West Yorkshire Archaeology Service
The National Trust
Project director:P. Spikins.
The West Yorkshire Mesolithic Project was initiated in 1993 as a response to threats identified during survey work in 1991 to Mesolithic sites on moorland owned by the National Trust in West Yorkshire. A project design was drawn up and submitted to English Heritage who agreed to fund a fieldwork-based assessment to be carried out in September 1993. The results of this evaluation prompted an application for further funding and a three year project was planned and put into operation. The first field season was completed in August 1994.
The project focused upon important sites of known early and late Mesolithic activity in West Yorkshire. Two particular threats were identified as posing immediate danger to the archaeological record; peat erosion and the activities of flint collectors. It is because of the ongoing damage caused by illicit flint collecting that the exact locations of the sites under study have been omitted from this project summary.Natural erosion processes can remove up to 30mm of peat each summer with a consequent loss of stratigraphic and contextual information, while at the same time exposing artefacts to casual collection by passers-by and others. More serious is the uncontrolled excavation of sites by collectors who make no record of their activities and do not report finds to either local museums or to the Archaeology Service. The areas of peat left exposed by these collectors is subsequently subject to erosion, leading to further damage to the sites.
Excavations of varying quality have been undertaken in the area since the 1880s. Early excavators removed significant quantities of flint from a number of sites and, inevitably, the quality of the documentation accompanying the surviving collections varies considerably. Some collections are held by the Tolson Memorial Museum, Huddersfield while parts of others are scattered around other museums in the north of England.
In recent years a number of individuals have been active in the area, removing unknown numbers of artefacts and entirely destroying a number of prehistoric activity areas.
Prior to the submission of a project design for a major three year programme of research, a short, fieldwork-based assessment was undertaken by the West Yorkshire Archaeology Service in September 1993. A series of objectives were defined:
- To provide an assessment of the damage to known Mesolithic sites caused by flint collectors and subsequent degeneration by erosion.
- To provide an estimate of the value and research potential of the surviving deposits.
- To assess the continuing threat to the main site, which is in a location of considerable national and regional importance for studies of the Mesolithic period.
- To provide an insight into the general nature of lithic scatters in this poorly known region and to develop methods of dealing with these types of sites from both a practical and management perspective.
The results of the fieldwork demonstrated that the area was suffering severely from the activities of collectors and that this activity was likely to lead to the virtual destruction of the archaeological resource. In spite of this, research within a rescue framework did appear to be a feasible option. Four particular points were noted:
The 1993 pilot project placed a heavy emphasis on the use of GIS (Geographical Information System) technology and the development of GIS techniques for the interpretation of Mesolithic sites, with all site records being stored as a GIS database enabling access to, and manipulation of, the spatial data.
- The fieldwork demonstrated that significant volumes of material had been removed; at one location it was estimated that archaeological deposits had been removed over an area of 40 square metres.
- The value of surviving deposits was demonstrated through the limited excavation of one scatter over an area of 2m by 3m. Lithics in this scatter appeared to be in situ with many of the blades apparently originating from the same core. Associated palynological and soil micromorphological evidence suggested possible Mesolithic activity at this location.
- A broad-scale sampling strategy demonstrated some association between the presence of lithics and certain 'favourable' landscape locations, which were also identified through the statistical analysis of known scatter locations across the region. The test pit sample, although suggestive, was not large enough to carry statistical significance.
- Post-excavation analyses were particularly interesting in demonstrating the value of laboratory micro-excavation of sediment blocks and, most significantly, the recovery of micro-scale debitage (fragments of flint waste measuring a few millimetres in length) with a distinct spatial distribution throughout the archaeological strata. In contrast the chemical analysis of tool surfaces proved disappointing. No surviving residues were identified and it was decided to limit further applications of these techniques to artefacts with visible residues.
The 1993 season was successful in that it raised a number of questions which required resolution through the implementation of a longer term project. These were divided into site specific and broad-scale questions.
Site-specific questions were concerned with:
- The microenvironment of the sites
- Resource availability
- Temporal variation in activity and occupation (seasonality, frequency of occupation)
- Spatial variation in activity and site location preferences.
Wider research issues included:
- Resource use in the uplands and change over time
- The impact of human settlement on the upland environment
- The function, scale and intensity of Mesolithic land clearance
- The landscape context of lithic scatters
The research design proposed a philosophical framework and a methodology for tackling these questions, together with a time scale and breakdown of the human and financial investment required.
The three year project was approved by English Heritage and organised as a joint endeavour between English Heritage and the West Yorkshire Archaeology Service with the co-operation of the National Trust and support in the final season.
The programme of work was designed to focus on the questions defined in the research design. The work was divided into a number of major elements, each of which was made up of discrete parts.
The location and extent of recent clandestine excavations were recorded together with the visible traces of excavation dating from the 19th and earlier 20th centuries using a detailed contour survey and surveys of changes in present vegetation. Where the location of existing collections was known permission was sought to examine and record the material and the circumstances of its recovery. The influence of erosion patterns on the recovery of 'sites' was investigated through a detailed survey of present vegetation and erosion patterns.
The excavation and survey of the study area was organised on the basis of a three tier strategy; large scale, medium scale and small scale.
The large scale sampling strategy aimed to build up a detailed picture of the distribution of lithic material across the landscape with a view to exploring the environmental and topographic factors which govern their distribution. A programme of field walking and test pitting was instituted across the study area. The distribution of the pits was informed by a predictive model of lithic scatter locations. All finds were recorded two dimensionally and all spoil was dry sieved.
Three locations were defined for analysis: a late Mesolithic 'rod' microlith type site, a late Mesolithic 'scalene triangle' type site and an early Mesolithic site.
The medium scale strategy was concerned with the definition and interpretation of known lithic scatters in two areas defined for detailed analysis. Four pits were excavated at 10m intervals from exposed scatters. If five or more artefacts were recovered then the next pit was excavated at a distance of 15m from the exposure. If no artefacts were recovered then the next pit was excavated 5m from the exposure. In this way the subdivision of distance between pits continued until the limits of the scatter were defined.
The small scale strategy followed from the definition of the extent of scatters plotted by the medium scale strategy. Sections of scatters were excavated and all finds over five millimetres in length were recorded three dimensionally. One quarter of each grid square was wet sieved and the remaining three quarters was dry sieved. Samples of charcoal were taken wherever possible. Two blocks of sediment measuring 500mm x 500mm x 160mm and 500mm x 550mm x 200mm were removed from the site using purpose-built boxes for micro-scale excavation off-site.
The programme of environmental work was organised on a two tier basis; large scale and small scale.
The large scale strategy was aimed at building up a detailed picture of the macro-environment of the site, the ways in which this changed through time and the possible role of human agency in these changes. The first priority was deemed to be the establishment of a pollen chronology for the area and to this end a series of pollen cores were taken at 10m intervals across the study area.
The small scale strategy was aimed at understanding the impact of human beings on the local environment, through activities such as the localised clearance of vegetation. Pollen cores and soil micromorphological samples were taken from selected archaeological contexts and this work was fully integrated with the micro-excavation research.
In order to provide the maximum amount of information during the course of fieldwork survey, data was processed during the course of the excavation and finds from the test pitting programme were sorted and identified so that their significance could be assessed immediately. Other components of the post-excavation process had necessarily to wait until the end of the field season.
Areas of recent disturbance were recorded and surveyed. Significant damage occurred at one area of the site between the 1994 and 1995 field seasons but otherwise damage to the site appears to have reduced during the span of the project. One amateur collector donated his collections of material from the study area to the project and assisted in defining their origins. Another collector donated his plan of a hearth together with a collection of tools to the project.
The sampling strategy based on the predictive model of scatter location proved highly productive with finds recovered from 65% of the pits. The recovery rate contrasted strongly with that in the 1993 excavations (based upon a systematic grid) where only 20% of the pits produced material. This increased success rate may relate to the accuracy of the predictive model, but may also have been affected by sampling error, the varying ease of excavation and weather conditions. There were clear indications of variability in the distribution of lithic scatters.
The small scale strategy involved the excavation of two main areas:
Area 1. Analysis of the spatial distribution of the worked flint, the debitage and environmental samples suggested that the site represented activity of high integrity, dating to the later Mesolithic, centred around a series of four hearths and most probably involving a number of individuals knapping flint.
Area 2. A scatter of finds belonging to a late Mesolithic 'rod' type industry were recovered around a hearth. The density of finds varied significantly to the north and south of the hearth. The hearth structure itself was removed for micro-excavation using two purpose-built sample boxes. It appears that there were two, possibly three, phases of activity related to the hearth. In the first a deep pit was excavated. This became filled with oak charcoal. A second, shallower pit was later cut into this, removing all but the bottom layers. The second pit contained hazel and alder charcoal together with packing material, which included debris from stone tool manufacture. Flat stones had been placed on the hearth, possibly to restrict the flow of air to the fire. The final phase of activity consisted of a third hearth overlying the two earlier ones. The distribution of finds suggested that the area around the hearth had been cleaned and maintained.
The assessment of the lithic material recovered from the surveys and excavations confirmed the importance of the sites. The assessment was necessarily limited in scope, but highlighted the need for further excavation and a longer programme of analysis.
The large scale environmental programme involved the extraction of soil cores at 10m intervals. The analysis of these cores is currently in progress.
The small scale palynological work was significant in that it suggested a causal relationship between human activity and environmental degradation, although secure inferences must await the dating of the pollen and the archaeological contexts. At present there seems to have been a rise in the representation of Corylus (hazel) pollen at about the time of the early Mesolithic activity with a major rise of Calluna (heather) at the time of the later Mesolithic activity.
In general terms the first season's work served to indicate the high quality of the Mesolithic sites in the study area and the great potential offered by the techniques employed, notably the micro-excavation and artefact refitting programmes. While the area has suffered severely from the activities of collectors, significant deposits appeared to have survived undisturbed.
In more detailed terms the research programme showed that there was evidence of the multiple occupation of sites and of site maintenance activities, a discrete activity area focused on a hearth and an early scatter of material underlying a later scatter. The application of relatively novel techniques (including the microstratigraphic excavation of the hearth from Trench B) was of prime importance in contributing to these interpretations.
J.D. Hedges, County Archaeologist, West Yorkshire Archaeology Service, 14 St John's North, Wakefield WF1 3QA. Tel. 01924 306791 e-mail. 101744.1537@compuserve.com
M. Newman, The National Trust, Goddards, 27 Tadcaster Rd, York YO2 2QG, Tel. 01904 702021
P. Spikins, Department of Archaeology, Downing Street, University of Cambridge, CB2 3DZ, Tel. 01223 339353 e-mail. pas1007@cus.cam.ac.uk