+- BAJR Federation Archaeology (http://www.bajrfed.co.uk)
+-- Forum: BAJR Federation Forums (http://www.bajrfed.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: The Site Hut (http://www.bajrfed.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?fid=7)
+--- Thread: distinctive regional traditions (/showthread.php?tid=4501)
distinctive regional traditions - Dinosaur - 24th June 2012
From what we seem to get around here, pits of all dates happen in pretty much the same places (even have early and late Neo pits in ostensibly fairly compact and discreet clusters) certainly in the same general bits of landscape, which would suggest that whatever their function it didn't change enough to alter the perception of where it should be happening. there does seem to be a common theme that the activity gets more complex over time e.g. more complex fill sequences and occasionally more 'exotic' objects in the later pits - have some EBA pits with wierd animal bone assemblages, but since they're the only pits in the area with any bone at all (wet ground) its a bit hard to tell whether thats unusual or not....charred plant remains seem to stay pretty consistent over 2 millennia (nutshell, grain and the like) and they seem to have had an ongoing fascination with burying charcoal and burnt stones. the pits themselves don't change much either, we don't seem to get the bigger late pits with loads of stuff that have turned up in some regions.
See the Walton Basin monograph (Upper Ninepence site) for a good example of multiple phases of earlier pits under and around a barrow, there are loads more examples and some barrow excavations could probably be reinterpreted in that light - I've recently been looking at the Quernhow publication and thinking that some of the pits ascribed to the initial barrow phase could easily be much earlier - there are other pits in the same field that are definitely earlier
More C14ing of aceramic pits might pick up more Meso dates as well - they're definitely out there
distinctive regional traditions - alisdair - 24th June 2012
'and they seem to have had an ongoing fascination with burying charcoal and burnt stones.'
Emmmm, as an ex scout, and just a wee thought, could it possibly be that good countryside management requires that the ramains of a fire should be deposed of safely?
distinctive regional traditions - CARTOON REALITY - 24th June 2012
If the pit is packed to the hilt with stones and charcoal it's possibly a 'fulachta fiadh' style of thing, a trough filled with water then hot stones dumped in to get the water boiling.
distinctive regional traditions - Dinosaur - 25th June 2012
But why mix it all up with soil first before shovelling it back in? If the stones were something to do with the function of the pit wouldn't they be at the bottom? - and wouldn't it be easier to just stick the soil back in that you'd dug out in the first place, rather than getting some different soil from somewhere else? [off a midden?] :face-thinks:
distinctive regional traditions - Dinosaur - 25th June 2012
...oh and the charcoal rarely happens in the bottom of the pits, its more usually flecked evenly through the soil backfill which seems like a lot of effort just to make sure its gone out...
distinctive regional traditions - Jack - 25th June 2012
Lots of fascinating stuff.
But I'd also point out............there is no reason why the fill of a pit has to have anything to do with its original function.............unless you can prove so.
It is clear that some archaeologists think or assume that the neo folks were digging the pits for the specific purpose of burying the deposits and artifacts that we find. This is not necessarily the case.
The pits may have equally been dug for a different purpose, the deposits that we excavate then being an end to the history of the feature.
The answers lie in the details in the evidence.
Absolutely more scientific dating of undated pits............in them, and those undated circular structures, lies the missing neolithic and Bronze Age..............and yes mesolithic cut features exists when you look for them.
It is a myth that mesolithic people didn't dig holes and build structures and neolithic people did.
Dinosaur Wrote:...oh and the charcoal rarely happens in the bottom of the pits, its more usually flecked evenly through the soil backfill which seems like a lot of effort just to make sure its gone out...
The evidence for those types of pits, the mixing, the charcoal mixed through the fills, the abraded/weathered and some burnt sherds, cross-matching of sherds, multi-periodness of finds points towards the fill being derived from an above ground 'midden' or similar deposit. Bit like those layers of material sometimes found in natural hollows.......e.g. Sewerby Farm, Eton rowing Course.
The evidence is very, very like the recent analysis of the fills of Grub Huts in the UK see Tipper 2004 'The Grubenhauser in Anglo-Saxon England.'
Same depositional processes same process?
distinctive regional traditions - P Prentice - 25th June 2012
everybody is making pertinent points and it would seem that neolithic people (and meso and BA for that matter) dug pits. some got filled with material culture and some did not. i think it was ros cleal that pointed out that very often the decoration on neo pots got more elaborate the closer you got to a major monument, and that the fills of pits got more eloborate the closer you got to major monuments. this would suggest that people behaved differently in some places but not so differently cross-regionaly. given that the absence of causewayed enclosures or cursuses or henges or hengiform monuments appears to be real, we can safely assume that regional differences reflect differing aspects of neo life. i quite like the idea of cultifying the neolithic and seeing pottery as non domestic
distinctive regional traditions - Jack - 25th June 2012
P Prentice Wrote:everybody is making pertinent points and it would seem that neolithic people (and meso and BA for that matter) dug pits. some got filled with material culture and some did not. i think it was ros cleal that pointed out that very often the decoration on neo pots got more elaborate the closer you got to a major monument, and that the fills of pits got more eloborate the closer you got to major monuments. this would suggest that people behaved differently in some places but not so differently cross-regionaly. given that the absence of causewayed enclosures or cursuses or henges or hengiform monuments appears to be real, we can safely assume that regional differences reflect differing aspects of neo life. i quite like the idea of cultifying the neolithic and seeing pottery as non domestic
Cool. Was thinking along those lines in my little study..........sort of. Do you have a reference for Ros Cleals work?
But there are also differences in the evidence between regions, suggesting people behaving differently on a regional or even smaller scale.
Could be a layered aspect to traditions e.g..........
Broader traditions including burying or not burying people, cremation, monuments, digging pits etc......
But with regional diversions as people try to demonstrate their identity (group identity) as different from their neighbours.
Also don't discount the functional aspects of life. For instance an easy way to obtain some materials is to dig a pit till you find it (e.g. chalk, clay etc). Once you've found that material in a place you frequent, surely you'd dig there again as you know its already there.............?
Not saying this explains Neo pit sites but it is a possible testable theory.
More likely scenario is different pits are being dug for different reasons. Maybe some for extraction, some for construction, some for storage, some for boundary definition, some for ritual use, and some for other uses not thought of.
As archaeologists we tend to lump things that we see as a category together and then study it, forgetting that the people that built/dug those things may have had their own or no categories
distinctive regional traditions - P Prentice - 25th June 2012
i'm not so sure we should expect so many different functions to features which, the country over, all look the same
the fact that their currency began in the late meso and ended in the EBA seems to me to indicate a purpose with a limited range of meanings - though a resurgence in the very late BA/IA reminds me of pit alignments
distinctive regional traditions - Jack - 25th June 2012
They don't all look the same the country over. Unless you first define the pits in discussion as only the ones that look the same.
For instance, take the 'grooved ware' pits some are fond of discussing. On Rudston wold alone they range from shallow bowl shaped to steep-sided flat bottomed and include at least one posthole with a post void. Also included are some natural hollows with layers and a possible hearth in them.
Not all the same at all.
If you spread the discussion to include grimston and peterborough ware pits I got every shape and size you could imagine! From abraded sherds in natural features to big circular flat bottomed steep (and undercut) sides.