24th July 2012, 12:42 PM
I know what you mean...........but was it in their nature?
Did each neolithic family/extended kinship group/clan/tribe/whatever have its own monument (group of monuments) as a statement to 'others'.
Or were these 'special' places less prolific, being used by several individual groups? A place of contact between groups?
Or were there only a few 'special' places where lots of groups went to periodically?
Is it a tier system of little monuments for the everyday/local use and big areas of monuments for annual gatherings?
I have a million questions to answer with respect to neo/ba monuments.
But the crux is guessing the actual original distribution and chronological use of monuments. Not as easy as it sounds......
Maybe it would be easier to prove where monuments weren't. Still not an easy task with the limited size of the average dig and the number of geophysical surveys and evaluation excavations that have missed sites but still seem to be enough to 'prove' the absence of archaeological remains.
Did each neolithic family/extended kinship group/clan/tribe/whatever have its own monument (group of monuments) as a statement to 'others'.
Or were these 'special' places less prolific, being used by several individual groups? A place of contact between groups?
Or were there only a few 'special' places where lots of groups went to periodically?
Is it a tier system of little monuments for the everyday/local use and big areas of monuments for annual gatherings?
I have a million questions to answer with respect to neo/ba monuments.
But the crux is guessing the actual original distribution and chronological use of monuments. Not as easy as it sounds......
Maybe it would be easier to prove where monuments weren't. Still not an easy task with the limited size of the average dig and the number of geophysical surveys and evaluation excavations that have missed sites but still seem to be enough to 'prove' the absence of archaeological remains.