The Upper Palaeolithic in the West midlands: previous research and research agenda There has been very little research concerned with the Upper Palaeolithic of the West Midlands, and the most recent national review (Campbell 1977) provided only summary descriptions of the West Midlands evidence. In this context, the assessment of the Upper Palaeolithic for the West Midlands Regional Research Framework earlier prehistory seminar is an important contribution to our understanding of this period in the region (Myers 2007). The present discussion of the evidence is based largely on that paper, together with additional assessment of the data presented by Campbell (1977) and recent work on the British Upper Palaeolithic (eg see Barton 1999, 2005).
The time span of the Upper Palaeolithic encompasses profound cultural changes: from the appearance of anatomically modern humans with wide range of new materials, practical and symbolic (c 40 Ka), to the development of early Holocene hunter-gatherer societies (by c 10 Ka). It is also important to recognise that Upper Palaeolithic societies in Britain cannot be understood separately from the wider northern European context of population movement, social and economic systems, and complex climatic and environmental changes.
Current research themes in British Upper Palaeolithic archaeology are set out in a Prehistoric Society research document (1999) and key issues and debates have been reviewed in several recent books and articles (eg Barton et al 1991; Smith 1992; Housley et al 1997; Gamble 1999; Barton 1991, 1999, 2005). These identify a number of general research themes that are relevant to the West Midlands:
Barton’s chronological outline of the Upper Palaeolithic occupation of Britain and representative lithic types (2005) is a convenient way of organising the West Midlands evidence. This framework is summarised below (cf Gamble 1999, tbl 6.5, 6.9). Dates are given in years Ka (thousand years ago).
Early Upper Palaeolithic
39-36 Ka: Leaf point industries; Jerzmanovican points.
36-32 Ka: Cold phase: no human presence.
32-28 Ka: Aurignacian II; nosed (shouldered) scrapers. 28-25 Ka: Gravettian; Font Robert points.
25-13 Ka: Full Glacial conditions (MIS 2): no human presence (Last Glacial Maximum (LGM), c 18 Ka).
Late and Final Upper Palaeolithic
13-12 Ka: Creswellian (late Magdalenian); straight-backed blades, Cheddar points.
12-11 Ka: Final Upper Palaeolithic; curve-backed blades and points, and penknife points.
11-10 Ka: Loch Lomond interstadial: extreme cold conditions; no human presence.
10.3-10 Ka: Final Upper Palaeolithic; long-blade industry. After c 10 Ka (c 8000 BC): Mesolithic industries.
Early Upper Palaeolithic sites and artefacts
There are very few Early Upper Palaeolithic (EUP) finds from the West Midlands (Fig 2.2) and only one site with known stratified deposits: King Arthur’s Cave, Herefordshire (Campbell 1977, 41-3). This site produced a small lithic assemblage that included a Jerzmanovice leaf blade-point (Barton 2005, 115-16). Another possible leaf-shaped point has been identified from Tiddington, Warwickshire. It is uncertain whether these items, which date to the period 39–36 Ka, relate to late Neanderthal activity or mark the earliest presence of anatomically modern humans in Britain (ibid, 114). Two probable Aurignacian scrapers (c 32-28 Ka), found at Aston Mill Quarry in the Carrant valley, Worcestershire, can be associated more confidently with modern human settlement. No Gravettian artefacts have been recorded in the region (Myers 2007, 25).
Late and Final Upper Palaeolithic sites and artefacts
The earliest reoccupation of Britain following the LGM is associated with Creswellian artefacts, dating to c13-12 Ka. The only sites with definite Late Upper Palaeolithic (LUP) finds in the West Midlands are King Arthur’s Cave (Myers 2007, 25; cf Campbell 1977, 41-3) and Arrow Court, Kington, Herefordshire (two backed tools: Campbell 1977, 167-8) (Fig 2.2). There are also several sites in the region with final Upper Palaeolithic material such as penknife points: King Arthur’s Cave, Herefordshire (Barton 2005, fig 127); Ossum’s Cave, Elder Bush Cave and Thor’s Cave in the Staffordshire Peak District (Campbell 1977; Myers 2007, 25); and Purley Park, Warwickshire (ibid, 26). No long- blade assemblages associated with the Final Upper Palaeolithic re-colonisation of Britain (from c 10.3 Ka), at the end of the cold Loch Lomond interstadial, have been found in the West Midlands (ibid).
Spatial patterns and regionality
Regional contrasts are not discernible in the distribution of the few EUP artefacts in Britain, but the larger numbers of LUP finds reveal a distinctive spatial pattern. Campbell (1977, 158-60, map 46) suggested that they fall into two major groups: in northern/ eastern England and southern/western England, divided by an extensive area across the midlands and central Wales that is largely devoid of LUP artefacts. This ‘empty’ area is interpreted as either a ‘socio-ecological buffer zone’ between distinct communities, or as an area traversed by a single population during a seasonal round (ie between winter encampments to south and west, and summer hunting stations to north and east; ibid, 159). Similar observations have been made by Smith (1992, 165-7), who interpreted the occupied zones as areas of settlement by groups migrating from different parts of Europe, and the intervening midlands area as a birch and willow scrub landscape with ‘less to offer’ in economic terms (ibid, 166). Although recent finds in areas such as Leicestershire (see below) may modify this picture to some extent, distribution maps continue to reproduce the general spatial pattern (eg Barton 2005, figs 127-26). From this perspective, the sites in the south-west of the West Midlands (including King Arthur’s Cave), and those in the north of the region in the Peak District, may have belonged to separate cultural regions in the LUP, or were occupation sites that related to very different economic practices at different times of the year.
The West Midlands has the potential to contribute in several ways to national research agendas in Upper Palaeolithic archaeology. The geographical situation of the region at the margins of known distributions of EUP material culture, and between what appear to have been distinct LUP regions (cultural and/or economic), provides opportunities for investigating the chronology, scale, extent and spatial pattern of Upper Palaeolithic occupation in Britain, including phases of re-colonisation and abandonment in response to climatic and environmental changes. The Upper Palaeolithic communities that occupied this region, at the northernmost fringes of human population distributions, would have been especially sensitive to changes of this kind. Moreover, the wide range of topographic zones in the region, with adjacent areas of upland and lowland terrain, provides opportunities for investigating relationships between upland and lowland occupation and economic activity, and between cave and open-air sites.
Specific regional research aims and questions that should take priority are discussed below under period headings.
Early Upper Palaeolithic
Reinvestigation of King Arthur’s Cave, Herefordshire, and a search for EUP sites of similar date in the same area, are clear priorities for investigating the earliest presence of anatomically modern humans in the West Midlands and their relationship with late Neanderthal communities. Assessment and prospection work to identify EUP occupation in the limestone caves of Staffordshire may also be rewarding. In wider terms, the thin distribution of artefacts currently known in lowland areas need not reflect either the research potential of EUP sites in the region nor the extent and intensity of occupation. The hunting station site recently excavated at Glaston, Rutland (Barton 2005, 116; Myers 2006; 2007, 25), demonstrates the existence of EUP remains in open-air locations, with important implications for the possibility of future discoveries of this kind elsewhere in the English midlands (Myers 2007, 27).
Late and Final Upper Palaeolithic
The presence of Creswellian material at King Arthur’s Cave, and the concentrations of sites just outside the West Midlands, to the south-west in the Cheddar area and to the north-east in the Creswell area, suggests that work on LUP sites in the region may contribute significantly to studies of the rate and extent of re-colonisation of Britain after the LGM. A clear research priority in regional terms should be to determine the spatial pattern of LUP activity, especially in relation to the interpretative frameworks proposed by Campbell (1977) and Smith (1992). Identification of open-air sites in the West Midlands would raise questions about the validity of existing spatial models, besides offering opportunities to explore the social organisation and resource procurement and consumption practices of LUP communities. The important open-air sites investigated recently at Bradgate Park (Creswellian assemblage) and Launde (long-blade assemblage) in Leicestershire, point to the potential presence of LUP material in open-air locations in the West Midlands (Myers 2007, 26). The long-blade assemblage at Launde also raises questions about the extent to which central Britain was occupied during the first phase of re-colonisation after the Loch Lomond interstadial (ibid; Cooper 2006, 86-90).
The research agenda and questions for Upper Palaeolithic archaeology in the West Midlands discussed in the previous section point to some important methodological and practical issues in current and future archaeological work in the region.
Recent discoveries in the east midlands have shown the existence of important Upper Palaeolithic open-air sites, with major implications for Upper Palaeolithic archaeology in the West Midlands. Curatorial and field archaeologists should be aware of this potential, and take active measures through appropriate site evaluation strategies to locate Upper Palaeolithic sites (Myers 2007, 27). This should include an awareness of potential deposits in what are now urban areas (ibid). The intensity of surface collection and other sampling strategies is especially significant for effective identification of Upper Palaeolithic sites in open-air settings (cf Hey and Lacey 2001).
The Upper Palaeolithic period in the West Midlands is clearly of great potential importance to future research at regional, national and international scales. The discovery of well- preserved in situ deposits would be especially relevant to research questions concerning the migration and social behaviour of anatomically modern humans in relation to the extreme environmental changes that took place in Europe during MIS 3 and 2. The geographical position of the region at the furthest northern limits of Upper Palaeolithic settlement in Europe is clearly important as a context for investigating modern human adaptations and social and cultural life in extreme environmental conditions.
Particular priorities, in this context, are to define more clearly the earliest presence of modern humans in the West Midlands during the EUP and their relationship with late Neanderthal communities, and to identify LUP sites in the region that may contribute to an understanding of the re-colonisation of Britain after the Late Glacial Maximum. The importance of cave sites in the region should not be forgotten and more of these deserve serious investigation using modern techniques, but perhaps especially important for future developer-funded field archaeology is the potential for discoveries of Upper Palaeolithic open-air sites throughout the West Midlands. Like the Lower and Middle Palaeolithic periods, the Upper Palaeolithic has been neglected in regional research terms and there is potential for major new discoveries that could change wider perceptions of modern human communities in Britain during the last Ice Age. It is again important to note that the National Ice Age Network, and the Ancient Human Occupation of Britain project will contribute significantly to the development of Upper Palaeolithic studies in the region.
Part of the Research Frameworks Network