The British Earlier Upper Palaeolithic: Settlement and Chronology

Jacobi, Roger; Higham, Thomas

doi:10.1016/b978-0-444-53597-9.00011-x

Cited by 12 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 72 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…sediment excavated during the TNHS excavation would have been impractical, so the system of hand sorting was a practical solution to a problem posed by the nature of the sediment. The recovery of small spalls resulting from scraper retouch shows that the recovery of finds was in fact very efficient (Jacobi & Higham, 2011).…”

Section: Excavation Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Dorothy Garrod (1926) had identified material from Pengelly's 4 ft (1.21 m) level as Middle Aurignacian, whereas material from the TNHS excavations, supposedly from a deeper level, had been assigned by the Abbé Breuil to the Upper Aurignacian, thus implying an inverted stratigraphy (Beynon et al, 1929a;1929b). However modern study has not supported the attribution of the Kent's Cavern Aurignacian assemblage to more than one industry (Jacobi & Higham, 2011). Moreover the only lithic artefacts illustrated by Garrod (1926) from the Vestibule are culturally undiagnostic (R. Dinnis, pers.…”

Section: Stratigraphy Of the Vestibule Cave Earthmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…In fact this affects very few findsno artefacts and only fifteen bones and teeth of animals were recorded from Trench C over this period. It affects only the deepest dated sample used in the Bayesian analysis reported by Jacobi and Higham (2011) and Higham et al (2011), and in no way invalidates the analysis; indeed the sample concerned lies at least 4 ft (1.21 m) below the next sample higher in the sequence and it is simply modelled as being below the archaeology and at the bottom.…”

Section: Recording and Publicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Determinations of other rhinoceros bones above this find spot were also underestimates, by some 2000 years. White and Pettitt (2012: 22) criticize the selection of samples by Jacobi and Higham (2011) to date the Kent's Cavern sequence, saying that the approach contradicts their written recommendations for selecting good samples for radiocarbon dating. At Kent's Cavern it was sadly not possible to select cut-marked or humanly modified bones, because apart from one bone pin there were none, probably due to the activities of hyenas (Jacobi, 2007).…”

Section: New Radiocarbon Datingmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

The Age and Context of the KC4 Maxilla, Kent's Cavern, UK

Proctor¹,

Douka

Proctor³

et al. 2017

Eur. j. archaeol.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Kent's Cavern is one of Britain's most important Palaeolithic sites. The Torquay Natural History Society excavations in the Vestibule (1926–1928 and 1932–1938) yielded Middle and Early Upper Palaeolithic deposits as well as a fragment of human jaw (KC4). Higham et al. (2011) recently identified it as the oldest modern human fossil known from North West Europe, with a date estimated, using Bayesian modelling, at 44,200–41,500 cal bp (at 95.4% probability). However, White and Pettitt (2012) and Zilhão (2013) have claimed that the poor quality of the excavations and lack of stratigraphic integrity cast doubt on the archaeological and dating evidence from the site. Here, we present a thorough re-analysis of the excavations and show that they were in fact conducted to a reasonable standard. We also carefully examine the stratigraphic and sedimentological sequence and present twelve new AMS determinations from key contexts to test the previous model and chronology. We find that, while Trench C has good stratigraphic integrity, there is some evidence of post-depositional disruption of certain parts; some post-depositional movement is also shown by a limited number of artefact refits. There are two outlying AMS determinations dating to c. 32,000 bp. We therefore cannot exclude completely the possibility that the maxilla's age could be younger than the published probability distribution function (PDF). Our analysis lends support to the assessment by Higham et al. (2011) of the site and KC4 and shows that it offers considerable potential for future study.

show abstract

Section: Excavation Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Stratigraphy Of the Vestibule Cave Earthmentioning

confidence: 97%

Section: Recording and Publicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: New Radiocarbon Datingmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The Age and Context of the KC4 Maxilla, Kent's Cavern, UK

Proctor¹,

Douka

Proctor³

et al. 2017

Eur. j. archaeol.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…During the Last Glacial Maximum much of Scotland and upland Wales would have been under an ice sheet that was up to one kilometre thick in places, and cold winds and dry air would have prevailed across Britain. This severe environment seems to have been too difficult to deal with, even for the resourceful first modern humans, and Britain was deserted once more, probably by around 28,000 years ago [41].…”

Section: Still Coming and Goingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prehistory of the British Isles: A Tale of Coming and Going

Groote

Lewis

Stringer

2018

BMSAP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It is now recognised that Britain has not always been geographically isolated from Europe and, for most of the last one million years, formed an extension of the northwest European landmass. During most of this time, Britain was accessible to migrating humans and animals, although climatic conditions varied greatly from Mediterranean-like through to glaciations and extreme cold, making Britain a difficult place to settle for any length of time. The oldest evidence for humans in Britain dates to between about 850,000 and 1 million years ago. Recovered lithic artefacts suggest that hominin species occupied and deserted the British Isles at least nine times. This article reviews the prehistory of the British Isles and presents the main sites and time periods.

show abstract

A Cut‐marked and Fractured Mesolithic Human Bone from Kent's Cavern, Devon, UK

Schulting

Bello

Chandler

et al. 2012

Intl J of Osteoarchaeology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An isolated adult human ulna fragment recovered from the ‘black mould’ layer of Kent's Cavern by William Pengelly in 1866 exhibits a series of stone tool cut marks. The specimen has been directly AMS 14C‐dated to 7314–7075 cal bc (OxA‐20588: 8185 ± 38 bp) and may be from the same individual as a maxilla fragment dated to the same period. The cut marks are located on the olecranon process, in a position indicative of dismemberment, whereas the fracture characteristics of the bone furthermore suggest peri‐mortem breakage, typical of butchery for the extraction of marrow. We here present and discuss the specimen and consider both ritual mortuary treatment and anthropophagy as possible explanations. Although it is difficult to interpret a single element in isolation, the latter scenario seems to be better supported and is not without parallel in prehistoric Europe, as indicated by a review of the available literature. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

show abstract

The British Earlier Upper Palaeolithic: Settlement and Chronology

Cited by 12 publications

References 72 publications

The Age and Context of the KC4 Maxilla, Kent's Cavern, UK

The Age and Context of the KC4 Maxilla, Kent's Cavern, UK

Prehistory of the British Isles: A Tale of Coming and Going

A Cut‐marked and Fractured Mesolithic Human Bone from Kent's Cavern, Devon, UK

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About