Product Description

This is an account of the Neolithic period in Scotland from its earliest traces around 4000 BC to the transformation of Neolithic society in the Early Bronze Age fifteen hundred years later. Gordon Noble inteprets Scottish material in the context of debates and issues in European archaeology, comparing sites and practices identified in Scotland to those found elsewhere in Britain and beyond. He considers the nature and effects of memory, sea and land travel, ritualisation, island identities, mortuary practice, symbolism and environmental impact. He synthesises excavations and research conducted over the last century and more, bringing together the evidence for understanding what happened in Scotland during this long period. His long-term and regionally based analysis suggests new directions for the interpretation of the Neolithic more generally. After outlining the chronology of the Neolithic in Europe Dr Noble considers its origins in Scotland. He investigates why the Earlier Neolithic in Scotland is characterised by regionally-distinct monumental traditions and asks if these reflect different conceptions of the world.He uses a long-term perspective to explain the nature of monumental landscapes in the Later Neolithic and considers whether Neolithic society as a whole might have been created and maintained through interactions at places where large-scale monuments were built. He ends by considering how the Neolithic was transformed in the Early Bronze Age through the manipulation of the material remains of the past. Neolithic Scotland provides a comprehensive, approachable and up-to-date account of the Scottish Neolithic. Such a book has not been available for many years. It will be widely welcomed.

Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #571169 in Books
• Published on: 2006-06-20
• Original language: English
• Number of items: 1
• Binding: Paperback
• 320 pages

About the Author
Gordon Noble holds a British Academy Postdoctoral Fellowship in the Department of Archaeology, University of Glasgow. His Aberdeen undergraduate MA was in the history of art. He has an MA (2001) and PhD (2004) in archaeology from University College. London, and Reading respectively. He has published in World Archaeology and contributed to three books on the neolithic in Britain.

Customer Reviews

Though-provoking and inspiring (from a non-archeologist)
I'm not an archeologist, but am finding this a fascinating read. It is beautifully and accessibly written for anyone to read, and is both thought-provoking and inspiring.

Given my personal interest in plants (in particular trees), I have to confess that I skipped to Chapter 4, "Planting Trees, Planting People" immediately after I'd finished the introduction. This is a highly critical and (to me at least) utterly convincing account of the role that trees played in Neolithic culture and spirituality. Contrary to current interpretations in archeological literature, this chapter provides evidence to suggest that ancient trees (split down the middle and up-ended in the ground) may have been as common a sight as the standing stones we all associate with Neolitic ceremony today.

As the book suggests, trees still play a major cultural and spiritual role in many modern day societies. By their very nature, they are rich in symbolism about the cycles of human life and death, and they share many of the characteristics we ascribe to God (for example: their existence on a different time-scale, pre-dating our birth and outlasting our lives and our children's lives; their permanence relative to our transcience; the way they make us feel so small and insignificant in contrast to their height and grandeur; the apparently steady and unchanging nature of a mature tree that is growing imperceptably; and the way they provide for us - food, fibre, building materials, fire, transport, medicine, the list goes on). Is it any wonder that trees form sacred groves for spiritual activities around the world, or that cathedral pillars mimic and exagerate the sacred grove, reaching up to branch-like lattices on their roofs amidst dappled and coloured light from stained glass windows that mimic and exaggerate the effect of sunlight through leaves?

The book highlights many fascinating examples of this close relationship from around the world. Working with pastoralist communities in the Kalahari, I have come across taboos associated with felling certain species of tree, and held meetings in ceremonial spaces ("Kgotlas") that closely resemble the tightly packed stake enclosures illustrated in this book, except that they are usually build around an ancient living tree. I've found that trees effectively "speak" to pastoralists about the future of their land - indicating whether current management practices are unsustainable and degrading the land.

I love the idea that our Neolithic ancestors may have had such close relationships with trees that when they eventually died or blew over, they may have given them their own ritual burial, creating the monuments that the book describes, around which other structures were built. The oldest and largest trees are given personal names by some indigenous groups (e.g. "Tane Muhuta" was 400 years old when the Mauris first arrived from Polynesia and is still alive and revered today). Given the close, possibly personal, possibly spiritual relationship that these people may have had with ancient trees (perhaps even giving them names) it seems only natural that mourning and ceremony should surround their death. Although modern western society may have lost this level of respect for trees, the current growing interest in woodland burials suggests to me that we will never fully lose this connection.

gone with the wind?
I am an archaeologist and have actually received lectures from the man himself, during his time at Durham University, and as much as I respect him, I must say that I have trouble with his albut personification of trees.

Certainly there is proof that trees were important to the Neolithic people (if there is such a thing). The very landscape which we now view as 'natural' was once awash with living trees. But the notion of ritual burial is somewhat questionable given the values we perceive in the rest of British Archaeology.

Not to mention the ethnocentric values which are present in discussing 'SCOTTISH' monuments as somehow autonomous, or even homogeneous. Scotland is a relatively modern concept, after all!

However, I am merely presenting caveats. This is a well written book with thought-provoking and important ideas.

Well worth a read.