A Research Framework for the Archaeology of Wales
All Wales – Palaeolithic and Mesolithic
22/12/2003
The Palaeolithic and Mesolithic periods in Wales cover some quarter of a
million years of human history. Not only have the cultural changes associated
with the different periods of archaeology taken place, but also the climate and
the landscape have changed and even the humans themselves have evolved. This is
a period where the archaeological evidence for a human presence is completely
entwined with the geological and palaeoenvironmental evolution of Wales.
The remit for undertaking a
resource audit assessment for the Palaeolithic and Mesolithic periods follows
the recommendation made at the Aberystwyth Conference that the exercise is done
on a pan-Wales, as opposed to a regional, basis. The sub-group, therefore,
appraised all four audit documents together. Discussions were undertaken by
letter, telephone and email; no meetings were held owing to the difficulty of
assembling a widely dispersed group. The work was co-ordinated by Elizabeth
Walker, National Museums & Galleries of Wales with contributions from
George Smith, Gwynedd Archaeological Trust; Professor Stephen Aldhouse-Green,
University of Wales College Newport; Louise Austin, Cambria Archaeology;
Professor Nick Barton, Oxford Brookes University; Dr Martin Bates, University
of Wales Lampeter; Dr Andrew David, English Heritage and Dr Roger Jacobi, The
British Museum.
This resource audit assessment
report is an expanded version of the presentation made at each of the four
regional seminars and encompasses many points that arose during the discussions
that followed. The format adopted is an analysis of the existing databases
using the SWOT methodology (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats).
The report that follows is intended to act as a discussion document from which
a detailed series of research questions can be formulated. Feedback on this
paper is now invited and further ideas towards the preparation of specific
questions for a research agenda for these periods are welcomed.
·
Wales has Palaeolithic sites of international significance.
·
Many sites have been subject to relatively recent or current detailed
investigation.
·
Many important cave sites that contain archaeology of this date exist in
the limestone regions of the country.
·
Amateur work has enhanced our knowledge of caves containing Palaeolithic
data.
·
There is good environmental data for many of the known cave sites.
·
Many sites are published in some form and thus data is available.
Wales has sites that can be
considered to be of truly international significance. Most notable are
Pontnewydd Cave, Denbighshire and Paviland Cave, Gower, Swansea. Both have
recently been studied by Professor Stephen Aldhouse-Green who has excavated at
Pontnewydd Cave (Green 1984) and has reinterpreted the old collections from
Paviland Cave (Aldhouse-Green 2000). These sites and other Welsh caves are also
incorporated into a broader project being run by Professor Chris Stringer of
the Natural History Museum, London (Ashton 2003). This project is investigating
the Ancient Human Occupation of Britain as a whole and will entail further
study of the assemblages from Pontnewydd Cave and investigation of some Gower
Caves. Both these projects are examples of current research that place the
Palaeolithic archaeology of Wales into its broader British context.
A lot of amateur work was
undertaken during the 1970s and the 1980s in caves. Whilst some of this work
may not have been done using the detailed recording strategies we would expect
of all excavators today, the work has provided benefits of its own in
increasing the database of caves known to contain Palaeolithic archaeology or
Pleistocene deposits. It is through individuals such as the late Melvyn Davies
and Brother James van Nedervelde that caves in the Llandudno area; the caves on
the Gower Coast, Swansea and caves on Caldey Island, Pembrokeshire have been
discovered.
Caves are good natural
sediment traps and are significant in their potential to preserve deposits
predating the last Glacial maximum, as has been demonstrated by the discoveries
of early Neanderthals in Pontnewydd Cave, Denbighshire. Faunal remains preserve
well in caves and from these some palaeoenvironmental data can be gleaned.
Recent excavations in several Welsh cave sites have now considerably enhanced
our understanding of past environments at specific times. By drawing together
data and employing specialists from a range of disciplines e.g. as at Coygan
Cave, Carmarthenshire (Aldhouse-Green et
al. 1995). Palaeolithic archaeology is one of the truly multi-disciplinary
areas of archaeology.
·
Distribution maps highlight the gaps in coverage. They demonstrate a
need for detailed consideration of why such gaps exist.
·
The knowledge base is spatially biased and patchy – it is also of a
highly variable quality.
·
There is a geographical bias towards sites and find spots on the present
day coastline and in caves. There is thus little known about inland sites,
sites in upland areas and open-air sites.
·
Caves are important for the preservation of archaeological deposits,
particularly for those dating before the last glacial maximum. More sites
containing such deposits need to be identified and those with potential require
further palaeoenvironmental investigation.
There are weaknesses with our
data set for this period. The distribution maps produced by each of the
regional audits demonstrate that there are considerable gaps in the coverage of
areas with Palaeolithic archaeology across Wales. Some of the gaps are no doubt
genuine absences of any surviving data; however, it is important that
opportunities are not missed to check these areas, particularly for any
palaeoenvironmental data that may survive. It is also necessary to ensure that
if new previously unrecorded evidence comes to light in any of these areas it
is investigated fully and professionally.
Whilst limestone caves across
Wales preserve a good Palaeolithic archaeological resource it is surprising
that the knowledge we have of such areas is patchy with key sites, for instance
Cae Gwyn and Ffynnon Beuno near Tremerchion in the Vale of Clwyd, Denbighshire
remaining poorly understood (Green and Walker 1991). It is also a weakness in
Wales that most of our knowledge of the Welsh Palaeolithic resource comes from
caves. Whilst these are undeniably important, Wales could be perceived as
following a cave hunting research agenda. There are some significant gaps in
the coverage of sites across the country and whilst it is necessary to
acknowledge the part played by the erosive characteristics of the ice coverage
we still know of surprisingly few open-air sites that date to the later and
Final Upper Palaeolithic well after the retreat of the last ice sheet.
·
Areas of relevance in the existing document Research Frameworks for the Palaeolithic and Mesolithic of Britain and
Ireland (1999) should be applied within Wales.
·
Capitalize on the fact that Wales has sites of international
significance by incorporating these into broader European wide studies and
research initiatives.
·
Recent developments in scientific techniques need to be applied, e.g.
Bayesian analysis for the refinement of chronologies and better prospection
techniques to locate new sites.
·
There should be more emphasis on inter-tidal and submarine deposits. In
England the Aggregates Levy Sustainability Funding is being used to assess the
archaeological potential of submarine aggregates off the southern English coast
and greater use of this fund should be made in Wales.
·
The National Assembly for Wales is encouraging partnership schemes
between institutions within Wales. Field projects could be developed that
address gaps in our knowledge of the archaeology and palaeoenvironmental
history of this period, e.g. with the Countryside Council for Wales.
There are opportunities
available to us and many of these need to be picked up and developed when
drawing up a final research agenda for this period. There are already research
agenda in existence that can provide a starting point for the development of
research questions relevant to Wales. The document Research Frameworks for the Palaeolithic and Mesolithic of Britain and
Ireland published in 1999 can provide a useful starting point. This
document has already been adopted fully in England where it is being successfully
applied to raise funding for projects such as the Ancient Human Occupation of
Britain project.
It is necessary to capitalize
on opportunities to ensure that Welsh archaeology continues to be included in
broad studies and in research initiatives. It is time that more archaeologists
in Wales took a lead and embarked upon some larger scale projects that extend
beyond the modern political boundaries of Wales. Opportunities are arising in
the form of new developments in science. The huge dating programmes applied to
Paviland Cave resolved the uncertainties about whether or not the ‘Red Lady’
really did live in Wales at the height of the last glacial or as has now been
proven around 26,000 years ago (Aldhouse-Green 2000). A similar large-scale
dating project is currently being applied to the dating of deposits of Last
Glacial age at Pontnewydd Cave. Such projects demonstrate the need to apply
modern science towards the refinement of the chronologies.
There are currently
opportunities available in funding. The first round of the Aggregates Levy
Sustainability Fund has been successfully applied to assess the archaeological
potential of submarine aggregates off the southern English coast. The second
round of money should soon be coming on-stream and could be deployed to
undertake similar studies offshore of Wales that could enhance our knowledge
and understanding of potentially important deposits. Likewise funding
opportunities may be available within Wales. The National Assembly for Wales is
enthusiastic about the development of partnerships between the organizations it
funds – an obvious area would be the development of a joint project between an
archaeological body and the Countryside Council for Wales.
·
It is rare in Wales for Palaeolithic sites to be affected by development
proposals, so new primary data rarely emerges from this system.
·
Developer funded archaeology is not pre-disposed favourably towards the
geological deposits in which most archaeology of this period is found.
·
Gravel and aggregate extraction, both on land and offshore are
threatening the survival of deposits potentially containing Palaeolithic
archaeology and palaeoenvironmental data.
·
There is a tendency for archaeological organizations to consider the
Palaeolithic in isolation within Welsh regions.
Palaeolithic sites are rarely
affected by development proposals in Wales and as a result new sites and new
data are only occasionally emerging from the development control system. The
significance of deposits that potentially contain Palaeolithic archaeology,
particularly the sites that just have palaeoenvironmental data, are not always
recognized as important. Developer-funded archaeology is not pre-disposed
favourably towards the investigation of such contexts. There is currently an increase
in activity offshore. Both aggregate extraction and plans for offshore wind
farms can all threaten the survival of Pleistocene deposits with the potential
to provide new Palaeolithic and palaeoenvironmental data. It is important that
archaeologists working in planning control are made more aware of such threats
and wherever possible the companies engaged in such work should be educated to
appreciate the nature and the fragility of the resource they may be destroying.
The potential for the blind destruction of this unknown and untapped
archaeological resource is great and given the potential it holds it is one
that requires further investigation.
·
Current work on the Severn Estuary Levels is of international
importance.
·
There is detailed palynological data for the Late Glacial – Holocene
environmental transition in Wales.
·
The present day coastline of the southern regions of Wales has many find
spots or sites that provide a good picture of the Mesolithic archaeology of
these areas.
·
The north-east Wales region appears to have a greater representation of
find spots and sites that date to this period that have been discovered during
the investigation of sites of other periods.
There are Mesolithic sites in
Wales that can be considered to be of international importance. Of these those
lying in the intertidal zone of the Severn Estuary Levels are perhaps amongst
the most important. These are currently the focus of work by Professor Martin
Bell and Nigel Nayling, who in complementary projects are investigating
specific known sites on the Levels and are looking at land clearance and the
environmental and human factors involved (Bell et al. 2001). This work is beginning to shed considerable light on
our understanding of the British later and latest Mesolithic. In Wales there
are very few sites with good palaeoenvironmental data that fall within the
early Holocene period, but where we do have a wealth of information is with the
detailed palynological data that covers the Late Glacial to early Holocene
transition at Waun Fignen Felen (Smith and Cloutman 1988; Barton et al. 1995). The resource assessment
maps have highlighted major concentrations of find spots or sites around the
present day coastline providing an opportunity for some detailed study of these
areas. Pembrokeshire is one such area where the wealth of find spots on the
coast is considerable. In some places there has been a long tradition of field
walking, particularly in the Glamorganshire uplands by Shôn Price, Derek
Clayton and Phil Shepherd. The Gwent area near Shirenewton is being walked
regularly by Ian McFarlane and members of the Chepstow Archaeological Society;
the Black Mountains of Gwent by Ken Palmer (Olding 2000); whilst in Radnorshire
Chris Dunn’s surface collection provided a basis for some new field walking by
Alex Gibson in the Walton Basin area (Gibson 1999). The amount of systematic
field walking being undertaken could easily be enhanced by members of our local
societies. In east and north-east Wales a different pattern emerges from the
data that suggests in this one region many of the known Mesolithic sites have
been discovered as a result of investigation of sites of other periods.
Discussions held at the seminars suggest that this may be as a result of a
different approach towards excavation in this one region, perhaps as a
consequence of the interests of some of the field archaeologists concerned.
·
The knowledge base is spatially biased and patchy – it is also of a
highly variable quality.
·
There is a geographical bias towards sites and find spots on the present
day coastline. There is thus less known about inland sites, particularly those
in upland areas and the archaeology offshore.
·
There is a lack of chronological control, and investigation of
well-stratified sites.
·
We currently have a poor understanding of sea-level change.
·
There is a lack of organic preservation.
The patchiness of the existing
knowledge database is also a key factor that shows up in the regional resource
audits. The apparent discrepancy between the more even distribution of sites in
the east and northeast region of Wales and the rest of the country helps to
emphasise this. The location of many Mesolithic sites and find spots on the
present day coastline also highlights a bias in collecting practice. The
corresponding gaps in coverage in some inland and offshore areas are also
notable. Few of these areas have received detailed investigation and we do not
know what, if anything, is preserved here.
There is currently a big
problem with the chronology for the Mesolithic: there are few dates available
and the resource audit makes it difficult to determine which of those there are
can be considered reliable. There is also still a lack of understanding about sea-level
change and a lack of sites with good organic preservation that date to this
period. In the absence of anything more local we still find ourselves relying
upon data and interpretations for Star Carr in North Yorkshire when
interpreting the early Mesolithic archaeology of Wales. Some research projects
are being developed and these are beginning to enhance our understanding of the
database, in particular Rick Schulting’s work into the isotopic composition of
human bone from caves on Caldey Island and elsewhere in Wales has resulted in
an enhanced database of AMS dates for this period. Unfortunately this data has
not, as yet, been linked back in detail to the stratigraphy and accompanying
palaeoenvironmental data for these sites (Schulting and Richards 2002).
·
Areas of relevance in the existing document Research Frameworks for the Palaeolithic and Mesolithic of Britain and
Ireland (1999) should be applied within Wales.
·
Capitalize and develop upon recent successful projects e.g. the Lithic Scatters
Project.
·
Recent developments in scientific techniques need to be applied, e.g.
Bayesian analysis for the refinement of chronologies and better prospection
techniques to locate new sites.
·
An expansion in offshore activity should be capitalized upon in order to
increase our understanding of what are now submerged deposits.
·
To build upon the foundations of the recent Cadw coastal survey and
increase our understanding of the threat posed by erosion of coastlines and
inter-tidal deposits.
·
To use the existing database to develop our understanding of raw
materials.
·
The National Assembly for Wales is encouraging partnership schemes
between institutions within Wales. Field projects could be developed that
address gaps in our knowledge of the archaeology and palaeoenvironmental
history of this period e.g. with the Countryside Council for Wales.
Opportunities do exist that
could improve the situation. Many of these are already outlined for the
Palaeolithic SWOT analysis and equally need to be picked up and developed when
drawing up a final research agenda for the Mesolithic period. There are already
research agenda in existence that cover the Mesolithic period that can provide
a starting point for the development of research questions relevant to Wales.
The document Research Frameworks for the
Palaeolithic and Mesolithic of Britain and Ireland published in 1999 and a
draft Lithic Studies Society agenda for the study of Holocene lithic
assemblages can both provide a useful starting point for the formulation of research
questions for the future Welsh agenda.
It is necessary to capitalize
on opportunities to ensure that Welsh archaeology continues to be included in
broad studies and in research initiatives. It is excellent news to hear that
the Lithic Scatters Project is now about to be expanded to encompass the Dyfed
region. Once this project has been completed it will be timely to look at the
potential for future research following on from these projects. Likewise the
foundations laid by the recent Cadw coastal survey should be built upon to
Projects such as that underway by Rick Schulting are enhancing our
understanding of Prehistoric diet and are enhancing the database of radiocarbon
dates available to us – this being one example that demonstrates the potential
of modern science towards refining chronologies (Schulting and Richards 2002).
There may be opportunities available in funding. The first round of the
Aggregates Levy Sustainability Fund is being successfully applied to assess the
archaeological potential of submarine aggregates off the southern English
coast. The second round of money should soon be coming on-stream and could be
deployed to undertake similar studies in off-shore Wales that could enhance our
knowledge and understanding of these potentially important early Holocene
off-shore deposits. Likewise funding opportunities may be available within
Wales. The National Assembly for Wales is enthusiastic for the development of
partnerships between the organizations it funds – an obvious area would be the
development of a joint project between an archaeological body and the
Countryside Council for Wales. enhance this area of knowledge. It is time that
more archaeologists in Wales took a lead and embarked upon some larger scale
projects rather than merely looking and working within the modern political
boundaries of Wales. Opportunities are arriving with the application of new
developments in science.
·
It is rare for Mesolithic sites to be affected by development proposals,
so new primary data rarely emerges from the present system.
·
Developer funded archaeology is not pre-disposed favourably towards the
geological deposits in which most archaeology of this period is found.
·
Gravel and aggregate extraction, both on land and offshore are
threatening the survival of deposits potentially containing Mesolithic
archaeology and palaeoenvironmental data.
·
Coastal erosion is threatening the survival of deposits containing
important Mesolithic archaeology.
·
There is a tendency for archaeological organisations to consider the
Mesolithic in isolation within Welsh regions.
As for the Palaeolithic period, Mesolithic sites are rarely affected by
development proposals in Wales and as a result new sites and new data are only
occasionally emerging from the development control system. The significance of
deposits that potentially contain Mesolithic archaeology, particularly those
sites only having palaeoenvironmental data are not always being recognized and
developer-funded archaeology is not pre-disposed towards investigation of such
contexts. There is currently an increase in activity offshore. Both aggregate
extraction and plans for offshore wind farms can all threaten the survival of
early Holocene deposits with the potential to provide new sites and more
palaeoenvironmental data. It is important that archaeologists working in
planning control are made more aware of such threats and wherever possible the
companies engaged in such work should be educated to appreciate the nature and
the fragility of the resource they may be destroying. The potential for the
blind destruction of this resource is great and given the potential it holds it
is one that requires further investigation.
In Wales coastal erosion is a significant factor in the exposure of new
sites on the fragile intertidal zone. It is these sites that have the greatest
potential to produce preserved organic remains and new palaeoenvironmental
data, yet it is these areas that are at greatest risk. The Mesolithic, like the
Palaeolithic, deals with people who were highly mobile. It is essential that
the study of the Mesolithic database is not undertaken in isolation and that
there is co-operation between the various archaeological and countryside
organizations involved in order to engage in truly cross-boundary and
cross-disciplinary study.
►
Artefact collections and site archives provide a wealth of information
on the Palaeolithic and Mesolithic periods. While considerable work has been
undertaken by some individuals on museum collections, it is clear that museums
are generally an under-used resource. Much material also resides in private
collections. The analysis and creation of a database of Palaeolithic and
Mesolithic collections held by the regional and local museums requires a
concerted and co-ordinated effort, overseen by suitably qualified specialists.
Results need to be standardized and the information produced to a common
standard.
►
The Wymer and Bonsall (1977) CBA Gazetteer of Sites of Upper Palaeolithic
and Mesolithic date is in need of urgent updating. This could easily follow on
from the current desktop studies by the regional trusts as well building upon
databases created by the Lithic Scatters Projects. There are concerns about the
level of ‘quality control’ in the current data. Databases produced should be
made accessible as a searchable digital archive with lists of sites, references
and dates backed up by accompanying lists of artefacts recorded to a common
standard.
►
Checking and updating of the existing database should be undertaken.
This should also include accurate mapping of sites using high-resolution
survey. Such studies would help identify areas where little work has been
undertaken, as well as helping to highlight areas of exceptional future
potential. There may be potential in the examination of data held by other
organizations, for example in the Welsh Assembly Government’s Environmental
Division or Welsh Water who manage river levels and who may hold additional
information about alluvial deposits that could be useful to
palaeoenvironmentalists and archaeologists. There could be a means of linking
the stratigraphic data into the SMR databases – in Kent this is currently being
explored for borehole data.
►
Completion of the list of recent and current projects that has been
undertaken for some regions in this resource assessment will help to play a key
role in identifying research themes. Future research needs to build on earlier
work by developing themes or answering new questions raised by this work. None
of the lists examined are at all comprehensive.
►
There is a need for further field collection and investigation of all
surface lithic scatters in order to understand lithic typologies better. There
is potential for the involvement of local societies and non-professional
archaeologists to make a major contribution to such work.
►
It is also necessary to identify sites with associated environmental
evidence in order to develop our chronologies for this period. It is essential
that whenever a new find of Palaeolithic age is discovered a field
investigation should be undertaken in order to determine the context and the
potential of the find spot or site for increasing our knowledge. In Scotland
some mapping has been undertaken by the University of Edinburgh where spot
dating of the tops of deposits has been done as a means to help focus resources
on the study of worthwhile pollen sequences.
►
Mapping - the mapped data should be expanded to cover earlier sea-levels,
solid geology, drift geology, past, present and future areas in which gravel
extraction is taking place, intertidal deposits, peat deposits and
colluvial/alluvial deposits. These should be linked to the data contained
within the SMRs in order to provide a better foundation for both resource and
development control. Carefully constructed distributions of environmental data,
e.g. pollen sampling sites or sites with faunal remains would also be very
useful to identify where primary data is available or has been collected.
►
Coastal peat beds – a lot of work has been carried out on these in the
last fifty years. Most of the investigations have concentrated on the
palaeoenvironmental record where there is little associated archaeology. Areas
with high archaeological potential in the intertidal and dryland zones now need
to be properly surveyed and evaluated. Coastal erosion means that these areas
should be given a high priority.
►
Raised beaches of the Holocene – northeast Wales (e.g. Prestatyn). This
region has a very high potential for locating Later and Latest Mesolithic
sites, which are otherwise exceptionally rare in Britain. The sites are
important for filling a gap in knowledge concerning the Mesolithic-Neolithic
transition.
►
Uplands - the relatively high concentration of Mesolithic sites around
upland lakes e.g. Waun Fignen Felen are indicative of the existence of other
concentrations of this kind. Upland peats with pollen evidence could be
identified and earmarked for future research and fieldwork to search for
Mesolithic sites.
Application of recent advances
in science and technological studies.
►
AMS dating of fauna and artefacts – the chronology is still poorly
understood for the Welsh Middle and Upper Palaeolithic periods as well as for
the Mesolithic. The identification of good secure samples for dating is now
necessary.
►
There needs to be a specific consideration of the contributions that
scientific and technical advances can offer to academic objectives. There is a
case for including separate sections on the potential of the different
scientific disciplines for none of these get specific treatment in the research
audits. There ought to be assessments of scientific dating methods,
biomolecules, isotopes, geochemistry, geophysics, geoarchaeology, palaeobotany,
faunal analysis, statistics, mathematical modelling and GIS analysis.
Planning Archaeology
►
Ideally, planning archaeologists should be aware of the necessity of
conducting impact assessments whenever there is a likelihood of Pleistocene or
early Holocene deposits with or without archaeology even if these lie below the
expected level of development. In areas of deep alluvium these will require
careful investigation strategies. We must not forget the impact that sea level
changes may have either directly through inundation of now dry land and through
coastal defence structure. Modifications to ground water tables to control
flooding and for water abstraction are also potentially going to impact on the
record from river floodplains.
►
The SMR’s do hold more data in a better format than the audit indicates.
The SMRs require upgrading to make the information more useable, accurate and
consistent for use as a research tool. A revision of the way the SMRs are
designed in order that they may respond more effectively to academic and
research questions may be necessary.
►
With a few exceptions most of the curators and
staff involved in contract archaeology are not familiar with Palaeolithic and
Mesolithic archaeology. Consequently education is required both to describe how
to design adequate fieldwork strategies, in particular the scale of
investigation that would be required to have a chance of recovering the
evidence. This would give projects a better chance of finding archaeology.
►
We should be promoting projects that will produce good primary data. We
need to enhance the methods of collecting and quality of primary data. We have
reached a stage where new surface collection or excavation may be necessary in
order to further our knowledge.
►
It is important for us to understand the relationship between sites or
find spots and their abandonment. We need to be able to assess what the data
tells us about the likely total record.
►
There has been little research activity undertaken in Wales by those
based within the country, with the exception of that being done in the National
Museums & Galleries of Wales and more recently by the University of Wales
College Newport. Much of this research has been insular. Archaeologists working
in Wales should consider contributing to wider projects beyond Wales to place
sites in their British and European context.
►
There is a need for broader studies to take place, e.g. for the
Mesolithic we might look at the Irish Sea region and assess the relationship
between the various regions.
►
Once a fuller database is available we need to look at a number of blank
areas, address questions of gaps in the coverage and seek to understand why it
is that one region (north-east Wales) has such a greater Mesolithic coverage
than elsewhere in the country.
Paper prepared by: Elizabeth A Walker (NMGW)
This document’s copyright
is held by contributors and sponsors of the Research Framework for the
Archaeology of Wales.