Tombs with a view: landscape, monuments and trees

Antiquity, June, 2003 by Vicki Cummings, Alasdair Whittle

[FIGURES 1 & 2 OMITTED]

To evoke positive analogies from the ethnographic literature, the potential broader significance of the landscape in Neolithic society can be explored with reference to extensive examples of symbolically charged landscapes (Carmichael et al. 1994; Hirsch & O'Hanlon 1995; Ucko & Layton 1999). To take just the example of mountains and hills; in Western Arnhem Land, Australia, many hills are considered to be the remains of ancestral beings formed during the Dreamtime, the most famous example being Uluru (Tilley 1994). The Black Hills in the USA are considered sacred among groups of native Americans (Sundstrom 1996). To many native Americans, mountains are highly symbolic places, connected with the creation of the earth. They are understood as the dwelling place of spiritual or mythical beings and are used in a number of ritual activities (Price 1994; Reeves 1994).

However, before we get this far, what about basic conditions of visibility? Are we committing what Alfred Gell (1995: 236) lightheartedly referred to as the culpable offence of visualism? The significance of the relationship between monuments and landscape features such as mountains and outcrops has long been called into question because we are unsure of the extent to which vegetation and trees would have affected visibility. This question is particularly pertinent in relation to early Neolithic sites as it is clear that much of Britain would have been covered with woodland. We need to consider the difficult question of whether or not monuments were surrounded by trees in the early Neolithic and if they were, how much of the landscape would actually have been visible from these sites.

The environmental setting

In the early Neolithic, much of Wales and Britain as a whole, is thought to have been covered with woodland which would have variously comprised oak, ash, alder, lime, elm, hazel, birch, poplar and yew (Caseldine 1990; Linnard 2000). There are several non-megalithic locations which have produced environmental evidence which enable us to construct an overall picture of the environment in Wales. In the south, at Goldcliff in the Gwent Levels, there are three main phases of activity in the Neolithic, characterised by woodland clearance, the maintenance of grassland, and then forest regeneration (Smith & Morgan 1989). A similar pattern can be found at Waun Fignen Felen, in inland Powys, where there were a series of small-scale clearances from the Mesolithic to the Neolithic (Smith & Cloutman 1988). Finally, at the site of Cefn Gwernffrwd in upland mid-Wales there is evidence of several episodes of vegetation interference marked by charcoal layers and peaks in grassland species (Chambers 1983). From this evidence we could suggest that the Neolithic human impact on the vegetation in Wales was characterised by small-scale activity which created short-lived clearances (Caseldine 1990). Evidence from Wales and Britain as a whole suggests that there was considerable variation in the early Neolithic, with both upland and lowland areas being cleared or altered. However, these clearings seem to have been predominantly small-scale and short-lived. The basic surroundings were wooded.