Durham E-Theses The making of the British early Palaeolithic, 1880-1960 O'Connor, Anne How to cite: O'Connor, Anne (2003) The making of the British early Palaeolithic, 1880-1960, Durham theses, Durham University. Available at Durham E-Theses Online: http://etheses.dur.ac.uk/3709/ Use policy The full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that: • a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in Durham E-Theses • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders. Please consult the full Durham E-Theses policy for further details. Academic Support Oce, Durham University, University Oce, Old Elvet, Durham DH1 3HP e-mail: [email protected] Tel: +44 0191 334 6107 http://etheses.dur.ac.uk The making of the British Early Palaeolithic, 1880-1960 Anne O'Connor Department of Archaeology Thesis submitted for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy At the University of Durham 2003 Volume 1 ofl 'And there were giants in those days' Watercolour of Scottish scenery and giant hammer labelled 'Hutton'. The inscription reads: 'And there were giants in those days'. J ames Hutton was a pioneer of geological research. Reproduced courtesy of Imperial College, London (Pencil signature 'E.J': ICL: KGNRamsay/4/5/6). 2 8 APR 2004 Anne O'Connor The Making of the British Early Palaeolithic, 1880-1960 Thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, 2003 Abstract This historical study explores the character of interpretations of the British Palaeolithic record between c. 1880 and c. 1960, focusing on attempts to classify and order the Early Palaeolithic industries. Interpretations were developed through complex interactions between individuals and groups, who were influenced by a range of aims, expectations and research opportunities. The impact of their contributions was partly dependent upon academic standing and the style of approach taken within the competitive arena of day-to-day research. General expectations of industrial patterning were founded upon the Early Palaeolithic industrial sequence from Western Europe, particularly the chronological succession from the Somme Valley, France, where the hand-axe was the most notable artefact. The assumption of progression and the use of prominent type-fossils such as the hand-axe in classifying and ordering industries coloured interpretations of the British Early Palaeolithic sequence. This is evident even in the approaches to the naturally-fractured stones known as 'eoliths'. The idea of a single, progressive line of industries also fuelled argument over the position and affinities of the flake-rich Clactonian industry in the 191 Os and 1920s. In the wake of rising uncertainties, the parallel culture scheme proposed by Henri Breuil achieved great popularity in the 1930s. The value of the Palaeolithic industrial sequence as a relative Quaternary chronology encouraged a complex interdependence between interpretations of the Palaeolithic and of the Quaternary sequence which helped to promote and to reinforce the new range of expectations that had been generated by Breuil' s scheme. However, by the mid-1940s, the rigid chronological order of industries proposed by Breuil had been weakened. By the late 1940s, researchers doubtful of the accuracy, scale and value of his scheme, expressed a desire to move away from the constraints of chronology and typology and towards more ecological and anthropological interpretations. Table of Contents List of Tables ............... l List of Illustrations ............... lll Declaration ............... Vll Statement of Copyright ............... Vll Acknowledgements ............... Vlll Terminological note ............... IX CHAPTER 1 ............... 1 Introduction 1.1: Scope of research ............... 3 1.2: Reasons for research ............... 4 1.3: The period under scrutiny ............... 6 1.3.1: The eolith debates ............... 7 1.3.2: The Clactonian, and other Early Palaeolithicjlake industries ............... 8 1.4: Methodology: a critical review of the sources used ............... 9 1.5: Chapter outline ............... 12 CHAPTER2 ............... 14 Introducing the late nineteenth century Palaeolithic research community, their assumptions and their expectations 2.1: Introducing the varied interests of the Palaeolithic researchers 16 2.1.2: Four brief vignettes ............... 17 John Evans (1823-1908) ............... 17 John Lubbock (1834-1913) ............... 18 William Boyd Dawkins (1837-1929) ............... 19 Augustus Pitt-Rivers (1827-1900) ............... 20 2.2: Subdividing the Early Palaeolithic industries: assumptions, expectations, and the development of a chronology 22 2.2.1: Lartet and Christy in the caves of France ............... 22 2.2.2: The cave I river-drift distinction ............... 25 2.2.3: The river-drift industries of Britain ............... 26 2.2.4: The Palaeolithic sequence of Gabriel de Mortillet 29 2.2.5: In summary ............... 32 2.2.6: Aside ... the use of ethnographic analogy in interpretations ofthe British Early Palaeolithic ............... 33 2.3: The development of a Quaternary framework for the British Palaeolithic ............... 36 2.3.1: The glacial chronology ............... 40 2.3.2: Geikie versus Dawkins ............... 43 2.3.3: Pre-glacial or post-glacial Palaeolithic, multiple glacial phases, and the problem of regional variation 46 2.3.4: Locating the Palaeolithic within the glacial period 4 7 2.4: The social and institutional context of British Palaeolithic research ............... 51 2.4.1: Employment for the Palaeolithic researcher in the nineteenth century .. 0 0 0 0 0 .. 0 0 0 0 0 0 51 2.4.2: Non-professional researchers 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 54 2.4.3: Societies, dissemination and debate 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 56 2.5: Conclusions 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 58 CHAPTER3 ............... 60 The British eolith debates: expectations and arguments 3.1: Background to the eolith debates 0 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 62 3.2: The Kent eolith debates: an introduction to the lbroade1r context of Palaeolithic research 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 64 3.2.1: The eolith debates in context: broader expectations of human antiquity in Britain 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 66 3.2.2: Prestwich, Harrison, and the presentation of their case 69 3.2.3: In summary: eoliths as archaeology and eoliths as fractured flints .. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 72 3.3: The pre-palaeoliths of East Anglia: a case study of the complexities behind interpretations of the §tone Age 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 77 3.3.1: Flint-fracture arguments and the pre-palaeoliths of East Anglia 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 80 Background to flint-fracture research 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 81 Moir, Lankester, Warren and Haward: diverse approaches to flint-fracture 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 84 In summary: tracing the sources of disagreement over flint-fracture research 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 90 3.3.2: Industrial patterning of the pre-palaeoliths: expectations and approaches 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 91 Concepts ofprogression and Moir 's evolving pre-palaeolithic industries 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 93 Lankester and the rostra-carinate 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 95 The evolution ofthe rostra-carinate, and links to the Palaeolithic sequence 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I 00 In summary: visions ofarchaeology and arguments over natural fracture 0 0 0 • 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 104 3.3.3: Social manipulation behind scientific debate: presenting the Sub-Crag .flints to the palaeolithic research community 105 Getting ahead in Society: society meetings and journals 105 Strategies ofterminology: the word 'eolith' 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 110 Strategies in print and in person: approaching the opposition 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 112 Strategies ofdirect confrontation with the evidence: exhibitions 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 113 'Those tricky Frenchmen': 'intelligent men & experts' 116 'Those tricky Frenchmen': 'two hasty foreigners' 119 The second visit: Breuil 's conversion at Foxhall Hall in 1920 oooooooooooooooo 122 3.4: Conclusions 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 126 CJHJ:AJPTER 4 ................ 128 EarDy Palaeolithic research in the earHy twentieth century: institutionaD collaborations and complex industrial sequences 4.1: Institutions, individuals, and impediments: the social and institutional context of palaeolithic research in the early twentieth century ................ 131 4.1.1: The Geological Survey of Great Britain ................ 134 4.1.2: The British Museum ................ 135 4.1.3: Collaboration in action: the British Museum and the Geological Survey at Swanscombe ................ 136 4.1.4: Warren at Clacton-on-Sea, and the research constraints facing non-professionals ................ 143 4.1.5: The impact of the Great War (1914-1918) ...............