1 2 3 Chapter Nine 4 5 6 4100–2700 B.C. 7 8 9 Monuments and Ideologies in the Neolithic Landscape 10 11 12 13 14 Johannes Müller 15 16 17 18 19 Abstract In northern central Europe and southern Scandinavia thousands of 20 megalithic monuments were constructed ca. 3600–3200 B.C. Which societies 21 erected them, and why? Were different ideologies responsible for different patterns 22 of social space, reflected in monumental constructions? Beside different types of 23 megalithic burial sites, causewayed enclosures were very important for the earliest 24 agriculturalists of northern Europe. They were placed in a landscape that went 25 through dramatic environmental changes. Within European society collective and 26 cooperative behavior changed through time into a pronunciation of individual 27 differences. Different architecture was used for the display of different social roles, 28 and in this sense megalithic constructions are a reflection of the need to express 29 stability in the relation between individuals and society, humans and nature. As 30 a consequence, the Neolithic mobility of ideas led to the formation of reorganized 31 space during the Funnel Beaker, or “TRB” (Trichterbecher), age, a reorganized 32 space that—as a social space—utilized the position of the ancestors for the posi- 33 tioning of the living. 34 35 36 Introduction 37 38 ne of the main questions of social anthropology concerns how social relations with‑ 39 Oin societies are created and confirmed. Within nonliterate societies these processes 40 were linked to other means than in literate societies: the creation and reconstruction of 41 memories, social memories, was related to a variety of mechanisms in which material 42 culture played an important role as a medium of knowledge transformation. Within many 43 44 181 SP_OSB_CH09_181-214.indd 181 5/6/14 12:37 PM 182 Johannes Müller 1 European Neolithic societies such constitutions are linked to the construction of visible 2 monuments, which function for ancestor worship or as gathering places. Within the social 3 space created by such monuments, the reconfirmation of rules of individual behavior 4 and group activities could have taken place, as well as the introduction of new ideas. 5 A monument of this type found in numerous regions in western, central, and 6 northern Europe is the so‑called megalith, in most cases megalithic tombs consisting of 7 uprights and capstones. It can be extrapolated from the current state of documentation 8 that in southern Scandinavia and northern central Europe approximately 15,000 more 9 or less well‑preserved megalithic tombs are in existence, although originally almost a 10 half‑million megalithic tombs probably were erected. 11 Apart from the distribution of megalithic tombs along the western Mediterranean 12 they can also be principally found along the so‑called Atlantic Facade as well as in north‑ 13 ern central Europe and southern Scandinavia (Fischer 1979). Their distribution (Figures 14 9.1 and 9.2) stretches from Portugal to Galicia and from the Basque region to northwest 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 figure 9.1 The distribution of megaliths in western, central, and northern Europe 44 (after Müller 2006; graphic: Holger Dieterich). SP_OSB_CH09_181-214.indd 182 5/6/14 12:37 PM 4100–2700 B.C. 183 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 figure 9.2 The distribution of megaliths in northern central Europe and southern 30 Scandinavia. Important sites mentioned in the article are marked. 1 Barkaer, 2 Vroue 31 Heide, 3 Bygholm, 4 Dragsholm, 5 Sarup, 6 Frälsegården, 7 Saxtorp, 8 Dagstorp, 9 Almhov, 10 Trolasten, 11 Tinnum, 12 Schwesing, 13 Büdelsdorf‑Borgstedt, 14 Ras‑ 32 torf, 15 Flintbek, 16 Albersdorf‑Dieksknöll, 17 Albersdorf‑Brutkamp, 18 Oldenburg, 33 19 Wangels, 20 Bad Oldesloe‑Wolkenwehe, 21 Triwalk, 22 Ostorf, 23 Parchim‑Löd‑ 34 digsee, 24 Flögeln, 25 Himmelpforten, 26 Hunte 1, 27 Kassel‑Calden, 28 Lüdelsen, 35 29 Haldensleben, 30 Hundisburg‑Olbetal, 31 Halle‑Dölauer Heide. 36 37 38 France, from southern England and Ireland to the North Atlantic Shetland Islands, and 39 from Drenthe in the Netherlands to Pomerania and central Sweden. Even though they 40 are difficult to date, the oldest are to be found in the Vendée and on the Armorican 41 Peninsula. Radiometric dating and Chasséen pottery from the earliest grave chambers 42 indicate a construction phase beginning ca. 4700 B.C. (Cassen et al. 2009; Laporte 2005; 43 Müller 1997). The Breton development appears to be a reaction to different influences. 44 SP_OSB_CH09_181-214.indd 183 5/6/14 12:37 PM 184 Johannes Müller 1 We know that at approximately the same time nonmegalithic long barrows of the Passy 2 type in the Blique/Epi‑Rössen tradition were erected in the Paris Basin and the concept 3 of trapezoidal‑rectangular long barrows coming from the east reached the area on the 4 northwest coast of France (Chambon and Thomas 2010). At the same time stone cists 5 and early passage graves, whose polygonal form appears similar to Epi‑Cardial and Cerny 6 grave traditions farther to the south, are to be found in these and other mounds. From 7 a mixture of a variety of influences—surely based on an indigenous substratum and in 8 connection with the development of agriculture—the oldest preserved monuments in 9 Europe emerged. These monuments leave their imprint on the landscape and, for exam‑ 10 ple, in the Gulf of Morbihan they cluster to ritual centers of transregional significance. 11 In cists within nonmegalithic long barrows interred humans were richly furnished with 12 alpine jadeite axes (Cassen et al. 2010), while menhirs as tall as 21 m were ceremoniously 13 broken and used as capstones, for example at the famous facility Table des Marchand 14 (Cassen 2009). In Brittany and Normandy, a centuries‑long tradition of the construction 15 of megalithic tombs develops until ca. 3200 B.C., during which dolmen, passage graves, 16 gallery graves, and menhirs were built (Boujot and Cassen 1993). 17 Not all megalithic facilities in Europe are as old as those in northwestern France. In 18 the Mediterranean region, for example on Corsica and Sardinia (see Kolb, this volume), 19 simple dolmen appear first as of 4200 B.C., whereas on the British Isles they first emerge 20 as of approximately 4000 B.C. and in the north central Europe and southern Scandinavia 21 regions, which are to be the center of attention here, they exist only as early as 3650 22 B.C. (Leandri et al. 2007; Müller 2009; A. Whittle et al. 2011). In fact, according to the 23 current state of research we cannot state with certainty how much the high mobility of 24 Neolithic society promoted a diffusion of the idea of laying large stones while using them 25 for collective graves, or whether we must assume convergent architectural developments 26 in different regions from the outset. Although it is relatively clear that the allées couvertes 27 and gallery graves both developed as of 3600 B.C. in inland settings from Brittany over 28 the Paris Basin to central Germany, the northern central European‑Scandinavian area 29 appears to have undergone a spatially and culturally autonomous development separate 30 from the west, though naturally accompanied by the reception of outside innovations. 31 These preliminary considerations lead us to the primary questions of the present 32 chapter: (1) Why, and from which date, were megalithic graves built in the northern 33 central European lowlands and in southern Scandinavia? (2) How can the different phases 34 of monumental development be explained for the area under investigation? and (3) Why 35 did this tradition cease after its 500‑year existence? 36 37 Funnel Beakers and Monuments 38 39 When speaking of megalithic graves in northern central Europe and southern Scandi‑ 40 navia one is simultaneously taking Funnel Beaker societies into account as well (Figure 41 9.3). Since the early nineteenth century we have known that megalithic graves in the 42 Netherlands and northern Germany as well as in Denmark and Sweden are associated 43 with a specific form of ceramics, the so‑called Funnel Beaker pottery. Defined recurring 44 features of material culture characterize Funnel Beaker societies (TRB or Trichterbecher) SP_OSB_CH09_181-214.indd 184 5/6/14 12:37 PM 4100–2700 B.C. 185 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 figure 9.3 Regional groups of the TRB culture (after Bakker 1979, Figure 1; graphic: 28 Andrzej Link). W = West Group, N = North Group, E = East Group, S = South 29 Group, SE = Southeast Group, Ah = Altheim Group or Culture, Pf = Pfyn Group, A and horizontally hatched = Altmark Group, vertically hatched = Walternienburg‑Ber‑ 30 nburg Group. The broken line indicates the occurrence of the Luboń decoration of 31 three‑strand cord impressions. Diagonal hatching indicates the related Michelsberg 32 culture. SOM = the Seine‑Oise‑Marne Culture. 33 34 35 36 and set them apart from other Neolithic societies to the south and to the west (see, e.g., 37 Bakker 1979; M. Midgley 1992). Precisely this autonomy of the material culture of TRB 38 societies will occupy us in the following investigation. The development of monumen‑ 39 tality is closely related to other aspects of TRB societies and the key to understanding 40 the phenomenon of megalithic tombs lies in deciphering the social conditions and ritual 41 practices of these societies.