MEGALITHS
Megaliths, those great stone monuments of prehistoric time, have always
excited the wonder and interest of all observers.[86] Under the name of
dolmens or stone chambers, cromlechs or stone circles, tumuli or mounds,
they form a striking contrast to the insignificant and ephemeral
thatched huts of wood and clay which formed the homes of the living.
These chambers, especially those of later date, are often accompanied by
circles or radiating lines of rude pillars, the Menhirs or standing
stones. In the more fertile and densely populated regions the great
blocks have been removed and used in the foundations of buildings. They
must once have been far more numerous. But Déchelette reports nearly
4,500 as still existing in France;[87] England contains almost or quite
as many; and they are very numerous in Denmark and Sweden. We will
mainly follow Sophus Müller in his study of these monuments in
Denmark.[88]
The simplest, and apparently the oldest, dolmens are the small
rectangular chambers consisting of four stones set up on edge with one
large one forming the roof. These are usually between 5 and 7 feet in
length, 2 to 3-1/2 feet wide, and 3 to 5 feet in height. One of the end
stones is shorter, leaving an opening under the roof through which one
may reach or even crawl into the chamber. Somewhat larger chambers of
the same type and having five or six wall stones are not uncommon.
Even these small chambers were intended for long use, and to contain
more than one body; some contain the remains of a dozen. The bones lie
in layers covered with flint chips, or in little heaps where they have
been collected to give room for new interments. Many of the smaller
chambers were too short to allow the body to lie fully extended; in some
it was evidently placed in a sitting posture leaning against the wall.
These smaller dolmens were surrounded by a heap of earth reaching nearly
to the top of the side stones, but not covering the roof, and hardly
deserving to be called a tumulus. The roof was usually composed of one
great stone, flat below but arching above and forming a sort of
monument. In one chamber this roof-stone is eleven feet long and three
feet thick. On each side of the doorway a stone is often set upright to
keep back the earth of the tumulus, and a covering stone may be laid
across them. Here we have a form intermediate between the small dolmen
without entrance-stones and the large chambers, which we shall consider
later.
The earthern tumulus may be round in outline or elliptical, forming the
long grave--the _Hunnenbett_ of popular German speech. The round tumuli
rarely exceed 40 feet in diameter. They were as a rule surrounded by a
circle of upright stones, now generally removed. The long tumuli are
rarely more than 5 or 6 feet high, and 20 to 30 feet wide. The length
varies greatly: usually between 50 and 100 feet, but infrequently from
100 to 200 feet; one is 500 feet long with over 100 of the marginal
stones still standing.
The chambers in the round and long tumuli in Denmark are very similar,
but in the long tumuli there are usually two or more dolmens, often
symmetrically located. In other cases it looks as if a tumulus had been
lengthened to cover chambers added later. A large amount of variety in
such details is not surprising. More rarely we find two or more small
tumuli side by side, each with one or two chambers. That those smaller
dolmens or chambers are the oldest is suggested not only by their
simplicity but even more by the pottery and implements contained in
them, though this is not invariably true, as the small dolmens continued
in use throughout the Neolithic period, in some regions far later. The
gifts which they contain are usually not numerous and often very scanty.
[Illustration: "CROUCHING BURIAL" (HOCKER-BESTATTUNG) ADLERBORG, NEAR
WORMS]
[Illustration: MENHIR, CARNAC, BRITTANY]
[Illustration: DOLMEN, HAGA, ISLAND OF BORUST]
The wide distribution of these simplest stone monuments is exceedingly
interesting. They occur in Denmark and Sweden, in North Germany and
Holland, in Great Britain and France, Portugal and Spain, in North
Africa, in the Ægean Islands, in Palestine and farther eastward, in
Thrace and Crimea, along the eastern shore of the Black Sea. They are
very numerous in India.[89] Throughout this wide extent they agree not
only in general form and structure, but also in certain interesting
details. For instance, the oriental and southern dolmens frequently have
a round opening in the upper part of the slab closing the entrance,
corresponding to the wide opening above the door of the Scandinavian
dolmens. The difference in the form of the opening may be explained by
the difficulty of cutting a circular opening in the hard granite rocks
of the northern area. There was a general unity of thought in
essentials, especially in those oldest forms. There was much diversity
in execution or expression in later structures. Some of them took the
form of pyramids in Egypt. In Mycenæ we find the "Tomb of Atreus," a
magnificent building in the form of a beehive. The large chambers,
"Giant Chambers" or _Riesenstuben_ of northern Europe, especially of
France, are connected with the older small dolmens by many intermediate
forms. For example, if another pair of stones is added to the sides of a
fair-sized dolmen, we have a chamber six to eight feet in length. Such
dolmens always have a covered entrance to the doorway of at least two
pairs of upright stones extending out through the tumulus. Then the
number of stones in the sides of the chamber is increased to seven,
eight, or nine; and the entrance passage is at right angles to the main
axis of the chamber, giving a rude T-shaped form to the whole structure.
The number of stones in the roof of the chamber increases with its
length. Chambers fifteen to twenty feet long are not uncommon, a length
of twenty to thirty feet is rare, a very few attain forty feet. The
height was between five and seven feet.
The inner surface of the great stones forming the sides of the chamber
is fairly flat. It could have been no easy matter to find in any region
a sufficient number of suitable great blocks of the right form. They
evidently had some method of splitting large boulders. In some chambers
both halves of the same block have been found. These blocks could have
been split by heat or by freezing water in a groove or by wooden wedges.
But we do not know the exact method. Near the top the blocks often
failed to meet exactly. Large holes were filled with bits of wall of
small stones and small chinks were stuffed with clay and moss.
It is surprising to find that these smaller and larger chambers were
erected without any deep foundation for the upright stones. Many of them
have fallen from the heaving of the frost. The monuments were generally
adequately protected against this by the thick tumulus.
The tumulus was enlarged proportionately and usually completely covered
the chamber. Its height averages ten to fifteen feet, and its diameter
over ninety. The culvert-like entrance had to be lengthened accordingly.
But one large chamber did not suffice for successive generations. It was
often extended or additions were made so that quite complicated forms
occur. In England we find frequently a row or cluster of small chambers.
Here the roof is sometimes made of successive layers of stone
approaching as they ascended until one slab covered the "false arch." In
Brittany we find great diversity as well as complexity of form. In some
parts of France the entrance continues the main line of the chamber
instead of being at right angles to it. The French have well
characterized these as "_Allées couvertes_."
Some of these "gallery chambers" were very large and contained a large
number of bodies; sometimes from 40 to 60, in one case 100. The tumulus
at Mont St. Michel measures 115 by 58 metres, and forms a veritable
hill. Thirty-five thousand cubic metres of stone were employed in the
construction of the chamber. Other chambers are from 30 to 50 feet in
length. The celebrated chamber at Bagneux, 25 feet long, is composed of
fourteen great blocks, of which three form the roof. The great tumulus
at _Fontenay-le-Marmion_ in Normandy covered eleven chambers in two
parallel rows. All the material for these great structures could hardly
have been found in the same vicinity. In one case it appears to have
been brought from a quarry two miles away. Some large stones, weighing
thousands of tons, seem to have been transported many miles.
Some of the latest structures show a certain amount of degeneration.
Certain galleries were apparently roofed with timber. We find "dry"
masonry, of smaller stones laid in courses but without mortar,
alternating with or replacing the great blocks, especially in structures
of Æneolithic or Bronze Age. The custom was declining and soon after
this disappeared.[90]
The age of these stone monuments can generally be fairly closely
determined by the contents, unless these have been removed or destroyed
by treasure-hunters, as is often the case. In many cases the objects
originally deposited seem to have been few and insignificant. Later,
secondary interments were often made in tumuli, but these usually betray
their later date by their position above the original chamber or near
the side of the mound. We must keep in mind that chambers in the north
containing only stone implements may be often of the same age as those
farther south containing copper or even bronze, for metal made its way
northward only gradually. The custom of building dolmens seems to have
persisted later in England than in France. The English round tumuli or
barrows belong to the Bronze period. It is not surprising that one
country should be more conservative than another, especially if it is
somewhat remote.
In Brittany we find the Menhirs or "standing stones," unhewn pillars,
regularly accompanying the dolmens. They are by far most abundant in
northwestern Europe, but occur elsewhere also. The largest known is the
Menhir of Locmariaquer in Morbihan, now fallen and broken. It was almost
21 metres long, and weighed nearly 300,000 kilograms. But specimens are
usually much smaller. They seem to characterize the Æneolithic Epoch and
the early Bronze Age.
Their meaning is often uncertain. Some of them standing singly were
probably erected much later, serving merely to mark boundaries. When
associated with dolmens they are probably objects of a religious cult
associated with the burial, rather than mere monuments to the dead. They
may well be examples of the world-wide pillar-cult. They remained
objects or centres of worship until late in historic time. The church
had a long and hard battle with their cult. Some of them appear to have
been thrown down and churches to have been erected over them. On some of
them Christian symbols have been carved. Among the people they are still
held in reverence or awe. Whatever may have been their origin, they must
have had some religious significance or association.
These pillars may be grouped in circles, cromlechs, or in long radiating
rows, alignments. Stone circles occur in the Mediterranean region, in
Syria, Upper Egypt, and in India. But circles and alignments belong
especially to Brittany, Great Britain, and Scandinavia. The most
noteworthy are the three adjacent or connected at Carnac, in Morbihan,
extending nearly 4,000 metres, and composed of nearly 3,000 Menhirs.
Stonehenge and Avebury in England are almost equally celebrated. They
represent the culmination of megalithic development, but are essentially
places of worship and assembly rather than of burial, though tumuli may
be clustered around them like graves in a churchyard.
The changes in the mode of disposal of the dead are evidently the
results of changed views concerning the future life. In early
Paleolithic times man buried his dead with the best flint axe in his
hand, with his ornaments and a supply of food, and often a quantity of
shells brought from a distance and evidently objects of value. The dead
man took with him his weapons and all his wealth. For the living to keep
back a portion of what belonged to the departed was robbery, which might
be avenged by all sorts of evils and plagues; for all this material
wealth and ornament was as much needed and as useful there as here.
Apparently, though this is anything but certain, the dead were buried at
first in Europe, extended at full length, and in the caves not far from
the abode of the living.
Soon we find them buried in a crouching position, with knees and hands
brought close to the chin. Sometimes we find rows of shells, which may
have been attached to cords or bands used to hold the body in this
forced position. This mode of burial in a contracted or crouching
position (_Hockerbestattung_) was usual in Europe in Neolithic time, but
has been discovered in all continents, even in America and Australia.
Very different explanations of this peculiar custom have been offered by
different observers, _e. g._, that it saved the labor of digging a
larger grave, an excellent economic argument; that the dead was laid in
its Mother Earth in the same position which as a foetus it had
maintained in the maternal body, etc., etc. But the predominant thought
appears to have been that the spirit remained in, with, or near the
body, and that binding the body prevented the spirit from walking and
returning to see the survivors. To the same end the most valuable
possessions of the dead had been buried with him. This does not
necessarily argue that there was no affection of the living for the
departed, or no belief in their possible helpfulness. But the community
generally felt that it was a wise precaution, and generally well to be
on the safe side. This belief in the possible return of the dead in
their bodily form and presence is still deeply imbedded in our modern
minds, ready to spring up as a conscious belief; and the departed are
still rarely expected to bring good tidings or benefits.
[Illustration: ALIGNMENT, CARNAC, BRITTANY]
This mode of burial continued common through upper Paleolithic time; was
very common, if not the rule during the Neolithic period in various
parts of Europe. Pumpelly found at Anau children, and only children,
buried under the floors of the houses, and notices that this custom was
general throughout the life of the Kurgan.[91] He gives instances of
this custom reported elsewhere. Whether this custom was as wide-spread
as the pottery of Anau and Susa seems doubtful. I can find no reports of
it. But conditions at Anau seem to have been unusually favorable to the
preservation of these perishable remains. It is not impossible that we
have here one of the ways in which the fear of the dead may have been
gradually dispelled. May we not imagine that one of the first steps was
the refusal of the mother to allow her dead child to be banished from
the house? The evidence is too slight to allow of more than a guess.
As time went on and communities became more closely united leaders must
have arisen for whom the people had only affection, in whose wisdom and
willingness to help they had full confidence, and who were gratefully
remembered as fathers, elders, and wise in counsel, and whose return
would have been gladly welcomed. This thought seems to be the foundation
of the wide-spread and ancient cult or worship of ancestors. Such cases
were certainly common at a somewhat later date, as in the Greek cities,
where the bones of the dead leader or hero were guarded as the chief
protection of the state. This feeling seems to find expression in the
dolmen or house of the dead, with a carefully prepared opening in the
door as if inviting the spirit to free egress. Anniversary feasts in
honor of the departed were certainly common in ancient days. Close
friendship and social relations were cultivated with the departed as
knowledge and culture increased.
The Egyptian pyramids and mummies, the graves and older dolmens, seem to
testify to a very close and dependent relation between spirit and body.
The spirit hovered around the body and returned to it, and where the
mouldering bones lay there was the spirit's home. Its life was a very
direct continuance of the life in the body. Hence also the food and
libations and the rich burial gifts. But toward the close of the
Neolithic period we find the great stone chamber giving place to a small
cyst or vault, hardly more than a stone coffin, and entirely
underground. At the same time the great stone circles seem at least to
be changing from burial places to temples or centres of worship. A new
method of disposal of the dead has appeared in different parts of
Europe, in Brittany, for example. Up to this time the body has been of
great importance; it has been scrupulously preserved, and provision made
in the grave for the supply of all bodily needs, though the burial gifts
have steadily diminished in number and value. Now the body is burned
immediately after death, as if its preservation were no longer of any
importance but a clog and hindrance from which the spirit was to be set
free as soon as possible. The custom of incineration gains ground in
Europe until in the Bronze Age it is the rule and inhumation the
exception. The old crass materialistic view has evidently given place to
a far higher and more spiritual conception of life after death, and
probably also before it. We here catch a fascinating glimpse of the
steady bold working and tendency of the mind of Neolithic man. It is
only a glimpse of one aspect of his thought and tendency. We lack the
facts to enable us to widen or deepen it. But it is enough to promise a
broad field of future discoveries.
But one fact leads us to hazard a question. Not very far in the Bronze
Age the first great wave of Celtic migration seems to have broken into
northern Europe, as the Achæans had already found their way toward or
into Greece. The Celts seem to have had their Vale of Avalon and Islands
of the Blessed, whither the spirits of the departed migrated. We
remember that when Ulysses went in search of the spirit of Achilles, and
of other comrades in the war before Troy, he sought him in no
underground world, but sailed far across the seas into the west. Such
beliefs, and customs like incineration, are a slow growth, probably far
older in origin than the Indo-European or Aryan migrations, of which
some have thought them characteristic. May not this old and wide-spread
belief be merely a continuance of views and conceptions already held by
our Neolithic folk?
We have already noticed the wide distribution of these megalithic
structures.[92] They stretch along the shore of the Baltic, North Sea,
and Atlantic Ocean down to the Mediterranean. Here they form a band
along the south shore. We find them also in Soudan. In Egypt and Greece
a far more precocious culture made it possible to replace them by
pyramids and "treasure-houses." We find them in Palestine and farther
eastward, along the Black Sea, and in India. In Europe they follow the
coast lines, and do not seem to have been erected by the dwellers in the
valley of the Danube. Their distribution is very similar to that of the
great Mediterranean race and its extensions, but they extend far beyond
the boundaries of any one tribe or people. They are the expression of a
certain thought or conception which spread widely. It might be more
correct to say that the general underlying conception was practically
universal, but found expression in this form in one area, while in other
regions it could not find this expression because conditions were
unfavorable.
It is exceedingly difficult to say just where the first dolmens were
built. Opinions differ widely. They could have been built only in an
area which had a fairly large and settled population who could unite in
a large and difficult work, and had the means of carrying it out. The
people were agriculturists who possessed no low grade of natural
material or mental culture. Many such general considerations lead us to
look for their first appearance somewhere in the region east of the
Mediterranean, which was evidently the home of many other very ancient
forms of culture.[93]