Ancient and Archaeology permalink
The History Ancient Britain
This discussion has been closed.
-
Message 1.Â
Posted by Steve (U8485667) on Thursday, 17th February 2011
Hi I just wanted to say how tremendously impressed I am with Neil Oliver's presentation of the above programme. He brings the subject to life in a very clear and easily understood way, no nonsense, no pretensions, just good straight forward commentary. He was good in Coast, but I think he's even better here, so be sure to find him something else to do when this series ends! Many thanks Steve Davies
-
Message 2
Posted by somewhatsilly (U14315357) on Thursday, 17th February 2011
Hi Steve,
I started watching this series prepared to do my usual thing and shout at the TV but, on the whole, I'm happy to have been pleasantly surprised. For once there seems to have been an emphasis on content rather than visuals and a brave attempt to introduce a more conceptual approach rather just 'wow, look at this'.
Not that I don't have some questions but they are largely around sources - perhaps the Ö÷²¥´óÐã might consider having a 'further reading' and 'references' section on programme web sites.
For instance, I have never heard the Carnac stone rows ascribed to the Mesolithic and I can't find any source, perhaps someone out there knows? Also the interpretation of the rock art at La Table des Marchands was somewhat different to what I understood. As the roof slab is a re used menhir, does that not make the final structure a bit late to be a symbolic representation of the impact of the neolithic?
Also, the interpretation of the curved carvings on the rear, I know these were originally thought to represent cereal stalks and then ribs but the throwing stick hypothesis is new to me, again, anyone come across this?
I notice there is no writer's credit or consultant named, did oor laddie write this one himself, I wonder.
Finally, when will directors abandon the notion that presenters must prove they can walk and talk at the same time?
ferval -
Message 3
Posted by Stoggler (U14387762) on Thursday, 17th February 2011
I too have enjoyed the programme. I've only seen the one episode, from last night, and it is a subject matter that I do not know much about, but it was good.
And as an old archer, I did enjoy the bit on neolithic bows.
-
Message 4
Posted by Haesten (U4770256) on Friday, 18th February 2011
Yes, I've watched both episodes (still available on the iplayer) and thought them very good. People seemed to be crossing water quite happily 9,000 years ago.
-
Message 5
Posted by giraffe47 (U4048491) on Friday, 18th February 2011
I liked it a lot as well - enough to turn away from the Arsenal match anyway!
I thought some of the 'conclusions' a bit 'inconclusive' though.
I don't think some of the 'This proves that . . . ' type statements would hold up in a court of law, but that seems to be a feature of all TV documentaries. -
Message 6
Posted by Anglo-Norman (U1965016) on Saturday, 19th February 2011
And as an old archer, I did enjoy the bit on neolithic bowsÂ
A friend of mine used to have a replica Neolithic bow. Unfortunately somebody 'shot' it without an arrow - all that power with nowhere to go except back into the stave caused the bow to shatter.
I was a bit disappointed that - unless I missed it - the Channel Islands weren't mentioned. We have have some important prehistoric sites - La Hougue Bie in Jersey, for example, is the second largest complete Neolithic tomb in Europe - but were overlooked. -
Message 7
Posted by Haesten (U4770256) on Saturday, 19th February 2011
The bows must be a guess though, none have survived?
-
Message 8
Posted by somewhatsilly (U14315357) on Saturday, 19th February 2011
The bows must be a guess though, none have survived? Haesten, I believe a number have turned up both in the UK and abroad, in various states of preservation. These might interest you.
-
Message 9
Posted by Anglo-Norman (U1965016) on Saturday, 19th February 2011
Apparently surviving Neolithic bows are in fact quite common! One of the most famous is perhaps the 5,300 year old Yew bow found with Ötzi the Iceman. Several have survived in peat bogs. There's an article here about reconstructing the Meare Heath Bow found in the Somerset Levels in 1961:
-
Message 10
Posted by Anglo-Norman (U1965016) on Saturday, 19th February 2011
Curses, beaten to it!
-
Message 11
Posted by Haesten (U4770256) on Saturday, 19th February 2011
ferval:
Thanks, a pretty impressive bow. -
Message 12
Posted by Haesten (U4770256) on Saturday, 19th February 2011
Presumably a bowyer of that skill would have understood the archer's paradox, have any arrows survived?
-
Message 13
Posted by Anglo-Norman (U1965016) on Saturday, 19th February 2011
The aforementioned Ötzi had a quiverful, I believe.
-
Message 14
Posted by Haesten (U4770256) on Saturday, 19th February 2011
It doesn't appear that he understood the archers paradox, but the bow and arrows were unfinished for some reason.
-
Message 15
Posted by LairigGhru (U14051689) on Sunday, 20th February 2011
I have never heard the Carnac stone rows ascribed to the Mesolithic and I can't find any source, perhaps someone out there knows?Â
Yes, I too would like to know where that theory came from.
Certainly in the pre-WW2 era the scholarly assumption was that the Carnac stones were built by Neolithic peoples. A book in my collection suggests "the Alpine race which dominated Armorica (Britanny) at that period". -
Message 16
Posted by raundsgirl (U2992430) on Sunday, 20th February 2011
Thank you all for this interesting discussion, which has led me to watch the first 2 episodes on iPlayer (we don't have a telly). I thought it was very enjoyable, although I also found his attribution of Carnac to the Mesolithic era a bit surprising. Can only suppose (or hope) that they have cutting-edge advisors behind the scenes! However, he did actually utter the words 'We don't know' several times instead of the blanket 'ritual purposes' normally used to mean the same thing.
-
Message 17
Posted by raundsgirl (U2992430) on Sunday, 20th February 2011
I don't suppose the OP will be back, but just in case you are, Steve, no one on these boards works for the Ö÷²¥´óÐã or has any connection with the programme. This is just one of a number of message boards hosted by the Ö÷²¥´óÐã so we can chat amongst ourselves and shout at each other instead of the Beeb.
-
Message 18
Posted by Haesten (U4770256) on Sunday, 20th February 2011
Some date the Neolithic (farming) to circa 5000-4000 BC in northern Europe, I think he was saying the people who erected the stones were still basically hunter-gatherers.
Apparently the Mesolithic tundra of Brittany became marshland rich in shellfish etc. -
Message 19
Posted by lolbeeble (U1662865) on Monday, 21st February 2011
The key issue is how one defines the Neolithic and by extension the Mesolithic. From Gordon Childe onwards, the Neolithic was a complete cultural package that was introduced by a farming population who subsequently replaced the existing hunter gatherers. The evolutionary model also tended to regard cultural expression as an indication of how complex the economic model employed by the society it was created by. In the case of North Western Europe the development of the megalithic tradition was seen as a side effect of the increasing economic sophistication associated with food production and sedentism. In the absence of domestic material remains comparable to those of central Europe, monumental architecture was a signpost for the the new and supposedly more advanced economic subsistence patterns.
More recently the definition of the neolithic has become more blurred as the various parts of this model of the Neolithic package were dissected and examined. Thus the Neolithic has been described as a time period, the means of food production, the population practicing food production or even an ideology or mode of thought associated with domestication. This last view has been very influential on the arguments put forward by the History of Ancient Britain.
The recognition that there was not one megalithic tradition but a series seemingly independent developments that arose on the periphery of areas that had been exposed to food production has lead to the suggestion that there must have been some involvement of the Mesolithic population. Andrew Sherratt's 1990 and 1995 papers have been particularly influential in highlighting this process and appear to have inspired much of the argument put forward in the programme. The 1990 article "Genesis of Megaliths: Monumentality, Ethnicity and Social Complexity in Neolithic North West Europe" questioned the need for such a definite correlation between the form of economic subsistence and monumental construction. "Instruments of Conversion? The Role of Megaliths in the Mesolithic/Neolithic Transition in Northwest Europe" described the phases of megalith construction as an essential part of the transition of the existing population towards a way of life dependent on food production. In turn there is a realisation that the choice of location for many of the earliest Megalithic monuments must reflect a more longstanding significance for their location. -
Message 20
Posted by somewhatsilly (U14315357) on Monday, 21st February 2011
Thank you for your response,lLolbeedle. Surely Sherratt suggests that megalithic construction was initiated by the incoming ideology and aimed at the indigenous hunter gather population as part of the process of 'conversion', or that some of it was an imitation of the introduced monumentality by the resident peoples, whereas the programme asserted that the stone rows were erected by the original inhabitants as a reaction to that contact, as a kind of challenge?
It's an intriguing idea and goes a good deal further than Sherratt but not one I've encountered before. Are you aware of any sources which deal with this more explicitly? What, I wonder, is the relationship, if any, with the British stone rows, The Hill of Many Stanes, Dartmoor etc? I thought they were considered middle-late Neolithic.
......an ideology or mode of thought associated with domestication. This last view has been very influential on the arguments put forward by the History of Ancient BritainÂ
Rather nice to find this referred to in a programme on the M - N transition, it's only taken 20 years. -
Message 21
Posted by lolbeeble (U1662865) on Tuesday, 22nd February 2011
Unsurpisingly a lot of the literature about the region is in French rather than English with Serge Cassen, the featured academic in the documentary, and Gregor Marhand being responsible for much of the reinterpretation of the evidence in recent years. Several English writers have suggested that the monumental construction could have been instigated by those practicing a Mesolithic life style rather than the incoming Neolithic lifestyle such as Ian Kinnes and Alasdare Whittle. The idea that the avenues functioned as some form of territorial marker had been proposed by Colin Renfrew but this was in the light of claims to control of the land and the establishment of aggregate sites for what might have been regionally dispersed communities of Neolithic farmers. Theories about the subsistence pattern employed by the originators of monumental practices in the region are more a matter of subjective interpretation of the evidence than anything concrete however.
There are signs that the standing stones in various alignments were constructed around the time of the transition between the Neolithoc and Mesolithic but the dating evidence alone really does not prove one way or the other whether the society had been Neolithicised. The strongest claim for the model proposed by the programme comes from the assertion that the tradition of standing stones was developed from the funerary practices seen at the cemeteries of Teviec and Hoedic, with several studies supposing that they were antecedenats of the Breton tomb building tradition. Cassen's 2000 paper cites the standing stone over Teviec grave k as a possible precurser to the avenues of stones on the Morbihan that piqued our interest. In turn he considers the avenues could be the action of the last Mesolithic population in the region, although he does add the caveat that it could be a recently Neolithicised community which would contrast with the more definite assertion put forward in the documentary that the avenues were territorial monuments from a population that could not understand the Neolithic way of life.
This really only looks at the architectural continuity but it has also been suggested that the rituals associated with the late Mesolithic inhumation practices parrallel those found during the Early Neolithic in Brittany and Britain for that matter. The association of ritual, feasting death and burning was highlighted by Christopher Tilley and Julian Thomas. One might note the numerous fires on the site of several early menhirs providing the organic material that allowed for their dating not to mention the burial of two cows dated to the late sixth millennium underneath the construction of the Long barrow at Eh Grah. Apparent continuity between Mesolithic and Early Neolithic seems to be suggested by the manner in which graves are reused for depositing the dead rather than being sealed once the body has been interred with those interred for some time being moved aside to make way for more recent additions.
Of course it is all very well suggesting that the Mesolithic population were under pressure but it is worth asking just which direction the pressure of Neolithicisation came from as the region was not only subject to influence from the East but also along the Atlantic coast to the south. Indeed the Neolithic took off south of the Loire in the late sixth millennium BC and preceded the first appearance of farming from the east at sites like Villeneuve Saint-Germaine dated to the early fifth millennium BC. More to the point the first appearance of the Neolithic south of the Loire valley coincides with the development of the construction of the cemeteries at Teviec and Hoedic in the late sixth Millennium BC. Proof of interaction appears in the appearance of flint styles that are apparently derived Mediterranean forms. Recent studies may well have revealed the significant exploitation of inland resources by Mesolithic communities within the region but the development of the Megalithic monumental tradition is concentrated on the coast. Cassen actually made an intriguing connection between US pilots of the second World War who assumed the avenues were anti tank defences designed to disuade invasion at this point and the possibility that they served a similar function when they were constructed.
Of course the influence of the Mediterranean may well have preceded that of the farming groups descended from the LBK tradition but that does not discount Ian Hodder's suggestion that the Neolithic was the product of numerous permutations where indigenous contributions combined with what he describes as the principle of social domination derived from the LBK that originated on the Danube. -
Message 22
Posted by somewhatsilly (U14315357) on Tuesday, 22nd February 2011
Thank you again,lolbeeble, your considerate and considered response is very much appreciated. I've been following it up all evening although I'm going to have leave it, reluctantly, to do the things that I'm really meant to be doing.
I've bookmarked lots to read more carefully later but am finding the hybridisation arguments persuasive. So much to mull over, so little time.
About this Board
The History message boards are now closed. They remain visible as a matter of record but the opportunity to add new comments or open new threads is no longer available. Thank you all for your valued contributions over many years.
or  to take part in a discussion.
The message board is currently closed for posting.
The message board is closed for posting.
This messageboard is .
Find out more about this board's
Search this Board
Ö÷²¥´óÐã iD
Ö÷²¥´óÐã navigation
Ö÷²¥´óÐã links
Ö÷²¥´óÐã © 2014 The Ö÷²¥´óÐã is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.
This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.