This page (revision-35) was last changed on 15-Oct-2014 11:59 by Administrator

This page was created on 22-Jul-2014 10:34 by Mesolithic

Only authorized users are allowed to rename pages.

Only authorized users are allowed to delete pages.

Page revision history

Version Date Modified Size Author Changes ... Change note
35 15-Oct-2014 11:59 79 KB Administrator to previous
34 23-Jul-2014 13:48 79 KB Mesolithic to previous | to last
33 23-Jul-2014 12:11 79 KB Mesolithic to previous | to last
32 23-Jul-2014 10:38 78 KB Mesolithic to previous | to last
31 23-Jul-2014 10:37 78 KB Mesolithic to previous | to last
30 23-Jul-2014 10:36 78 KB Mesolithic to previous | to last
29 23-Jul-2014 10:32 77 KB Mesolithic to previous | to last
28 23-Jul-2014 10:30 77 KB Mesolithic to previous | to last
27 23-Jul-2014 10:28 77 KB Mesolithic to previous | to last
26 22-Jul-2014 14:30 77 KB Mesolithic to previous | to last
25 22-Jul-2014 14:29 77 KB Mesolithic to previous | to last
24 22-Jul-2014 14:29 77 KB Mesolithic to previous | to last
23 22-Jul-2014 14:28 77 KB Mesolithic to previous | to last
22 22-Jul-2014 14:18 77 KB Mesolithic to previous | to last
21 22-Jul-2014 13:43 77 KB Mesolithic to previous | to last Mesol_Res_Cons_Framework ==> Meso_Res_Cons_Framework

Page References

Incoming links Outgoing links
Meso_Res_Cons_Framework...nobody
Meso_Res_Cons_Framework

Version management

Difference between version and

At line 5 added 4 lines
[{TableOfContents }]
[Download a PDF version of this report|MRF_complete.pdf]
At line 8 changed one line
archaeology had developed a distinct agenda and set of requirements. Since 1999, Mesolithic archaeology has indeed changed significantly: many important discoveries have been made and there has been increased interest in the period among both archaeologists and the public. A new Mesolithic Framework was necessary in order to improve understanding of the period and guide future work. Accordingly this document outlines the current challenges facing the study of the
archaeology had developed a distinct agenda and set of requirements. Since 1999, Mesolithic archaeology has indeed changed significantly: many important discoveries have been made and there has been increased interest in the period among both archaeologists and the public. A new Mesolithic Framework was necessary in order to improve understanding of the period and guide future work. Accordingly this document outlines the current challenges facing the study of the
At line 33 added 3 lines
[{Image src='Postglacial_project.jpg' width='500' height='..' align='center' caption='Excavating horse bone at the long blade site on Flixton Island, 2013(© POSTGLACIAL
project)'}]
At line 33 changed 2 lines
There are hints of temporal succession in the Early Mesolithic assemblage types of the Preboreal (Reynier 2005) and some indications of Middle Mesolithic developments around the beginning of the Boreal, but the chronologies require more work. In addition, the nature and timing of the Mesolithic–Neolithic transition is much debated (Milner 2010). Although the general consensus is that at some point around 4000 cal BC changes associated with the Neolithic occur (see eg Whittle et al 2011), rod microlith sites have been identified as particularly late vestiges of Mesolithic behaviour, possibly extending into the 4th millennium cal BC (eg Spikins 2002, 43; Chatterton 2005; French et al 2007, 283). Overall, the lack of chronological refinement for the whole of the Mesolithic has been thrown into sharper relief by the precision now achieved for the Early Neolithic through Bayesian modelling (Whittle et
al 2011).
There are hints of temporal succession in the Early Mesolithic assemblage types of the Preboreal (Reynier 2005) and some indications of Middle Mesolithic developments around the beginning of the Boreal, but the chronologies require more work. In addition, the nature and timing of the Mesolithic–Neolithic transition is much debated (Milner 2010). Although the general consensus is that at some point around 4000 cal BC changes associated with the Neolithic occur (see eg Whittle et al 2011), rod microlith sites have been identified as particularly late vestiges of Mesolithic behaviour, possibly extending into the 4th millennium cal BC (eg Spikins 2002, 43; Chatterton 2005; French et al 2007, 283). Overall, the lack of chronological refinement for the whole of the Mesolithic has been thrown into sharper relief by the precision now achieved for the Early Neolithic through Bayesian modelling (Whittle et al 2011).
At line 44 added 3 lines
[{Image src='Low_Hauxley.jpg' width='500' height='..' align='center' caption='Cliff face section at Low Hauxley showing tsunami deposit and underlying sediments (© Clive Waddington,
Archaeological Research Services Ltd)'}]
At line 56 added 2 lines
[{Image src='StarCarr_plan.jpg' width='..' height='600' align='center' caption='The full extent of early Mesolithic activity at Star Carr (© POSTGLACIAL project)'}]
At line 62 added 2 lines
[{Image src='Low_Hauxley2.jpg' width='500' height='..' align='center' caption='A youth group excavating at the site of Low Hauxley which had been eroding into the sea (© Clive Waddington, Archaeological Research Services Ltd)'}]
At line 62 changed one line
__CASE STUDY : [Asfordby. Lynden Cooper, University of Leicester Archaeological Services|Asfordby]__
__Case Study: [Asfordby. Lynden Cooper, University of Leicester Archaeological Services|Asfordby]__
At line 107 changed one line
__CASE STUDY : [Stainton West, Cumbria. Fraser Brown, Oxford Archaeology|Stainton_West]__
__Case Study: [Stainton West, Cumbria. Fraser Brown, Oxford Archaeology|Stainton_West]__
At line 109 changed one line
__CASE STUDY : [The value of human remains and the potential of ancient DNA studies. Rick Schulting, University of Oxford, and Oliver Craig, University of York|DNA_studies]__
__Case Study: [The value of human remains and the potential of ancient DNA studies. Rick Schulting, University of Oxford, and Oliver Craig, University of York|DNA_studies]__
At line 124 added 2 lines
[{Image src='Howick.jpg' width='500' height='..' align='center' caption='The site of Howick and a reconstruction of the Mesolithic house (© Clive Waddington, Archaeological Research Services Ltd)'}]
At line 167 changed 2 lines
* T3.5: Can we refine further the chronology of Mesolithic lithic industries? For instance, is it possible to refine the spatial and temporal limits of distinctive lithic assemblage types (eg Star Carr, Deepcar, Horsham) and what may these distribution patterns imply? What do the
changes in tool form, especially microliths, indicate?
* T3.5: Can we refine further the chronology of Mesolithic lithic industries? For instance, is it possible to refine the spatial and temporal limits of distinctive lithic assemblage types (eg Star Carr, Deepcar, Horsham) and what may these distribution patterns imply? What do the changes in tool form, especially microliths, indicate?
At line 201 changed 2 lines
* S1.4: Engagement with local communities is essential to engender a spirit of shared ownership in decision-making about how land is managed and the means by which archaeology is accessed and preserved. Working with local societies and raising awareness among relevant people about at-risk zones, such as eroding coastlines, could help with monitoring and
research.
* S1.4: Engagement with local communities is essential to engender a spirit of shared ownership in decision-making about how land is managed and the means by which archaeology is accessed and preserved. Working with local societies and raising awareness among relevant people about at-risk zones, such as eroding coastlines, could help with monitoring and research.
At line 205 changed 2 lines
* S.1.7: We should assess the extent to which undergraduates have an understanding of the Mesolithic and increase the opportunities for training on Mesolithic sites: it is critical that future generations of archaeologists are made fully aware of Mesolithic issues, as part
of developing and applying appropriate research methodologies in prehistory.
* S.1.7: We should assess the extent to which undergraduates have an understanding of the Mesolithic and increase the opportunities for training on Mesolithic sites: it is critical that future generations of archaeologists are made fully aware of Mesolithic issues, as part of developing and applying appropriate research methodologies in prehistory.
At line 221 added 2 lines
__Case Study: [Engaging people with Star Carr. Nicky Milner, University of York|Star_Carr]__
At line 233 added 2 lines
[{Image src='Vale_of_Pickering.jpg' width='..' height='600' align='center' caption='Coring to determine the depth of the Mesolithic land surface in the Vale of Pickering (© POSTGLACIAL project)'}]
At line 220 changed 3 lines
* S2.1: The extent and ways in which geophysical survey and aerial remote sensing techniques
can be used to understand the presence and nature of Mesolithic archaeology need to be
explored further.
* S2.1: The extent and ways in which geophysical survey and aerial remote sensing techniques can be used to understand the presence and nature of Mesolithic archaeology need to be explored further.
At line 225 changed 2 lines
* S2.4: Novel methodologies to evaluate the locations of Mesolithic activity should be sought and successes in the field appropriately communicated across all sectors. For instance, these might be grounded in geoarchaeological modelling, or the application of borehole, coring and
sieving strategies.
* S2.4: Novel methodologies to evaluate the locations of Mesolithic activity should be sought and successes in the field appropriately communicated across all sectors. For instance, these might be grounded in geoarchaeological modelling, or the application of borehole, coring and sieving strategies.
At line 244 added 4 lines
[{Image src='Lake_Flixton_map.jpg' width='500' height='..' align='center' caption='Map of the
palaeolandscape of Lake Flixton obtained by coring through the peat and Late Palaeolithic and
Early Mesolithic sites found by test-pitting (Milner et al 2013) (© POSTGLACIAL project).'}]
At line 238 changed 4 lines
* S2:.12: Similarly, features containing palaeoenvironmental information should be targeted to complement archaeological information, especially where the two datasets can be demonstrated to be contemporary or relevant for investigating landscape use and development through the
Early Holocene.
* S2.13: Coastal, estuarine and marine contexts also require the development of novel methodologies both to evaluate the archaeological resource and to mitigate for its destruction through development or erosion. Areas of poor data need to be targeted and archives need to be
accessed through working in partnership with developers (eg wind farms) (see also the recently published maritime research agenda, Ransley et al 2013).
* S2:.12: Similarly, features containing palaeoenvironmental information should be targeted to complement archaeological information, especially where the two datasets can be demonstrated to be contemporary or relevant for investigating landscape use and development through the Early Holocene.
* S2.13: Coastal, estuarine and marine contexts also require the development of novel methodologies both to evaluate the archaeological resource and to mitigate for its destruction through development or erosion. Areas of poor data need to be targeted and archives need to be accessed through working in partnership with developers (eg wind farms) (see also the recently published maritime research agenda, Ransley et al 2013).
At line 258 changed 2 lines
* S3.5: Tephrochronology is relevant to some sites and can provide an important chronostratigraphic underpinning of environmental sequences. The recent recognition of cryptotephra deposits provides an expanded series of volcanic ash isochrons for potential synchronisation of environmental and archaeological records in the Lateglacial and Early
Holocene.
* S3.5: Tephrochronology is relevant to some sites and can provide an important chronostratigraphic underpinning of environmental sequences. The recent recognition of cryptotephra deposits provides an expanded series of volcanic ash isochrons for potential synchronisation of environmental and archaeological records in the Lateglacial and Early Holocene.
At line 277 added 2 lines
__Case Study: [Erosion of in situ Mesolithic remains at Low Hauxley, Northumberland. Clive Waddington, Archaeological Research Services Ltd|Low_Hauxley]__
At line 290 added 3 lines
[{Image src='Westward_Ho.jpg' width='500' height='..' align='center' caption='An aerial picture
of Westward Ho!, Devon (© N Balaam, English Heritage).'}]
At line 278 changed 4 lines
* S3.18: The archaeological and palaeoenvironmental potential of Lateglacial and Postglacial landscape features such as kettle-holes, palaeochannels and areas of waterlogged deposits should be recognised and targeted. Palaeochannels are highlighted here for their potential to
bear archaeological evidence of fishing, such as fish-traps and dugout canoes, that can be dated to the Mesolithic with certainty. As such they should not be discounted in schemes of investigation.
* S3.19: Submerged forests are also important, as their archaeological potential extends from submarine, through intertidal and reclaimed wetland areas. Many of those in western Britain relate to the final millennia of the Mesolithic and represent tracts of Mesolithic landscape
with known Mesolithic sites, eg Westward Ho!, Devon. Elsewhere in north-west and north-east England peats have recently been dated from the Windermere Interstadial through to the Late Mesolithic and these represent a very important and, as yet, barely tapped resource.
* S3.18: The archaeological and palaeoenvironmental potential of Lateglacial and Postglacial landscape features such as kettle-holes, palaeochannels and areas of waterlogged deposits should be recognised and targeted. Palaeochannels are highlighted here for their potential to bear archaeological evidence of fishing, such as fish-traps and dugout canoes, that can be dated to the Mesolithic with certainty. As such they should not be discounted in schemes of investigation.
* S3.19: Submerged forests are also important, as their archaeological potential extends from submarine, through intertidal and reclaimed wetland areas. Many of those in western Britain relate to the final millennia of the Mesolithic and represent tracts of Mesolithic landscape with known Mesolithic sites, eg Westward Ho!, Devon. Elsewhere in north-west and north-east England peats have recently been dated from the Windermere Interstadial through to the Late Mesolithic and these represent a very important and, as yet, barely tapped resource.
At line 300 added 2 lines
__Case Study: [Potential for palaeoenvironmental data. Martin Bell, University of Reading|Palaeoenv]__
At line 290 changed 2 lines
* S4.1: A quality audit on radiocarbon dates from across the country encompassing the full temporal range from the Lateglacial to the last vestiges of the Mesolithic should be carried out, as has previously been undertaken in the South-West under the Ancient Human Occupation of
Britain banner for the Lateglacial (see Jacobi and Higham 2009). As part of this programme, the identification of samples suitable for re-dating could be undertaken.
* S4.1: A quality audit on radiocarbon dates from across the country encompassing the full temporal range from the Lateglacial to the last vestiges of the Mesolithic should be carried out, as has previously been undertaken in the South-West under the Ancient Human Occupation of Britain banner for the Lateglacial (see Jacobi and Higham 2009). As part of this programme, the identification of samples suitable for re-dating could be undertaken.
At line 295 changed 2 lines
* S4.5: For the Mesolithic to be represented properly in national and local records, standardised quality audits and enhancements need to be undertaken, especially in Historic Environment Records (HERs). This would serve the purpose both of making the HERs a viable
research tool and of enabling Mesolithic archaeology to be catered for adequately in the planning process. Standards could be agreed which embed refined dating assignations into these records and draw upon palaeoenvironmental and geomorphological evidence with which to inform schemes of fieldwork and resource management.
* S4.5: For the Mesolithic to be represented properly in national and local records, standardised quality audits and enhancements need to be undertaken, especially in Historic Environment Records (HERs). This would serve the purpose both of making the HERs a viable research tool and of enabling Mesolithic archaeology to be catered for adequately in the planning process. Standards could be agreed which embed refined dating assignations into these records and draw upon palaeoenvironmental and geomorphological evidence with which to inform schemes of fieldwork and resource management.
At line 302 changed 2 lines
* S4.9: An audit of the regional research frameworks is required to identify significant sites which require analysis and publication, including assemblages from old academic and rescue projects known or likely to include significant Mesolithic components. For example, excavations at Eskmeals, Cumbria, and the work of the Vale of Pickering Research Trust
have produced important information and their publication should be a priority.
* S4.9: An audit of the regional research frameworks is required to identify significant sites which require analysis and publication, including assemblages from old academic and rescue projects known or likely to include significant Mesolithic components. For example, excavations at Eskmeals, Cumbria, and the work of the Vale of Pickering Research Trust have produced important information and their publication should be a priority.
At line 310 changed 2 lines
* S4.14: Stronger connections between the university, museum and commercial sectors are necessary to promote sharing of both interpretative and methodological findings and developments. Further to this, effective cross-sector relationships may prove to be fruitful in
establishing efficient schemes by which one party can fill the other’s skills gap as necessary.
* S4.14: Stronger connections between the university, museum and commercial sectors are necessary to promote sharing of both interpretative and methodological findings and developments. Further to this, effective cross-sector relationships may prove to be fruitful in establishing efficient schemes by which one party can fill the other’s skills gap as necessary.
At line 313 changed 4 lines
* S4.16: Opportunities potentially exist to engage with groups already researching or managing resources pertinent to Postglacial climate, palaeoenvironment and geomorphology. These may exist within agencies such as Natural England, charities like the RSPB or the private sector.
The success of the North Sea Palaeolandscapes Project is testament to the benefits of engaging with Quaternary science and industry in gaining access to established datasets.
* S4.17: There is great potential for further collaborations between academics in a range of University departments (including but not confined to geology, geography, ecology, biology and oceanography) to investigate changes in sea level, climate, vegetation and landforms during
the Early Holocene/Mesolithic periods.
* S4.16: Opportunities potentially exist to engage with groups already researching or managing resources pertinent to Postglacial climate, palaeoenvironment and geomorphology. These may exist within agencies such as Natural England, charities like the RSPB or the private sector. The success of the North Sea Palaeolandscapes Project is testament to the benefits of engaging with Quaternary science and industry in gaining access to established datasets.
* S4.17: There is great potential for further collaborations between academics in a range of University departments (including but not confined to geology, geography, ecology, biology and oceanography) to investigate changes in sea level, climate, vegetation and landforms during the Early Holocene/Mesolithic periods.
At line 331 added 16 lines
!!Studies
![Asfordby. Lynden Cooper, University of Leicester Archaeological Services|Asfordby]
![Stainton West, Cumbria. Fraser Brown, Oxford Archaeology|Stainton_West]
![The value of human remains and the potential of ancient DNA studies. Rick Schulting, University of Oxford, and Oliver Craig, University of York|DNA_studies]
![Engaging people with Star Carr. Nicky Milner, University of York|Star_Carr]
![Erosion of in situ Mesolithic remains at Low Hauxley, Northumberland. Clive Waddington, Archaeological Research Services Ltd|Low_Hauxley]
![Potential for palaeoenvironmental data. Martin Bell, University of Reading|Palaeoenv]
![Mapping Doggerland. Vince Gaffney and Simon Fitch, University of Birmingham|Doggerland]
This page (revision-35) was last changed on 15-Oct-2014 11:59 by AdministratorTop