Lithics 31

A VIEW FROM THE OUTSIDE: SOME THOUGHTS ON THE RESEARCH PRIORITIES FOR AND LITHIC STUDIES IN BRITAIN AND IRELAND Vicki Cummings1

ABSTRACT This paper considers some possible avenues for new research into the study of lithics for British and Irish assemblages dating from the Mesolithic and Neolithic. While scholars have been successful in extracting detail on technological aspects of stone , it is argued that we now need to integrate other approaches into our consideration of stone tools. Firstly, the significance of colour in relation to stone tools is considered. Secondly, this paper discusses how specific research questions can help frame the methodologies used for both the collection, and subsequent analysis, of chipped stone assemblages. The research questions for the Southern Kintyre Project are briefly discussed, and new scientific techniques are outlined which could potentially answer these questions. This paper also argues that by making our methods more accessible to the wider archaeological community via the World Wide Web we can potentially enable other people to run their own projects. Ultimately this could mean we could compare results across broad areas. This paper is thus offered as a starting point for thinking about new research priorities which can potentially revitalise our study of lithics. Full reference: Cummings, V. 2010. A view from the outside: some thoughts on the research priorities for Mesolithic and Neolithic studies in Britain and Ireland. Lithics: the Journal of the Lithic Studies Society 31: 68– 77. Keywords: Mesolithic, Neolithic, colour, flint sourcing, fieldwalking, web resources, accessibility.

stone (Cooney 2002) has also been noted. INTRODUCTION All of these different studies have considered As someone who has spent most of their career the potential symbolic importance of colour in studying megalithic architecture, I have only these contexts, and how colour can create recently started looking at stone connections with other parts of the cosmos, assemblages. Drawing on experiences of such as the moon and sun. However, while the working with ―big stones‖, this paper offers colour of stone tools is usually recorded by some fresh perspectives on ―small stones‖, most lithics specialists, the potential specifically chipped stone assemblages from significance and meaning of the colour of the Mesolithic and Neolithic. Drawing from a stone has not been considered in detail. The range of methodological and theoretical issues colour of flint, for example, can clearly assist surrounding the study of , this paper lithics specialists in provenancing the source of highlights a series of research priorities which the material. But did people in the past choose should enable lithic studies to move forward particular colours of flint to make specific and become more accessible and integrated objects? Were , for example, made with other archaeological investigations. from different coloured stone than scrapers? Were people deliberately choosing specific A CONSIDERATION OF COLOUR colours of stone to make specific objects, and In recent years there has been considerable if so, why was that? debate surrounding the significance of colour Before looking at the colour of in the past (Jones & McGregor 2002). Many assemblages, it was important to establish a Neolithic and monuments were solid and repeatable methodology. It is constructed using a variety of different documented that colour is highly subjective: it coloured stones (Lynch 1998; Jones 1999; can vary considerably depending on light Bradley 2000; McGregor 2002). The conditions and many people, especially men, significance of colour in relation to other are colour blind (Bornstein 1975). stones such as quartz pebbles deposited at Consultation with a colour specialist suggested monumental sites (Darvill 2002) and polished that the most reliable way to record colour

1School of Forensic and Investigative Science, University of Central Lancashire, Preston, PR1 2HE. Email: [email protected]. 68 Vicki Cummings would be using a consistent light source so that relatively small numbers of diagnostic artefacts the ambient lighting conditions were the same such as arrowheads, and it was therefore regardless of context, and recording the colour logical to look at all of the material including of objects using the Natural Colour System, a the . The most informative of the tool similar to the Munsell chart which analysis done on these assemblages involved includes hues covering all colours of the comparing the colour of the flint debitage with rainbow (John Hutchings pers. comm.). This the colour of individual tool types. To avoid method was therefore trialled on a small repetition, only the assemblage from assemblage. While it was found that it is a Tomnaverie will be discussed here, although consistent and repeatable way of recording the similar patterns were noted in the Black Isle colour of lithics, there are a number of and Clava assemblages (Bradley 2000 & problems. Firstly, it is very time-consuming. It 2004). would not be realistic to use this method for a The Tomnaverie assemblage comprised a total large assemblage. Secondly, this method of 317 flints, of which 278 were unretouched provides a colour code, as with the Munsell debitage, with 20 utilised pieces and 19 system, that is combination of letters and arrowheads and scrapers. There were some numbers. The problem with generating a code interesting patterns in this material, although for each individual object is that it does not the limitations of using such a small dataset give a sense of the colour of an object: people should be noted here (and see below). The do not think about colour in this way. Instead, colour of all of the retouched flints was people universally create colour categories compared to the colour of the debitage (Figure (Berlin & Kay 1999) such as red, black, white 1): the absence of retouched grey objects and and so on. However, using the Natural Colour the larger percentage of red, retouched objects System does enable grouping of ranges of hues is of interest here; however a chi-squared test into colour groups (reds, oranges, and so on) on these figures did not support the suggestion and of course also enables comparability that this distribution was significant. It also between different assemblages, recorded at seems that more ―toffee‖ (browny-orange) different times. For the bulk of my pilot study, coloured pieces were utilised (Figure 2). then, colour groupings were used which were informed by the Natural Colour System, as There were a total of nine scrapers in the well as a consistent light source, but lithics assemblage, primarily brown or toffee in were only recorded by colour category (red, colour. The arrowheads are clearly primarily orange, white, black and so on). This is a red in colour; however since there were only methodological issue that may need revisiting four arrowheads in total, this is not a sufficient in the future. sample to be statistically significant. It is interesting that the arrowheads were all barbed Initially, three fieldwalking assemblages were and tanged; this could perhaps imply examined. These assemblages comprised

Figure 1. The total percentages (divided into colour groups) of retouched flints at Tomnaverie compared to the debitage (278 pieces of debitage compared to 19 artefacts).

69 Lithics 31

Figure 2. The total percentages (divided into colour groups) of utilised pieces at Tomnaverie, compared to the colour of the debitage (278 pieces of debitage compared to 20 utilised pieces). chronological patterning in the use of specific The sheer number of pieces from Culbin colours. Sands, around 13,000 artefacts (Alison Sheridan pers. comm.), meant it was only The relatively small size of this assemblage feasible to look at retouched flint artefacts (a means that the relationships noted are at best total of 4729 for this study) rather than all the tentative. There does seem to be evidence, debitage. As such, this study differed from the however, that from a broad repertoire of previous studies on fieldwalked assemblages colours, people preferred certain artefacts to be as no debitage was examined. specific colours (e.g. barbed and tanged arrowheads tend to be red, and toffee-coloured Results were interesting, and suggested the pieces tend to be retouched or utilised). So, careful selection of coloured material to make although these data sets provided useful different object types. A high percentage of insights into the use of colour in , it leaf-shaped arrowheads, for example, were is clear that they are also limited in a number made from red or orangey-red flint as of ways. Firstly, there is simply not enough compared to barbed and tanged arrowheads material for them to be considered a and scrapers (Figure 3). The majority of representative sample. Secondly, the barbed and tanged arrowheads, in contrast, fieldwalked assemblages clearly contain flints were made from orange-brown coloured flint. from the Mesolithic through to the Bronze The material from Culbin Sands is sorted by Age. This means that changes in the use of size in the museum, making it easy to consider different coloured flints through time cannot this aspect of the assemblage. There are two be identified. The next stage was therefore to broad sizes of barbed and tanged arrowheads. locate a flint assemblage which had a large The larger barbed and tanged arrowheads were number of diagnostic artefact pieces. Culbin more likely to be made from grey flint than the Sands, located to the north-east of Inverness on smaller barbed and tanged arrowheads (Figure the Moray Firth, has produced masses of 4); most small arrowheads are orange-brown. prehistoric material culture (Society of It is possible that different sizes of arrowheads Antiquaries of Scotland 1892; Walker 1966) may have been manufactured by different and was therefore chosen for colour analysis communities, and perhaps certain colours of work. material were therefore associated with group The large lithic assemblage from Culbin Sands identity. Another possibility is that smaller is held in the National Museums Scotland in objects may have been used by different Edinburgh and comprises thousands of groups within a community (children, women, artefacts. The Natural Colour System was used older people, for example: Finlay 2006), and to create colour groupings and a consistent that different colours were associated with lighting source was used to examine all pieces. these different people.

70 Vicki Cummings

Figure 3. The percentages (divided into colour groups) of leaf-shaped arrowheads, barbed and tanged arrowheads and scrapers at Culbin Sands (198 leaf-shaped arrowheads, 726 barbed and tanged arrowheads and 2731 scrapers).

These preliminary results may suggest that deposition around megalithic architecture, for certain objects were preferentially made from example. It would also be interesting to chart specific colours of flint. It could be argued that the use of colours over time, and, for example, this pattern is a simple reflection of the quality compare early and late Neolithic assemblages. of the raw material: arrowheads were Critically, these should not be studied in predominately made from red flint, for isolation, but considered in relation to broader example, as that was the highest quality trends and developments. As noted above, I material available. However, high quality flint became interested in the colour of lithics in all these collections actually occurs in a through megalithic architecture, and the small variety of different colours. Instead it is study by Jones (1999) on Arran of the suggested here that the colour of the raw chambered tombs and their contents (including material was significant. It is possible to lithics) could easily and fruitfully be expanded envisage a simple connection between the use out both spatially and temporally. Quite of an object and its colour: red arrowheads clearly, a much more detailed study of this may have been considered more potent as they phenomenon is required and with more and were the colour of blood. Colour may also more lithic material being excavated and have had strong connections with identity. collected, now would be an ideal time to Specific groups of people, or groups of people conduct this analysis. within communities, may have used different coloured stones. RETHINKING THEORIES AND METHODS: AN EXAMPLE FROM It is clear from this pilot study that lithic SOUTHERN KINTYRE analysis should take into account the colour of material being used and it may well have been This paper will now consider other aspects of the case that specific objects were frequently lithic studies. This stems from a project on and deliberately made from specific colours of lithics which was conducted as part of the stone. However, this may have been something Southern Kintyre Project (a co-directed project that was contextually specific with clear with Gary Robinson, Bangor University). We regional differences. Red arrowheads may conducted fieldwork in southern Kintyre with have been appropriate in the early Neolithic in the explicit aim of trying to understand Scotland for hunting, but not suitable for interactions between western Scotland and

71 Lithics 31

Figure 4. The percentages (divided into colour groups) of barbed and tanged arrowheads in relation to size at Culbin Sands (441 large, and 285 small, barbed and tanged arrowheads). eastern Ireland from the Mesolithic through to characterise the nature of settlement and we the Bronze Age (Cummings & Robinson in had a relatively small study area, so it made prep.). Prior to our work, very little was known sense to find out as much as possible about the about the prehistoric use of the Southern area as we could. As such a team of about 10 Kintyre area. Two chambered tombs are people walked two metres apart, each person located in this area (Blasthill and Macharioch: collecting material one metre either side of Henshall 1972), and a couple of stray finds their central line. Walking behind the team and a lithic scatter have also been found. Jack were one or two people, each with a hand-held Scott conducted excavations of known GPS and finds bags, who were responsible for chambered tombs to the north of the area in the recording the location of each find. This 1960s and 1970s (Scott 1954, 1955 & 1960), effectively meant that the whole strip being and Graham Ritchie wrote about the prehistory walked was covered entirely. Typically we of Argyll more generally (Ritchie 1997). One followed plough or harrow lines to make it known Neolithic settlement site is known from easier for the walkers. Because flint is not the area, Balloch Hill (Peltenburg 1978), found in the geology of western Scotland which was discovered under later Iron Age (apart from beach flint), every piece of flint remains. While relatively little was known had to have been the result of activity, about the of southern so all flint and other exotic material such as Kintyre, it is an important location for thinking pitchstone was recorded using a hand-held about interactions between Britain and Ireland; GPS. This was accurate to about eight metres, it is the closest point between the two and was sufficient for getting a sense of where landmasses, which are separated here by only flints were found within a field in relation to 12 miles. We decided to look for artefactual one another (see Figure 5). Large quantities of and structural evidence in southern Kintyre quartz were found in each field as this does which we could compare with the eastern Irish occur naturally in the local geology, so we sequence. A key element of this was acquiring retained quartz by transect only. Historic lithics, primarily through fieldwalking. material was not retained. found in the geology of western Scotland (apart from beach flint), METHODOLOGIES every piece of flint had to have been the result The Southern Kintyre Project used the ―total of human activity, so all flint and other exotic collection‖ fieldwalking methodology. This material such as pitchstone was recorded using was because we wanted to locate and a hand-held GPS. This was accurate to about

72 Vicki Cummings

Figure 5. The spread of Mesolithic flints from a field at Machribeg, Kintyre, produced using a hand-held GPS. eight metres, and was sufficient for getting a The publication of fieldwalking methods and sense of where flints were found within a field results on the web is an important step to in relation to one another (see Figure 5). Large opening access to this type of research. Many quantities of quartz were found in each field as fieldwalking projects are done by local groups this does occur naturally in the local geology, of amateurs, and it would be enormously so we retained quartz by transect only. Historic beneficial if they were able to see the methods material was not retained. and results of other, similar projects. One key technique that is currently not available online Although there are now some useful guides to is a beginner‘s guide to lithics analysis. While fieldwalking methods (e.g. BAJR 2007), they people have little problem identifying lithics in were limited when we began our work. In the field, and getting a GPS co-ordinate for response to this we developed an online web them, it is harder for them to identify resource to outline our methodology, with diagnostic pieces. A basic, beginners guide to short videos to illustrate particular points (see lithics, available online, is now urgently www.uclan.ac.uk/kintyreonline and Figure 6). required to redress this imbalance, and open up There is scope for this to be developed further the study of lithics even further to amateurs, (see Cummings et al. 2010). Our resource only students and professionals alike. covers the specific methodology we employed, and it would be useful to make available and RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND compare alternative strategies in a similar METHODOLOGIES format. Previous considerations of interactions We have also developed online methods for between communities either side of the Irish illustrating the results of our fieldwalking. GPS Sea have focussed on different elements. Early co-ordinates of each flint were used to produce considerations suggested significant contact GIS plots which are published on the website between people in western Scotland and and linked to images of finds from each field eastern Ireland as demonstrated by similarities (only retouched artefacts and not debitage). in monument form (court and Clyde This means that the distribution and nature of cairns, for example; Piggott 1954) and also finds from each field can easily be interrogated styles (see Cummings 2009, chapter 3). (Figure 7). Online dissemination of the results But culture-historians envisaged waves of of similar fieldwalking projects would allow people coming over from mainland Europe the amateur groups who conduct the majority within a relatively short chronology (Piggott of these studies to compare methods and 1954). As the chronology for early prehistory results; a useful development of this approach was revised through radiocarbon dating, so our might be the development of an online guide to interpretation of other forms of material lithic identification.

73 Lithics 31

Figure 6. An example of one of the pages from the online fieldwalking methodology resource.

Figure 7. The distribution of finds on the Kintyre fieldwalking website. The numbered points are hotlinked to an image of the artefact (insert is an fragment). culture improved, and lithics had a significant mainland Europe. The frequency of contact role to play. Stone axe petrological work between eastern Ireland and western Scotland conducted from the 1960s onwards (e.g. was unclear (Cummings 2009), however, with Clough & Cummins 1988) demonstrated that this uncertain level of contact continuing into material was transported across the Irish Sea in the early Bronze Age. the Neolithic. However, the analysis of This interpretation of the data is unsatisfying, chipped stone assemblages suggested that since the Mesolithic data is interpreted entirely people were not in contact in the preceding from a technological standpoint, while the Mesolithic period, evidenced by different Neolithic narrative draws on a completely either side of the Irish Sea (e.g. different dataset, including the results of Saville 2004). The Neolithic, however, saw the petrological analysis. How can we begin to sudden sharing of particular forms of material change this viewpoint? The petrological culture which ultimately originated from analysis used for sourcing stone axes is not

74 Vicki Cummings possible on flint, meaning that our just like the domesticated cattle bones found in understanding of how particular sources of Mesolithic deposits at Ferriter‘s Cove flint were used and distributed is under- (Woodman et al. 1999). The challenge now is developed. One of the most exciting advances to excavate sites which can produce tightly in recent years has involved pilot studies dated sequences where we can address these sourcing flint and chert. A number of studies in questions head-on. both the UK and abroad have been conducted on flint and chert using ICP-MS analyses, INTEGRATING LITHICS INTO looking for pure elements, trace elements and LANDSCAPE rare earth elements (Owen et al. 1999; Carter This paper has detailed our work on lithic et al. 2006; Evans et al. 2007). These pilot collection and analysis, but it is important to studies have shown that it is now possible to note that this was just one of a suite of isolate the source of both flint and chert techniques that we used. We conducted objects. While this work needs to be done in extensive walkover surveys of areas that had combination with the geological assessment of never been ploughed, and these were individual flint and chert sources, and it is also successful in revealing archaeological features, much more time-consuming that traditional including boundary walls, circles, house petrological analyses, it offers a new platforms, cairns and quarries (Cummings & methodological avenue for us to explore. Our Robinson in prep.). In turn, a number of these research aims in Kintyre were to understand features were targeted for trial excavation. interactions between communities either side Detailed excavation was also conducted on of the Irish Sea but traditional methodologies some sites such as a chambered tomb in the were unable to answer this question heart of our study area. This landscape definitively. Flint sourcing offers a new approach is not new and has been used opportunity to answer this question, and for successfully elsewhere (e.g. Bradley 2000, novel avenues of research to be opened up in 2004) but we now need to integrate all of this Britain and Ireland. We plan to conduct these with other approaches too, namely analyses on diagnostic material from our phenomenological approaches (Thomas 2008, assemblages, including Mesolithic, Neolithic 304–305). This experiential approach may and early Bronze Age pieces, to see if these seem totally at odds with the careful collection, methods can help address our original research recording and analysis of lithic scatters but question. essentially offers us yet another technique at On top of this we also need to challenge the our disposal for considering these idea that certain technologies define particular assemblages. This needs to be done in periods, and are therefore found exclusively in combination with the characterisation of the those cultural contexts. This may have been nature of occupation and the types of practices demonstrated in some areas, but most of which are being performed. It has been noted Britain and Ireland does not conform to for many years that Mesolithic scatters tend to southern British standards. Microlithic be dense and closely clustered, while Neolithic (or Bann-flake technology) may material comprises less debitage which is well continue for several hundred years into spread more widely and is harder to define (for the Neolithic. Likewise, technologies example as noted by Bradley 2000, 208). Why associated with the Neolithic, or objects we is this? I would argue that we can only begin to consider exclusively Neolithic, may well have answer these questions by using as many appeared hundreds of years before 4000 BC, theoretically-informed methods as we can. of scientific techniques. This paper has not CONCLUSION been offered as a critique of these methods. Coming to lithic studies from the world of Instead, this paper has offered some ideas studying megaliths, I have been amazed by about how we can enhance these already how much information can be gleaned from impressive studies. Those of us who are the study of chipped stone assemblages. This is fortunate enough to work in the Neolithic obviously the result of many decades of period have other stones to study. Megaliths in dedicated analyses of stone tool technologies, particular heavily in the Irish Sea zone. experimental archaeology and the application But megaliths offer us only a ‗quick glance‘ at

75 Lithics 31 society, the fleeting and short-lived Clough, T. & Cummins, W. (eds) 1988. Stone Axe constructions of particular people at a Studies: Volume Two. Council for British particular point in the history of their Archaeology, London. community. Lithics offer us glances at Cooney, G. 2002. So many shades of rock: colour something more enduring. These are objects symbolism and Irish stone axeheads. In A. Jones and G. MacGregor (eds), Colouring that were constantly in use by people, the Past: 93–108. Berg, Oxford. continually being used, thought about, and Cummings, V. 2009. A View from the West: the discarded. This paper has offered some Neolithic of the Irish Sea Zone. Oxbow thoughts and suggestions on making the study Books, Oxford. of lithics more accessible to people through the Cummings, V. & Robinson, G. in prep. The internet, but also on how we can now move on Southern Kintyre Project: Interactions and glean even more information about past Across the Irish Sea. lives. Cummings, V., Hawkesworth, S. & Dagya, A. 2010. Archaeological methods (online). ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS www.uclan.ac.uk/archaeologymethods. Darvill, T. 2002. White on blonde: quartz pebbles First and foremost I would like to thank the Lithics and the use of quartz at Neolithic Studies Society for accepting my paper for monuments in the Isle of Man and beyond. presentation at their 30th anniversary conference. In A. Jones & G. MacGregor (eds), The colour work presented here was only possible Colouring the Past: 73–91. Berg, Oxford. with the help of a number of people, and I would Evans, A., Wolframm, Y., Donahue, R. & Lovis, particularly like to thank John Hutchings for W. 2007. A pilot study of ―black chert‖ advising me on colour methodologies and also sourcing and implications for assessing Richard Bradley, Alan Saville, Alison Sheridan and hunter-gatherer mobility strategies in Elizabeth Walker for giving me access to various Northern England. Journal of stone tool assemblages. The Southern Kintyre Archaeological Science 34: 2161–2169. Project was co-directed with Gary Robinson Finlay, N. 2006. Gender and personhood. In C. (Bangor University) and the Southern Kintyre web Conneller & G. Warren (eds) Mesolithic resource was developed with the technical wizardry Britain and Ireland: 35–60. Stroud: Tempus. of Simon Hawkesworth at UCLan. Both are Henshall, A. 1972. The Chambered Tombs of thanked for letting me refer to collaborative work in Scotland Volume Two. Edinburgh University this paper. I have benefitted enormously from Press, Edinburgh. various discussions with Olaf Bayer on lithics. Jones, A. 1999. Local colour: megalithic Many thanks to Olaf Bayer, Gary Robinson and architecture and colour symbolism in two anonymous referees for comments on drafts of Neolithic Arran. Oxford Journal of this paper, and to the editors for all their help. Archaeology 18: 339–350. Jones, A. & MacGregor, G. (eds) 2002. Colouring REFERENCES the Past. Berg, Oxford. BAJR. 2007. Short Guide to Field Survey, Field Lynch, F. 1998. Colour in prehistoric architecture. Walking and Detecting Survey. In A. Gibson & D. Simpson (eds) http://www.bajr.org/documents/shortguidetof Prehistoric Ritual and Religion: 62–67. ieldsurvey.pdf. Sutton, Stroud. McGregor, G. 2002. Making monuments out of Berlin, B. & Kay, P. 1999. Basic Color Terms: mountains: the role of colour and texture in Their Universality and Evolution. CSLI Publications, Stanford. the constitution of meaning and identity at Bornstein, M. 1975. The influence of visual recumbent stone circles. In A. Jones and G. perception on culture. American MacGregor (eds), Colouring the Past: 141– Anthropologist 77: 774–798. 158. Berg, Oxford. Owen, A., Armstrong, H. & Floyd, J. 1999. Rare Bradley, R. 2000. The Good Stones: A New Investigation of the Clava Cairns. earth elements in chert clasts as provenance Bradley, R. 2004. The Moon and the Bonfire. An indicators in the Ordovician and Silurian of Investigation of Three Stone Circles in the Southern Uplands of Scotland. North-East Scotland. Society of Antiquaries Sedimentary Geology 124: 185–195. of Scotland, Edinburgh. Peltenburg, E. 1982. Excavations at Balloch Hill. Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries of Carter, T., Poupeau, G., Bressy, C. & Pearce, N. 2006. A new programme of obsidian Scotland 112: 142–214. characterisation at Çatalhöyük, Turkey. Piggott, S. 1954. The Neolithic Cultures of the Journal of Archaeological Science 33: 893– British Isles. Cambridge University Press, 909. Cambridge.

76 Vicki Cummings

Ritchie, G. 1997. The Archaeology of Argyll. Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries of Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh. Scotland 94: 1–27. Robinson. G. 2007. The Prehistoric Island Society of Antiquaries of Scotland. 1892. Landscapes of the Isles of Scilly. British Catalogue of the National Museum of Archaeological Reports. British Series 447. Antiquaries of Scotland. Society of Archaeopress, Oxford. Antiquaries of Scotland, Edinburgh. Saville, A. 2004. The material culture of Mesolithic Thomas, J. 2008. Archaeology, landscape and Scotland. In A. Saville (ed.), Mesolithic dwelling. In B. David & J. Thomas (eds) Scotland and its Neighbours, 185–219. Handbook of Landscape Archaeology: 300– Society of Antiquaries of Scotland, 306. Left Coast Press, Walnut Creek. Edinburgh. Walker, I. 1966. The counties of Nairnshire, Moray Scott, J. 1954. The chambered at Beacharra, and Banffshire in the Bronze Age — Part 1. Kintyre, Argyll. Proceedings of the Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries of Prehistoric Society 9: 134–158. Scotland 98: 76–125. Scott, J. 1955. The excavation of the chambered Woodman, P. 1986. Problems of the colonisation of cairn at Brackley, Kintyre. Proceedings of Ireland. Ulster Journal of Archaeology 49: the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland 89: 7–17. 22–59. Woodman, P.C., Anderson, E. & Finley, N. 1999. Scott, J. 1960. The excavation of the chambered Excavations at Ferriter’s Cove 1983–1995: cairn at Crarae, Loch Fyneside, mid Argyll. Last Foragers, First Farmers in the Dingle Peninsula. Wordwell, Bray.

77