Rock-tombs also occur in the islands. The most remarkable are those of S. Vincent in Majorca. One of these has a kind of open antechamber cut in the rock, and is exactly similar in plan to the Grotte des Fees in France (cf. Fig. 12).
Prehistoric villages surrounded by great stone walls can still be traced in the Balearic Isles. The houses were of two types, built either above ground or below. The first are square or rectangular with rounded corners, the base course occasionally consisting of orthostatic slabs.
The subterranean dwellings are faced with stone and roofed with flat slabs supported by columns. In each village was one building of a different type. It stood above ground and was semicircular in plan. In its centre stood a horizontal slab laid across the top of an upright, forming a T-shaped structure which helped to support the roof-slabs, but which may also have had some religious significance. The stones which composed it were always carefully worked, and the lower was let into a socket on the under side of the upper.
CHAPTER VI
ITALY AND ITS ISLANDS
Italy cannot be called a country of megalithic monuments. In the centre and north they do not occur, the supposed examples mentioned by Dennis in his _Cities and Cemeteries of Etruria_ having been proved non-existent by the Italian Ministry of Education. It is only in the extreme south-west that megalithic structures appear. They are dolmens of ordinary type, except that in some cases the walls are formed not of upright slabs, but of stones roughly superposed one upon another. On the farm of the Gra.s.si, near Lecce, are what appear to be two small dolmens at a distance of only 4 feet apart; they are perhaps parts of a single corridor-tomb. In the neighbourhood of Tarentum there is a dolmen-tomb approached by a short pa.s.sage, and at Bisceglie, near Ruvo, there is an even finer example, the discovery of which is one of the most important events which have occurred in Italian prehistoric archaeology during the last few years. The tomb is a simple rectangular corridor 36 feet in length, lying east and west. Only one cover-slab, that at the west end, remains, and the exact disposition of the rest of the tomb is uncertain. In one of the side uprights which supports this slab is a circular hole, which, however, seems to be the work of Nature, though its presence may have led to the choice of the stone. The tomb was carefully excavated, and the remains of several skeletons were found, one of which lay in the contracted position on the right side. Three of the skulls were observed by an expert to be dolichocephalic, but their fragile condition prevented the taking of actual measurements. Burnt bones of animals, fragments of pottery, a terra-cotta bead, and a stone pendant were also found, together with flint knives and a fragment of obsidian.
These discoveries show that the heel of Italy fell under the influence which caused the spread of the megalithic monuments, whatever that influence may have been. The same influence may also have been responsible for the bronze age rock-hewn tombs of Matera in the Basilicata, each of which is surrounded by a circle of fairly large stones.
Geographical considerations would lead one to suppose that the same conditions existed in Sicily, and it is possible that this was the case.
Yet it is an affirmation which must be made with great reserve.
Megalithic monuments in the ordinary sense of the term are unknown in Sicily. There are, however, four tombs in the south-east of the island which show some affinity to megalithic work. Two of these were found by Orsi at Monteracello. They were rectangular chambers built of squared slabs of limestone set on edge. At one end of the finer of the two was a small opening or window cut in the upright slab. This same grave contained a skeleton lying on the right side with the legs slightly contracted. These two tombs can hardly be described as dolmens; they seem to have had no cover-slabs, and the blocks, which were small, were let into the earth, scarcely appearing above the surface. Taken by themselves the Monteracello tombs would hardly prove the presence of the megalithic civilization in Sicily. However, in the valley called Cava Lazzaro there is a rock-hewn tomb where the vertical face of the rock in which the tomb is cut has been shaped into a curved facade, a very usual feature of megalithic architecture. This is ornamented on each side of the entrance of the tomb with four pilasters cut in relief in the solid rock, each pair being connected by a semicircular arch also in relief.
On the pilasters is incised a pattern of circles and V-shaped signs. A somewhat similar arrangement of pilasters is seen in two rock-tombs at Cava Lavinaro in the same district. This work forcibly recalls the work of the megalithic builders in the hypogeum of Halsaflieni in Malta (see Chap. VII), and on the facades of the Giants" Tombs in Sardinia (see below). It affords, at any rate, a presumption that in all three islands we have to deal with the same civilization if not the same people.
Such a presumption is not weakened by the fact that in Sicily the usual form of tomb was the rock-hewn sepulchre, which, as will be seen later, is very often a concomitant of the megalithic monument, and in many cases is proved to be the work of the same people. In the early neolithic period in Sicily, called by Orsi the Sicanian Period, rock-hewn tombs seem not to have been used. It is only at the beginning of the metal age that they begin to appear. In this period, the so-called First Siculan, the tomb-chamber was almost always circular or elliptical, entered by a small door or window in the face of the rock.
The dead were often seated round the wall of the chamber, evidently engaged in a funerary feast, as is clear from the great vase set in their midst with small cups for ladling out the liquid. A single tomb often contained many bodies, especially in cases where the banquet arrangement was not observed; one chamber held more than a hundred skeletons, and it has been suggested that the bodies were only laid in the tomb after the flesh had been removed from the bones, either artificially or as the result of a temporary burial elsewhere. Such a custom is not unknown in other parts of the megalithic area. With these bodies were found large quant.i.ties of painted pottery, a few implements of copper and many of flint. Among the ornaments which the dead carried--for they seem to have been buried in complete costume--were several axe-shaped pendants of polished stone, precisely similar to those of Sardinia, Malta, and France. The most important cemeteries of this period are those of Castelluccio, Melilli, and Monteracello. Near this last site was also found a round hut based on a course of orthostatic slabs of typically megalithic appearance.
In the full bronze age, called the Second Siculan Period, burial in rock-tombs still remained the rule. The tomb-form had developed considerably. The circular type was still usual, though beside it a rectangular form was fast coming into favour. The main chamber often had side-niches, and was usually preceded by a corridor which sometimes pa.s.sed through an antechamber. Occasionally we find an elaborate open-air court outside the facade of the tomb, built very much after the megalithic style. Large vertical surfaces of rock were carefully sought after for tombs, and the almost inaccessible cliffs of Pantalica and Ca.s.sibile are literally honeycombed with them. Where such surfaces of rock were un.o.btainable a vertical shaft was sunk in the level rock and a chamber was opened off the bottom of it. The tradition of the banquet of the dead is still kept up, but the number of the skeletons in each tomb steadily decreases. The sitting posture is still frequent, though occasionally the body lies flat on one side with the legs slightly contracted. Flint is now rare, but objects of bronze are plentiful. The local painted pottery has almost entirely given place to simpler yet better wares with occasional Mycenean importations.
It is impossible to decide whether this Sicilian civilization ought to be included under the term megalithic. If, as seems probable, the idea of megalithic building was brought to Europe by the immigration of a new race it is possible that a branch of this race entered Sicily. In that case I should prefer to think that they came not at the beginning of the First Siculan Period as we know it, but rather earlier. Certain vases found with neolithic burials in a cave at Villafrati and elsewhere in Sicily resemble the pottery usually found in megalithic tombs; one of them is in fact a bell-shaped cup, a form typical of megalithic pottery.
It is thus possible that an immigration of megalithic people into Sicily took place during the stone age, definitely later than the period of the earliest neolithic remains on the island, but earlier than that of such sites as the Castelluccio cemetery. This, however, is and will perhaps remain a mere conjecture, though it is quite possible that there are in the interior of Sicily dolmens which have not yet come to the notice of the archaeologist; in this connection it is worth while to remember that up to five years ago the existence of dolmens in both Sardinia and Malta pa.s.sed unnoticed.
If the inclusion of Sicily in the megalithic area is doubtful there is fortunately no question about the island of Sardinia. Here we have one of the chief strongholds of the megalithic civilization, where the architecture displays its greatest variety and flexibility. The simplest manifestation of megalithic building, the dolmen, was up till lately thought to be absent from Sardinia, but the researches of the last few years have brought to light several examples, of which the best known are those of Birori, where the chamber is approximately circular in plan.
The monuments, however, for which Sardinia is most famous are the _nuraghi._ A _nuraghe_ is a tower-like structure of truncated conical form, built of large stones laid in comparatively regular courses (Pl.
II, Fig. 2). The stones are often artificially squared, and set with a clay mortar. The plan and arrangement of a simple _nuraghe_ are usually as follows (Fig. 17): The diameter of the building is generally under 30 feet. A door of barely comfortable height even for an average man and surmounted by a single lintel-block gives access to a narrow pa.s.sage cut through the thickness of the wall. In this pa.s.sage are, to the right, a small niche (_c_) just large enough to hold a man, and, on the left, a winding staircase in the wall (_d_) leading to an upper storey. The pa.s.sage itself leads into the chamber (_a_), which is circular, often with two or three side-niches (_b b_), and roofed by corbelling, i.e. by making each of the upper courses of stones in its wall project inwards over the last. The upper chamber, which is rarely preserved, is similar in form to the lower.
[Ill.u.s.tration: Plate II Fig. 1. MNAIDRA, DOORWAY OF ROOM H]
[Ill.u.s.tration: Plate II Fig. 2. THE NURAGHE OF MADRONE IN SARDINIA To face p. 82]
[Ill.u.s.tration: Fig. 17. Elevation, section and plan of a _nuraghe_.
(Pinza, _Monumenti Antichi_.)]
Considerable speculation has been indulged in concerning the purpose of the _nuraghi_. For many years they were regarded as tombs, a view which was first combated by Nissardi at the International Congress in Rome in 1903. Further exploration since that time has placed it beyond all doubt that the _nuraghi_ were fortified dwellings. The form of the building itself is almost conclusive. The lowness of the door would at once put an enemy at a disadvantage in attempting to enter; it is significant that in the _nuraghe_ of Su Cadalanu, where the doorway was over 6 feet in height, its breadth was so much reduced that it was necessary to enter sideways. Arrangements were made for the closing of the entrance from inside by a heavy slab of stone, often fitted into grooves. The niche on the right of the pa.s.sage clearly served to hold a man, who would command the pa.s.sage itself and the staircase to the upper floor; he would, moreover, be able to attack the undefended flank of an enemy entering with his shield on his left arm. To the same effort at impregnability we may safely ascribe the fact that the staircase leading to the upper room did not begin on the floor-level of the pa.s.sage, but was reached through a hole high up in the wall. Many of the _nuraghi_ are surrounded by elaborate fortifications consisting of walls, towers, and bastions, sometimes built at the same time as the dwelling itself, sometimes added later. Those of Aiga, Losa, and s"Aspru are among the most famous of this type. All the _nuraghi_ stand in commanding situations overlooking large tracts of country, and the more important a position is from the strategical point of view the stronger will be the _nuraghe_ which defends it. All are situated close to streams and springs of good water, and some, as for instance that of Abbameiga, are actually built over a natural spring. At Nossiu is a building which can only be described as a fortress. It consists of a rhomboidal enclosure with _nuraghe_-like towers at its corners and four narrow gateways in its walls. It is surrounded by the ruins of a village of stone huts.
There cannot be the least doubt that in time of danger the inhabitants drove their cattle into the fortified enclosure, entered it themselves, and then closed the gates.
Each _nuraghe_ formed the centre of a group of stone huts. Mackenzie has described such a village at Serucci, where the circular plan of the huts was still visible. The walls in one case stood high enough to show, from the corbelling of their upper courses, that the huts were roofed in the same fashion as the _nuraghi_ themselves. Another village, that which surrounds the _nuraghe_ of Su Chiai, was protected by a wall of huge stones.
It is thus clear that the _nuraghi_ were the fortified centres of the various villages of Sardinia. Probably each formed the residence of the local chieftain; that they were actually inhabited is clear from the remains of everyday life found in them, and from the polish which continual use has set on the side-walls of some of the staircases. In general appearance and design the _nuraghi_ recall the modern _truddhi_, hundreds of which dot the surface of Apulia and help to beguile the tedium of the railway journey from Brindisi to Foggia. The _truddhi_, however, are built in steps or terraces and have no upper chamber.
Who were the foes against whom such elaborate preparations for defence were made? Two alternatives are possible. Either Sardinia was a continual prey to some piratical Mediterranean people, or she was divided against herself through the rivalry of the local chieftains.
The second explanation is perhaps the more probable. Mackenzie seems to adopt it, and fancies that in the growth of the largest _nuraghi_ we may trace the rise to power of some of these local dynasts at the expense of their neighbours. He suggests that the existence of the fortified enclosure of Nossiu, where there is no sign of a true _nuraghe_, may mean that there were certain communities which succeeded in maintaining their independence in the face of these powerful rulers. But here, as he himself is the first to admit, we are in the realm of pure conjecture.
[Ill.u.s.tration: Fig. 18. Giant"s Tomb at Muraguada, Sardinia. (Mackenzie, _Papers of the British School of Rome_, V.)]
It is now established that in the Giants" Tombs of Sardinia we are to see the graves of the inhabitants of the _nuraghe_ villages. Every Giant"s Tomb lies close to such a village, and almost every village has its Giants" Tombs, one or more in number according to its size. A Giant"s Tomb consists of a long rectangular chamber of upright slabs roofed by corbelled masonry (Fig. 18). The slab which closes one end of the tomb is of great size, and consists of a lower rectangular half with a small hole at the base and an upper part shaped like a rounded gable.
There is a raised border to the whole slab, and a similar band in relief marks out the two halves. This front slab forms the centre-piece in a curved facade of upright slabs. The chamber is covered with a coating of ashlar masonry, which is shaped into an apsidal form at the end opposite to the facade. Occasionally more than 50 feet in length, the Giants"
Tombs served as graves for whole families, or even for whole villages.
Mackenzie has shown that the form is derived from the simple dolmen, and has pointed out several of the intermediate stages.
The inhabitants of Sardinia in the megalithic period also buried their dead in rock-hewn sepulchres, of which there are numerous examples at Anghelu Ruju. The contents of these graves make it clear that they are the work of the same people as the Giants" Graves. Were further proof needed it could be afforded by a grave at Molafa, where a Giant"s Grave with its facade and gabled slab has been faithfully imitated in the solid rock. There is a similar tomb at St. George. Two natural caves in Cape Sant" Elia on the south of the island contain burials of this same period.
The neighbouring island of Corsica also contains important megalithic remains. They consist of thirteen dolmens, forty-one menhirs, two _alignements_, and a cromlech. They fall geographically into two groups, one in the extreme north and the other in the extreme south of the island.
The stones used are chiefly granite and gneiss. The dolmens, which are of carefully chosen flat blocks showing no trace of work, are all rectangular in plan, and usually consist of four side-walls and a cover-slab. The finest of all, however, the dolmen of Fontanaccia, has seven blocks supporting the cover, one at each short end, three in one of the long sides, and two in the other. None of the dolmens are covered by mounds.
Of the _alignements_, that of Caouria seems to consist, in part at least, of two parallel lines of menhirs, the rest of the plan being uncertain. There are still thirty-two blocks, of which six have fallen.
The other _alignement_, that of Rinaiou, consists of seven menhirs set in a straight line. The cromlech is circular and stands on Cape Corse.
On the small island of Pianosa, near Elba, are several rock-hewn tombs of the aeneolithic period which ought perhaps to be cla.s.sed with the megalithic monuments of Sardinia and Corsica.
CHAPTER VII
AFRICA, MALTA, AND THE SMALLER MEDITERRANEAN ISLANDS
North Africa is a great stronghold of the megalithic civilization, indeed it is thought by some that it is the area in which megalithic building originated. Morocco, Tunis, Algeria, and Tripoli all abound in dolmens and other monuments. Even in the Nile Valley they occur, for what looks like a dolmen surrounded by a circle was discovered by de Morgan in the desert near Edfu, and Wilson and Felkin describe a number of simple dolmens which exist near Lad in the Sudan. Tripoli remains as yet comparatively unexplored. The traveller Barth speaks of stone circles near Mourzouk and near the town of Tripoli. The great trilithons (_senams_) with holes pierced in their uprights and "altar tables" at their base, which Barth, followed by Cooper in his _Hill of the Graces_, described as megalithic monuments, have been shown to be nothing more than olive-presses, the "altar tables" being the slabs over which the oil ran off as it descended. True dolmens do, however, occur in Tripoli, and Cooper figures a fine monument at Messa in the Cyrenaica, which appears to consist of a single straight line of tall uprights with a continuous entablature of blocks similar to that of the outer circle at Stonehenge.
Algeria has been far more completely explored, and possesses a remarkable number of megalithic monuments. Many of the finest are situated near the town of Constantine. Thus at Bou Nouara there is a hill about a mile in length which is a regular necropolis of dolmen-tombs. Each grave consists of a dolmen within a circle of stones.
The blocks are all natural and completely unworked. The circle consists of a wall of stone blocks so built as to neutralize the slope of the hill and to form a level platform for the dolmen. Thus on the lower side there are three courses of carefully laid stones rising to about five feet, while on the upper side there is only one course. The diameter of the circles varies from 22 to 33 feet. In the centre of the circle lies the dolmen with its single long cover-slab. This usually rests on two entire side-slabs, the ends being filled up either with entire slabs or with masonry of small stones. In rare cases the side-slabs are replaced by masonry walls. The average size of the cover-slab is 6-1/2 by 5 feet.
The dolmen itself is, of course, built directly on to the platform, and the s.p.a.ce between it and the circle is filled up with rough stones. The orientation of the dolmens varied considerably, but the cover-slab was never placed in such a way that its length ran up the hill-slope, probably because in moving the slab into place this would have been an awkward position.
Another equally fine site is that of Bou Merzoug, near Oulad Rahmoun, about an hour"s railway journey from Constantine. The place is naturally adapted for a settlement as there is a spring of water there. This spring was later utilized by the Romans to provide water for the city of Cirta. The dolmen-graves lie in great numbers on the hill at the foot of which the spring rises, and extend down into the valley. Each dolmen lies in the centre of a stone circle. This last is in some cases formed by very large slabs set on edge, but more often by two or three courses of rough oblong blocks. Many of the graves are badly damaged. One of the finest had an outer circle about 27 feet in diameter, and an inner circle 14 feet in diameter. Between these two a third circle, much more irregular and of small stones, could just be distinguished. But in most cases it was impossible to make out clearly more than the one outer circle and the dolmen within it. The dolmen itself consisted of a large slab resting on walls formed of several large blocks, the s.p.a.ces between which were filled up with smaller stones. None of the stones used were worked. The dolmens were not oriented according to any fixed system. M.
Feraud states that the separate graves were united together by open corridors formed by double or triple rows of large stones, but no traces of such a system could be found by the later visitors to the site, Messrs. MacIver and Wilkin.
Fortunately we have some record of what these graves contained, for thirteen were opened by Mr. Christy and M. Feraud. One contained a human skeleton in good condition, buried in the contracted position with the knees to chin and arms crossed. With this were two whole vases, fragments of others, and pieces of cedar wood. At the feet of the skeleton were two human heads, and as the graves would not have accommodated more than one whole body M. Feraud suggests that these belong to decapitated victims. Another grave contained, in addition to human bones, those of a horse, together with three objects of copper, viz. a ring, an earring, and a buckle. In another were found the teeth and bones of a horse and an iron bit.
An entirely different type of monument is found near Msila, south-west of Algiers. Here is a long low hill called the Senam, covered with large numbers of stone circles. These consist of large slabs of natural limestone set up on edge and not very closely fitted. The height of the slabs varies from 2 to 3 feet, and the diameters of the three still perfect circles are 23-1/2, 26-3/4, and 34-1/3 feet respectively. At a point roughly south-east there is a break in the circ.u.mference, filled by a rectangular niche (Fig. 19) consisting of three large slabs, and varying in width from 2 ft. 6 in. to 6 feet. There is a possibility that the niches were originally roofed, but the evidence on this point is far from conclusive. The interior of the circle is filled with blocks of stone, apparently heaped up without any definite plan. There seems to be no clue as to the meaning of these circles, as none have as yet been explored. MacIver and Wilkin are probably right in cla.s.sing them as graves.
[Ill.u.s.tration: FIG 19. Stone circle at the Senam, Algeria.
(After MacIver and Wilkin).]
The most famous, however, of the Algerian sites is unquestionably that of Roknia. Here the tombs lie on the side of a steep hill. They consist of dolmens often surrounded by stone circles from 25 to 33 feet in diameter. The cover-slabs of the dolmens usually rest on single uprights, and never on built walls. Several of the graves excavated contained more than one body, one yielding as many as seven. It is remarkable that three of the skulls showed wounds, the dead having been apparently killed in battle. Several vases have been found and a few pieces of bronze.
We have seen that in some of the tombs of Bou Merzoug objects of iron were found. This makes it clear that some at least of the Algerian tombs belong to the iron age, i.e. that they are probably later than 1000 B.C., but beyond this we cannot go. The medal of Faustina sometimes quoted as evidence for a very late date proves nothing, as it is not stated to have been found in a tomb. There is no evidence to show how far back the graves go. It may be that, as MacIver and Wilkin suggest, the parts of the cemeteries excavated chance to be the latest. At Bou Merzoug the excavators worked chiefly among the graves on the plain and at the bottom of the hill. The more closely crowded graves which lie on the hill itself may well be older than these. In fact, all that may be said of the Algerian graves is that some are of the iron age, while others may be and probably are earlier.