aspect, architecture, and art: the passage grave tradition of northwest britain

This article was downloaded by: [University of Auckland Library]On: 30 October 2014, At: 14:59Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: MortimerHouse, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Time and Mind: The Journal of Archaeology,Consciousness and CulturePublication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rtam20

Aspect, Architecture, and Art: The Passage GraveTradition of Northwest BritainGeorge Nasha

a George Nash is co-editor of Time & Mind, and is a part-time lecturer and VisitingFellow at the Department of Archaeology and Anthropology, University of Bristol;Associate Professor at the Spiru Haret University, Bucharest, Romania; and SeniorResearcher at the Museu de Arte Pré-Histórica de Mação, Portugal. George hasundertaken extensive fieldwork on prehistoric rock art and mobility art throughoutmany parts of the world.Published online: 28 Nov 2013.

To cite this article: George Nash (2013) Aspect, Architecture, and Art: The Passage Grave Tradition of NorthwestBritain, Time and Mind: The Journal of Archaeology, Consciousness and Culture, 6:2, 199-210

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.2752/175169713X13589680081858

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”)contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensorsmake no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitabilityfor any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinionsand views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy ofthe Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources ofinformation. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands,costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly orindirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial orsystematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution inany form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rtam20

http://dx.doi.org/10.2752/175169713X13589680081858

http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Time and Mind Volume 6—Issue 2—July 2013, pp. 199–210

Time and Mind: The Journal of Archaeology, Consciousness and Culture

Volume 6—Issue 2July 2013pp. 199–210DOI: 10.2752/175169713X13589680081858

Reprints available directly

from the publishers

Photocopying permitted by

license only

© Bloomsbury Publishing Plc

2013

Aspect, Architecture, and Art: The Passage Grave Tradition of Northwest BritainGeorge Nash

George Nash is co-editor of Time & Mind, and is a part-

time lecturer and Visiting Fellow at the Department

of Archaeology and Anthropology, University of Bristol;

Associate Professor at the Spiru Haret University,

Bucharest, Romania; and Senior Researcher at the Museu

de Arte Pré-Histórica de Mação, Portugal. George has

undertaken extensive fieldwork on prehistoric rock ar t

and mobility ar t throughout many parts of the world.

[email protected]

AbstractBy the mid-seventh millennium BP Neolithic communities along the Atlantic Seaboard of Europe began to witness the emergence of a pictographic language based on a common repertoire of abstract and figurative motifs. Although largely confined to passage grave communities occupying the coastal fringes of Atlantic Europe, the megalithic art tradition unified much of the Neolithic world from the coastal regions of the Mediterranean to northern Scotland over a period of some 3,000 years. The art itself appears to have acted as a personal signature, unique to each monument and its builders, but drawing on a limited set of symbols. This article explores the geographic extent of this mainly abstract motif repertoire and proposes that, over time and space key symbols may have been expressed in different ways; forming a distinct relationship between aspect (the landscape) and architecture.

Keywords: abstract motifs, grammar, linguistics, meaning, rock art, semiotics

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f A

uckl

and

Lib

rary

] at

14:

59 3

0 O

ctob

er 2

014

200 Aspect, Architecture, and Art George Nash


IntroductionHow and why are ideas transmitted?

And, how do they develop over a long

period of time and sometimes over vast

distances? Moreover, and pertinent to this

article, how are they recognized in the

later prehistoric archaeological record? For

these questions I will look at how certain

rock art motifs were transmitted from one

Neolithic core area, central eastern Ireland,

to another, North Wales. The mechanisms

for this transmission are stone chambered

burial-ritual monuments; in particular,

passage graves. From study of burial-ritual

monuments and rock art across much of

Atlantic and Mediterranean Europe, death

and art appear to be inextricably linked.

However, what we are looking at is probably

only a fragment of the artistic endeavor

associated with the performance associated

with death and ritual. As demonstrated in

earlier research within the Iberian Neolithic

monuments, archaeologists are beginning

to identify sometimes minute fragments of

pigment from the chamber and passage walls,

suggesting that the ritual involved in death

would have been a colorful affair. I argue that

a similar artistic endeavor could have existed

in the monuments that occupy northwestern

Europe. Painting, along with the acts of

engraving, chanting, dancing, storytelling, and

trance would have created an event charged

with drama and visual semiotic expression;

rock art playing only a part of a ritualized

package.

Based on a fragmentary archaeological

record, the various components of this

package appear to have travelled as a set

of ideas from one Neolithic core area to

another, probably over a 2,000-year period;

its origins being in island and coastal centers

such as Malta, Sardinia, Spain, Portugal, and

Brittany. Parts of this package, in particular

the permanent decoration of chamber walls

with engravings and paintings, appears to

have come to an end at around 2800 BCE in

western Britain. However, the passage grave

tradition continued in southern Scandinavia

but without the execution of rock art.

In Wales, as in the rest of southern Britain

and Ireland, the Neolithic is most visibly and,

in some cases, spectacularly represented

by stone burial-ritual monuments and

sometimes the rock art that accompanies

it. It is more than probable that chambered

monuments were controlled and used

by community elites when practicing the

rites of death and burial. The chambered

monuments of the Neolithic occur within

a number of core areas in Wales. In

each core area are monuments that are

architecturally and chronologically diverse

and include Portal Dolmens, long mounds

(mainly of the Cotswold-Severn variety),

round mounds, earth-fast monuments, gallery

graves, and the developed passage grave.

Influences in architectural style probably

originate from a number of sources, creating

in some instances a melting pot of ideas

and meaning—what is sometimes termed

as hybrid monumentality. However, the

primary function of each monument type

remains common: a repository for the dead

where the ancestral remains embark on

a final journey to spiritual places beyond

the physicality of the monument. The

basic architectural components of these

repositories include mound, entrance/facade,

passage, and chamber. What established

a monument-type are variations on these

themes as well as idiosyncratic additions

to the primary architecture such as the

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f A

uckl

and

Lib

rary

] at

14:

59 3

0 O

ctob

er 2

014

George Nash Aspect, Architecture, and Art 201


application of rock art on some monuments

and architectural phasing in others.

The passage grave tradition forms part

of a northern movement of an architectural

style that probably has its origins in

the Iberian Peninsula. The movement

northwards, mainly along the Atlantic

seaboard, established a foothold in nearly

all the major Neolithic core areas along

this extensive coastline including Portugal,

Brittany, Channel Islands, Eastern Ireland,

southern Scandinavia, and to a limited extent

North Wales, northwest England, Scotland,

and Orkney. Interestingly, rock art is not

present in all passage graves. Indeed, almost

no rock art is present on or within passage

graves in northern Britain and southern

Scandinavia.

In Ireland, passage graves account for

around 15 percent of the 1,500 or so

Neolithic stone burial-ritual monuments;

of these, only around thirty-five possess

megalithic carved art (Waddell 2000).

This unique group of monuments, usually

clustered in cemeteries, is found in a distinct

east–west band across the northern part

of Ireland. Monuments that have been

excavated in recent times have yielded

reasonably secure chronometric dating

sequences that tie-in construction and use to

between c. 3100 and 2700 cal. BC. In Wales,

two fully developed passage graves, similar

to those found in Ireland, stand in Anglesey.

Based on a recent reappraisal of one of

the sites by Steve Burrow (2010), their

construction and use is contemporary with

their Irish cousins suggesting that contact

and exchange networks existed between

Neolithic communities either side of the Irish

Sea (Figure 1).

Ancestors, Aspect, and ArchitectureThe majority of Irish passage graves (c. 60

percent) are sited within the lowlands,

Fig 1 The distribution of

passage graves within the

Irish Sea Province and the

distribution of fully formed and

hybrid passage graves in Wales:

1. Barclodiad y Gawres; 2. Bryn

Celli Ddu; 3. The Calderstones;

4. Bryn yr Hen Bobl. Drawn by

Abby George.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f A

uckl

and

Lib

rary

] at

14:

59 3

0 O

ctob

er 2

014



although there are a considerable number

on the top of hill plateaus, such as the three

passage grave groups at Loughcrew (Sliabh

na Cailli) and the Mound of the Hostages

on the Hill of Tara (both in County Meath).

Interwoven into these Late Neolithic burial-

ritual landscapes are other monument types

such as henges, standing stones (menhirs),

and stone circles, all of which represent

different chronological stages that create

a monumental pastiche of ritual activity

that probably spans at least 1,000 years,

establishing an ancestral landscape (Cooney

2000). Here, stories and myths displayed

through rock art and other mediums would

have been passed down from generation

to generation; both the visual and the

storytelling mediums creating an identity and

an embellished ancestry.

The Boyne Valley monuments such as

Newgrange, Knowth, and Dowth are not

discrete and appear to be the epitome

of visually defining a ritual or ceremonial

funerary landscape, despite the probable

secrecy of the internal arrangement of

each monument (Figure 2). In addition to

visual display, builders appear to be aware

of the strategic importance of location

and mound design. The Boyne Valley

monuments geographically sit in the bend

of a meandering river which itself may have

acted as a boundary between the land of

living and that of the dead. Moreover, the

River Boyne appears to act as a physical

boundary whereby only the shape of the

mound and possibly the entrance can be

seen; the engraved curbing and the complex

entrance area are excluded from the eye of

the onlooker.

In many respects a quite different

burial-ritual landscape is present in Anglesey,

North Wales, where the passage graves of

Barclodiad y Gawres and Bryn Celli Ddu

are sited. A similar landscape setting can

be considered for the original siting of the

now destroyed Calderstones monument,

located c. 2.5 km east of the River Mersey

Channel (NW England). None of these three

monuments, though, stood in isolation: today,

fragments of their prehistoric setting are

witnessed by a series of stone monuments

and prominent natural features that would

have guided communities through their

respective ritualized landscapes.

Of the many hundreds of monuments

that occupy the Atlantic European Seaboard,

only three survive in Wales. Barclodiad

y Gawres, forming part of a wider ritual

landscape, stands on a small promontory

hillock located some 30 m from the present

coastline; its landscape position is unique as

no other passage grave within the Irish Sea

Province stands this close to the foreshore.

From the top of the mound are commanding

views of the northwest coastline that include

Holy Island and the southwestern shoreline

of Anglesey. Commanding views are also

present to the southeast with the Snowdonia

Mountains as a dominant backdrop; whilst to

the west are the Irish Sea and the pencil line

of the Llyn Peninsula.

Somewhat different to Barclodiad y

Gawres is the ritual landscape of Bryn Celli

Ddu (Figure 3). This restored monument

stands within an undulating landscape, some

1.6 km northwest of the Menai Straits, a

narrow channel of water that separates

Anglesey from the North Wales mainland.

Approximately 120 m to the west of Bryn

Celli Ddu is a substantial exposed rock

outcrop with up to 28 cup marks on its

summit (Figure 4).1 Further cupmarks were

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f A

uckl

and

Lib

rary

] at

14:

59 3

0 O

ctob

er 2

014



Fig 2 The landscape statement that is Newgrange, with the Boyne River in the foreground and the

white quartz walls and domed shape of the Newgrange mound on the skyline. Photo: Author.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f A

uckl

and

Lib

rary

] at

14:

59 3

0 O

ctob

er 2

014



also present on isolated rock-outcropping

to the northwest. The intensity of the ritual

landscape includes the course of the Afon

[river] Braint and the two standing stones

possibly each demarcating the extent of a

ritualized prehistoric landscape, with Bryn

Celli Ddu as its focus.2

By contrast, the prehistoric setting of

the Calderstones monument has been

completely lost due to early historic

landscape division followed by urban

development, especially over the past 100

years. Despite this severe disruption however,

one can make some inferences concerning

the landscape position. Not surprisingly,

the original position of the Calderstones

is similar to other Neolithic burial-ritual

groups elsewhere, originally standing on land

that may have had views to the southwest,

towards the Mersey (Nash 2010).

Similar to other passage graves within

the Irish Sea Province the Calderstones did

not stand in isolation. Approximately 1.6 km

to the southeast is a standing stone known

as the Robin Hood’s Stone. This 2.4-m-high

monolith does not sit in its original position

and when moved in 1910, one face of the

lower section of the stone was found to

possess a cup-and-ring motif which was

accompanied by up to nine cup marks

(Figure 5).

Art for Some but Not AllI turn now from consideration of

monuments and the landscape in general to

Fig 3 The entrance of Bryn Celli Ddu.

Photo: Author.

Fig 4 Cup marks on rock outcropping set and

within the ritual draw of Bryn Celli Ddu.

Photo: Author.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f A

uckl

and

Lib

rary

] at

14:

59 3

0 O

ctob

er 2

014



the relationship of megalithic rock art with

landscape and monument. This component,

I believe, cannot be treated in isolation and

merely used as a way of comparing and

contrasting different sites (e.g. Lynch 1970;

O’Kelly 1982; Eogan 1986; Nash 2006).

Indeed, I have previously suggested that

rock art forms part of a much wider ritual

package of ideas that involve a restricted

set of motifs that form a semiotic grammar

that creates a unique narrative for each

site (Nash 2006). As part of this package,

architecture and landscape are indelibly

linked with rock art, especially in the way

each component is used within the act of

ritual burial. However, it should be stressed

that the rock art can be considered an

exotic element in that it only occurs within

Fig 5 Cup marks and a cup-

and-ring motif on the base of

the Robin Hood’s Stone (from

Stuart-Brown 1911).

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f A

uckl

and

Lib

rary

] at

14:

59 3

0 O

ctob

er 2

014



10 percent of all Irish passage graves, with a

similar ratio existing elsewhere throughout

the core areas of Atlantic Europe.

Generally, megalithic art, comprising

mainly non-representative motifs, is

found exclusively within a burial context,

mainly within, on, or around passage grave

monuments. This artistic style has been

extensively studied by Elizabeth Shee

Twohig (1981), and it is her seminal work

that identifies a clear repertoire of motifs,

numbering eleven generic forms, ranging

from chevrons and cup-and-rings to zigzags,

many of which are incorporated into the

rock art that is found in and around the

two passage graves in Anglesey (Figure 6).

Based on this classification, archaeologists

have reported two clear primary stylistic

movements that are present in different

sections of the passage and chamber

at Knowth and Newgrange comprising

curvilinear (motifs 1–5) and angular (motifs

6–11) forms (O’Kelly 1982; Eogan 1986).

Curiously, in terms of motif organization,

no two panels are the same. Moreover, this

linguistic repertoire of motifs is present on or

within burial-ritual monuments either side of

the Irish Sea Province. Apart from the three

British developed passage graves there are

many stone chambered burial monuments

that contain single and multiple cup-marked

engravings. Controversially, this phenomenon

is now regarded as having its origins in the

Early Neolithic (Waddington et al. 2005).

During the excavation of Barclodiad

y Gawres in 1952–3, five uprights with

complex carved decoration were recorded.

These stones, along with a sixth stone

discovered in 2002 were located within

the inner section of the passage area and

chamber. The passage, unorthodoxly

orientated north–south, appears to restrict

Fig 6 Motif classification (from

Shee Twohig 1981: 107, Fig. 11).

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f A

uckl

and

Lib

rary

] at

14:

59 3

0 O

ctob

er 2

014



any visual access to the art (Nash 2006).

Stone 5, located at the interface of the

passage and chamber, contains a series of

pecked lozenges and chevrons, whilst Stone

6, lying immediately south of Stone 5, has

within its design code two interlocking

anticlockwise spirals, a series of lozenges, and

a series of zigzag lines that link the lozenges.

Stone 8, located within the eastern part of

the chamber, is decorated with six spirals,

one of which is integrated with a lozenge

design. Four of the spirals extend in a line

across the face of the upright. The pecking

for all spirals is very faint as with other

engraved surfaces. In the western section

of the chamber and incorporated into an

antechamber is Stone 19, which has a single

clockwise spiral at its center. Finally, Stone

22, probably the most complex example of

megalithic art within this monument, lies at

the junction of the passage and chamber

(Figure 7). This stone, measuring 1.47 m in

height, contains three sets of designs. At the

top of the stone is an anticlockwise spiral,

part of which is missing. Immediately below

this are five complete horizontal zigzag lines

Fig 7 The rock art engraved

on Stone 22 at Barclodiad y

Gawres. Photo: Author.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f A

uckl

and

Lib

rary

] at

14:

59 3

0 O

ctob

er 2

014



and three part zigzag lines. Forming part

of the lower zigzag are two chevrons, one

below the other. Either side of the principal

face of this upright and continuing the

lower set of part zigzag lines is a multi-lined

curvilinear pattern that continues to the base

of the upright. This particular section of the

upright has similarities with the Pattern Stone

at Bryn Celli Ddu. What of its meaning?

Well, anyone can of course make a guess

to what the motifs may represent. I support

the idea of certain motifs representing

the elements of a wider landscape. Stone

22 is placed in such a way to suggest this,

creating a linguistic grammar that is unique

to each monument with the zigzag lines

representing the Snowdonia Mountain range,

the serpentiform and lozenges the sea, and

the spiral the eastern setting sun. But … this

is from the mindset of a twenty-first-century

archaeologist!

Despite the extensive artistic repertoire

at Barclodiad y Gawres there are probably

no contemporary engravings at Bryn Celli

Ddu. The site was excavated by F.D. Lucas

in 1865 and later by W.J. Hemp between

1925 and 1929 (Hemp 1930). It was Hemp’s

excavation that revealed an ornately carved

stone referred to as the Pattern Stone.

Uniquely, this stone was carved on both faces

and on the top ridge, the designs on both

faces appearing to be interlinked. The Pattern

Stone, standing c. 1.5 m in height, was found

during Hemp’s excavation overlying a central

pit (Figure 8). It is not known if this stone

belonged to the passage grave or possibly,

an earlier henge monument. Based on new

evidence it is conceivable that the centrally

located pit, the Pattern Stone, and a clay floor

extending along the passage and chamber

may have formed part of a pre-construction

phase; ritually dedicating and demarcating

the site. Based on the amount of surface

decoration covering the stone, it is probable

that it would have originally stood upright.

On one of the faces is a double serpentiform

(snake-like design) pattern that has the end

terminating into an anticlockwise spiral. One

section of this pattern is similar to the lower

section of patterns on Stone 22 in Barclodiad

y Gawres (see Figure 7).

Synthesis: Moving ForwardsThe question must arise, why do only three

monuments in this part of Britain possess

Fig 8 The Pattern Stone (replica) standing west of

the chamber at Bryn Celli Ddu. Photo: Author.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f A

uckl

and

Lib

rary

] at

14:

59 3

0 O

ctob

er 2

014



complex megalithic art and only thirty-

five monuments or so in Ireland? I have

stated earlier that the idea of constructing

chambered tombs is based on a transmission

of ideas: we came, we saw, we copied. It is

clear that certain architectural traits such as

the introduction of drystone faced-horns

and false portals in long mounds and

some passage graves must have originated

somewhere and were probably fashionable

traits transmitted via contact and exchange

networks. Likewise, there must have been

a point in time during the Neolithic when

megalithic art in burial monuments became

important, but only to a selected number of

communities.

The passage grave tradition, as with other

monument groups, appears to have had

a long history that developed over some

considerable distance between the Iberian

Peninsula, Brittany, Ireland, and western

Britain and beyond. From its inception to

its demise, the passage grave retains its

basic architectural components—circular

mound, facade, passage, and chamber. These

components were, over time and space,

slightly altered, or added to, providing the

builder and the community with a unique

identity. Based on the small number of

developed passage graves that possess

engraved megalithic art, one could consider

that they form a later ideological wave that

either becomes added to an existing passage

grave or is incorporated into a new wave of

passage grave building.

It is becoming apparent that a universal

sign system involving a recognized set of

symbols and associated with mainly death

and burial extended from the Iberian

Peninsula to northern Britain within what

is sometimes referred to as the Atlantic

Seaboard (Cunliffe 2001). Whether the

meaning to each motif type was the same

over a 3,600 km coastline is difficult to

substantiate, but what is clear is that subtle

changes were made to each motif type over

time and space that coincided with changes

to the ritual deposition within passage graves.

Julian Thomas (2000: 14) states that

Western modernity essentially has its

origins in the Scientific Revolution of

the seventeenth century and the Age of

Enlightenment of the eighteenth century.

From these two movements the world

becomes a different place. Likewise in

prehistory, a new wave of modernity was

created—from small-scale communities

burying their dead in featureless cemeteries

in the Mesolithic to the concept of housing

the body (albeit temporally) in sometimes

enormous stone and earthen structures

during the Neolithic. These repositories for

the dead formed the backdrop and focus for

Neolithic life. In some, but not all, of these

repositories rock art formed an integral part

of the decor that served in creating a unique

identity for its users.

Note1 It is interesting that this outcrop is marked by rock

art, as preliminary acoustic fieldwork at Bryn Celli

Ddu by Paul Devereux in 2010 revealed that the

rock acted as a point source of clear and distinct

echoes resulting from percussion conducted

at the monument (personal communication). If

intentionality was involved, it would mean that

the outcrop was connected to the monument

and the ritual activities conducted there in terms

of both sight and sound, providing an acoustic

dimension to the ritual landscape.

2 During his ten-day tour of Anglesey in 1802, the

Reverend John Skinner noted that a few meters

west of Bryn Celli Ddu was another passage grave

(Skinner 1802).

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f A

uckl

and

Lib

rary

] at

14:

59 3

0 O

ctob

er 2

014



References

Burrow, S.P., 2010. “Bryn Celli Ddu: Alignment,

Construction, Date and Ritual.” Proceedings of the

Prehistoric Society 76: 249–70.

Cooney, G., 2000. Landscapes of Neolithic Ireland.

London: Routledge.

Cunliffe, B., 2001. Facing the Ocean: The Atlantic and

its Peoples, 8,000 BC to AD 1500. London: Oxford

University Press.

Eogan, G., 1986. Knowth and the Passage-tombs of

Ireland. Thames & Hudson, London.

Hemp, W.J., 1930. “The Chambered Cairn of Bryn

Celli Ddu.” Archaeologia Cambrensis 80: 179–214.

Lynch, F.M., 1970. Prehistoric Anglesey. Anglesey:

Anglesey Antiquarian Society.

Nash, G.H., 2006. The Architecture of Death: The

Chambered Monuments of Wales. Hereford: Logaston

Press.

Nash, G.H., 2010. “Art in this World and Art for the

Underworld: An appraisal of the Later Prehistoric

Menhir of Robin Hood’s Stone, Allerton.” Liverpool:

Merseyside Archaeology Society 13: 87–94.

O’Kelly, M.J., 1982. Newgrange: Archaeology, Art and

Legend. London: Thames & Hudson.

Shee Twohig, E., 1981. Megalithic Art of Western

Europe. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Skinner, J., 1802. Ten Days Tour through the Island of

Anglesey (reprinted with introduction by T. Williams,

2004).

Stuart-Brown, R., 1911. A History of the Manor

and Township of Allerton in the County of Lancaster.

Liverpool.

Thomas, J.S., 2000. Interpretive Archaeology: A Reader.

London: Continuum.

Waddell, J., 2000. The Prehistoric Archaeology of

Ireland. Bray: Wordwell.

Waddington, C., Benjamin, J., and Mazel, A., 2005.

“Excavation of a Rock Art Site at Hunterheugh Crag,

Northumberland.” Archaeologia Aeliana 5th Series 34:

29–54.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f A

uckl

and

Lib

rary

] at

14:

59 3

0 O

ctob

er 2

014

aspect, architecture, and art: the passage grave tradition of northwest britain

Documents