g 5 i 1
: m
a L w e 2 v s
v e k i -
e l a
,
e e
e l 6 r t n
. n e
2
d t R
. e ) l l n n m e ; e u 6 a e e r
m h r h s n 7 e s oo e
s i e en en E n e
D . d 9
t a 0 n n i i s (2e p p
t i
o d b 2 e n c ‘ e M d e , v
e l
) b d i i ’ e n 1
v 1 a l n e r r , r
s N u w 1 u s l e a
M 3 m , s . k
h m o 1 e r i r o n
n n m m , 0 e v e e e e
r n t u ) o a i h d D r h R m
k p 1 k p i t e C g e
a e h a a
h a
2
e d d V D . e s s e
e 9 ge . d d o t a
a a 0 t o u t
d
v c t k o r h x x d . d t , o : p l r
e n a l 9 e v n h N D e 2 a e S B e h h r c n 7 n e e e l e k
s M
( b t e . n
e K n
. r o e i n 9 b n ; . c c
1
e ferenc e e t e h e a o h aa a i e . r r w e e e e
e e s s p g
1 C
e l a r J r h e 3 3 w e e J G G ed a ed d . t ( B
’
e g r e w
o o . . h l d u i r g
M c d d
m . h n p T n 4 4 , l v i h D t d o .
a - - F M F T S n n .
n e o s n D r B g 6 L
c r n i a H n n
j . o u e i
. a o . a i e e e n 2 - - - - 0 - A e a d r i e 1 o . a n n n a V H L
l m & 5 D 1 R d d o i l i ‘ A e l 3 n M d N H H N 2 a 1 3 2 ( J v se H g i ( n 4 for d V a z
E E N O P G R A V I N G N A B I J D E V A L T H E R H U N E B E D D E N D 3 6 E N D 3 7 W AARDE E L 2 - 2 0 1 3 16 accidental topsoil removal at Valthe – Hunebedweg as an opportunity to scrutinize precisely such an area. Figure 1. The excavation site
In the summer of 2012 (21st of May to 18th of June 2012), an excavation was undertaken, the costs of to the south of the scheduled which were partly paid for by Dienst Landelijk Gebied and executed by the Groningen Institute of Arch- plot of passage graves D36/D36 aeology (Groningen University), under the supervision of the present authors and with the cooperation of has been stripped of its topsoil. Photo looking east archaeology students and volunteers. 6 (photo: R.L. Fens)
Location 3
1 The passage graves D36 and D37 follow a similar alignment but are spaced 7 m apart. Their orientation is 0 2
WNW-SSE and the entrance is situated in the southern side. Whereas most of the upright boulders are still - present, several of the capping stones are missing while others have dropped down into the main passage, 2 giving both passage graves a dilapidated outlook. L E E
Dutch Ordonance Datum, at the transition of glacial ice-pushed ridge capped by coversand, to an erosion D R gully (droogdal) situated to the east that had formed when during the last glacial meltwater scoured the AA were later to be incorporated into the passage graves. The erosion gully later silted-in with sand, but is W locally (at the Kampervenen) still situated four meters lower than its surroundings. The edges of the erosion 17
gullies comprise many archaeological sites, predominantly from the Funnel Beaker Culture period and the 7
Iron Age. To the east of the erosion gully, an Iron Age bog trackway known as the Valther brug (Valthe bridge) 3 D traverses the the peat that formed in the Hunzedal. Throughout the Holocene (from the Mesolithic to the N
present), the erosion gully situated at the gradient of Hondsrug to Hunzedal will have been an ecologically rich E
and diverse area. 6 3 D
N E D
Figure 2. Romantic depiction D E
of passage grave D36 on a B
litho known as ‘Hunebed te E Valthe’ by H.D. Kruseman N U
van Elten, from: W.J. Hofdijk, H Ons voorgeslacht in zijn R
dagelyksch leven geschilderd I E
(Haarlem, 1859) H T L A V
E D
J I B A N
G N I V A R G P O 6- Scientific framework Land van ontdekkingen - ‘Op N E
zoek naar de trechterbekercul- E tuur’ (www.land-der-entdeckungenkungen.de). 0 0 6 road-ditches precursor Hunebedweg 6 5 2 m 5 2 flake middle- Palaeolithic hearth (possibly Mesolithic)
0
Other 0 0 2 0 4 5 8 granary granary fence line pits with stones 0 0 6 6 5 2 fence line 9 m tentative structure 5 ditch 2 pits farm 7
0
Iron Age Iron 0 0 2 0 4 5 At the suspected base of the covering mound of D37, a pit with a 3 m diameter which was At the suspected base of the covering site, indicate The 133 decorated Funnel Beaker Culture period sherds recovered from the The area in front of the passage grave entrances may have been used for commemorative At 50-70 m south of the twin Valthe passage graves, a number of poorly-discernible features 0 0 6 extraction pit boulders 6 5 2 Traces of the hunebed-builders graves, a wide variety of archaeologically traceable Based on observations at other passage vicinity of the Hunebed megaliths: culture layers predating activities can be expected in the direct related to the megalith’s construction, funerary sites or the Funnel Beaker Culture period, features the funerary activities (e.g. refuse pits with waste of stone cists, remainders of rituals accompanying the periodically cleaning-out of the megalith’s central chamber. collective feasting) as well as traces of eroded boulder-clay (keizand) was uncovered (Fig. 3). Note- dug down into the stone-rich top of the of boulders of substantial size was present in the worthy is that at this location, a concentration used to extract such large boulders for the construction of keizand, which suggests that this pit was surrounding soil showed increased illuviation fibers, which the passage graves. Both this pit and the underneath an artificially raised soil, such as a covering could indicate secondary soil formation mound of a passage grave. a use-period of several centuries (Brindley horizons 1/2 – 5; Fig. 4). The diffuse distribution pattern of the cleaning- of this pottery in the northern part of the site may have developed as a consequence out of D36/D37’s burial chambers to allow for more interments (in prehistory), or a as consequence the two burial of more recent looting activities that aimed at recovering valuables. Unfortunately, cleaning of the chambers proper have never seen systematic excavation, leaving ideas on periodical Beaker Culture interiors unsubstantiated. Two Late Mediaeval sherds recovered amidst Funnel and/or robbed of period sherds tentatively mark the time at which the chambers were reopened some of their capping stones. of a number of frag- ceremonies and funerary rituals. Noteworthy in this respect is the presence ments of heat-affected (calcinated and showing heat-cracks or craquelé) polished flint axes (Fig. 5). and effectively taken Through the process of burning, a useful and important object was destroyed between the tran- out of the realm of everyday usage. Possibly, parallels may have been perceived sitions ‘from the living to the deceased’ with humans and ‘from functional axes to defunct objects’ such transitions are in the Funnel Beaker Culture period communities. The rituals bound-up with labelled rites des passages. Unfortunately, we do not know the full details underlying such rituals, de passage that sym- but tentatively is may be assumed that the axes themselves underwent a rite flint tools, and mostly bolized biological death in humans. Whereas as few fragments of heat-affected graves, this category axes, have been recovered from the interior burial chambers of some passage suggest that this is best know from surface scatters near passage graves. Southern Swedish sites ritual of axe burning is widespread. by their poor visibility were visible, that may represent postholes of a wooden construction. Judging TRB passage graves with covering mounds et he de t D37 des , e m du e de de - t n, Les ir pits he an et té 5 a. of er f t an s v e 2 A v té, es sy por glacial boulder orica en ailles, t naissance, alité, t eiden, 909). and he la .C. hing Odoor L Beuk 1 hic.’ t iançailles ( es c P f la . ossesse 1 entse er . elements puber tentative structure (dating pending) r Nieuw dination, in de R 4 at of Gennep, js, Étude g 9: funér at 1 de aehis Dr jl - eolit la des es J. l’or e. salmanak Scr in: l’hospit la N ari D36 zuidw Pr ‘W D1 an assemblag 36 en
de des rit g-bi v (P n’ 1 a de de de
olk . en mation 69-82 e, flint- knapping om, c. T V D32: A vian deposits des or Flint et passag Geul 1) hement, ance, 6; 1 Hunebedden 986)
0
arsson, Neolithic dek 1 ousber ue Odoor seuil,
de L L h 0 0 2 0 4 5 ansf (1 onnement, ace. c . 1) (20 mariag f l’enf entse tr Megalith ritual L After: du es 1 oer ussen en candina 03 9- as S Document in E Dr ‘T Gem. 20 Hunebed Dut saisons, 8- W sur du et l’accouc cour rit matiq l’adoption, l’initiation, 7- de 1 38 Figure 3. Features from the Funnel Beaker Culture period (neolithic), the Iron Age and other periods (drawing S. Arnoldussen, Groningen Institute for Archaeology)
E E N O P G R A V I N G N A B I J D E V A L T H E R H U N E B E D D E N D 3 6 E N D 3 7 W AA R D E E L 2 - 2 0 1 3 18 a Neolithic age for these traces is possible, and they could form a clue that a settlement may have been situated at close distance from the passage graves. The exact age and contemporaneity of these features however still needs to be supported with radiocarbon dates. Close to these features, a small concentration of Funnel Beaker Culture period pottery was found. In a general sense, and excluding the heat-a ected axe-fragments, the int assemblage deviates from what is to be expected for a megalith’s interior; particularly the scrapers hint at domestic activities normally associated with settlements. Considering the low number of nds, the tentative habitation phase will have been very short-lived. A series of re tted akes in any case sug- gests that south of the passage graves, domestic activities such as the construction of new int tools were undertaken.
Farmers from the Iron Age
During the Iron Age (800 BC -12 BC) the area was 3 used intensively for crop cultivation. To the north, 1 0
west and east of the excavation remains of Iron Age 2
Celtic fields - agricultural systems known as have been recognised.10 Within the excavation proper, two 2 granary-type outbuildings, several ditches, a stake L
fence-line and a few pits and postholes dated to the E
Iron Age were uncovered (Fig. 3). Bordering the E northern excavation limit, eight postholes from a portal construction that is provisionally dated to the Early and Middle Iron Age based on the pottery re- AARD covered (radiocarbon date pending). Portal con- W structions were used in the entrances midway the 19 Figure 4 (top): Decorated long sides of Iron Age farmhouses, but few other 7 roof-supporting posts were found in the vicinity. The Funnel Beaker Culture per- 3 D majority of the roof-bearing construction of this farmhouse are situated within the unexcavated part of the iod pottery (drawing M.A. Los-Weijns, Groningen In- N scheduled Hunebed monument. Evidently, this Iron Age farm was constructed very close to, or even into, the E stitute for Archaeology). covering mound of D37: was the passage grave perhaps no longer covered by a soil mound at that time? 6 3
Figure 5 (bottom): Left: two D transverse arrowheads that Remains from other periods N
area typical for the Funnel E Beaker Period Culture in D
Incidentally, objects and features datable to (presumably) the Middle Palaeolithic, the Mesolithic, the Bronze D
Age, the Late Mediaeval period and the recent periods were uncovered.11 In parallel to the present-day dirt Drenthe (with sideviews). E Right: heat-a ected frag- B road running past the passage graves, the Hunebedweg, several ditch systems were found that may represent E
ment of polished int axe. N road-side ditches of precursors to the Hunebedweg, which has since moved slightly eastwards. Originally, it U ran 12 m more to the west, almost touching upon passage grave D37. H
R E
Conclusion H
10- J.A. Brongers, A‘ ir pho- T L tography and Celtic field Within a 25 m radius from the Hunebed passage graves, features related to the construction of the megaliths A research in the Netherlands’ V were found, as well as indications of (funerary) transition rituals and the clearing-out of the megalith’s
Nederlandse Oudheden E chambers, but no remains of burials or cists. Within hundred meters distance from the passage graves 6 (1976). D
possibly wooden structures were erected, but whether these indicate habitation is not fully clear. 11- A tentative Middle Palaeo- J I
From the younger nds we can deduce that the two passage graves remained a focal point in the lithic flake is out-of-place at the B
excavation levels. It presumably A landscape during later times. In the Iron Age, D36 and D37 were located amidst agricultural plots. It is striking was displaced in the Neolithic, N
when the builders of the passage that a farmhouse was constructed on or into the covering mound of passage grave D37, although this location G may have been favoured for its beauty or shelter. In Mediaeval and later times, economic incentives – besides graves dug a deep pit into the N eroded top of the glacial I religious zeal – damaged the passage graves, yet they remained a landmark used in the orientation of the till in order to extract stones for V the construction of the Hunebed, A roads through the erosion gully. R and unknowningly disturbed a G
much older Neanderthal camp- P
site. O
N E E