A better understood chronological framework for the Middle Pleistocene of Britain has enabled archaeologists to detect a number of temporally-restricted assemblage-types, based not on ‘culture historical’ schemes of typological progression but on independent dating methods and secure stratigraphic frameworks, especially river-terrace sequences. This includes a consistent pattern in the timing of Clactonian and Levalloisian industries, as well as a number of handaxe assemblage types that belong to different interglacial cycles. In other words, Derek Roe’s hunch that the apparent lack of coherent ‘cultural’ patterning was due to an inaccurate and inadequate chronological framework was correct. Some variation in handaxe shape is culturally significant. Here we focus on twisted ovate handaxes, which we have previously argued to belong predominantly to MIS 11. Recent discoveries have enabled us to refine our correlations. Twisted ovate assemblages are found in different regions of Britain in different substages of MIS 11 (East Anglia in MIS 11c and south of the Thames in MIS 11a), the Thames, and the MIS 11b cold interval separating the two occurrences. These patterns have the potential to reveal much about hominin settlement patterns, behaviour, and social networks during the Middle Pleistocene.

Recent analysis of the ceramic assemblage from the Neolithic loch islet settlement of Eilean Dòmhnuill, North Uist, in the Western Isles of Scotland has highlighted the intense conservatism of the potting traditions over a period of more than 800 years. Hebridean Neolithic pottery exhibits clear relationships with pottery from Argyll, Arran, and Bute, as well as Orkney and the north-east mainland of Scotland. It appears to have developed a distinctive, often decoratively elaborate regional form very soon after its initial appearance, which subsequently appears to have undergone little or no significant change until the introduction of Grooved Ware in the early 3rd millennium bc. An association exists between large assemblages of elaborately decorated Hebridean pottery and a number of artificial islets in freshwater lochs, some very small and producing little or no evidence for domestic activities. This might be explained by the importance of commensality in mediating relations between small communities in the Western Isle at such sites following the introduction of agriculture in the 2nd quarter of the 4th millennium bc. The conservatism and stasis evident at Eilean Dòmhnuill, in the face of environmental decline, raises wider issues around the adaptive capabilities of the first farming communities prior to significant social changes in the earlier 3rd millennium bc.

Archaeological fieldwork preceding housing development revealed a Mesolithic site in a primary context. A central hearth was evident from a cluster of calcined flint and bone, the latter producing a modelled date for the start of occupation at 8220–7840 cal bc and ending at 7960–7530 cal bc (95% probability). The principal activity was the knapping of bladelets, the blanks for microlith production. Impact-damaged microliths indicated the re-tooling of hunting weaponry, while microwear analysis of other tools demonstrated hide working and butchery activity at the site. The lithics can be classified as a Honey Hill assemblage type on the basis of distinctive leaf-shaped microlithic points with inverse basal retouch.

Such assemblages have a known concentration in central England and are thought to be temporally intermediate between the conventional British Early and Late Mesolithic periods. The lithic assemblage is compared to other Honey Hill type and related Horsham type assemblages from south-eastern England. Both assemblage types are termed Middle Mesolithic and may be seen as part of wider developments in the late Preboreal and Boreal periods of north-west Europe. Rapid climatic warming at this time saw the northward expansion of deciduous woodland into north-west Europe. Emerging new ecosystems presented changes in resource patterns and the Middle Mesolithic lithic typo-technological developments reflect novel foraging strategies as adaptations to the new opportunities of Boreal forest conditions. While Honey Hill-type assemblages are seen as part of such wider processes their distinctive typological signature attests to autochthonous, regional developments of human groups infilling the landscape. Such cultural insularity may reflect changing social boundaries with reduction in mobility range and physical isolation caused by rising sea level and the creation of the British archipelago.

This article presents a comparative study of the arrowheads found in graves dating to between 2500 BC and 1700 bc in north-west France, southern Britain and Denmark. The aim is to characterise their modes of production and functions during a period which successively sees the introduction of copper then bronze metallurgy, the former accompanying the appearance of Bell Beaker pottery and associated practices in these areas. Several modes of production are proposed, from individual manufacture by Bell Beaker-using warriors to specialist production for elite use during the Early Bronze Age. Over and above their function as weapons – arguably associated more with interpersonal combat than with hunting – arrowheads served to portray and emphasise the social status of the individuals. In the case of the Early Bronze Age Armorican arrowheads, they should be regarded as ‘sacred’ objects, made for display and enhancing the power of the chiefs. Lastly, arrows are placed in the broader perspective of major trends affecting Europe during the Bell Beaker period and then the Early Bronze Age, while the distribution of arrowheads with slanted barbs suggests the operation of an Atlantic cultural complex.

Banjo enclosures are an important archaeological site type within British Iron Age studies, particularly for southern England. Significant numbers of these sites have been discovered through aerial survey but only a comparatively small number have been explored through additional survey and excavation. Chronologically these sites wholly exist within the Middle and Late Iron Age periods, c. 400 bc to ad 43. As yet there has been no standard interpretive framework for these sites and our understanding and discussion has often been based on the theoretical model most popular at the time of investigation. A key aim of his paper is to question this piecemeal approach and incorporate more recent interpretations from a much-expanded dataset. Since the 1990s large-scale landscape surveys have increased considerably the numbers of sites identified and subsequently the regions in which they are located. Tying this in with recent excavations, we have begun to redefine our understanding of banjo enclosures as more complex in their site development and function, while also providing a simplified framework which accounts for the diversity of forms, locations, and relative associations. Ultimately these enclosures are more complex than previously realised, potentially serving a multiplicity of functions with different phases of use throughout a period of significant change at the end of prehistory.

A wealth of cave sites makes southern Belgium the most important area for understanding the north-western European Early Upper Palaeolithic. However, despite their abundance, the interpretation of many assemblages remains problematic. Here we present a new study of lithic material from layer B of Trou du Renard (Furfooz, Namur Province) and consider its place in the Belgian Aurignacian. The assemblage is typical of Late Aurignacian assemblages found across western Europe, underscoring the contrast between the Aurignacian and the periods that pre- and post-date it, when we instead see profound differences between north and south. The assemblage is apparently unmixed, distinguishing Trou du Renard from other key Belgian Aurignacian cave sites. A large proportion of the site’s lithic assemblage documents the production of small bladelets from carinated/busqué burin cores, suggesting that Trou du Renard served as a short-term hunting camp. Radiocarbon dating cannot pinpoint the assemblage’s age, though here it is argued to be c. 32–33,000 bp (c. 36–37,000 cal bp) on the basis of its similarity to the well-dated Aurignacian assemblage from Maisières Canal (Atelier de Taille de la Berge Nord-Est area). For the same reason a third assemblage – Trou Walou layer CI-1 – is also argued to be contemporaneous. Trou du Renard, Maisières Canal and Trou Walou may represent three points in the same Late Aurignacian landscape. Differences between their lithic assemblages can be explained by the acquisition and transport of flint, and by a desire to produce small bladelets of highly standardised form irrespective of the size and shape of available blanks.

Iron Age tankards are stave-built wooden vessels completely covered or bound in copper-alloy sheet. The distinctive copper-alloy handles of these vessels frequently display intricate ‘Celtic’ or La Tène art styles. They are characterised by their often highly original designs, complex manufacturing processes, and variety of find contexts. No systematic analysis of this artefact class has been undertaken since Corcoran’s (1952a) original study was published in Volume 18 of these Proceedings. New evidence from the Portable Antiquities Scheme for England and Wales and recent excavations have more than quadrupled the number of known examples (139 currently). It is therefore necessary and timely to re-examine tankards, and to reintegrate them into current debates surrounding material culture in later prehistory. Tankards originate in the later Iron Age and their use continued throughout much of the Roman period. As such, their design was subject to varying influences over time, both social and aesthetic. Their often highly individual form and decoration is testament to this fact and has created challenges in developing a workable typology (Corcoran 1952a; 1952b; 1957; Spratling 1972; Jackson 1990). A full examination of the decoration, construction, wear and repair, dating, and deposition contexts will allow for a reassessment of the role of tankards within the social and cultural milieu of later prehistoric and early Roman Britain.

This paper presents a re-examination of Iron Age and early Roman cauldrons, a little studied but important artefact class that have not been considered as a group since the unpublished study of Loughran of 1989. Cauldrons are categorised into two broad types (projecting-bellied and globular) and four groups. New dating evidence is presented, pushing the dating of these cauldrons back to the 4th century bc. A long held belief that cauldrons are largely absent from Britain and Ireland between 600 and 200 bc is also challenged through this re-dating and the identification of cauldrons dating from 600–400 bc. Detailed examination of the technology of manufacture and physical evidence of use and repair indicates that cauldrons are technically accomplished objects requiring great skill to make. Many have been extensively repaired, showing they were in use for some time. It is argued that owing to their large capacity cauldrons were not used every day but were instead used at large social gatherings, specifically at feasts. The social role of feasting is explored and it is argued that cauldrons derive much of their significance from their use at feasts, making them socially powerful objects, likely to be selected for special deposition.

Flint daggers are a well-known and closely studied category of artefact found throughout western Europe during the final centuries of the Neolithic and the earliest phases of metal use. They are widely linked to the adoption of metal objects and metallurgy – in many cases being described as copies of metal daggers. In Britain, several hundred flint daggers have been recovered from a variety of contexts, among the best known of which are a handful of rich Beaker single inhumation burials. The British flint daggers were of great interest to early archaeologists, and were the subject of several publications in the early 20th century, most notably the seminal 1931 typochronology and catalogue by W.F. Grimes. However, despite 80 years of evolution in our understanding of the British Early Bronze Age, Beaker burials, European flint daggers, and lithic technology in general, little further attention has been accorded to the British flint daggers. This paper returns to the flint daggers deposited in British contexts. It proposes a new classification for British daggers, distinguishing between those probably produced in Britain and those brought in from elsewhere on the continent. It further examines the chaîne opératoire for these daggers based on their final form as no production locales are yet known and examines in detail the choices made in their deposition, not just in funerary contexts but on dry land and, most importantly, in wet contexts. Finally, it proposes a sequence of development for British flint daggers which links them technologically and morphologically to lanceolate Scandinavian daggers in circulation in the Netherlands. It is suggested that people in south-east Britain knowingly played up this Dutch connection in order to highlight a specific ancestral identity linking them directly to communities across the Channel.

‘Corded Ware’ in central and eastern Europe is an archaeological phenomenon that has generated multiple ideas and myths about the origins of the Indo-European language, large scale migrations from the eastern Steppes and radical ideological turnovers after 3000 bc. These ideas have been fostered in large part by the over-emphasis placed by successive generations of archaeologists on its extraordinarily large geographical extent and on the seemingly uniform pattern of Corded Ware material culture. The traditional model is characterised by the presence of an early phase, the so-called A-horizon, showing pan-European unity in material culture, and a successive phase characterised by increasing regional variability. However, over the last 15 years, a number of new studies, especially those focusing on the rigorous radiocarbon dating of Corded Ware contexts, bring into question several of the fundamental aspects of this old model. New results strongly suggest that the different components of the Corded Ware A-horizon emerged in several different regions, and that the previously claimed cultural uniformity is instead due to the co-occurrence of some special elements, while regional variability stands out as being much more prominent than hitherto assumed throughout all Corded Ware phases. Here, a new interpretation built on the diversity and regional variability of material culture and burial practices is proposed, one that challenges the view of Corded Ware as an expression of a social totality. This new model argues that several interlinked networks facilitated the flow of new practices and symbols into very diverse regional settings. Rather than viewing the Corded Ware phenomenon as representing a singular identity, ideology, or tradition, it may be more appropriate to regard it as a set of symbols and practices that were selectively incorporated into, and transformed by, local societies; it is this which produced the diversity attested for in the archaeological record

This paper explores the interpretation of the deposition of artefacts in Ireland from c. 2500 to c. 800 bc, combining a contextual analysis with post-processual ideas about materiality, artefacts, and their biographies. Hoards, single and burial finds are shown to be complementary strands of the depositional record and the result of deliberate deposition. It is argued that both the symbolic value of these items as well as economic and practical rationales determine the depositional mode. The paper attempts to infer social practices and rules that determined the differential treatment of materials and object types. The main structuring factor in the depositional record is the type-specific meanings of individual artefacts, which embody social identities beyond the utilitarian function of the object. The act of deposition facilitates and legitimates the literal and symbolic transformation of artefacts and the concepts they embody. The need for a separation between ritual and profane interpretation is removed, as deposition is understood as the reflection of prehistoric concepts rather than labelled according to modern notions of functionality. It is also argued that both dry and wet places are meaningful contexts and that different forms of wet landscapes were conceptualised differently

This paper deals with the V-bored buttons that were in use in Great Britain and Ireland during the late 3rd and early 2nd millennia BC. It presents a corpus and typology; reviews their distribution, dating, contexts, and artefactual associations; examines their possible functions and their associations by sex; and looks at their Continental origins and connections.

In this paper an attempt is made to integrate discussions on social and technological aspects of Copper Age metallurgy. The South-east European Copper Age is widely held to be characterised by newly emerging elites and a strong societal impact of metallurgy. It is shown that much of this discussion is influenced by the evidence of the exceptionally rich Varna cemetery in Bulgaria. This is not a suitable model for Copper Age social structure in general because Varna is an extremely short-lived phenomenon and may reflect aspects of culture and identity other than our search for social elites implies. In any case there is no comparable evidence throughout the rest of Copper Age Europe. In the Carpathian basin, for example, Copper Age society certainly did not know permanent hierarchies, centralised control over dispersed settlements units, or distinctions in personal identity other than age and gender. Against this background metallographic data are used to establish the state of knowledge of Copper Age metalworkers. There are similarities in overall approach, yet within this broad tradition two distinct horizons of metallurgical knowledge and practice can be distinguished. The reasons of the differences observed in casting technique and forging are discussed. Drawing on ethnographic data a model is presented to account for uniformity in the basic parameters on the one hand and the spread of innovations in Middle to Late Copper Age society on the other without social elites being in control of raw materials, metalworking, and exchange.

The Bell Beaker bracers, or wrist-guards, are traditionally thought to have functioned as archery equipment, protecting the arm against the sting of the bowstring. Their position on the body is therefore thought to have been on the inside of the lower arm. Through analysis of the position in which wrist-guards are found, we have come to the conclusion that they were, however, more often than not fastened to the outside of the arm, which leads us to consider a range of new possible uses and meanings for the bracers. With combined information from archaeological and ethnographic surveys we have come to think of the stone wrist-guard as an artefact that was associated with a martial, ideologically-laden activity in the Bell Beaker culture.

The purpose of this paper is to evaluate whether the presence of gold and bronze ornaments in Britain during the centuries c. 1400-1100 cal BC constitutes an ‘ornament horizon’ and to analyse the roles that these objects played in prehistoric communities. To achieve this, a comprehensive ornament database was compiled and the evidence for ornament production, forms, distribution, modes of adornment, and depositional practices was analysed. This revealed the existence of an earlier bronze ornament tradition concentrated in the coastal areas and along the major rivers of southern and eastern England and a later gold ornament tradition throughout Britain. The ornaments were designed to adorn the neck, wrist, and fingers and, with the exception of a quantity of elaborate bronze pins, are not thought to relate to clothing. These were high visibility objects that would have been widely recognised by the networks of communities participating in the intensive movement of objects, people and practices that occurred throughout northwest Europe and beyond. The ornaments were probably worn for substantial periods of an individual's life before being separated from their wearers. Though the ornaments were circulated, repaired, and probably recycled, there does not appear to have been a substantial delay in their deposition. The excavation of the ornaments in diverse and frequently elaborate arrangements such as in ditches and in settlements, on hills and in rivers, and accompanying cremation burials or other metal objects implies localised reworkings of the more widespread practices of structured deposition.

This paper addresses a small group of Neolithic monuments recorded as cropmarks in eastern lowland Scotland that have been termed timber halls, the best known example being the large rectangular building, Balbridie. Three such sites have now been excavated, and all have been shown to date to the early centuries of the Neolithic and to have been largely similar structures; further possible examples in the cropmark record will be assessed, through looking at the use of the term ‘timber hall’ in Scottish archaeology over the past 40 years. The paper will also address a number of sites, mostly known as cropmarks, which have similar dimensions and architectural traits to these timber halls. Excavations, however, have shown them to have a very different form (for instance, probably unroofed), and to date to the latter half of the 4th millennium cal BC, several centuries later than the first timber halls. Drawing on excavation results, cropmarks, and evidence from outwith Scotland, this paper will discuss the changing form and function of the Neolithic ‘timber hall’ tradition in Scotland, arguing that roofed ‘big houses’ were later replaced by ceremonial and mortuary ‘cult houses’, drawing on social memory and tradition.

‘It is the slippery assemblages and the social traditions they represent, that we are trying to precipitate from the mass of beaker data’. Clarke 1970, 33

The pottery we collectively call ‘Beakers’ is united by the thread of a potting and style tradition, Wrapped up in that tradition are also expressions concerning what such a pot is for and who it may represent. Both style and those embedded meanings mutate through the long currency of British Beakers. Indeed, the newly emerging chronology for Beaker grave groups suggests that there was one critical point of rapid mutation in both pot form and associated artefacts. This phase is referred to as a fission horizon, c. 2250–2150 cal BC, and it underlines the difficulties that past schemes of steady evolution have run into.

In reviewing the continental background for Beaker-carrying cultures, a corridor of Bell Beaker/Corded Ware fusion is perceived along the southern flanks of the Channel. This created a modified spectrum of Beaker culture which stands at the head of the insular phenomenon. The long ensuing currency of Beaker pottery and Beaker graves in Britain does not hold up as a unified, steadily evolving entity. Instead, three ‘phases of meaning’ can be suggested: 1) Beaker as circumscribed, exclusive culture; 2) Beaker as instituted culture; 3) Beaker as past reference. The fission horizon initiates phase 2.

The significance of morphological variation in Acheulean bifaces has been a central issue in Palaeolithic research for well over a century. For much of that period interpretation has been dominated by culture-historical models and it is only in the past 20 years that other explanatory factors have received adequate attention. This paper examines the combined role of several of these factors – namely raw materials, reduction intensity, and function – on biface variability in the British Isles, with special reference to the two major shaped-based ‘tradition’ devised by Roe (1967; 1968). First-hand examination of bifaces from 19 assemblages suggests that final biface shape depends largely on the dimensions of the original raw materials and the technofunctional strategies designed to deal with them. Through these observations a new model is generated and tested. This suggests that the patterning in the British Acheulean simply reflects the nature of the resources available at a site and the hominid procurement and technological strategies used to exploit them. According to this model, well-worked ovates with all-round edges were preferentially produced wherever raw materials were large and robust enough to frequently support intensive reduction procedures, usually when obtained from primary flint sources. Assemblages characterised by partially-edged, moderately-reduced pointed forms were only manufactured when smaller, narrower blanks, that imposed restrictions on human technological actions regarding the location and extent of working, were exploited. Such blanks were usually obtained from a secondary flint source, such as river gravel. Thus, Roe's pointed and ovate ‘traditions’ are seen not as the products of different biface making populations, but as the same broad populations coping with the exigencies of a heterogeneous environment, using different resources in an adaptive, flexible manner.

Taking grave and non-grave pottery together, five summary regional groups of beaker pottery are proposed for Britain and Ireland: Group A, Ireland; Group B, north Britain and eventually widespread; Group C, north and to some extent south Britain; Group D, south Britain; and Group E, East Anglia and south-east England. It is anticipated that further discoveries and research will enable these groups to be refined regionally.

These groups are set in a quarter-millennium calendrical chronology, which suggests that they may all have appeared around or near the mid-3rd millennium BC, and that many of their aspects were long enduring, some surviving to the 2nd quarter of the 2nd millennium BC.

Decorative features especially are related to bell-beaker pottery in western Europe, to Single Grave pottery across the North Sea, and to native Late Neolithic pottery. In presenting the chronology of these relationships, it is argued that a widely held view that bell-beaker pottery evolved in north-west Europe requires modification.

This paper discusses the development of pottery styles in southern and eastern England during the first half of the first millennium B.C. The region discussed is Hawkes' Southern Province (1959, fig. 1), and excursions will also be made into the Eastern Province (fig. 1).

The discussion of settlement sequences, and the dating of individual sites, is still largely dependent upon ceramic refuse derived from such sites. The analysis of settlement patterns for the earlier part of the first millennium B.C. thus rests upon our understanding of the ceramic traditions of that period, and this has led to considerable confusion. Two problems must be isolated at the outset. The first results from the re-evaluation of British Bronze Age chronology which took place in the 1950's, leading to Hawkes' 1960 scheme and then to Burgess' rather rigid reading of the evidence nine years later (Butler and Smith 1956; Smith, M. A. 1959; Smith, I. F. 1961; Hawkes 1960; Burgess 1969). The main effect, if we are to follow Burgess, was to draw Beakers, Food Vessels and most Urn forms back into an early Bronze Age the end of which, around 1400 B.C., was marked by the end of the Wessex grave series. As for the Middle and Late Bronze Age Burgess concluded that ‘over much of the British Isles there are no settlements, burials, defended sites, pottery, or other non-metallic cultural material which can safely be assigned to the Middle or Late Bronze Age. There are a few localized exceptions such as the Deverel-Rimbury culture and Flat-rim ware’ (Burgess 1969, 29).