The Changing Face of Neolithic and Bronze Age Ireland: A Big Data Approach to the Settlement and Burial Records

J World Prehist DOI 10.1007/s10963-016-9093-0 The Changing Face of Neolithic and Bronze Age Ireland: A Big Data Approach to the Settlement and Burial Records T. Rowan McLaughlin1 • Nicki J. Whitehouse2 • Rick J. Schulting3 • Meriel McClatchie4 • Philip Barratt1,2 • Amy Bogaard3 Ó The Author(s) 2016. This article is published with open access at Springerlink.com Abstract This paper synthesizes and discusses the spatial and temporal patterns of archaeological sites in Ireland, spanning the Neolithic period and the Bronze Age transition (4300–1900 cal BC), in order to explore the timing and implications of the main changes that occurred in the archaeological record of that period. Large amounts of new data are sourced from unpublished developer-led excavations and combined with national archives, published excavations and online databases. Bayesian radiocarbon models and contextand sample-sensitive summed radiocarbon probabilities are used to examine the dataset. The study captures the scale and timing of the initial expansion of Early Neolithic settlement and the ensuing attenuation of all such activity—an apparent boom-and-bust cycle. The Late Neolithic and Chalcolithic periods are characterised by a resurgence and diversification of activity. Contextualisation and spatial analysis of radiocarbon data reveals finer-scale patterning than is usually possible with summed-probability approaches: the boom-and-bust models of prehistoric populations may, in fact, be a misinterpretation of more subtle demographic changes occurring at the same time as cultural change and attendant differences in the archaeological record. Keywords Neolithic Ireland  Settlement  Burial  Megalithic tombs  Demographics  Radiocarbon dating Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s10963-016-9093-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. & T. Rowan McLaughlin 1 School of Geography, Archaeology and Palaeoecology, Queen’s University Belfast, Belfast BT7 1NN, Northern Ireland, UK 2 School of Geography, Earth and Environmental Sciences, Plymouth University, Plymouth, UK 3 School of Archaeology, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK 4 School of Archaeology, University College Dublin, Belfield, Dublin 4, Republic of Ireland 123 J World Prehist Introduction In this paper we present new insights into Irish Neolithic and Early Bronze Age prehistoric settlement patterns that have been discovered during the last two decades of intensive, developer-funded fieldwork, and compare these results to the arguably more familiar monumental megalithic landscape. The overall aim is to identify points in time and space where settlement patterns were at their most dynamic, in order to examine both demographic and cultural changes and the ways in which the archaeological record challenges notions of population influxes and booms and busts. We focus on a comparison between (1) Mesolithic–Neolithic transitional sites (4300 cal BC–4000 cal BC), (2) Neolithic sites (c. 4000 cal BC–2500 cal BC), and (3) sites of the Chalcolithic and opening centuries of the Early Bronze Age (c. 2500 cal BC–1900 cal BC). Population dynamics has recently re-emerged as a subject of active debate in prehistoric studies, especially in parts of the world where large amounts of radiocarbon data are available (e.g. Peros et al. 2010; Shennan et al. 2013; Kelly et al. 2013; Crombé and Robinson 2014). The patterns of social and economic change that these studies appear to indicate—particularly oscillating patterns of activity—conflict with traditional views of the steady, slow pace of change in prehistory. Human history from the start of the Neolithic onwards—at least in Europe—has been viewed conventionally as a gradual but continual increase in the scale and complexity of social organisation (e.g. Childe 1925). By contrast, meta-analyses of large radiocarbon datasets and of archaeological sites using Bayesian chronological approaches (e.g. Whittle et al. 2011; Stevens and Fuller 2012; Feeser and Furholt 2013; Armit et al. 2013; Wicks et al. 2014; Whitehouse et al. 2014) appear to indicate a past that was highly punctuated and dynamic. This applies both to particular phenomena and to entire societies, with the latter emerging, flourishing in certain regions, and then undergoing decline, collapse or a radical restructuring as in decline-and-fall accounts of classical civilisations. These meta-analytical approaches provide a useful means of directly comparing human cultural dynamics with climatic and landscape palaeoecological data (e.g. Whitehouse et al. 2014; Wicks and Mithen 2014; Woodbridge et al. 2014) and thus have great potential for exploring human environmental impacts over the Holocene, and the creation of the cultural landscape. Criticisms of these approaches as applied to the study of prehistory—particularly the use of cumulative probability distributions of calibrated radiocarbon dates as proxies for human populations—are centred on taphonomic considerations, and the fact that the shape of the calibration curve strongly influences the results (cf. Contreras and Meadows 2014). Archaeological materials are an imperfect record, with highly complex social factors underlying the initial deposition of the material drawn on for radiocarbon dating, whereupon millennia of taphonomic processes eventually result in the ‘what’ and ‘where’ of that which survives (Schiffer 1987). Nor are data subsequently encountered in a neutral manner by archaeologists: many biases exist as the result of research traditions and the practicalities of undertaking fieldwork. Many syntheses of radiocarbon datasets have failed to fully confront these factors, limiting the applicability of these approaches and leading to criticisms within the archaeological literature (e.g. Bamforth and Grund 2012; Contreras and Meadows 2014; Crombé and Robinson 2014; Sheridan and Pétrequin 2014). Here, we present methods whereby the imperfections and limitations of the archaeological record can be better contextualised, understood and taken into account when using meta-analytical approaches centred on radiocarbon dates. Ireland (Fig. 1), a large European island immediately west of Britain, is divided into two territories; the northeastern quarter being Northern Ireland and part of the United 123 J World Prehist Fig. 1 Map of Ireland showing topography, major lakes and rivers, the main regions, and places and sites mentioned in the text. (1) Gransha, Co. Londonderry; (2) Thornhill, Co. Londonderry; (3) Altanagh, Co. Tyrone; (4) Donegore, Co. Antrim; (5) Liscolman, Co. Antrim; (6) Lyle’s Hill, Co. Antrim; (7) Annaghmare, Co. Armagh; (8) Ballynahatty ‘1855’, Co. Down; (9) Millin Bay, Co. Down; (10) Carrowmore complex, Co. Sligo; (11) Magheraboy, Co. Sligo; (12) Knocknareagh, Co. Sligo; (13) Belderrig, Co. Mayo; (14) Corralanna, Co. Westmeath; (15) Brú na Bóinne (Newgrange, Knowth and Dowth), Co. Me (...truncated)