Maritime Havens in Earlier Prehistoric Britain

Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society http://journals.cambridge.org/PPR Additional services for Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society: Email alerts: Click here Subscriptions: Click here Commercial reprints: Click here Terms of use : Click here Maritime Havens in Earlier Prehistoric Britain Richard Bradley, Alice Rogers, Fraser Sturt, Aaron Watson, Diana Coles, Julie Gardiner and Ronnie Scott Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society / FirstView Article / February 2016, pp 1 - 35 DOI: 10.1017/ppr.2015.22, Published online: 09 February 2016 Link to this article: http://journals.cambridge.org/abstract_S0079497X15000225 How to cite this article: Richard Bradley, Alice Rogers, Fraser Sturt, Aaron Watson, Diana Coles, Julie Gardiner and Ronnie Scott Maritime Havens in Earlier Prehistoric Britain. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society, Available on CJO 2016 doi:10.1017/ ppr.2015.22 Request Permissions : Click here Downloaded from http://journals.cambridge.org/PPR, by Username: courtneynimura, IP address: 163.1.117.122 on 22 Feb 2016 Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society, page 1 of 35 © The Prehistoric Society doi:10.1017/ppr.2015.22 Maritime Havens in Earlier Prehistoric Britain By RICHARD BRADLEY1, ALICE ROGERS2, FRASER STURT3, and AARON WATSON4 with contributions by DIANA COLES5, JULIE GARDINER6, and RONNIE SCOTT7 It is widely accepted that between the beginning of the Early Neolithic period and the end of the Early Bronze Age different regions of Britain were connected to one another by sea, but little is known about the nature of maritime contacts before plank-built boats developed during the 2nd millennium BC. This paper considers a series of coastal sites, some of which were first settled from Mesolithic times. From the early 4th millennium they were also associated with artefact production and the use of imported objects and raw materials. Their distribution focuses on the region of isostatic uplift in northern Britain where the ancient shoreline still survives. It is considered in relation to a new model of coastal change which suggests that these locations were characterised by natural havens sheltered behind islands or bars. The sites can be compared with the ‘landing places’ and ‘beach markets’ discussed by historical archaeologists in recent years. Keywords: Neolithic, Chalcolithic, Bronze Age, navigation, harbours, beach markets, seamarks, craft production, coastal change, sand dunes, Culbin Sands INTRODUCTION where strangers came in contact with one another and (Richard Bradley) where objects were made and exchanged. In recent years historical archaeologists have described such sites This article discusses a series of places along the British as ‘beach markets’, but when prehistoric material of coast which are associated with exceptional collections similar character is found there, it is seldom discussed. of artefacts dating from the period between 4000 and That is unfortunate as it identifies an element that is 2000 BC, although activity sometimes extended outside missing from the maritime archaeology of the earlier that range. With just one exception, they are found in prehistoric period. Instead it has investigated other the area of isostatic uplift where the ancient shoreline issues. There have been important accounts of sea survives. None has been recorded in much detail and levels and the evolution of the coast, marine currents, most of the original findspots are inaccessible today. and prevailing winds (Van de Noort 2011; Sturt Nevertheless they bear a striking resemblance to a series et al. 2013). Other writers have considered the sea of early medieval sites, some of them in the same routes leading between different regions (McGrail locations. Both groups are associated with large num- 1993; Callaghan & Scarre 2009). There has been bers of artefacts, including objects of non-local origin, an emphasis on the relationship between logboats, and with striking evidence for craft production. skin boats, and more sophisticated craft. Which were The early medieval examples were where travellers used for inland travel, and which were better suited for embarked and landed – they provided neutral locations long distance voyages? Van de Noort (2011) considers 1 the history of maritime technology in the British Isles. University of Reading; [email protected] The direct evidence is limited, but the first plank-built 2University of Reading; [email protected] vessels so far recorded date from the Early Bronze Age. 3University of Southampton; [email protected] [email protected] As he says, it may be no accident that the few [email protected] surviving traces of such boats are in regions which [email protected] provide evidence of connections with the Continent at [email protected] this time (Van de Noort 2011, chap. 8). 1 THE PREHISTORIC SOCIETY Where did these vessels come from, and where did The earlier prehistoric archaeology of Culbin shares their crews disembark? There are numerous signs of many features with that of Hengistbury Head and the contacts between different parts of Britain, some of Luce Sands – two places whose earlier prehistory has which must have been by sea, but the role of natural been investigated in recent years. A common element harbours has hardly been discussed. Recent research is their topography which they share with the find- has emphasised the importance of long distance travel spots of similar collections from the coast. All are in from the Neolithic period onwards, whether it was regions where the ancient shoreline survives, and this concerned with the introduction of domesticates, account offers a new reconstruction of the local sea the acquisition of artefacts and materials, or the levels. Such places were associated with sheltered transmission of religious beliefs and the practice of harbours and were separated from open water by pilgrimage (Sheridan 2010; Anderson-Whymark & offshore islands or bars. Most were at river mouths Garrow 2015; Wilkin & Vander Linden 2015), but and are characterised by sand dunes today. Again there is little to show how any of these connections comparison with the early historical period suggests were formed. Large numbers of people may have that these were among the pivotal locations in a assembled at enclosures and others could have pattern of maritime contact. In most cases they were gathered for funerals (Oestigaard & Goldhahn 2006), offset from the distribution of large prehistoric monu- but this was often a feature of inland areas. Is there ments which were confinedtoinlandareas.Thisstudy comparable evidence from the shoreline? considers the wider implications of such evidence in It is here that prehistorians can learn from their relation to maritime travel during earlier prehistory and colleagues who study later periods. Two kinds of site suggests how the model might extend to regions in have featured in recent research: ‘landing places’ and which the ancient coast has been submerged. ‘maritime havens’. There is a fine distinction between them, for the term ‘haven’ implies a sheltered mooring which could have been employed over a period of ‘ ’ THE SHORELINE IN PREHISTORIC AND HISTORICAL time. Landing places played a more ephemeral role ARCHAEOLOGY and for that reason they are more difficult to identify (Richard Bradley) (Ilves 2009). Historical archaeologists have also studied the social and economic significance of these If similar phenomena have been identified by locations (Loveluck & Tys 2006), and their work prehistorians and historical archaeologists, those investigates the relationship between inland communities common elements have seldom been compared. This is and people who lived by the sea. Our paper considers an especially apparent at the most extensive of all these earlier period in which skin boats may have been used complexes, the Culbin Sands in north-east Scotland for long distance travel and advocates a new integration (Fig. 1). They are located on the Moray Firth which between maritime and terrestrial archaeology. provides access from the North Sea to the Great Glen – It has several components: it begins by considering an important route to Ireland. The artefacts recovered the specialised locations that historical archaeologists from the dunes represent one of the largest collections have interpreted as ‘beach markets’. Several are asso- from anywhere in Britain (National Museum of ciated with large collections of earlier prehistoric Antiquities 1892), but accounts of this material have artefacts, but these finds have not been considered in been divided between the Iron Age and Pictish periods, the same terms. This article presents a new analysis of on the one hand (Carver 1999, 57), and the Neolithic, the prehistoric material from the Culbin Sands in Chalcolithic, and Early Bronze Age, on the other north-east Scotland which includes some obvious (Black 1891; Callander 1911; Clarke 2004). The later imports and provides evidence of craft production. material can be related to discoveries in the sur- The dunes were located at a river mouth. They were rounding area. The metalwork and Roman imports cut off from the surrounding region and associated resemble artefacts found at settlements, and the with a sheltered harbour that provided access to the remarkable group of material dating from the 1st hinterland. These features recall the role of Culbin millennium AD emphasises the close relationship during the Iron Age and Pictish periods, when it is between the dunes and the defended centre

Load more