Unit 1: Prehistoric Britain
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Load more
Recommended publications
-
Archaeological Features of the Iron Age in Southern Britain
Ouachita Baptist University Scholarly Commons @ Ouachita Honors Theses Carl Goodson Honors Program 1982 Archaeological Features of the Iron Age in Southern Britain Karen V. Wallace Ouachita Baptist University Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarlycommons.obu.edu/honors_theses Part of the Ancient, Medieval, Renaissance and Baroque Art and Architecture Commons Recommended Citation Wallace, Karen V., "Archaeological Features of the Iron Age in Southern Britain" (1982). Honors Theses. 677. https://scholarlycommons.obu.edu/honors_theses/677 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Carl Goodson Honors Program at Scholarly Commons @ Ouachita. It has been accepted for inclusion in Honors Theses by an authorized administrator of Scholarly Commons @ Ouachita. For more information, please contact [email protected]. ARCHAEOLOGICAL FEATURES OF THE IRON AGE IN SOUTHERN BRITAIN An Honors Independent Study Project Submitted By Karen V. Wallace To The Honors Council 0~ Ouachita Baptist University May 4, 1982 I. INTRODUCTION An OBU Honors Special Studies Grant, matched by a donation from a private source, enabled me to spend five weeks during the summer of 1981 studying British archaeology, particularly that of the Iron Age, at Christ College, Cam bridge. After one week of extensive lectures at the college and one week of touring major archaeological sites of the area, five other American students and I spent two and one half weeks at the Claydon Pike excavation near Fairford, Gloucestershire. During our stay at the dig the excavation director, Dr. David Miles, and the assistant director~ - Simon Palmer, both of Oxford University and the Oxfordshire Archaeological Unit, delivered several lectures on the Iron A~e, Claydon Pike, and other excavations in the area that dated from the same period. -
Ulug-Depe and the Transition Period from Bronze Age to Iron Age in Central Asia
Ulug-depe and the transition period from Bronze Age to Iron Age in Central Asia. A tribute to V.I. Sarianidi Johanna Lhuillier To cite this version: Johanna Lhuillier. Ulug-depe and the transition period from Bronze Age to Iron Age in Central Asia. A tribute to V.I. Sarianidi . Dubova, N.A., Antonova, E.V., Kozhin, P.M., Kosarev, M.F., Muradov, R.G., Sataev, R.M. & Tishkin A.A. Transactions of Margiana Archaeological Expedition, To the memory of Professor Viktor Sarianidi, 6, Staryj Sad, pp.509-521, 2016, 978-5-89930-150-6. halshs-01534928 HAL Id: halshs-01534928 https://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-01534928 Submitted on 8 Jun 2017 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. N.N. MIKLUKHO-MAKLAY INSTITUTE OF ETHNOLOGY AND ANTHROPOLOGY OF RUSSIAN ACADEMY OF SCIENCES MARGIANA ARCHAEOLOGICAL EXPEDITION ALTAY STATE UNIVERSITY TRANSACTIONS OF MARGIANA ARCHAEOLOGICAL EXPEDITION Volume 6 To the Memory of Professor Victor Sarianidi Editorial board N.A. Dubova (editor in chief), E.V. Antonova, P.M. Kozhin, M.F. Kosarev, R.G. Muradov, R.M. Sataev, A.A. Tishkin Moscow 2016 Туркменистан, Гонур-депе, 9 октября 2005 г. -
Bronze Age Iron Age Anglo-Saxons the Mayflower Thames Tunnel The
Monday 11th – Friday 15th May 2020 History Think about what the word ancient means. Which description below do you think is the most accurate? 1. Ancient means a period of time five years ago. 2. Ancient means a period of time five hundred years ago. 3. Ancient means a period of time five thousand years ago. This half term, we will be looking at a time in history when people lived many thousands of years ago. People who lived many thousands of years ago lived in what we call ancient times. There were three main time periods (long lengths of time) in ancient times in Britain (the country we live in). We call these periods of time the Stone Age, the Bronze Age and the Iron Age. Bronze and iron are types of metal. Why do you think these periods of time were named after metals? Look at the pictures below. Can you match the ancient artefact (object) to the right time period? What clues can you see? We will be looking in more detail at the Bronze Age and Iron Age – they both happened after the Stone Age. The Bronze Age began around 2,100BCE (over 4,000 years ago). It lasted for around 1500 years until 750BCE when the Iron Age began. Bronze Age Anglo-Saxons Thames Tunnel 2,100BCE 750BCE 55BCE 0 410 1620 1825 1940 2020 Iron Age The Mayflower The Blitz Just like the Stone Age when early humans made tools from stone, the Bronze Age was called that because humans started making tools from…bronze! The Bronze Age started at different times around the world – depending on when humans in different countries discovered how to make bronze by mixing other metals together. -
Homes for Hunters? Exploring the Concept of Home at Hunter-Gatherer Sites in Upper Paleolithic Europe and Epipaleolithic Southwest Asia
Current Anthropology Volume 60, Number 1, February 2019 91 Homes for Hunters? Exploring the Concept of Home at Hunter-Gatherer Sites in Upper Paleolithic Europe and Epipaleolithic Southwest Asia by Lisa A. Maher and Margaret Conkey In both Southwest Asia and Europe, only a handful of known Upper Paleolithic and Epipaleolithic sites attest to aggregation or gatherings of hunter-gatherer groups, sometimes including evidence of hut structures and highly structured use of space. Interpretation of these structures ranges greatly, from mere ephemeral shelters to places “built” into a landscape with meanings beyond refuge from the elements. One might argue that this ambiguity stems from a largely functional interpretation of shelters that is embodied in the very terminology we use to describe them in comparison to the homes of later farming communities: mobile hunter-gatherers build and occupy huts that can form campsites, whereas sedentary farmers occupy houses or homes that form communities. Here we examine some of the evidence for Upper Paleolithic and Epipaleolithic structures in Europe and Southwest Asia, offering insights into their complex “functions” and examining perceptions of space among hunter-gatherer communities. We do this through examination of two contemporary, yet geographically and culturally distinct, examples: Upper Paleolithic (especially Magdalenian) evidence in Western Europe and the Epipaleolithic record (especially Early and Middle phases) in Southwest Asia. A comparison of recent evidence for hut structures from these regions suggests several similarities in the nature of these structures, their association with activities related to hunter-gatherer aggregation, and their being “homes” imbued with quotidian and symbolic meaning. All of this is my home temporary, yet geographically and culturally distinct, exam- these fjords rivers lakes ples: the EP record (especially Early and Middle phases) in the cold the sunlight the storms Southwest Asia and the UP (especially Magdalenian) evidence The night and day of the fields in Western Europe. -
Iron Age and a Mobile Roman Population Paper for Britannia By
‘Are you local’?1 The ‘indigenous’ Iron Age and a mobile Roman population Paper for Britannia By Richard Hingley, Chiara Bonacchi and Kate Sharpe Abstract The Iron Age and Roman periods are often defined against each other through the establishment of dualities, such as barbarity–civilisation, or continuity–progress. Despite criticisms, dualities remain prevalent in the National Curriculum for schools, television, museum displays and in some academic research. Recent scientific studies on human origins, for example, have communicated the idea of an ‘indigenous’ Iron Age, setting this against a mobile and diverse Roman-period population. There is also evidence for citizens leveraging dualities to uphold different positions on contemporary issues of mobility, in the UK and internationally. This paper discusses the values and limitations of such binary thinking and considers how ideas of ambiguity and temporal distancing can serve to challenge attempts to use the past too directly as an analogy for the present. Keywords: Celtic, heritage, indigenous, Iron Age, dualities, mobility, Roman Britain This article has published in a revised form in Britannia. This version is free to view and download for private research and study only. Not for re-distribution, re-sale or use in derivative works. The Author(s) 2018. Published by The Society for the Promotion of Roman Studies 1 Dyson, Gattis, Pemberton and Shearsmith (1999). !1 Introduction2 There is a considerable body of literature on the history of the study of the Iron Age and the reception -
Neolithic Report
RESEARCH DEPARTMENT REPORT SERIES no. 29-2011 ISSN 1749-8775 REVIEW OF ANIMAL REMAINS FROM THE NEOLITHIC AND EARLY BRONZE AGE OF SOUTHERN BRITAIN (4000 BC – 1500 BC) ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES REPORT Dale Serjeantson ARCHAEOLOGICAL SCIENCE Research Department Report Series 29-2011 REVIEW OF ANIMAL REMAINS FROM THE NEOLITHIC AND EARLY BRONZE AGE OF SOUTHERN BRITAIN (4000 BC – 1500 BC) Dale Serjeantson © English Heritage ISSN 1749-8775 The Research Department Report Series, incorporates reports from all the specialist teams within the English Heritage Research Department: Archaeological Science; Archaeological Archives; Historic Interiors Research and Conservation; Archaeological Projects; Aerial Survey and Investigation; Archaeological Survey and Investigation; Architectural Investigation; Imaging, Graphics and Survey; and the Survey of London. It replaces the former Centre for Archaeology Reports Series, the Archaeological Investigation Report Series, and the Architectural Investigation Report Series. Many of these are interim reports which make available the results of specialist investigations in advance of full publication. They are not usually subject to external refereeing, and their conclusions may sometimes have to be modified in the light of information not available at the time of the investigation. Where no final project report is available, readers are advised to consult the author before citing these reports in any publication. Opinions expressed in Research Department Reports are those of the author(s) and are not necessarily those of English Heritage. Requests for further hard copies, after the initial print run, can be made by emailing: [email protected]. or by writing to English Heritage, Fort Cumberland, Fort Cumberland Road, Eastney, Portsmouth PO4 9LD Please note that a charge will be made to cover printing and postage. -
The Archaeology of Britain's First Modern Humans
The archaeology of Britain’s first modern humans Rob Dinnis∗ The sites of the first modern humans Research who occupied what is now Britain have been reduced to a handful by subsequent glaciation and the rise in sea level, and their assemblages have been further depleted because early excavators ignored the microliths. Confronting the challenges of this exiguous material, the author succeeds in painting a vivid picture of Aurignacian hunters following prey down the now submerged Channel River Valley, colonising the preferred hilly zones at the west of Britain. The presence of two types of bladelet manufacture suggests a lengthy or repeated period of subsequent occupation. Keywords: Britain, Europe, Upper Palaeolithic, Aurignacian, Paviland burin, burin busqu´e Introduction: the Aurignacian Indigenous European Neanderthals were replaced by incoming modern humans about 40– 35 000 BP. Although the intricacies of this event continue to be debated, there is broad consensus that the Aurignacian culture (c. 38–30 000 BP) was created by the first modern humans to successfully occupy the entire continent (e.g. Kozłowski & Otte 2000; Davies 2001; Zilhao˜ & d’Errico 2003; Conard 2006; Zilhao˜ 2006; Mellars et al. 2007; Joris¨ & Street 2008; Bailey et al. 2009). European Aurignacian assemblages are found from Russia in the east, to Britain, France and Iberia in the west. These assemblages contain conspicuous evidence for many capabilities and behaviours associated with extant humans, including complex language, music and symbolic material culture (e.g. Vanhaeren & d’Errico 2006; Conard 2009; Conard et al. 2009). The last decade has seen significant advances in our understanding of the Middle–Upper Palaeolithic transition (e.g. -
Maidstone Area Archaeological Group, Should Be Sent to Jess Obee (Address at End) Or Payments Made at One of the Meetings
Maidstone Area Archaeological Group Newsletter, March 2000 Dear Fellow Members As there is a host of announcements, I will hold over the Editorial until the next Newsletter, due in May (sighs of relief all round). David Carder Subscriptions and Membership Cards Subscriptions for the year beginning 1st April 2000 are now due. Please use the renewal form enclosed with this Newsletter, and complete as much as of it as possible - that way we can establish what members' interests really are. Return the form with your cheque by post to Jess Obee (address at end), or hand it with cheque or cash to any Committee Member who will give you a receipt. Renewing members will receive a handy Membership Card with the May Newsletter, giving details of indoor meetings, subscription rates, and contacts. In order to comply with the data protection legislation, we have included on the form a consent that your details may be held on a computer database. This data is held purely for membership administration (e.g. printing of address labels and registration of subscription payments). It will not be used for other purposes, or released to outside parties without your express consent. If you have any queries or concerns over this, please write to the Chairman. Notice of Annual General Meeting - Friday 28th April 2000 This year's AGM will be held at 7.30 pm on Friday 28th April 2000 (not 21st as previously published) at the School Hall, The Street, Detling. The Agenda is as follows : 1. Chairman's welcome 2. Apologies for absence 3. -
Stone Age to Iron Age All Dates Shown Below Are Approximate
Key dates to learn: Key Vocabulary to use: Stone Age to Iron Age All dates shown below are approximate. Chronology The arrangement of dates or events in the order in 800,000 BC Earliest footprints in Year 3 which they occurred. Britain The period of prehistory in Britain generally refers to the time before BC A way of dating years written records began. It begins when the earliest hunter-gatherers Before Christ before the birth of Jesus. The bigger the number 10,000 BC End of the last Ice came to Britain from Europe around 450,000 BC and ends with the BC, the longer ago in Age invasion of the Romans in AD 43. history is was. AD “In the year of our 4000 BC Adoption of agriculture The Stone Age, Bronze Age and Iron Age covers 98% of human Anno Domini Lord”. AD is used to show dates after the birth history in Britain. The evolution of humans from the earliest hominins of Jesus. This year is AD 3000 BC Stonehenge started to Homo sapiens occurred in this period. Some of the major advances 2019. in technology were achieved, including the control of fire, agriculture, Archaeology The study of the 3000 BC Skara Brae built buildings, graves, tools metalworking and the wheel. and other objects that 2300 BC Bronze working belonged to people who STONE AGE lived in the past, in order introduced to learn about their Palaeolithic to 10,000 BC culture and society. 1200 BC First hillforts Prehistoric Belonging to the time Mesolithic to 4000 BC before written records 800 BCE Ironworking introduced were made. -
QECP and Butser Ancient Farm
QECP and Butser Ancient Farm Butser Hill is the highest point on the South Downs Way and the descent from the flat summit to Queen Elizabeth Country Park (QECP) is not to be missed. Tea and cakes in QECP Visitor Centre cafe will give you the energy to cycle through the forest back up to the South Downs ridge above Buriton. Then follows a long gentle descent and a sharp climb through country lanes to Chalton and the fascinating Butser Ancient Farm. The trail starts at the Sustainability Centre above East Meon, grid reference SU676191 , post code GU32 1HR . The distance is 13.2 miles or 21.3 kms with an ascent of 1319 feet or 402 metres. Butser Hill : at 271 metres (889 ft) high this chalk hill is one of the highest points in Hampshire and the highest point on the South Downs ridge. On the flat summit there are panoramic views in all directions. The hill was used for growing wheat but now the only farming activity is sheep grazing. Butser Hill National Nature Reserve is designated a Site of Special Scientific Interest. Queen Elizabeth Country Park (QECP) is Hampshire’s biggest Country Park with 2,000 acres of open access woodland and downland set within the South Downs National Park, including the Butser Hill National Nature Reserve. The main facilities of the park are open all year round and include a visitor centre with shop, café, theatre and activity area. There are 2 children play areas, BBQ sites, picnic areas and 20 miles of trails for walking, cycling and horse riding. -
Andronovo Problem: Studies of Cultural Genesis in the Eurasian Bronze Age
Open Archaeology 2021; 7: 3–36 Review Stanislav Grigoriev* Andronovo Problem: Studies of Cultural Genesis in the Eurasian Bronze Age https://doi.org/10.1515/opar-2020-0123 received June 8, 2020; accepted November 28, 2020. Abstract: Andronovo culture is the largest Eurasian formation in the Bronze Age, and it had a significant impact on neighboring regions. It is the important culture for understanding many historical processes, in particular, the origins and migration of Indo-Europeans. However, in most works there is a very simplified understanding of the scientific problems associated with this culture. The history of its study is full of opposing opinions, and all these opinions were based on reliable grounds. For a long time, the existence of the Andronovo problem was caused by the fact that researchers supposed they might explain general processes by local situations. In fact, the term “Andronovo culture” is incorrect. Another term “Andronovo cultural-historical commonality” also has no signs of scientific terminology. Under these terms a large number of cultures are combined, many of which were not related to each other. In the most simplified form, they can be combined into two blocks that existed during the Bronze Age: the steppe (Sintashta, Petrovka, Alakul, Sargari) and the forest-steppe (Fyodorovka, Cherkaskul, Mezhovka). Often these cultures are placed in vertical lines with genetic continuity. However, the problems of their chronology and interaction are very complicated. By Andronovo cultures we may understand only Fyodorovka and Alakul cultures (except for its early stage); however, it is better to avoid the use of this term. Keywords: Andronovo culture, history of study, Eurasia 1 Introduction The Andronovo culture of the Bronze Age is the largest archaeological formation in the world, except for the cultures of the Scytho-Sarmatian world of the Early Iron Age. -
Unit 10 Chalcolithic and Early Iron Age-I
UNIT 10 CHALCOLITHIC AND EARLY IRON AGE-I Structure 10.0 Objectives 10.1 Introduction 10.2 Ochre Coloured Pottery Culture 10.3 The Problems of Copper Hoards 10.4 Black and Red Ware Culture 10.5 Painted Grey Ware Culture 10.6 Northern Black Polished Ware Culture 10.6.1 Structures 10.6.2 Pottery 10.6.3 Other Objects 10.6.4 Ornaments 10.6.5 Terracotta Figurines 10.6.6 Subsistence Economy and Trade 10.7 Chalcolithic Cultures of Western, Central and Eastern India 10.7.1 Pottery: Diagnostic Features 10.7.2 Economy 10.7.3 Houses and Habitations 10.7.4 Other 'characteristics 10.7.5 Religion/Belief Systems 10.7.6 Social Organization 10.8 Let Us Sum Up 10.9 Key Words 10.10 Answers to Check Your Progress Exercises 10.0 OBJECTIVES In Block 2, you have learnt about'the antecedent stages and various aspects of Harappan culture and society. You have also read about its geographical spread and the reasons for its decline and diffusion. In this unit we shall learn about the post-Harappan, Chalcolithic, and early Iron Age Cultures of northern, western, central and eastern India. After reading this unit you will be able to know about: a the geographical location and the adaptation of the people to local conditions, a the kind of houses they lived in, the varieties of food they grew and the kinds of tools and implements they used, a the varietie of potteries wed by them, a the kinds of religious beliefs they had, and a the change occurring during the early Iron age.