THE MESOLITHIC OCCUPATION OF MILL of his work is unpublished.t Bart's Shelter Cave DAM MEADOW. . . at Scales is currently under excavarion but it may be some years before the results of the work CRSalisbury&JCoupe are published.

In 1993 and 1994, the authors investigated the There is an abundance of evidence, mainly from possible location of a l2th century water mill in recent field walking exercises, that the Mill Dam Meadow, near Gleaston on the Peninsular would have been an attractive area Furness Peninsula in Cumbria. Whilst they were for Mesolithic hunter/gatherer groups and that unable to positively identify the location of the the region was probably exploited to a far water mill, they were able to recover sufficient greater extent than has previously been thought. evidence of a l2th century economic This is perhaps corroborated by the presence of exploitation for them to be able to assume that a very large hunting encampment on the Mill Dam Meadow had been occupied during southern shore of Morecambe Bay at Heysham the early medieval period. The artefacts Head discovered in 1992.' At first sight the recovered included medieval poffery, structural Heysham Head site and Mill Dam Meadow may timber, nails and the remains of several domestic appear to be geographically isolated, but this is animals.t not the case. The Heysharn site can been seen across Morecambe Bay to the south from the A puzzling feature of the artefact assernblages high ground adjacent to Mill Dam Meadow. was the presence of a ntrmber of flint and chert tools and fragments from contexts containing A large number of Mesolithic sites have been medieval pottery and faunal remains. It was excavated in northern Britain in recent years assumed that the medieval builders of a water from the Pennine sites to Star Carr in east channel crossing the site had disturbed earlisr Yorkshire and a number of sites in Scotland. occupation layers during the construction of the Generally, flint and chert microliths dominate channel. As a result of the recovery of the flint the tool assemblages unless the soil conditions and chert artefacts, field walking exercises were are sufficiently anaerobic for tools made from undertaken on the ploughed high ground around wood, bone and antler to have survived. the perimeter of Mill Dam Meadow in late 1994. Because of the dry condition of the soils at A large number of flint and chert tools and Heysham Head tools made from materials other fragments wsre recovered during the field than stone had not survived. Whilst the walking and in early 1995 a trial trsnch was stratigraphy at Mill Darn Meadow is different in excavated in Mill Dam Meadow. The results of many respects to the Heysham Head the trial excavation point to a fairly extensive stratigraphy, the excavators were yet again faced Mesolithic exploitation of the high ground with soils possessed of poor preservation surrounding Mill Darn Meadow as do the results qualities and no organic remains were recovgred of further field walking exercises undertaken during the excavations. However, tools made during the excavation work. There is a distinct from imported flint and indigenous chert were possibility that Mill Dam Meadow may have recovered together with flint and chert been a small lake or tarn during the Mesolithic fragments. Period. Because of the large areas of land yet to be investigated, this report is submitted as an MILL DAM MEADOW interim report pending further excavations and Mill Dam Meadow lies to the north of Gleaston field walking. on the Furness Peninsular (Fig:l) some 5Km north east of the town of Barrow-in-Furness and THE MESOLITHIC BACKGROUND 2Km inland from the northern shore of Very little investigation of a Mesolithic Morecambe Bay. The Mesolithic site at occupation of the Furness Peninsular has ever Heysham Head is some 17Km to the south east been undertaken. The late Dr G Jackson across Morecambe Bay. Mill Dam Meadow is a investigated much of and some of flat valley, part bog and wetland and some 450m the coastal areas for a number of years but much long by 200m wide. It is surrounded by rising

4 ground except to the south where water courses prove that a lake did exist in Mill Dam Meadows have cut through terminal moraines to form a during the Mesolithic Period; that can only be steep sided narrow valley. proved by rather long and costly sediment currently (NGR - SD 261 715) lies at the northern end of analysis. That sediment analysis is the valley and Gleaston Water Mill (NGR - SD being undertaken and will be published with the 260 709) at the southern end. Beacon Hill results of the 1995196 season reports as a final (Summit NGR - SD 26571l) lies adjacent to the site report, For the moment, the authors are geographic and valley to the west. relying on a number of archaeological facts which, when taken together, The lithology is complicated being generally tend to point to a lake margin occupation of Mill limestone with chert outcrops to both east and Dam Meadow. west of the valley. The overburden is derived glacial till with a wide range and variety of MILL DAM MEADOW - THE PHYSICAL erratics. There is no evidence of flint being GEOGRAPHY the valley readily available from local sources othsr than Before the physical characteristics of to be compared with Antrim erratics from the Cumbrian west coast. can be assessed, they have two valleys to the north at Urswick and Mere Urswick a The Furness Peninsular is blessed with a present where present day tarns exist. At tills and day mild climate rather similar to that of some large, deep tarn overlies imperrreable in turn flows of the southern coastal towns. The Isotherm outflows into Gleaston Beck which passing through Bournemouth intercepts the as a surface stream into the northern end of Mill Urswick Furness Peninsular. Mill Dam Meadow, in a Dam Meadow. The out-flow from high volume; in low lying position surrorurded by high ground, is Tarn is neither constant nor in months. The sheltered from the westerly winds and has the fact it often dries up in the surmer Gleaston Beck from benefit of an almost unique micro-climate' This volume of flow along the local phenomenon was noted several times by Urswick Tarn is insufficient to have created have markedly Davisono when he excavated Moat Farm, some erosion processes which could stream 2Km to the west at , in 1968, for the eroded any blocking moraine. The Ministry of Public Works. Perhaps a more therefore meanders along the contour. important feature of Mill Dam Meadow is the by fact that it has a pennanent and very prolific At Mere Tarn the standing water is entrapped water supply. Many of the valleys of the very high ground all around the perimeter of the in volume to Furness Peninsular possess small lakes, tarns, tarn and the out-flow is insufficient from the meres or ponds of varying surface area and erode any blocking land. The water fissures in the depth. There are two large tarns to the north of tarn egresses through underground point to the Mill Darn Meadow at Mere Tarn and Urswick limestone at some unknown adjacent end Mill Tarn. The outflows from both these tarns flow tarn and emerges at the northern of joins the flow through Mill Dam Meadow. In addition a very Darn Meadow where it eventually prolific and constantly flowing spring emerges from Urswick Tarn. from the limestone on the eastern slopes of the is rather valley and conjoins with the streams from Mere At Mill Dam Meadow the situation Mere and Urswick Tarns to form a constantly fast- different. Whereas both Urswick and their own flowing river called Deep Meadow Beck. The Tarns dsrive their water supply from reliability of water sgpply from these three catchment areas and small surface streams. Mill the from sources is evidenced by the fact that water- Dam Meadow is supplied by out-flows powered mills have been in use in the valley both Urswick and Mere Tarns, the more constant from the 12th cenrury. and high volume supply from the underground stream to the east of the valley and from a very The excavators are of the opinion, albeit rather large catchment area. cautiously, that a lake was present in Mill Dam and Mere Meadow at some stage in the past. It is not the The geomorphology at both Urswick Dam present intention of the authors to attempt to Tarns is different from that at Mill Meadow. At Urswick and Mere Tarns the THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL EXCAVATIONS - surrounding high ground extends outwardly APRIL 1995 from the tarn perimeters for a considerable Following upon the field walking of the higher linear distance; the tarns are in effect in ground in late 1994, a 5m by 2m trench was set "hollows" surrounded by rolling hills. Whilst out intercepting the suspected lake perimeter and Mill Dam Meadow is surrounded by a similar a full excavation undertaken down to late glacial landscape to the north, west and east, to the deposits. The trench was located on a slight rise south there is a very short steep-sided valley approximately 3m above the suspected lake which would have presented less of a barrier to margin as shown in figure two. Six contexts the outflowing stream and would have been were encountered with the upper five being fully eroded away fairly quickly, but the rate of excavated. Details of each context are listed erosion cannot be estimated with any accuracy. below. However, that erosion of blocking moraines has occurred in the past is evidenced by the erosion patterns on the steep sided valley and deposits in THICKNESS DESCRIPTION the adjacent river valley to the south. The valley floor at Dam Meadow is further evidence Mill 75mm Turf layer with roots and that the valley once contained a lake, or at least vegetafion and adhered standing water across the whole valley floor. In loam. contrast to other dry valleys in the area with their classic 'Lfu shaped valley floors, Mill Dam 2. ll0mm Dark grey/dafu brown Meadow is flat with the exception of several loam with open and friable texture containing root protuberances created modern agriculture, by matter and vegetation. stream diversions undertaken in 1774, and strearn migration. 3. l3Omm YellowAight brown clay with grit, sand and pebble One of the stratigraphic contexts exposed and lenses, small amounts of penetrated during the archaeological excavations root matter and vegetation. is composed of such fine silts and clays that it 4. l25mm Brown clay and silt layer can only have forrred under still-water containing gravel, grtt & conditions. This context, together with others, is sand to be examined during the forthcoming sediment analysis. At the lowest part of the valley floor 5. l80mm Yellow clay with blue clay where two stream flows join, the land is wet laminates in isolated bands. No evidence erratics, even in drought conditions and whilst it could of gravel, sand or other possibly be not be described as a bog, it could particulates. described as a peat bog in embryonic form. 6. Yellow clay with lenses of A further indication that the valley may have lighter clays varying in been a lake during the Mesolithic Period is the colour from yellow to fact that whilst there is evidence of a medieval brown with gravels, sand, gdts and water-routrded modern use the land below a contour and of erratics. extrapolated some 3m above the present lowest point, there is no evidence of a Mesolithic occupation below that contour. The spatial distribution of surface finds from field walking and excavation finds is shown in figrne two but Contexts 5 and 6 are considered to be the most this must be viewed with some caution crucial to the hypothesis of an ancient lake particularly as most of the rising ground around having once existed in Mill Dam Meadow. the valley floor has never been subjected to deep Context 6 is typical of glacial tills throughout ploughing. the area and may have comprised the impervious layer over which the lake was ultimately to tbrm. Context 5 is considered to have been laid Walney or Drigg flint, which is often referred to *d.own as very fine silts in the still water as Antrim flint, were recovered. condition that exists at the margins of lakes and ciuns. Future grain size frequency tests and CONCLUSIONS eumuiative frequency curves to be carried out on With so small an excavation containing soils that samples may clarify the situation. are both difficult to interpret and to date and with an assemblage that many would consider TI{E ARTEFACTS not to be diagnostic, the authors are not prepared Context I contained evidence of market to arrive at any conclusions at this very early gardening in the early part of this century in the stage in the research. Tlpologically, the form of modern pottery, metal objects, carbon assemblages may be considered to be Mesolithic and glass. No artefacts of any significance were but much work remains to be undertaken on the recovsred from this context. stratigraphy before chronology can be firmly Context 2 contained evidence of occupation in established. The authors are also of the opinion the form of coal, slag and leather in the upper that the position chosen for the 1995 trial trench zones of the context. In the lower layers the was wrong in that it was too far down-slope and context contained evidence of an earlier probably more in the lake sediments than in any occupation in the form of large numbers of flint occupation zone. A frrrther trench site has now and chert fragments, and flint and chert been established, further up-slope than the 1995 microliths and bladelets. trial trench. This will be excavated in late 1995 Context 3 contained similar flint and chert and 1996, when it is anticipated that a more assemblages to Context 2 but chert microliths diagnostic and representative Mesolithic tool dominated as opposed to Context 2 where flint assemblage will be recovered. artefacts were predominant. Both Contexts 2 and 3 contained carbon lenses. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Contexts 4, 5 and 6 wsre devoid of any evidence The authors wish to thank the landowners Mr & of occupation other than small carbon lenses Mrs Brereton for their consent to excavate the throughout Contexts 4 and 5. site, Mr Webster of, Gleaston Castle Farm for The artefacts from the field walking exercises allowing access to ploughed land and all the wsre mainly blades, bladelets, cores, projectile students and volunteers who cheerfully served in points and fragments of flint and chert. A the trenches. number of artefacts have been selected for illustration and are shown in Fig 3. BIBLIOGRAPHY. Megaw & Simpson. Introduction to British ARTEFACT MATERIAL SOURCES Prehistory. Leicester University Press. Geological mapst and associated literature for Darvill, T., Prehistoric Britain. Batsford, the region all make mention of chert outcrops London. within the local limestone and it would appflr Report on an that tools and fragments of chert recovered are l. Salisbury, C. R., & Coupe, J.,(1994). Archaeological Excavation undertaken ar Mill Dam The chert is known to have of local origin.' Meadow, Gleaston, Cumbria, in November 1993. Gleam been readily available from two sources to the Publications. immediate east and west of the site. Samples of both outcrops have been obtained and whilst 2. Jackson, G. see his unpublished work on Wdney and different in colour, it would appear that they are other Locations. the sources of much of the material recovered. 3. Salisbury, C.R., & Sheppard, D., (1992) The Mesolithic Occupation of Heysham Head, . The flint artefacts are from a variety of sources TRANS. LANCS. & CIIESH. ANT. SOC. VOL 87. I4I- with black, ivory, blue and pink coloured flint 149. artefacts and fragments recovered in varying quantity. From the excavated horizons it would 4. Davison, K., Unpublished archives of Moat Farm Excavations (1968) held al Kendal Museum under appear that all the flint is patinated and is white Acquisition Title - ALDINGHAM EXCAVATIONS in colour. Several pieces and fragments of the

7 5. British Geological Survey lvfaps - The Ordnance 6.Bolton,J.,(1869)GeologicalFragmentsofCartrnel& Survey - London. Furness. Reprinted (1978) Michael Moon - Whitehaven.

t Ii At/,1

\

FIG 2: MILL DAM MEADOW. GLEASTON

8 FIG l: IOCATION OF GLEASTON. CUMBRIA

6a PEojectile Point

7b Long Blade - (ProxiMl End)

0 5cm

FIG 3: FLINT ARTEFACTS FROM MILL DAMMEAIX)W. GLEASTON. CUMBRIA