Mesolithic Research and Conservation Framework 2013. Edward Blinkhorn and Nicky Milner

Summary Statement

In 1999 the first Palaeolithic and Mesolithic Framework document was produced. Due to significant advances in Palaeolithic research, a new Research and Conservation Framework document was published in 2008 for the Palaeolithic alone, in which it was noted that Mesolithic 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 Mesolithic, as well as the opportunities, and sets out a series of research themes and strategies to address these over-arching aims.

Introduction

Background and aims of the Framework

Since the previous Palaeolithic and Mesolithic Framework document (Prehistoric Society 1999) was produced numerous significant discoveries have been made and fresh perspectives have been developed for the British Mesolithic. These include the discovery of a number of settlement sites with houses; the recognition of the potential of intertidal and offshore deposits following the mapping of submerged landscapes under the North Sea and elsewhere; renewed excavations at the flagship site of Star Carr which have highlighted alarming problems with drying out of the peat; and more detailed studies of the Mesolithic environment and landscape change including the creation and settlement of the British archipelago.

However, the Mesolithic is arguably still the most neglected period in British prehistory and as a consequence of its low profile and the need to assimilate new information and discoveries a project was commissioned by English Heritage to develop a new Mesolithic Research and Conservation Framework for England. This supersedes the 1999 joint framework for the Palaeolithic and Mesolithic and sits alongside the current Palaeolithic Framework, which acknowledged that Mesolithic archaeology had developed its own distinct agenda and requirements (Pettitt et al 2008, 3–4).

The aims of this Research and Conservation Framework are to: (1) improthe understanding of the Mesolithic of England; and (2) set out key issues and priorities for future work. In addition, it will aid English Heritage in its broader objectives of identifying and protecting our most important heritage, and helping people appreciate and enjoy England’s national story (English Heritage 2011), as well as contributing to the Pleistocene and Early Holocene activity of the National Heritage Protection Plan (English Heritage 2012).

This framework has been produced by undertaking broad-ranging consultation across the sector using a dedicated website to disseminate information, an on-line discussion forum to generate interactive debate, email correspondence, and a meeting of interested experts from across the sector. The framework process has been composed of three parts, as set out by Olivier (1996) in Frameworks for our Past. The first part was a resource assessment: a statement of the current state of knowledge and a description of the archaeological resource; this will be archived with the Archaeology Data Service (Blinkhorn and Milner 2012a). The second part was a research agenda: a list of the gaps in that knowledge, of work which could be done, and of the potential for the resource to answer questions (Blinkhorn and Milner 2012b). This was discussed at the expert meeting and formed the basis for the final part of the process, the production of this Research and Conservation Framework, which sets out key issues and priorities for future work as well as methods and approaches for achieving these.

In terms of geographical scope, the document aims to improve the understanding of the Mesolithic of England. It should be noted that for over half the period Britain was physically joined to Europe and consequently the maritime resource has been included. This framework partners the Palaeolithic and Mesolithic Research Framework for the Archaeology of Wales (Walker 2011), the Scottish Archaeological Research Framework for the Palaeolithic and Mesolithic (ScARF 2012), and the Maritime Research Agenda (Ransley et al 2013).

What is the Mesolithic and what are the challenges of studying it?

The Mesolithic is generally defined as corresponding to the beginning of the Preboreal period (which follows the Younger Dryas – the last cold snap of the Ice Age) at about 9600 cal BC, and finishes at about 4000 cal BC in Britain with the introduction of farming. However, the term ‘Mesolithic’ is a modern construct, coined in 1866, and the boundaries of the period are rather fuzzy (Milner and Woodman 2005a). The ‘transition’ from Upper Palaeolithic to Mesolithic is poorly understood: the long blade sites of the Terminal Palaeolithic are poorly dated and the degree of continuity with the Early Mesolithic is not clear (Barton and Roberts 2004).

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).

Despite the difficulties of defining a specific beginning and end point to the period, we can say that the Mesolithic spans roughly five and a half thousand years: a significant chunk of time which covers about half of the Holocene, the geological epoch we are currently living in. One of the reasons this period has been overlooked may be because it lacks the impressive monuments and artefacts associated with later periods. Developments in lithic artefact styles and technology enable a broad Early/Late assignment to stone tools, the change occurring across the late 9th and 8th millennia cal BC, and a ‘Middle’ facies has been posited for southern and central England. Scarcity of substantial remains and associated radiocarbon dates has hindered refinement of Mesolithic chronology to a more familiar, human scale. Consequently, these five and a half thousand years tend to be conflated and the Mesolithic is often seen as a ‘timeless’ period, lacking history and change until the arrival of the Neolithic.

However, this neglect in the past arguably makes the Mesolithic one of the most exciting periods to study because there are so many questions to answer; recent work has demonstrated that important discoveries can overturn our understanding of hunter-gatherers after the Ice Age and contribute significantly to the national story. Recent research has also shown that a historical perspective is both vital and possible. Several cultural and environmental events occurred during the Mesolithic, including rapid climate change at the beginning of the period, significant changes in lithic technology and, in the 7th millennium cal BC, a cold event, a tsunami and eventually the breaching of the landscape which joined Britain to the rest of Europe. Many of these events speak to current concerns about climate change, the environment, and Britain’s place in the world.

There are a number of challenges that those dealing with the Mesolithic have to face (Spikins 2010). Mesolithic sites can be hard to find: the archaeology can be ephemeral and prospecting for sites can be difficult. There are some entrenched views on what Mesolithic sites and material should look like, which can limit exploration and consequently lead to a self-fulfilling prophecy. For instance, because the human bone record is so sparse for the Mesolithic, such remains are not expected to be found. It is only through recent radiocarbon dating programmes that more have been identified as Mesolithic (Meiklejohn et al 2011).

Similarly, recent excavations at Star Carr have shown that the site is much larger than the original excavator had envisaged, which had been based on a belief that sites of this period are small (Conneller et al 2012).

Conversely, the difficulties of prospection for small sites (and intra-site archaeology) mean that the enormous potential of studying single-period events is mostly untapped. Such small sites can preserve archaeological signatures for short-term events, archaeological snapshots, and offer ‘clean’ assemblages, unaffected by the palimpsests often seen on larger scales. Their significance is inversely proportional to their size, offering huge potential to inform our understanding of the bigger picture at certain points in time (see text box).