Looking back at observations and analyses made throughout the previous chapters, it is clear that the meanings read into the material patterns of contemporary and Chalcolithic cemeteries were of entirely different orders and that the gap between them is formidable. The juxtaposition of the two cases at hand is, of course, by design, with the intention of exploring the opposition they produce. It is based on this study's attempt to explore the claim that research focused on the qualitative appraisal of cultural differences — a comparative approach rarely taken explicitly — is a legitimate and worthwhile endeavour.

This comparative approach has also been applied in previous sections, albeit more subtly. Most notable are the discussions of the different types of Chalcolithic cemeteries and of the internal discourses within the contemporary ones. These discussions, like the forthcoming one, were founded on the opposition between socio-cultural material phenomena. As such, one could claim that the point has already been made (e.g. in the various examples given in Chapter 2). The difference, however, resides in the quality of the relationships; while in all the cases presented in Chapter 2 and throughout the book the oppositions are among neighbouring or temporally successive cultural phenomena, those now at hand are sufficiently removed from each other to deny the existence of any contextual relationship. But before plunging into a detailed analysis, a concise summary of what has already been said about Chalcolithic and contemporary cemeteries is likely to be useful.