Research on the megalithic tombs of southern Iberia is experiencing an important upwing. Great discoveries, such as the tholos of Montelirio (Seville), have been coupled with huge efforts on the part of researchers to study and disseminate this important heritage (Fernández et al. Reference Fernández, García-Sanjuán and Díaz-Zorita2016). The application of innovative technologies and multidisciplinary approaches to long-known impressive monuments such as those of Menga (Antequera, Málaga) (García-Sanjuán & Mora Reference García-Sanjuán and Mora2018) and Soto (Huelva) is revealing amazing insights.

This monograph, prefaced by Jean Guilaine, presents the much-anticipated results of the most recent (2012–2013) archaeological intervention at the ‘dolmen’ of Soto, conducted within the framework—and limitations—of consolidation and conservation works. The monument, a 21m-long ‘covered gallery’ enclosed within an impressive 60m-diameter tumulus, was excavated in 1923 by Armando de Soto. The monument appeared early on the international stage as a result of the involvement of Hugo Obermaier (Reference Obermaier1924) in its study and dissemination. The excavations produced insights into the funerary use of the monument during the Chalcolithic, including the inhumations of eight individuals (featuring one adult male, two adult females and a child among those numbered), whose bodies were flexed and resting on selected decorated slabs of the gallery. Grave goods include stone dagger blades and axe heads, long flint blades and pottery vessels (a few Beaker fragments), but, apparently, no metal artefacts. Obermaier noted that several of the slabs featured carved motifs (also depicting weapons), and that at least one, with its decoration upside down, seemed to be a reused menhir. This opened intriguing questions about the art and temporality of this great monument that subsequent investigations were unable to answer because of their limited scope or resources.

The 2012–2013 intervention aimed to gather high-resolution data on the construction techniques and temporality of the monument, to produce high-quality documentation of its parietal art, and to contextualise the latter within the sequence of the former. This was achieved through the excavation of areas located inside and outside the gallery, the recording of its parietal art by means of high-resolution photography (visible spectrum) with raking light, and the application of in situ Raman microscopy to determine the chemical composition of possible pigments and their micro-stratigraphy.

The data gathered, their analysis and interpretation, are presented in this volume within Chapters 7–10, and a catalogue of slabs. Other chapters situate the site and the evidence within broader frameworks, particularly those linked to megalithic architecture and art at local (Chapters 1–2), regional (Chapter 3), peninsular and European levels (Chapters 11–12). Supplementing these are three chapters describing the theoretical and methodological approach of the research on megalithic art (Chapters 4–6), and two chapters (Chapters 13–14) synthesising the results and their implications. Countless photographs richly illustrate the volume, although the printed quality of some is not always ideal. While the chapters are variously led by Vera, Linares, Bueno or Hernanz, there is a total of 11 contributors. The book offers many new insights, but, for brevity, here I focus on some of the key findings.

The new results, stratigraphy and radiocarbon dates shed light on the emergence of the megalithic phenomenon, and the persistence of some monuments through time. Most of the slabs used in the fabric of the gallery seem to have been older, culturally significant elements (e.g. stelae or menhirs), as they show existing decoration and signs of secondary reshaping. The authors interpret five pits located along and beneath the edge of the peristaltic ring of the tumulus as possible erection pits for standing stones. These could have belonged to a stone circle that was later dismantled to construct the gallery. While most of the stones seem to be local, some came from afar. According to the authors, the circle would date to the late fifth to early fourth millennia BC, while the gallery was probably constructed during the first half of the fourth millennium BC (Late/Final Neolithic). Activities conducted at the site until the late fourth millennium BC included burial within the gallery and the transformation of the monument and its external space. During the Chalcolithic, further burials were deposited, and other activities (including copper smelting) were conducted in the atrium (mid- and late third millennium BC). Additional activities took place in the Late Bronze Age, Middle Ages and later.

Inside the gallery there is evidence of pigments on at least 11 slabs, mostly red (possibly belonging to an early phase), but also black and white. There are countless marks of surface levelling, carving, incision, abrasion and superimpositions. Motifs are scattered around the monument and probably belong to different phases of use, from the fourth to the second millennium BC, but also earlier. The weapons depicted (e.g. axes, daggers) are attributed to the Chalcolithic and linked to increasing levels of social inequality, as the individualised burials documented by de Soto suggest (and perhaps, too, the individualisation of the slabs, as the authors propose). It is suggested that weapon depictions could be related to the increasing significance of copper metallurgy in southern Iberia, as the activities in the atrium testify. I wonder, however, whether some of these depictions could also correspond to lithic daggers, like those impressive examples from Montelirio or even the reported cases from Soto, one of which was associated with a woman and child.

Overall, the volume contributes significant preliminary data to the broader understanding of megalithic art and monuments, their temporalities and influential roles in the long-term social make-up of late prehistoric Iberia. Some collective ancestral places and monuments were persistently revisited and transformed; they were used to (re)create social relations and inequalities, and to sustain power. In the context of increased mobility in third-millennium BC Europe, persistent places such as Soto hold invaluable clues that are worth pursuing.