It is not my intention in this paper to deal with the whole field of antiquities found on the southwestern moors and I shall only refer to the sepulchral and other remains of a ritual character in so far as they have a direct bearing on the interpretation of the settlements (fig. 1). Inclusion of the Cornish moors is prompted by the fact that certain stages in the development of the settlements are not represented on Dartmoor but can be illustrated from the lower moorlands further west.

The material on which my interpretation is based is largely the result of work carried out by the Dartmoor Exploration Committee of the Devonshire Association. Beginning in 1894 this Committee, in addition to other work, explored some 20 settlements excavating nearly 150 hut circles. The objects discovered are mostly in the City Museum at Plymouth and some of the pottery is now illustrated for the first time. Most of the Committee's work was carried out in the first ten years of its existence, but the excavation of a site now flooded by the Torquay Corporation's reservoir was undertaken as late as 1933 and the Committee remained in existence until 1950, when the Association reconstituted its arrangements in respect of Dartmoor. As the last surviving member of the old Dartmoor Exploration Committee it is perhaps fitting that it should fall to my lot to interpret the results then obtained in the light of more modern knowledge and methods. The Association has kindly sanctioned the republication of figs. 4, 5, 6 and 9.

Through the kindness of Dr J. Waechter I have been able to study the deposits of Gorham's Cave on the spot, to investigate the evidence for fluctuations of the sea-level afforded by the Rock of Gibraltar and to identify the fauna. The material thus obtained suggests a chronology for the prehistoric industries of Gorham's Cave which is of more than local interest. I wish to express my gratitude to Dr Waechter for allowing me to do this work on his excavation and for his constant and efficient co-operation. This became particularly important during the last season (Spring 1954) when I was unable to re-visit the site, so that he had to make certain observations for me. I also wish to acknowledge the help I received from Dr I. W. Cornwall in the analyses of samples from the strata, and from Mr Antony Sutcliffe with the identification of the osteological material. The latter will be published in full in Dr Waechter's final report but a preliminary list is here included since some of the palaeontological evidence supports the results obtained in the laboratory. A contribution towards the expenses incurred in carrying out the field work was received from the Central Research Fund of London University and is herewith gratefully acknowledged.

This paper is intended as a sequel, reaching into the Early Iron Age, to the preceding one by Professor Childe on ‘The Final Bronze Age in the Near East and in Temperate Europe.’ When he and I were invited to prepare these papers first, as addresses to the Prehistoric Society's Conference in London in April 1948, we purposely agreed to do most of our work on them separately, he approaching the problem of the European Bronze—Iron Age transition from its Bronze Age end, and I from its Iron Age end. But now, through his kindness, I am writing with his paper in its final form before me; and I want therefore to begin by considering what he has written, in order to fit my contribution squarely into his. I shall then turn to Italy, and to its relations with Europe beyond the Alps and with Greece and the Orient, and so approach the Hallstatt question and the Final Bronze Ages of the North and West, upon which the Iron Age, in due time, supervened. I am most grateful to Childe for his approval to this course; and his paper is truly so important, that I cannot but make it the starting-point for mine.

Most prehistorians would probably agree that one of the most promising developments in the theory of the subject in recent years has been the increasing use of geographical concepts and methods. By this I do not mean merely the compilation of distributions—naturally suggested by the growing body of observations—but rather the deliberate attempt to use such distributions as an indication of the part played by various natural and social factors in stimulating and moulding the cultural traditions.

Probably the best known work of this description is Sir Cyril Fox's Personality of Britain, but the same general tendency is implicit in many other recent studies of prehistoric material both here and on the Continent. Roughly speaking the underlying principle might be described as a combined interpretation of the traits themselves with that of various elements in the environment, including its general structure.

In general it is likely that the most obvious fields for work of this sort will occur in the later periods of prehistory. Apart from somewhat increased chances of preservation, the remains of later societies tend to be of a more specialised character which greatly facilitates their attribution to this or that specific cultural tradition. At the same time it may be argued that the ultimate problems at issue during the earlier phases are of a somewhat simpler nature.

The surveys of the megalithic tombs of France made by Bertrand (1864; 1875), the Sous-Commission des Monuments mégalithiques, Adrien de Mortillet (1901), and Joseph Déchelette enabled maps to be made which showed the essential features of the distribution in space of the thousands of prehistoric collective tombs in France. Déchelette listed a total of 4457 dolmens and allées couvertes: fresh regional surveys and fieldwork in the fifty years that have elapsed since the publication of the first volume of his Manuel d'archéologie préhistorique, celtique et gallo-romaine in 1908 have increased this figure to between five and a half and six thousand tombs. This quantitative increase, however, has in no way altered the qualitative picture of the distribution in space of the megalithic tombs in France, implicit in Bertrand's original essay, and explicit in the analyses of Déchelette and Adrien de Mortillet.

Bertrand had emphasized that the ‘dolmens’ of France occurred mainly west of a line from Marseilles to Brussels; Adrien de Mortillet's map stressed the main axis of distribution, namely from Brittany to the Gulf of Lions, and the very large numbers of megalithic tombs that exist in the six departments of the Ardèche, Lozère, Aveyron, Gard, Hérault and Lot.

Excavations at Fort Street, Silvertown, London revealed a short length of a prehistoric trackway constructed within the floodplain of the Thames. Two pollen profiles were obtained through peat together with four radiocarbon dates; two from the trackway itself, one from near the bottom and one from near the top of the peat. These dates indicate that the trackway was constructed in the Early Neolithic and that peat formation took place in the Neolithic and Bronze Ages. The trackway is of considerable importance in that it represents the earliest known structure of this kind yet discovered in the London area.

Parks of Garden, a Neolithic site in southern Scotland, is located within a thin wedge of peat which abuts a ridge of glacial moraine that stretches across the Upper Forth river valley. The site comprises a rapidly constructed small wooden platform dating to 3340–2920 cal BC, within the Early Neolithic period of Scotland. The platform may have functioned as a transitory hunting hide and as a preparation area for hunting and gathering expeditions across the fen and into the salt-marshes of the local environment.

Triangular, concave-base ‘Streletskian points’ are documented in several assemblages from the Kostёnki complex of Upper Palaeolithic sites in south-western Russia. Some of these assemblages have been argued to evidence very early modern human occupation of Eastern Europe. However, Streletskian points are also recorded from younger contexts, notably at Kostёnki 11, where examples are attributed both to Layer V and the stratigraphically higher Layer III. The apparent relatively young age of Layer III has led some to view it as the latest manifestation of the Streletskian, although its assemblage has also been compared to the non-Streletskian Layer I of Kostёnki 8, with the two described together as the Anosovka-Tel’manskaya Culture.

Radiocarbon dates of 24–23,000 bp (c. 28,500–27,000 cal bp) for a wolf burial associated with Layer III of Kostёnki 11 confirm the layer as younger than other Streletskian assemblages at Kostёnki. New radiocarbon dates for Kostёnki 8 Layer I show that the two layers are broadly contemporary, and that both are close in age to assemblages of Kostёnki’s (Late Gravettian) Kostёnki-Avdeevo Culture. In the light of these new radiocarbon dates the context of the Streletskian point from Kostёnki 11 Layer III is considered. Although firm conclusions are not possible, unresolved stratigraphic problems and the lack of technological context for this single artefact at the very least leave a question mark over its association with other material from the layer.

Sir Lindsay Scott carried out excavations on the barrow on Whiteleaf Hill, near Princes Risborough, Bucks., with meticulous care from 1934 till the outbreak of war in 1939 interrupted operations. After the war he had no opportunity to resume excavations beyond making a 2 ft. section across the ditch on the west, and he was not able to complete the work he had planned or to prepare the material for publication before his untimely death in 1952. He gave four short and explicitly provisional reports in P.P.S. 1935, p. 132; 1936, p. 312; 1937, p. 440, and in the Records of Bucks. 1941–6, p. 298, but insisted that ‘this description must be taken as entirely provisional.’ His papers comprised a master plan contoured at 6 inch intervals, and showing the grid over the excavated area, small detailed plans of individual features—post holes, pits, and the ‘peristalith trench’—and a series of sections taken across the whole excavated area at 2 ft. intervals on both X and Y axes, but no complete plan of the excavated area nor any detailed description of the observations made in the course of the excavation. The relics are, however, all numbered with three co-ordinates, so that the position of each can be exactly located on the plans and sections, and these, especially the Neolithic pottery, are of such exceptional importance that it is an obvious duty to attempt a provisional account of the results achieved, without waiting for the completion of the excavation.

In a recent article a description was given of the contents of two pits found by Mr A. St. J. Booth in his garden at Woodlands, Countess Road, Amesbury within 300 yards of the centre of Woodhenge. These pits produced a remarkable assemblage of objects of neolithic B Grooved Ware type, and the apparent care which had been expended upon their deliberate burial induced the suggestion that they represented the sacred or hallowed relics of feasts held in connexion with rites at Woodhenge itself.

Deliberately buried deposits of this type in the vicinity of the monument suggested further that many other pits might exist in the neighbourhood of this and other comparable sites. No surprise was therefore felt when Mr Booth reported the discovery of two more pits of similar character within a few feet of the first two. These were examined during June 1948.

Excavations at Knossos have uncovered faunal and archaeobotanical archives spanning the Neolithic and Bronze Age (7th–2nd millennia bce), during which one of Europe’s earliest known farming settlements developed into its first major urban settlement and centre of one of its oldest regional states. Through stable isotope (δ13C, δ15N) analysis of seeds and bones (as evidence for the growing conditions of cereal and pulse crops and for the types of forage consumed by livestock), land use and, ultimately, political economy are explored. Changing husbandry conditions overwrite any effects of long-term aridification. Early (7th–6th millennium bce) Knossian farmers grew intensively managed cereals and pulses (probably in rotation) that were closely integrated (as manured sources of forage) with livestock. Through the later Neolithic and Bronze Age, settlement growth accompanied more extensive cultivation (eventually with cereals and pulses not in rotation) and greater use of rough graze and, by goats, browse. Pasture on cultivated land remained central, however, to the maintenance of sheep, cattle, and pigs. Variable diet of early sheep suggests management at the household level, while thereafter progressive dietary divergence of sheep and goats implies their separate herding. Until the Old Palace phase (early 2nd millennium bce), urban growth was matched by increasingly extensive and probably distant cultivation and herding but somewhat more intensive conditions during the New and Final Palace phases (mid-2nd millennium bce) perhaps reflect greater reliance on surplus from prime land of previously rival centres that now came under Knossian control.

It is doubly appropriate that the Prehistoric Society should celebrate its jubilee in Norwich. The Society was born in the Castle on 23 February 1935 of a parent conceived improbably enough in the Public Library at a meeting held on 26 October 1908 to inaugurate an East Anglian Society ‘for the study of all matters appertaining to prehistoric man’. The question I want you to consider in this address is how the Prehistoric Society of East Anglia developed so rapidly to the point at which it achieved national status as The Prehistoric Society. Let me begin by removing one misapprehension. My hands are not dripping with East Anglian blood nor have I just wiped them clean. The Prehistoric Society was not the outcome of a revolutionary putsch. It stemmed from nothing more dramatic than a recognition that the Prehistoric Society had long ceased to be East Anglian. When we met at Norwich Castle for our Annual General Meeting in 1935 and passed the resolution which eliminated the words ‘of East Anglia’ from our title we were merely recognizing a fact, that we had long ceased to be East Anglian in anything but name. There were no dissentient votes.

The two men who between them set the Prehistoric Society on its feet came from different but complementary backgrounds. W. G. Clarke was Norfolk born and bred and earned his living as a working journalist in Norwich, while cultivating a wide-ranging interest in natural history and prehistoric archaeology.

This paper discusses whether a consideration of the capacity of rocks to affect humans in terms of their charisma or object-agency can aid in understanding identified variation in patterns of lithic procurement, distribution, and use. Lithic assemblages at sites dating to both the Late Mesolithic and Early Neolithic in two separate areas of the central mountain plateau in southern Norway demonstrate use of locally available rock. Their use contrasts with that of flint which could only be sourced at the coast. While the use of flint in regions with a restricted range of available and suitable rock types is understandable, the presence of flint in regions rich in flint alternatives is more puzzling. In order to understand the choices and actions of prehistoric communities we must consider other factors, such as a sensorial exploration of the ability of raw materials to affect humans, together with the diverging ontological perspectives that shape human–material relations and the social situations of practice. This paper argues that, in addition to their straightforward utility, lithic raw materials had socially situated object-agency and inherent characteristics of charisma and that these exerted powerful influences on human choice, perception, and preference.

Editorial summary. This paper began as a review of Renfrew, Archaeology and Language. The Puzzle of Indo-European Origins (1987). It was expanded with a further review, of Mallory, In Search of the Indo-Europeans (1989). It has ended by considering not only the books in question, but also wider issues of the relationship between archaeological and linguistic evidence.

The hypothesis of Renfrew for an early dispersal of Indo-European speakers from Anatolia with the spread of farming from the 7th millennium bc is contrasted with the view of Mallory that Indo-European speakers emerged from a diverse background in a broad homeland between the Pontic and Caspian Seas in the period 4500–2500 bc. One major difficulty, among many others, for Renfrew's view is that there is no historical evidence for Indo-Europeans in western Asia until the early 2nd millennium bc; the Indo-European-speaking Hittites appear to have been intrusive into Anatolia only slightly before this time and to have made use of the non-Indo-European language of the indigenous Hatti; and in Iran, Indo-European speakers may not have appeared until the end of the 2nd millennium bc.

Both Renfrew and Mallory are seen to seek congruence between the archaeological and linguistic records. The opposite view is argued, that historical, linguistic and archaeological evidence each represent different kinds of human behaviour. The metaphor is employed of an incomplete jigsaw puzzle, three-dimensional and with past, present and future, and possessing both picture and text; picture and text each require separate specialists in their reconstruction. The independence and importance of archaeological evidence is reaffirmed.

This paper describes the results from a project to date Early Bronze Age daggers and knives from barrows in south-west England. Copper alloy daggers are found in the earliest Beaker associated graves and continue to accompany human remains until the end of the Early Bronze Age. They have been identified as key markers of Early Bronze Age graves since the earliest antiquarian excavations and typological sequences have been suggested to provide dating for the graves in which they are found. However, comparatively few southern British daggers are associated with radiocarbon determinations. To help address this problem, five sites in south-west England sites were identified which had daggers and knives, four of copper alloy and one of flint, and associated cremated bone for radiocarbon dating. Three sites were identified in Cornwall (Fore Down, Rosecliston, Pelynt) and two in Devon (Upton Pyne and Huntshaw). Ten samples from these sites were submitted for radiocarbon dating. All but one (Upton Pyne) are associated with two or more dates. The resulting radiocarbon determinations revealed that daggers/knives were occasionally deposited in barrow-associated contexts in the south-west from c. 1900 to 1500 cal bc.

The dagger at Huntshaw, Devon, was of Camerton-Snowshill type and the dates were earlier than those generally proposed but similar to that obtained from cremated bone found with another dagger of this type from Cowleaze in Dorset: these dates may necessitate reconsideration of the chronology of these daggers

The mound traditionally known as ‘Crig-a-mennis’ was excavated in September and October, 1957 on behalf of the Ministry of Works. Although a scheduled site, it was threatened with destruction owing to the clearing of mine dumps from the field where it was situated.

The site lies just off the main Perranporth-Truro road (fig. 1, map 3) on the south-east slope of Liskey Hill, about one mile south-east of the modern resort of Perranporth in the parish of Perranzabuloe (O.S. National Grid: 757528) and was originally one of a group of barrows in the area, few traces of which now remain.

In the course of four weeks of excavation the mound was stripped and nothing of it now remains. The finds were placed, after restoration by the writer, in the Museum of the Royal Institution of Cornwall in Truro by kind permission of Lord Vyvyan on whose land the barrow stood.

The site revealed a composite bell-barrow surrounded by an irregular causewayed ditch. A central stone-heap covering a fire and an oval pit was overlain by a turf and soil mound, stone reveted on the north and west, with a narrow berm between revetment and ditch. A trench-ramp cut into the natural rock on the east led into the ditch from outside and up towards the central area. Two finely decorated Ribbon-handled Urns were found inverted on the periphery of the turf stack and contemporary with it, one containing charcoal, the other burnt flints, biconical terracotta beads of Wessex type and a small terracotta cone. A miniature cup, five flint flakes and a flint core, and the possible remains of a wooden tool were also found, while a number of pits and charcoal patches suggest an elaborate ritual. Only one main phase of barrow construction was discernible—though this was capable of some sub-division—and the finds date the whole to c. 1400 B.C. or slightly later. Subsequent activity on the site, probably during the Iron Age, is attested by quern fragments, a slate ‘comb’ and an iron object.

Through lack of data, knowledge of primary copper mining has remained for a long time unclear (Bognár-Kutzián 1976, 75; Sherratt 1975, 577). For the same reason, comparisons with the mining of flint, well known in Central and Western Europe, were not possible. This lack of direct knowledge of copper mining has meant that theories concerning the origins of copper metallurgy have been based largely on the results of examination of various copper objects (Tylecote 1976, 5; Rowlands 1971, 210).

Recent excavations carried out in SE Europe underline the importance of mining as a new element in the investigation of the beginning of copper metallurgy. Two sites are foremost: Ai Bunar in South Bulgaria and Rudna Glava in North-East Yugoslavia (fig. 1). Mining works of considerable size, attested at Ai Bunar, have not been completely examined (see now Cernych 1978, not available when this report was prepared). According to the published results, it seems to be a combination of open-cast and shaft extraction; the places of exploitation are numerous—eleven of them have been investigated—but this may not be the final total. An ore bed of copper carbonate minerals, mainly malachite and to a lesser extent azurite, has been exposed for a distance of 1·5 km (Cernych 1975, 133; Cernych 1978).

The discovery with which this paper deals was made by me in August, 1908. In the early part of that month, while walking in Upper Dovercourt, I noticed a gravel pit being excavated in a field overlooking the Stour Valley, and thinking it was a likely spot to find river drift implements, I interviewed the workmen, and found that though they knew nothing of humanly-flaked flints, they had noticed and preserved a number of bones, which, however, had unfortunately been sold to a local rag and bone merchant. The occurrence of these bones made me feel confident that flint implements must be associated with them; so I took a representative series of Palæolithic implements for the men to see, and explained to them that it was such things I wanted them to look for. I also took the opportunity of examining the stone heaps in the pit, and was fortunate enough to discover two Moustier-like implements, which, though of no great importance, confirmed me in my opinion as to the implementiferous nature of the gravel bed.

Classification has been a fundamental tool in archaeology since the birth of the discipline, particularly in artefactual analysis. All artefacts, including field monuments, have a limitless variety of characteristics and their reduction into a system of classification necessitates the selection, summarization and simplification of those characteristics regarded as diagnostic in order to clarify groupings of related monuments which might otherwise be obscured by concentration on detail. While some doubt has been cast on the value of the classification of henge monuments as an internally coherent group (and the discovery of many more sites has certainly done little to consolidate that coherence) it can still be argued that a strictly defined class of henge is a useful contribution to our understanding (Harding 1987). Other classes of monument of the 3rd and 2nd millennia BC which seem to have ceremonial/funerary functions have also been defined, such as enclosed cremation cemeteries, recumbent stone circles, postcircles, ring cairns, ring ditches and so on. It is widely agreed that there are complex relationships between these various types and their myriad hybrids, or at least that comparisons can be made between various constructional elements.