Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Abstract
In terms of geography, the distribution of Welsh Neolithic
burial monuments and their setting has recently been
discussed by Tilley (1994), Children and Nash (2002),
Cummings and Whittle (2004), Burrows (2006) and
Nash (2006). Tilley has applied an ancestral geography,
its roots embedded in the Mesolithic, to a number of
Neolithic ritual/burial monuments occupying the core
areas of south-west and central Wales. Cummings and
Whittle have approached monument location using the
concept of view sheds. (i.e., the landscape features that can
be seen from each monument). Children and Nash, and
recently Nash, have explored similar approaches, focusing
on intervisibility between neighboring monuments and
monument, chamber, and passage orientation. Although
some of these approaches have been seen as flawed (e.g.
Fleming 2005), the interaction between burial, monument
construction, and landscape must be considered as
being important to a monument’s builders and users.
Steve Burrows has provided a good dolmens—are recorded within the Neolithic
introduction to the construction and from this part of Britain (Barker 1992; Daniel
use of Neolithic burial-ritual monuments 1950). In terms of distribution, Children and
using the excellent archive recourses of Nash (2002) and later Nash (2006) have
the National Museum of Wales in Cardiff. arranged the monuments into nine clusters,
Children and Nash (2002) identify a one of which comprises the Fishguard
number of clusters within south-west Group. This cluster includes a cemetery
Wales that appear to conform to a group from Gar n Wen (PEM 7–9)1and single
number of architectural and landscape monuments at Carn Wnda (PEM 13), Parc-
rules; one of these groups, the Fishguard y-Cromlech (PEM 14), Garn Gilfach (PEM
Group, is located on Strumble Head (Nash 15), Ffyst Samson (PEM 16), Carreg Samson
2006). Nash has recognized that elements (PEM 18) and Ffynnondruidion (PEM 28).
of this group form a linear distribution Nearly all appear to conform to the same
comprising up to ten monuments. architectural rules and landscape positioning,
This paper discusses in detail the each monument embracing the fertile
architecture of each of the Strumble Head lowlands north and south of an east-west
monuments and explores the concept upland ridge, which straddles Strumble Head
of linearity, a trait that is common in the (Figure 1). Excluded from the list, but forming
siting of European Bronze Age barrows part of the discussion, is the destroyed
and cairns but limited in respect of monument of Y Garn, which once stood
Neolithic ritual/burial monuments. It between Garn Gilfach and Carn Wnda.
is clear that there is intentionality in
the distribution of the Strumble Head Problems with Morphology and
monuments, which utilize a series of jagged Setting
peaks along the uplands. The uplands along Strumble Head contain
a number of small and unobtrusive sub-
Keywords: linearity, monument, landscape megalithic rectangular chambers, which
grammar, uplands, visibility usually exhibit little or no evidence of a
covering mound and which are almost all
Introduction located close to or within rock outcropping
The counties of Cardiganshire, (Nash 2006). Glyn Daniel (1950) has
Carmarthenshire, and Pembrokeshire, in classified several of these as being “earth-
south-west Wales, contain at least sixty- fast,” having one end of the chamber
five surviving monuments, which are capstone deliberately buried rather than
described generically as Neolithic burial- being supported by upright stones. However,
ritual chambered monuments (Children and more than 5,000 years of natural denudation
Nash 2002). However, the Neolithic spans and antiquarian damage may have created
some 2,000 years, and a number of different monuments that appear to be earth-fast but
burial chamber forms—including earth-fast which in fact represent a different type and it
monuments, gallery graves, long barrows, is likely that there is only one true earth-fast
chambered round mounds, and portal monument—Carn Wnda—within this group
(Figure 2). Daniel (1950) believes a shallow The Garn Wen cemetery, for example,
cairn wall may have been built against the would have had, during its use, uninterrupted
side of this monument’s chamber to conceal views across the sea to Dinas Head to
any burial/mortuary ritual activity. This being the east2 but, immediately west, a large
the case, the monument would have merged glacially smooth rock outcrop impedes the
with the surrounding rocky landscape, its view, what Cummings and Whittle refers
users relying on memory and geography to as a closed landscape (2004). At Carn
to locate it. Several monuments, such as Wnda, the fertile plain to the north of the
Garn Gilfach and Garn Wen, are sited on uplands would have been in view, but rock
intermediate slopes, among extensive rock outcropping would have obscured views
outcropping, and they probably behaved in a to the south. The dramatic landscape of St
similar way. David’s Head to the west is an important
Monuments located east of the Fishguard focal point for Garn Gilfach but the peaks of
Group take the sea as their main visual Garn Gilfach block the view to the north.
focus, even though each is locally oriented or In landscape terms, the exposed peaks
physically associated with natural terrestrial of Garn Fawr, Garn Gilfach and Garnwnda
features within the immediate landscape. appear to form a natural barrier dividing the
Carreg Samson Portal Dolmen E/MN O E-W 3.4 x 1.7m Yes E-W Cremation
Ffynnondruidion Unknown – – – – – – –
Y Garn Unknown – – – – – – –
graves elsewhere within the Atlantic Zone while the capstones (or roofing stones) are
of Europe (Nash 2007) and similar features of igneous rock (Tilley 1991: 70). Entrances
are evident in the monument architecture of are uniformly narrow, between 0.5m and
Strumble Head. 0.8m wide, and low, and people would thus
The passage graves of central Sweden have had to crawl into the passage. Beyond
are regularly spaced across the landscape, the entrance, the passage opens out to the
sometimes in rows of up to twelve, and—like point at which passage and chamber meet.
the monuments comprising the Garn Wen Here a keystone, or threshold, provides a
cemetery—are highly visible. Tilley has clear separation between the space of the
identified a set of intriguing architectural passage and that of the chamber and at
traits, which are replicated in most of the this transition point a deliberately placed
Västergötland monuments and which capstone, set lower than the other capstones,
further suggest a recognized design blueprint forces one to crouch when entering the
associated with their ritual use. Almost all of chamber. Like other thresholds, the keystone
the uprights used to construct the passage is designed to deny visual access to those
and chamber walls are of sedimentary rock, looking into the passage from the façade
area. It may also signify the point at which the of Pendine Sands in Carmarthenshire. The
body (or body parts) finally enters the realm Morfa Bychan cemetery, comprising four
of the ancestors. (or more) sub-megalithic and freestanding
To reach the chamber entrance, the chambers, extends along a 210m stretch
body has to travel the length of the passage, of exposed rock (Figure 11). Several of
through what Tilley and others term “liminal the freestanding chambers were originally
space” (ibid.: 74–5). This physical journey, incorporated into round or oval mounds
albeit short, becomes, in the ritual setting (Barker 1992: 10–13). The manner in
of the monument, a rite of passage, during which these monuments interact with the
which the body is neither of this world nor landscape points to similarities with the Garn
the next. This simplistic hypothesis can be Wen cemetery (Figure 12). Both are sited
further elaborated to incorporate a series of next to exposed rock on small flat parcels of
journeys, thereby adding further complexity land overlooking the sea and the views from
to the act of ritually depositing the dead. both are extensive. A vista incorporating
Do the monuments of the Strumble Head nearby Gilman Point and the western extent
uplands exhibit a similar set of landscape and of Pendine Sands opens out from the Morfa
architectural traits? The Västergötland passage Bychan cemetery (Figure 13), although
graves are much larger and earlier that those immediately to the west a 4–5m cliff extends
on Strumble Head; however, considerable along the cemetery area and restricts the
physical and mental effort would have been view. Similarly, the Garn Wen monuments
required to access certain areas of the are oriented roughly N–S and are sited
landscape that may have been regarded as immediately beneath an extensive rock
strictly taboo. outcrop. Although the outlook to the west is
thus obscured by rock, views extend to the
Two Variables of Encoded east over the coastline toward Dinas Head.
Grammar Both groups of builders appear to have
It was suggested earlier that the builders been concerned with concealment (that
and users of the Neolithic monuments of is, with hiding monuments next to or amid
Strumble Head constructed each monument rock outcrops) and also with the concept
to a recognized blueprint, in particular the of ritualizing a landscape (that is, with
concept of defining and enclosing a ritual delineating the extent of a natural feature,
landscape. Two clear categories of linearity such as a rock outcrop), while at the same
are identifiable within the Strumble Head time not encroaching upon these features.
group. The first is localized and restricted to The second linearity category (or rule)
the Garn Wen cemetery. Although Barker involves all of the monuments occupying
recognizes only three monuments in this the highland ridge along Strumble Head
group, the author has identified a further two, (see Figure 1). Based on the distribution of
and several more probably existed, although monuments, including the destroyed Y Garn
their location is unknown (Pughe 1855: 274; site, a clear line can be established between
Laws and Owen 1897–1906). Outside the the Garn Wen cemetery in the east and
area, a similar linear group lies to the west the westernmost monument, Garn Gilfach.
ridges and spurs of the Black Mountains. the Strumble Head monument group, lack
For example, the two Cotswold-Severn intervisibility.
monuments of Ffostyll North and South Outside Wales, linearity appears to play
appeared to be aligned to Y Das, a large a similarly important role, usually where
visually striking spur that dominates the upland mountain or hill ranges are present.
north-western extent of the mountains A linear group of up to eight monuments
and its hinterlands. The monument group is located along the intermediate slopes of
forms an arc that encompasses this large the Sierra de Cantabria, north of Laguardia,
sandstone massif within the fertile valleys of in Northern Spain (Nash, Swann, and Waite
the rivers Dore, Usk, and Wye. In terms of forthcoming). The eight monuments appear
landscape grammar, each monument appears to be constructed according to an identical
to be strategically placed and, similar to blueprint, comprising a narrow passage and
chamber of stone uprights incorporated into much larger community. Other monuments
a round cairn mound (Figure 14). The Sierra along the central and western locales of
de Cantabria group, like the Strumble Head Strumble Head would have served smaller
group, comprises equally spaced monuments communities. The construction of larger
located along the intermediate slopes and monuments, such Garn Gilfach and Parc-y-
foothills of the Sierra de Cantabria, Álava. Cromlech, would have required inter-group
cohesion.
Reference Points Monuments along the Strumble Head
The Strumble Head group, comprising ten uplands follow a similar construction
small architecturally similar chambered methodology and occupy identical sites
monuments, were probably all in use around close to rock outcrops. As well as being
the same time. Each monument occupies strategically spaced along the uplands, all
a similar location along the highland ridge possess simple chambers, probably with no
of Strumble Head. To the north, beyond covering mound. The monuments were
the highlands, were small communities who themselves hidden within the local and
would have supplemented their farming wider landscapes, what I have termed in
economy with hunting, gathering, and the past as being incognito (Nash 1997).
probably fishing. Each community, bound Similarly, Cummings and Whittle suggests
together by common ancestry, would have that many “rocky forms” resemble the built
occupied a small territory possessing a structures (2004: 37). The concealment
communal burial place. The cemetery of of the architecture through, say, incognito
Garn Wen, possibly once comprising nine would have established a hierarchy within
or more monuments, may have served a society—people who knew and people who
did not. This being said, Edmonds (1999) Chippindale and Paul Devereux for providing
takes a slightly different stance when he invaluable comments and the referees who
suggests that monuments are multipurpose made essential comments and suggestions
buildings possibly used for events other to the final draft. Thanks also to Richard
than burial, echoing an idea originally put Jones of Cambria Archaeology (Dyfed
forward by Renfrew (1976, 1979) and Archaeological Trust) for providing the
later by Bradley (1993). While I support necessary site information. All mistakes are
the concept of multipurpose monuments, of course my own responsibility.
maybe over consecutive periods, the
Strumble Head group conform to a rigid set Notes
of architectural and landscape rules—i.e.,
1 The author has recognized a further two possible
they are constructed similarly and occupy monuments within this cemetery group.
similar upland locations—that suggest
single-purpose monuments. The landscape 2 Alas, housing currently obscures views to the
north of this monument cemetery.
in which each is located is concealed, hidden
away from the outside world; a landscape 3 Based on antiquarian accounts there is also a
devoted to the dead, a world that linked the limited record of the grave goods found in some
dead with the spirits, and their repositories (see Barker 1992).
reaching into the heavens: what Cummings 4 Several other possible monuments are listed
and Whittle refers to as Stones that float to within the Strumble Head area and are
the sky (2004: 67–91, italics in original). Here, commented upon by Barnwell (1872) and later
altitude and concealment is as important as by Barker (1992). Missing or lost monuments
recognized by both authors include Glynymel
landscape setting and vistas. (NGR SM 966 369), Man y Gromlech (NGR SM
Outside the physical sphere of Strumble 909 389) and Pencwm (NGR SM 9438 3847).
Head, other monuments, such as Carreg
5 Information held in RCAM, Pembrokeshire (1925).
Samson, Ffyst Samson, and the destroyed
Ffynnondruidion monument, occupy a
different landscape and differ in terms of References
construction, which probably reflects a Barker, C.T., 1992. The Chambered Tombs of South-
different Neolithic mindset relating to burial, West Wales: A Re-assessment of the Neolithic Burial
ritual, and social organization; an ancestral Monuments of Carmarthenshire and Pembrokeshire.
world where landscape concepts other than Oxford: Oxbow Monograph 14.
linearity formed part of the grammar of Barnwell, E.L., 1872. “Notes on some South Wales
location. Cromlechs.” Archaeologica Cambremsis (4th Series)
3: 81–143.
Acknowledgements Barnwell, E.L., 1884. “On some South Wales
I would like to thank my dear friends Abby Cromlechs.” Archaeologica Cambremsis (5th Series)
George, John Swann, and Laurie Waite 1: 129–44.
for commenting on the text and making Bradley, R., 1993. Altering the Earth: Origins of
the usual comments concerning grammar. Monuments in Britain and Continental Europe. Society
I would also like to thank Christopher of Antiquaries of Scotland. Monograph Series No. 8.
Burrows, S., 2006. The Tomb Builders in Wales J. Davis (eds), Prehistoric Wales. Stroud: Sutton, pp.
4000–3000 BC . National Museum of Wales. 79–138.
Children, G.C. and Nash, G.H., 2002. The Neolithic Nash, G.H., 1997. “Monumentality and the
Sites of Cardiganshire, Carmarthenshire and Landscape: the Possible Symbolic and Political
Pembrokeshire, Vol. V. Hereford: Logaston Press. Distribution of Long Chambered Tombs around the
Cummings, V. and Whittle, A., 2004. Places of Special Black Mountains, Central Wales,” in G.H. Nash (ed.),
Virtue: Megaliths in the Neolithic Landscapes of Wales. Semiotics of Landscape: Archaeology of Mind. Oxford:
Oxford: Oxbow Books. British Archaeological Reports, International Series
661, pp 17–30.
Daniel, G.E., 1950. The Prehistoric Chambered Tombs
of England and Wales. Cambridge: Cambridge Nash, G.H., 2006. The Architecture of Death: The
University Press. Chambered Monuments of Wales. Herefordshire:
Logaston Press.
Edmonds, M., 1999. Ancestral Geographies of the
Neolithic: Landscapes, Monuments and Memory. Nash, G.H., Swann, J. and Waite, L. (forthcoming).
London: Routledge. “Negotiating Linearity and Intervisibility: A Case for
the Neolithic Burial-ritual Monuments of the Sierra
Fenton, J., 1848. “Cromlech at Llanwnda,
de Cantabria, Laguardia, Northern Spain.
Pembrokeshire.” Archaeologica Cambremsis (1st
Series) 3: 283–5. Nash, G.H. and Waite, L. (forthcoming). “Notes on the
Lost Neolithic Chambered Monument of Y Garn,
Fenton, T., 1810. A Historical Tour through
Strumble Head, Pembrokeshire.”
Pembrokeshire (London).
Peterson, R., 2003. Neolithic Pottery from Wales:
Fleming, A. 2005. “Megaliths and Post-modernism: the
Traditions and Constructions of Use. Oxford: BAR
Case of Wales.” Antiquity 79(306): 921–32.
British Series 344.
Grimes, W.F. 1936. “The Megalithic Monuments of
Wales.” Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society, Vol. Pughe, O., 1855. “Antiquaries of Northern
2: 106–39. Pembrokeshire.” Archaeologica Cambrensis (3rd
Series) 1: 271–4.
Laws, E. and Owen, H. 1897–1906. Pembrokeshire
Archaeological Survey. RCAM (Wales), 1925. An Inventory of the Ancient
Monuments in the County of Pembrokeshire. London.
Lévi-Strauss, C., 1964. Mythologies, in 4 vols published HMSO.
1969–1981. Trans J. Weightman and D. Weightman.
New York: Harper and Row. Renfrew, C., 1976. “Megaliths, Territories and
Populations,” in S. de Laet (ed.), Accumulation and
Lynch, F.M., 1972. “Portal Dolmens in the Nevern
Continuity in Atlantic Europe. Bruges: de Tempel, pp.
Valley, Pembrokeshire,” in F. Lynch and C. Burgess
98–220.
(eds.), 1972. Prehistoric Man in Wales and the West.
Bath: Adams & Dart, pp. 67–84. Renfrew, C., 1979. Investigations into Orkney. London:
Society of Antiquities.
Lynch, F.M., 1976. “Towards a Chronology of
Megalithic Tombs in Wales,” in G.C. Boon and Tilley, C., 1991. “Constructing a Ritual Landscape,” in
J.M. Lewis (eds), Welsh Antiquity (Essays Mainly on K. Jennbert, L. Larsson, R. Petre and B. Wyszomirska-
Prehistoric Topics. Presented to H.N. Savory upon his Werbart (eds), Regions and Reflections (in Honour
Retirement as Keeper of Archaeology). Cardiff: National of Marta Stromberg). Acta Archaeologica Lundensia
Museum of Wales, pp. 63–79. Series 8, No. 20, pp 67–79.
Lynch, F., 2000a. “The Early Neolithic,” in F. Lynch, S. Tilley, C., 1994. A Phenomenology of Landscape.
Aldhouse-Green, and J. Davis (eds), Prehistoric Wales. London: Berg.
Stroud: Sutton, pp. 42–78. Tilley, C., 1999. “The Dolmens and Passage Graves of
Lynch, F., 2000b. “The Later Neolithic and Earlier Sweden: An Introduction and Guide.” London: UCL
Bronze Age,” in F. Lynch, S. Aldhouse-Green and Press.