The Archaeological Potential of Secondary Contexts

Module 2 - Implications for the Archaeological Record

In general, the evidence suggests a model of rapid, episodic fluvial activity during mid-late marine isotope stage 8 (270-245 kya?), possibly related to short-term climatic oscillations, interspersed with periods of stability and landsurface development. The Broom evidence therefore provides support to the model of fluvial sequences presented in the module 1.

With respect to the archaeological content of the Broom sediments, a series of preliminary observations can be drawn:

1. If the artefacts are all contemporary with their individual sedimentary contexts (lower gravels, middle beds, upper gravels), the Broom assemblage represents several thousand years of occupation in the River Axe landscape. Under this model, the presence of a repetitive morphological form (amygdaloid handaxes) within the assemblage requires detailed investigation with respect to: its provenance (are all these artefacts from the middle beds?); the possibilities of transmitting techno-cultural knowledge over such a long time-span; the potential relationships between the raw materials and artefact morphology.
2. If the artefacts represent a single occupation, what mechanisms can explain their incorporation throughout a sedimentary sequence that accumulated episodically over several thousand years?
3. Although it is possible that the artefacts recovered from the upper gravels were re-worked during late stage 8 by erosional processes from the fine-grained middle beds sediments, this interpretation cannot explain their presence in the lower gravels.
4. For significant periods of time, the River Axe floodplain (a boreal environment with pine woods and grasslands) would have been inhabitable, with stable landsurfaces forming on the fluvial sediments. The floodplain would therefore act as an intermittent, potential location for episodic hominid activity and artefact discard, prior to their subsequent incorporation with the fine and coarse-grained sediments.
5. If the artefacts have been fluvially transported prior to their incorporation within the sediments, can any assessment be made of their spatial and temporal origins?

These issues will all central to the understanding of the secondary context archaeology, and will be addressed in the second phase of the project.

Go back to Module 2 Introduction | Return to top