163 Geoarchaeology and Archaeomineralogy (Eds. R. I. Kostov, B. Gaydarska, M. Gurova). 2008. Proceedings of the International Conference, 2930 October 2008 Sofia, Publishing House “St. Ivan Rilski”, Sofia, 163168. University of Mining and Geology “St. Ivan Rilski”, 1700 Sofia; rikostov@yahoo.com The leading role of the geological and mineralogical, and not the geomorphological background has to be stressed in the distribution of the megalithic and rockcut monuments. Megalithic sites in Europe (in the cases of Bulgaria, Great Britain, France, Portugal and Spain) display a tendency to be linked to a specific geological setting of the region. They are built mainly at places of distribution of quartzbearing igneous (granites) or metamorphic (gneisses) rocks. Usually their composition is of the same rock species, but in some cases the rock blocks have been transported from remote areas. White vein quartz blocks are also considered of importance at such sites. Rockcut trapezoidal niches on high vertical cliffs, holes and graves in the Eastern Rhodopes in Bulgaria are related mainly to regions of distribution of volcanic (including volcanic tuff) or sedimentary (limestone) rocks. Such a tendency may be observed in certain other places in Europe and worldwide. Other geological (geotectonic), geographical features and physical (including acoustical) properties of the rocks are also to be considered important for interpretation of the megalithic culture in future research. The megalithic and rockcut monuments are linked to the development of human civilization since its origin. These monuments have a key significance throughout the centuries in different regions and countries around the world. For some of them the discussion about their fuction, transport and construction continues, as well as for their age and importance for ancient civilizations. A lot of the ancient technologies are not yet recognized by contemporary engineering and scientific thought and some of them are considered even difficult or impossible for the present technical possibilities of humankind. The megalithic monuments are usually related to large rock blocks which have been moved from their original location and in most cases have been later partly of fully formed. Among the megaliths can be listed a number of architectural forms as menhirs (standing stones), dolmens (stone “table” or stone “house”; usually a rectangular space formed by big rock slices with or without an entrance passage and a barrow above), cromlechs (stone circles), alignments (rows with large stones) and cyclopic buildings (walls, temples, fortresses etc.). Megalithic sculptures are represented by giant stonecut figures (for example the two quartzite statues 750 t each of Amenhotep III transported at ~680 km distance in Ancient Egypt, or the numerous elongated large volcanic ‘heads’ on the Easter Island). Some giant rock blocks can be seen in the ancient quarries even today – such are the cases in Baalbeck in Lebanon and the Aswan quarry in Egypt (for examples see also Kukal et al., 1989; Kostov, 1998). The rockcut monuments represent the “negative” approach to the rock or stone – cutting and disintegration. Such monuments are for example rock pits (cups), holes, niches, circles, steps, borders, thrones, chambers, corridors, temples, tunnels, labyrinths and other architectural forms (Kostov, 1993; for an early classifcation of ring and cup marks c. Reader, 1891, 23; for their metrology including the “megalithic inch” – Thom, Thom, 1978). Since prehistoric and ancient times two types of sacred attitude towards the rock (stone) or the mountain can be traced. The first one is as a lithic totem, where the rock or stone is believed sacred and associated with a group or tribe, and the second one is as lithic idol (amulet), where the sacred object introduces a single individual (Kostov, 1993, 3036). The uniqueness of the object is regarded as some real or imaginable important characteristic or property (morphology – crystal habit or interesting mineral aggregate; physical property – colour, hardness, transparency, lustre etc.; chemical property; cut) or place and position in nature (mountain peak; peculiar rock form; entrance of a cave; rock hit by lightning etc.). The aesthetic view of humankind towards stones (minerals and rocks) and bioobjects becomes the object of study of gemmology (in the case of archaeological artefacts – archaeogemmology). Two opposite tendencies can be traced in describing rocks and rockcut monuments of culture – a “positive” and a “negative”. The megaliths represent the first tendency with the expression for building and constructing architectural forms imitating the “holy” rock or mountain. In this case we see also examples of building stone towers, columns, obelisks, pyramids, walls and whole cities. The extreme case is the lithic gigantism – cutting, transporting and using of giant rock blocks or statues. The second tendency, as already discussed, is related to the rockcut monuments. This tendency is linked to the primitive belief for finding shelter in nature (away from