distinctive regional traditions

[kevin wooldridge]

I don't know of any written work on the subject, but there is a proliferation of neolithic sites in southern Norway around about the 50m contour line. I have often wondered if the location of these sites might represent the highest level at which certain types of field system/crop regimes were viable, with the higher and lower lands still reserved for hunter-gatherer activities....what kind of level are these sites appearing in Yorkshire and Durham?

[P Prentice]

i havent seen a synthesis yet either but all of mine have been on higher ground in river valleys as have most of the ones i am aware of. must be a phd in it - someone?

[Dinosaur]

I don't know of any written work on the subject, but there is a proliferation of neolithic sites in southern Norway around about the 50m contour line. I have often wondered if the location of these sites might represent the highest level at which certain types of field system/crop regimes were viable, with the higher and lower lands still reserved for hunter-gatherer activities....what kind of level are these sites appearing in Yorkshire and Durham?

Height above sea level doesn't seem to have much bearing, its the topographic relationship to water. Some seem to be in good 'lookout' locations (for passing game?) too, while others are near water but in sheltered spots such as valley-side terraces. The ones in Co Durham with the sea-views (only slightly spoilt by Easington Colliery in the foreground) were also overlooking a small coastal (freshwater) wetland area, but 150m above both - I know, I spent a month walking up and down that XXXX hill. Other considerations are apparent avoidance of contemporary monuments and high-level anticipation skills of where someone would want to put a barrow hundreds of years later - suspect the latter may in some instances go back to the 'look-out' thing, lines of sight work both ways and many EBA barrows are sighted for visibility.

Yup, definitely PhD territory, otherwise I'll end up having to do it

[Jack]

I'd say so!

I'm in the process of plotting broad phased landscapes for 3 pipelines against stuff like truncation, topography, geology and archaeological methodology looking for patterns. The patterns emerging so far don't match the 'on higher ground' or overlooking water models....though these aren't discounted as factors. We got Neo/EBA lone pits and clusters on hill tops, on flat spurs, on hill slopes and in valley bottoms. It may be a specific 'special case though' as our transect goes across the yorkshire wolds and vale of pickering.

Have you thought about location vs palaeosoils, In the East riding its all about the old brown earth soils that existed in the neo and bronze ages and/or areas of preservation/destruction i.e. deep ploughing vs areas of colluvium.

But in the literature 'location' of these sites was previously definitely heavily biased by assumptions of where the pits should be.
The old circular argument of: 'that hilltop has extant barrows on it and there are some neo/BA pits on the hill, therefore the hill is a 'special place' in the landscape and the pits are part of a ritual focus'. Followed by: 'the hilltop is a special place in the landscape and the ritual activity of pit-digging is focused on it'.

Problem was when some folks put pipelines across this landscape it turned out that the pits weren't focused on the hill.

I suspect that given a time machine and a gps that works in the neolithic that a plot of neolithic sites would look very different than what we get now.....a bit more like a mix of temporary camps, semi-permanent farms, semi-permanent non-farming settlements a few mostly permanent settlements/farms, ceremonial/burial places ranging from a funny rock, to kin burial sites to epic tribal ceremonial/festival sites.

The distribution of these sites I suspect would cover far more of the country than any of us would suspect.....animals tend to rapidly fill their environment till an equilibrium with available resources is met.

[P Prentice]

a greater incidence on upslopes might well be expected in a landscape without a couple millennia of amphopomorphous drainage. given the likely corolory with early clearance episodes it is also worth considering how sites might show us the roads through the wildwood and the nexus of communication?

[Marc Berger]

Problem was when some folks put pipelines across this landscape it turned out that the pits weren't focused on the hill.

Presume that all these wondrous coincidents of archaeology and development do not have their own symbiosis thingy going on. I had the misfortune to be setup on a pipeline once and after a little while it became apparant that the pipeline was going from minor hill top to minor hill top to the extent that I considered setting up an organisation called save our hill tops. What was going on was that the machines that lifted and put the pipes into the trench were unsymmetrical and the weight of the pipes that they were trying to lift a bit dodgy so that the whole pipe lifting operation was best done facing either up or down the slope. This trait had the effect that even after a wondrous environmental impact assessment had clearly been used to align the the pipe away from all known and imaginary archie-ology the sneaky pipeliners still got their way of going directly up and down slopes and what was amazing was that they where hitting these very hill tops to within centimetres. The next coincidental thing that happened its that these hill tops almost invariably had boundaries or other liners near them to the extent that the easement shot up from 30 metres to 65 metres. It still makes me wince when I consider the carnage that went on around these features but mostly I imagine that give it a thousand years and we will find that where there was once a hill top there will be a valley caused by erosion instigated by the trench. Any way the only conclusion that I drew was that archaeology could be found anywhere but that it was more likely to be eroded on hills -the old absence of evidence motto and you need to do an evaluation to find it and not a watching brief of five bulldozers either side of a break in slope or of a summit...

But...what I wanted to ask Jack is why are you trying to find any patterns in your data or why archaeology could be premised on a contour or dino where doesn't somewhere overlook water? Is it cause you is trying to undercut the amount of evaluation trenches that should be undertaken?

[Jack]

a greater incidence on upslopes might well be expected in a landscape without a couple millennia of amphopomorphous drainage.

yep or on stilts .
But depends on what your site is..........some sites seem deliberately sited lower down closer to water/boggy ground

given the likely corolory with early clearance episodes it is also worth considering how sites might show us the roads through the wildwood and the nexus of communication?

Have to say I like this idea, given the wobliness of early trackways/boundaries but tracking too far back into the wild wood has problems.....I feel that many (not you PP) that theorise about the wildwood and roads/routes through it have never stepped into a wildwood or have been hunting.

Except for the exceptions of passes through terrain.......or possibly long-distance routes that need to be marked to traverse, I'd assume that people that lived in the wildwood would traverse the network of game trails and/or the network of rivers?

Though over time I guess some of these may become more 'permenant' in the landscape through use if they are a particularly useful route.

[P Prentice]

Though over time I guess some of these may become more 'permenant' in the landscape through use if they are a particularly useful route.

and precisely where you might build your communal monument, totem, anchor to the ancestors, receptory for significaneces etc. i always imagine trackways adorned with messages and signposts - i'm always looking for the street furniture

[Dinosaur]

But...what I wanted to ask Jack is why are you trying to find any patterns in your data or why archaeology could be premised on a contour or dino where doesn't somewhere overlook water? Is it cause you is trying to undercut the amount of evaluation trenches that should be undertaken?

Could be that we're interested in contributing to archaeology beyond just getting the next job?

...and of course it's cool getting published occasionally in peer-reviewed journals and seeing your name in bibliographies :face-approve:

[Dinosaur]

...I'd assume that people that lived in the wildwood would traverse the network of game trails...Though over time I guess some of these may become more 'permenant' in the landscape through use if they are a particularly useful route.

Seen Mike Bishop's Secret Life of Roman Roads?