2004 : le dolmen
de la Pierre Fritte à Yermenonville (Eure-et-Loir) |
|
After
four campaigns on the Pierre Fritte site at Yermenonville,
Eure-&-Loir, we are henceforth in a position to propose
hypotheses concerning the history of this monument.
In the framework of the P12 research program within the
SDA entitled “Funerary Rites and Practices”,
we resumed the excavation of a small dolmen built facing
south-east on a gently sloping hillside descending into
the Eure River valley. At first glance, this dolmen would
appear to present the most classical of architectures: a
capstone measuring 3.2 meters by 2.5 meters, resting on
two lateral orthostats and a third one at the foot.
|
|
|
We have implemented an exhaustive excavation method, extended
to the entire site, and have distinguished the indicators
disturbed by an earlier excavation conducted in 1930 by Léon
Petit. The study’s problematic focuses not only on the
site’s burial aspect but also on its funerary aspect
broadly speaking. |
| It should
be borne in mind that this monument appears in a ruined condition,
with its megalithic elements (orthostats and capstone) tumbled
and collapsed. |
| |
| Excavation
layout in 2004
(© Jean-Marc Mourain) |
 |
|
|
|
The excavation
revealed that the monument area and surroundings underwent
successive modifications by the Neolithic community: first
a layer of hardened limestone was removed and the dolmen erected
on this bared ground surface. The limestone blocks retrieved
in the process were laid down to form a paved area all around
the monument, extending between 5 and 12 meters beyond the
orthostats. These latter were set up summarily, and there
is nothing to indicate today whether the capstone was part
of the original scheme or not. |
 |
|
An ossuary-type trench containing dislocated and broken bones
was unearthed in the southern portion of the chamber. We have
been able to establish that this trench had been excavated
and refilled at a time when the dolmen had already collapsed. |
| |
| |
| The
almost total absence of bones in the remainder of the chamber
leads us to believe that the dolmen’s function was not
necessarily sepulchral. If such is the case, this dolmen might
have been intended primarily for the living, a monument destined
for religious or ceremonial purposes. It could further be
true that the monument was willfully rendered unusable, with
the capstone serving as “weighty” evidence of
the fact. Indeed, the secondary use of such altered monuments
as ossuaries is not unheard of in the Neolithic Period. |
| |
|
The sparse examples of moveable goods, which have not yet
been formally dated, evidence three quite distinct phases:
the Middle Neolithic 1, corresponding to an occupation pre-dating
the dolmen (a few decorated pottery shards discovered on the
spot, but with no confirmed stratigraphy), an occupation in
the Upper Neolithic verging on the Middle Neolithic 2, probably
associated with when the dolmen was in use, and, lastly, the
ossuary, marked by a typical Grand-Pressigny blade (end of
Upper Neolithic). |
| |
|
A multidisciplinary team is henceforth deployed in order to
bring the dedicated study of this monument and of its funerary
environment to a conclusion. |
| |
| |
Summary
of the 2004 excavation report |
Text
: Dominique Jagu |
|
|
|
|
