The Occurrence of Non-handaxe Assemblages Early in the Purfleet Interglacial (MIS 9) in Britain.

IF 1.8 Q1 ANTHROPOLOGY
Journal of paleolithic archaeology Pub Date : 2025-01-01 Epub Date: 2025-05-17 DOI:10.1007/s41982-025-00217-2
Aaron Rawlinson, Rob Davis, Nick Ashton, David Bridgland, Luke Dale, Simon Lewis, Mark White
{"title":"The Occurrence of Non-handaxe Assemblages Early in the Purfleet Interglacial (MIS 9) in Britain.","authors":"Aaron Rawlinson, Rob Davis, Nick Ashton, David Bridgland, Luke Dale, Simon Lewis, Mark White","doi":"10.1007/s41982-025-00217-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Despite the widespread acceptance of the Clactonian during the earlier part of the Hoxnian interglacial (MIS 11c) in Britain, the subsequent occurrence of a non-handaxe signature early in the following interglacial (MIS 10/9) has received less coverage and remains contentious. Recent work on MIS 9 in Britain has re-evaluated the archaeology of the period. This paper offers a critical assessment of the non-handaxe signature in MIS 9 Britain, including the addition of Redhill in East Anglia from recent excavations. The paper is an evaluation of the evidence for distinct core and flake assemblages, analysing the technology and offering a comparison with handaxe sites from the interglacial. Four non-handaxe sites can be identified in the Thames and East Anglia; the technology of the artefacts they yield represents a base line that cannot be differentiated from the wider Lower Palaeolithic other than in terms of the presence/absence of handaxe manufacture. Due to the lack of positive identifiers, the MIS 9 technology cannot be linked directly to the Clactonian and should be treated separately. Given the temporal pattern of occurrence early in the interglacial in both MIS 11 and MIS 9, and no convincing functional or raw-material explanations, the assemblages are interpreted as a cultural signature. This fits into the wider variation across Europe during the Lower Palaeolithic linked to the 'Cultural Mosaic Model', and a further example of the nuanced chronological patterns emerging in the Lower Palaeolithic of Britain.</p><p><strong>Supplementary information: </strong>The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s41982-025-00217-2.</p>","PeriodicalId":73885,"journal":{"name":"Journal of paleolithic archaeology","volume":"8 1","pages":"18"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12085398/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of paleolithic archaeology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s41982-025-00217-2","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/5/17 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANTHROPOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Despite the widespread acceptance of the Clactonian during the earlier part of the Hoxnian interglacial (MIS 11c) in Britain, the subsequent occurrence of a non-handaxe signature early in the following interglacial (MIS 10/9) has received less coverage and remains contentious. Recent work on MIS 9 in Britain has re-evaluated the archaeology of the period. This paper offers a critical assessment of the non-handaxe signature in MIS 9 Britain, including the addition of Redhill in East Anglia from recent excavations. The paper is an evaluation of the evidence for distinct core and flake assemblages, analysing the technology and offering a comparison with handaxe sites from the interglacial. Four non-handaxe sites can be identified in the Thames and East Anglia; the technology of the artefacts they yield represents a base line that cannot be differentiated from the wider Lower Palaeolithic other than in terms of the presence/absence of handaxe manufacture. Due to the lack of positive identifiers, the MIS 9 technology cannot be linked directly to the Clactonian and should be treated separately. Given the temporal pattern of occurrence early in the interglacial in both MIS 11 and MIS 9, and no convincing functional or raw-material explanations, the assemblages are interpreted as a cultural signature. This fits into the wider variation across Europe during the Lower Palaeolithic linked to the 'Cultural Mosaic Model', and a further example of the nuanced chronological patterns emerging in the Lower Palaeolithic of Britain.

Supplementary information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s41982-025-00217-2.

英国Purfleet间冰期早期非手斧组合的出现。
尽管在英国霍克斯期间冰期早期(MIS 11c)的克拉顿期被广泛接受,但随后在随后的间冰期早期(MIS 10/9)出现的非手斧特征得到的报道较少,仍然存在争议。最近在英国对MIS 9的研究重新评估了这一时期的考古学。本文对MIS 9英国的非手斧特征进行了批判性评估,包括最近发掘的东安格利亚的Redhill。本文评估了不同岩心和薄片组合的证据,分析了技术,并与间冰期的手斧遗址进行了比较。在泰晤士河和东安格利亚发现了四个非手斧遗址;它们产生的人工制品的技术代表了一个基线,除了手斧制造的存在/缺失之外,无法与更广泛的旧石器时代晚期区分开来。由于缺乏积极的标识符,MIS 9技术不能直接链接到克拉克顿,应单独处理。鉴于MIS 11和MIS 9在间冰期早期出现的时间模式,以及没有令人信服的功能或原料解释,这些组合被解释为一种文化特征。这与旧石器时代晚期欧洲更广泛的变化相吻合,这种变化与“文化马赛克模型”有关,也是英国旧石器时代晚期出现的微妙时间模式的进一步例子。补充资料:在线版本包含补充资料,网址为10.1007/s41982-025-00217-2。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信