Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-4rdpn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T07:33:12.484Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Hominid colonisation and the Lower and Middle Palaeolithic of the West Midlands

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 February 2014

A.T.O. Lang  and
D.H. Keen
A.T.O. Lang
Affiliation:
Birmingham Archaeology, Institute of Archaeology and Antiquity, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham B15 2TT (D.H.Keen@Bham.ac.uk) Current address: Institute of Archaeology, University of Oxford, 36, Beaumont Street, Oxford OX1 2PG
D.H. Keen
Affiliation:
Birmingham Archaeology, Institute of Archaeology and Antiquity, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham B15 2TT (D.H.Keen@Bham.ac.uk)
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The recognition over the last 20 years that the Quaternary deposits of the West Midlands cover a longer period of time than previously envisaged has led to a re-analysis of their contained Palaeolithic archaeology. Stone tools have been found in the region for over a hundred years and cover most periods of hominid colonisation from the time of the earliest occupants of the country over half a million years ago. Twentieth century research in the West Midlands, often led by Professor F. W. Shotton at the University of Birmingham, correlated the Palaeolithic of the region with the Quaternary geological sequence as it was then understood. Shotton identified the ‘Wolstonian’ glaciation as the key event of the Midlands Pleistocene, around which a chronology for the Palaeolithic could be built and gave an age of less than 250 kyr for this episode. Work since 1985 has compared the Midlands sequence with the oxygen isotope record of the ocean basins and shown that the concept of a relatively recent ‘Wolstonian’ is now untenable and that the former chronology built around it is too short for the observed events in the area. This new time paradigm, with the earliest occupation of the area thought to be c. 500 kyr, has made necessary a reconsideration of the chronology of the Palaeolithic and Middle Pleistocene of the area. This new time framework brings into critical focus the issue of reworking of the archaeology and its true age. The tools themselves present complications of analysis compared to many other areas containing a Palaeolithic record, perhaps most notably through the use of largely non-flint raw materials, some which may have been introduced into the area by early humans or an hither-to unidentified glacial event. This opportunity to present a new chronology of occupation comes out of the work carried out by the ‘Shotton Project’ based at the University of Birmingham, and by the University of Liverpool.

Résumé

La reconnaissance, au cours de ces 20 dernières années, que les dépôts du quaternaire des West Midlands couvrent une période de temps plus étendue qu'on ne l'avait envisagé auparavant a conduit à une nouvelle analyse de leur contenu archéologique paléolithique. Cela fait plus del 00 ans que l'on trouve dans la région des outils en pierre et ils couvrent la plupart des périodes de la colonisation hominidée – depuis l'époque des plus anciens occupants du pays, il y a plus d'un demi-million d'années. Au 20ème siècle les recherches dans les West Midlands, souvent sous la direction du Professeur F.W. Shotton de l'université de Birmingham, ont mis en corrélation le paléolithique de la région et la séquence géologique du quaternaire telle qu'on la comprenait alors. Shotton a identifié la glaciation Wolstonienne comme étant l'événement clé du pléistocène des Midlands, autour duquel pouvait s'établir une chronologie pour le paléolithique et a attribué un âge de moins de 250 ka pour cet épisode. Les travaux menés depuis 1985 ont comparé la séquence des Midlands avec le stade d'isotopes d'oxygène des bassins océaniques et ont démontré que le concept d'un Wolstonien relativement récent était désormais intenable et que l'ancienne chronologie établie à partir de cette base était trop courte pour les événements observés dans cette région. Ce nouveau paradigme temporel, qui estime que la plus ancienne occupation de la région se situe vers 500 ka, a rendu nécessaire une reconsidération de la chronologie du paléolithique et du pléistocène moyen de la région. Ce nouveau cadre temporel attire une attention critique sur la question de la révision de l'archéologie et de son âge réel. Les outils eux-mêmes présentent des complications pour l'analyse comparés à beaucoup d'autres régions contenant des archives paléolithiques, peut-être plus notablement à cause de l'utilisation de matières premières qui pour la plus grande partie ne sont pas du silex, certaines auraient pu être introduites dans la région par les premiers humains ou un épisode glaciaire jusqu'à présent non-identifié. Ce sont les travaux menés par le ‘projet Shotton’ basé à l'université de Birmingham, et par l'université de Liverpool qui nous offrent cette opportunité de présenter une nouvelle chronologie d'occupation.

Zusammenfassung

In den letzten 20 Jahren hat sich bestätigt, dass die Quartiären Ablagerungen der West Midlands eine längere Zeitperiode belegen, als bisher angenommen; dies hat zu einer erneuten Analyse der Paläolithischen Archäologie in dieser Region geführt. Steingeräte wurden hier für über hundert Jahre gefunden, und umfassen von der Zeit der ersten Landnahme vor über einer halben Million Jahren die meisten Perioden der Hominidenkolonisation. Die Forschung des 20. Jahrhunderts in den West Midlands, die oft von Professor F.W. Shotton von der Universität Birmingham durchgeführt wurde, korrelierte das Paläolithikum in dieser Region mit der damals bekannten Quartiären geologischen Abfolge. Shotton identifizierte die ‘Wolstonian’ Vereisung als das Schlüsselereignis des Midland Pleistozän; auf dieser Grundlage konnte eine Chronologie für das Paläolithikum mit einer Datierung von weniger als 250.000 Jahren gebildet werden. Seit 1985 haben Arbeiten die Midlands Abfolge mit den Sauerstoffisotopen-Daten der Meeresbecken verglichen und gezeigt, dass das Konzept eines relativ jungen ‘Wolstonian’ mittlerweile nicht mehr haltbar ist, und dass die bisherige Chronologie, die sich darauf gründet, für die beobachteten Ereignisse in diesem Gebiet zu kurz ist. Dieses neue Zeit-Paradigma, in dem man die früheste Okkupation des Gebietes mit c. 500.000 Jahren ansetzt, hat eine erneute Überprüfung die Chronologie des Paläolithikums und mittleren Pleistozäns in diesem Gebiet notwendig gemacht. Dieser neue zeitliche Rahmen unterstreicht die Notwendigkeit einer Neubearbeitung der Archäologie inklusiver ihrer neuen Datierung. Die Geräte weisen aber Probleme bei einer vergleichenden Analyse mit anderen Gebieten mit paläolithischen Fundstellen auf, besonders wenn man Rohmaterialien heranzieht, die nicht aus Silex sind, von denen einige Materialien vielleicht von frühen Menschen oder durch ein bisher noch nicht identifiziertes glaziales Ereignis in das Gebiet gekommen sind. Die Möglichkeit der Ausarbeitung einer neuen Chronologie der Okkupation dieses Gebietes ist ein Hauptergebnis dieser Arbeit des ‘Shotton-Projektes’ der Universität Birmingham und der Untersuchung der Universität Liverpool.

Résumen

La comprensión en los últimos 20 años de que los depósitos cuaternarios de West Midlands abarcan un periodo de tiempo más largo de lo que se pensó previamente, ha conducido a un re-análisis de la arqueología paleolítica que contenían. Durante más de cien años se han encontrado en la región objetos líticos que cubren la mayoría de los periodos de colonización homínida, desde el momento de la llegada de los primeros habitantes al país hace más de medio millón de años. La investigación durante el siglo XX en West Midlands, a menudo dirigida por el Profesor F.W Shotton de la Universidad de Birmingham, relacionó el Paleolítico de la región con la secuencia geológica del Cuaternario como era entendida en aquel entonces. Shotton identificó la glaciación ‘Wolstonian’ como el acontecimiento clave del Pleistoceno de las Midlands, alrededor del cual se podía construir una cronología del Paleolítico, y asignó una edad de menos de 250.000 años a este episodio. Trabajos realizados desde 1985 han comparado la secuencia de las Midlands con el registro de isótopos de oxígeno de los fondos oceánicos, y demuestran que el concepto de un periodo ‘Wolstonian’ relativamente reciente es ahora insostenible, y que la antigua cronología construida en base a esta datación es demasiado corta para los acontecimientos que se observan en la región. Este nuevo paradigma temporal, en el que la primera ocupación se emplaza alrededor de hace 500.000 años, ha hecho necesaria una revisión de la cronología del Paleolítico y del Pleistoceno Medio de la región. Este nuevo marco temporal resalta la importancia crítica de reelaborar la arqueología y su cronología auténtica. El análisis de los mismos útiles presenta complicaciones en comparación con otras zonas con restos paleolíticos, quizás de manera más marcada como consecuencia del empleo de grandes cantidades de materia prima que no es sílex, algunas de las cuales pueden haber sido introducidas en la región por los primeros humanos o por un evento glacial hasta ahora no identificado. Esta oportunidad de presentar una nueva cronología para la ocupación es el resultado de los trabajos realizados por el ‘Proyecto Shotton’ con sede en la Universidad de Birmingham, y por la Universidad de Liverpool.

Type
Research Article
Information
Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society , Volume 71 , 2005 , pp. 63 - 83
Copyright
Copyright © The Prehistoric Society 2005

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Ashton, N.M. & Lewis, S.G. 2002. Deserted Britain: declining populations in the British late Middle Pleistocene. Antiquity 76, 388–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ashton, N.M., Lewis, S.G. & Parfitt, S.A. (eds). 1998. Excavations at the Lower Palaeolithic Site at East Farm, Barnham, Suffolk, 1989–1994. London: British Museum Occasional Paper 125Google Scholar
Ashton, N.M., Cook, J., Lewis, S.G. & Rose, J. (eds). 1992. High Lodge: Excavations by G. de G. Sieveking 1962–8 and J. Cook 1988. London, British Museum PressGoogle Scholar
Ashton, N.M., Lewis, S.G., Parfitt, S.A., Candy, I., Keen, D.H., Kemp, R., Penkman, K., Thomas, G.N. & Whittaker, J.E. 2005. Excavations at the Lower Palaeolithic site at Elveden, Suffolk. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 71, 1–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barclay, W.J.A., Brandon, R.A., Ellison, R.A. &. Moorlock, B.S.P 1992. A Middle Pleistocene Palaeovalley–fill from west of the Malvern Hills. Journal of the Geological Society, London 149, 75–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bishop, W.W. 1958. The Pleistocene geology and geomorphology of Three Gaps in the Midland Jurassic escarpment. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B241, 255–306Google Scholar
Bridgland, D.R. 1994. The Quaternary of the Thames. London: Chapman & HallCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bridgland, D.R. 1998. The Pleistocene history and early human occupation of the River Thames valley. In Ashton, N.M., Healy, F. & Pettitt, P. (eds), Stone Age Archaeology: essays in honour of John Wymer, 29–37. Oxford: Oxbow Monograph 102Google Scholar
Bridgland, D.R. 2000. River terrace systems in north-west Europe: an archive of environmental change, uplift and early human occupation. Quaternary Science Reviews 19, 1293–303CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bridgland, D.R., Keen, D.H. & Maddy, D. 1986. A reinvestigation of the Bushley Green Terrace typesite, Hereford and Worcester. Quaternary Newsletter 50, 1–6Google Scholar
Bridgland, D.R., Keen, D.H. & Maddy, D. 1989. The Avon Terraces: Cropthorne, Ailstone & Eckington. In Keen, D. H. (ed.), The Quaternary of the West Midland: Field Guide. Cambridge, Quaternary Research Association, 51–67Google Scholar
Briggs, D.J., Coope, G.R. & Gilbertson, D.D. 1975. Late Pleistocene terrace deposits at Beckford, Worcestershire, England. Geological Journal 10, 1–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bristow, C.R. & Cox, F.C 1973. The Gipping Till: a reappraisal of East Anglian glacial stratigraphy. Journal of the Geological Society of London 129, 1–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burkitt, M. 1934. Notes: flint implements from the Severn Basin. Antiquaries Journal 16, 63–4Google Scholar
Clifford, E. 1943. Palaeolithic implements from Little Alne, Alcester, Warwickshire. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 9, 52–4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Conway, B.W., McNabb, J. & Ashton, N.M. 1996. Excavations at Barnfield Pit, Swanscombe, 1968–72. London: British Museum PressGoogle Scholar
Coope, G.R. 2001. Biostratigraphical distinction of interglacial coleopteran assemblages from southern Britain attributed to Oxygen Isotope Stages 5e and 7. Quaternary Science Reviews 20(16–17), 1717–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coope, G.R., Shotton, F.W. & Strachan, I. 1961. A Late Pleistocene fauna and flora from Upton Warren, Worcestershire. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B244, 379–421Google Scholar
Coope, G.R., Field, M.H., Gibbard, P.L., Greenwood, M. & Richards, A.E. 2002. Palaeontology and biostratigraphy of Middle Pleistocene river sediment in the Mathon Member, at Mathon, Herefordshire, England. Proceedings of the Geologists' Association 113, 237–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Rouffignac, C., Bowen, D.Q., Coope, G.R., Keen, D.H., Lister, A.M., Maddy, D., Robinson, J.E., Sykes, G.A. & Walker, M.J.C. 1995. Late Middle Pleistocene interglacial deposits at Upper Strensham, Worcestershire, England. Journal of Quaternary Science 10, 15–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Evans, J. 1897. Ancient Stone Implements, Weapons and Ornaments of Great Britain, 2nd edition. London: LongmanGoogle Scholar
Fennell, J.F.M. & Shotton, F.W. 1977. A newly discovered handaxe from Brandon, Warwickshire. Proceedings of the Coventry and District Natural History and Scientific Society 5(1), 15–17Google Scholar
Gamble, C.S. 1986. The Palaeolithic Occupation of Europe. Cambridge: University PressGoogle Scholar
Gamble, C.S. 1999. The Palaeolithic Societies of Europe. Cambridge: University PressGoogle Scholar
Gowlett, J.A.J. 1995. Psychological worlds within and without: human–environment relations in early parts of the Palaeolithic. In Ullrich, H. (ed.), Man and Environment in the Palaeolithic, 29–42. E.R.A.U.L. 62Google Scholar
Gowlett, J.A.J. & Hallos, J. 2000. Beeches Pit: overview of the archaeology. In Lewis, S.G., Whiteman, C.A. & Preece, R.C. (eds), The Quaternary of Norfolk & Suffolk: Field Guide, 197–206. London: Quaternary Research AssociationGoogle Scholar
Gowlett, J.A.J., Chambers, J.C., Hallos, J. & Pumphrey, T.J. 1998. Beeches Pit: first views of the archaeology of the Middle Pleistocene in Suffolk, UK, in European context. Anthropologie (BRNO) 36, 91–7Google Scholar
Graf, A. 2002. Lower and Middle Palaeolithic Leicestershire and Rutland: progress and potential. Transactions of the Leicestershire Archaeology & History Society 76, 1–46Google Scholar
Green, H.S. 1984. Pontnewydd Cave, a Lower Palaeolithic Hominid Site in Wales: the first report. Cardiff: National Museum of WalesGoogle Scholar
Grinsell, L.V. 1960. Notes: a Palaeolithic implement from Beckford, Worcestershire. Antiquaries Journal 40, 67–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hardaker, T. 2001. New Lower Palaeolithic finds from the Upper Thames. In Milliken, S. & Cook, J. (eds), A Very Remote Period Indeed; papers on the Palaeolithic presented to Derek Roe, 180–98. Oxford: OxbowGoogle Scholar
Hardaker, T. &. MacRae, R.J. 2000. A lost river and some Palaeolithic surprises: new Quartzite finds from Norfolk and Oxfordshire. Lithics 21, 52–9Google Scholar
Harrison-Reed, A. & Shotton, F.W. 1970. A Quartzite handaxe from near Claverley, East Shropshire. Proceedings of the Birmingham Natural History Society 21, 243–9Google Scholar
Howard, A.J. 2000. Design for Sampling and Recording of Geological Deposits Associated with Palaeolithic Archaeology. Leicester: Trent and Peak Archaeological Unit (Unpublished Mitigation Strategy, in Leicestershire. & Rutland Sites & Monuments Record, planning archaeological site file, Brooksby Quarry)Google Scholar
Jack, A. 1920. Summary of Proceedings. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society of East Anglia 3(4), 621–4Google Scholar
Keen, D.H. 1995. Raised beaches and sea levels in the English Channel in the Middle and Late Pleistocene: problems of interpretation and implications for the isolation of the British Isles. In Preece, R.C. (ed.), Island Britain: a Quaternary perspective, 63–74. London: Geological Society Special Publication 96Google Scholar
Keen, D.H. 1999. The chronology of Middle Pleistocene (‘Wolstonian’) events in the English Midlands. In Andrews, P. & Banham, P.H. (eds), Late Cenozoic Environments and Hominid Evolution: a tribute to Bill Bishop, 159–68. London: Geological SocietyGoogle Scholar
Keen, D.H. 2001. Towards a late Middle Pleistocene non-marine molluscan biostratigraphy for the British Isles. Quaternary Science Reviews 20, 1657–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keen, D.H. & Bridgland, D.R. 1986. An interglacial fauna from Avon No. 3 Terrace at Eckington, Worcestershire. Proceedings of the Geologists' Association 97, 303–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keen, D.H., Coope, G.R., Jones, R.L., Griffiths, H.I., Lewis, S.G. & Bowen, D.Q. 1997. Middle Pleistocene deposits at Frog Hall Pit, Stretton–on–Dunsmore, Warwickshire, English Midlands, and their implications for the age of the type Wolstonian. Journal of Quaternary Science 12, 183–2083.0.CO;2-Q>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kelly, M. 1965. The Middle Pleistocene of North Birmingham. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B247, 533–92Google Scholar
Lang, A.T.O. 2004. The Lower and Middle Palaeolithic of the Region North and West of the Cotswolds: a case study from a peripheral archaeological area. Unpublished M.Phil thesis, University of LiverpoolGoogle Scholar
Lang, A.T.O. & Keen, D.H. 2005. A further andesite handaxe from Waverley Wood Quarry, Warwickshire. Lithics 24, 32–6Google Scholar
Lee, J.R., Rose, J., Hamblin, R.J.O. & Moorlock, B.S.P. 2004. Dating the earliest lowland glaciation of eastern England: a pre–MIS 12 early Middle Pleistocene Happisburgh glaciation. Quaternary Science Reviews 23(14–15), 1551–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lister, A.M., Keen, D.H. & Crossling, J. 1990. Elephant and molluscan remains from the basal levels of the Baginton Lillington Gravels at Snitterfield, Warwickshire. Proceedings of the Geologists' Association 101(3), 203–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacRae, R.J. 1988. The Palaeolithic artefacts of Warwickshire. In MacCrae, & Moloney, (eds) 1988, 95–102Google Scholar
MacRae, R.J. & Moloney, N. (eds). 1988. Non–Flint Stone Tools and the Palaeolithic Occupation of Britain. Oxford: British Archaeological Report 189CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maddy, D. 1989. The Middle Pleistocene Development of the Rivers Severn and Avon. Unpublished Ph.D Thesis, University of LondonGoogle Scholar
Maddy, D. 1999. Middle Pleistocene reconstruction of the Baginton River Basin: implications for the Thames drainage system. In Andrews, P. & Banham, P.H. (eds), Late Cenozoic Environments and Homonid Evolution: a tribute to Bill Bishop, 160–82. London: Geological SocietyGoogle Scholar
Maddy, D., Keen, D.H., Bridgland, D.R. & Green, C.P. 1991. A Revised model for the Pleistocene development of the River Avon, Warwickshire. Journal of the Geological Society of London 148, 473–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maddy, D., Coope, G.R., Gibbard, P.L., Green, C.P. & Lewis, S.G. 1994. A re–appraisal of the Middle Pleistocene fluvial deposits near Brandon, Warwickshire and the significance for the Wolston Glacial Sequence. Journal of the Geological Society of London 151, 221–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maddy, D., Green, C.P., Lewis, S.G. & Bowen, D.Q. 1995. Pleistocene of the Lower Severn Valley U.K. Quaternary Science Review 14, 209–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maddy, D., Lewis, S.G. & Keen, D.H. 1999. Pleistocene palaeomeanders of the River Avon, Warwickshire. Proceedings of the Geologists' Association 110, 163–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maddy, D., Brandon, A., Coope, G.R., Douglas, T.D., Green, C.P., Gao, C., Howard, A.J., Keen, D.H., Richards, A., Sinclair, J.M., Smith, K.A., Sumbler, M.G. & Worsley, P. 1999. The English Midlands. In Bowen, D.Q. (ed.), A Revised Correlation of the Quaternary Deposits of the British Isles, 28–44. London: Geological Society Special Report 23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McNabb, J. 2001. An Archaeological Resource Assessment and Research Agenda for the Palaeolithic in the East Midlands (part of Western Doggerland). http://www.le.ac.uk/a/pdf-files/emidpal.pdfGoogle Scholar
Meijer, T. & Preece, R.C. 1996. Malcological evidence relating to the stratigraphical position of the Cromerian. In Turner, C. (ed.), The Early Middle Pleistocene in Europe, 53–82. Rotterdam: BalkemaGoogle Scholar
Mitchell, G.F., Penny, L.F., Shotton, F.W., & West, R.G. 1973. A Correlation of Quaternary Deposits in the British Isles. London: Geological Society Special Report 4Google Scholar
Moloney, N. 1988. Experimental biface manufacture using non–flint lithic materials. In MacRae, & Moloney, (eds) 1988, 49–65Google Scholar
Moloney, N., Bergman, C., Newcomer, M. & Wenban-Smith, F.F. 1988. Experimental replication of bifacial implements using Bunter Quartzite pebbles. In MacRae, . & Moloney, (eds) 1988, 25–47Google Scholar
Murchison, R.I. 1836. Proceedings of the Geological Society 2, 230–326Google Scholar
Perrin, R.M.S., Rose, J. & Davies, H. 1979. The distribution, variation and origins of pre–Devensian tills in eastern England. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, B287, 535–70Google Scholar
Pickering, R. 1957. The Pleistocene geology of the south Birmingham area. Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society 113, 223–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Posnansky, M. 1963. The Lower and Middle Palaeolithic industries of the English East Midlands. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 29, 357–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Powell, J.H., Glover, B.W. &. Waters, C.N. 2000. The Geology of the Birmingham Area. Memoir for the 1:50 000 Geological Sheet 168 (England and Wales), London: The Stationary OfficeGoogle Scholar
Preece, R.C., Bridgland, D.R., Lewis, S.G., Parfitt, S.A. & Griffiths, H.I. 2000. Beeches Pit, West Stow Suffolk (TL 798719). In Lewis, S.G., Whiteman, C.A. & Preece, R.C. (eds), The Quaternary of Norfolk and Suffolk: field guide, 185–96. London: Quaternary Research AssociationGoogle Scholar
Pye, W.R. 1978. Prehistory: Herefordshire. Archaeology in Wales 18, 37Google Scholar
Rice, R.J. 1991. Distribution and provenance of the Baginton Sand and Gravel in the Wreake Valley, northern Leicestershire, England: implications for inter–regional correlation. Journal of Quaternary Science 6, 39–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Richards, A.E. 1997. Middle Pleistocene deposits of north–east Herefordshire. In Lewis, S.G. & Maddy, D. (eds), The Quaternary of the South Midlands & The Welsh Marches: field guide, 75–88. London: Quaternary Research AssociationGoogle Scholar
Richards, A.E. 1998. Re–evaluation of the Middle Pleistocene stratigraphy in Herefordshire. Journal of Quaternary Science 13, 115–363.0.CO;2-D>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Richards, A.E. 1999. Middle Pleistocene glaciation in Herefordshire: sedimentological and structural evidence from the Risbury Formation. Proceedings of the Geologists' Association 110, 173–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roberts, M.B., Stringer, C.B.& Parfitt, S.A. 1994. A Hominid tibia from Middle Pleistocene sediments at Boxgrove U.K. Nature 369, 311–13Google Scholar
Roberts, M.B. & Parfitt, S.A. 1999. Boxgrove: a Middle Pleistocene hominid site at Eartham Quarry, Boxgrove, West Sussex. London: English Heritage Research Report 17Google Scholar
Roe, D.A. 1968. A Gazetteer of British Lower and Middle Palaeolithic Sites. London: Council for British Archaeology Research Report 8Google Scholar
Rose, J. 1987. Status of Wolstonian glaciation in the British Quaternary. Quaternary Newsletter 53, 1–9Google Scholar
Rose, J. 1994. Major river systems of central and southern Britain during the Early and Middle Pleistocene. Terra Nova 6, 435–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saville, A. 1986. Two Palaeoliths from northeast Warwickshire. Lithics 7, 3–6Google Scholar
Saville, A. 1988. The Waite Collection of Palaeolithic Quartzites from the Nuneaton area of Warwickshire. In MacRae, & Moloney, (eds) 1988, 67–88Google Scholar
Saville, A. & Shotton, F.W. 1973. An Acheulean flint handaxe from near Burton Hastings, Warwickshire. Proceedings of the Coventry and District Natural History & Scientific Society 4(7), 214–17Google Scholar
Saville, A. & Shotton, F.W. 1974. A Palaeolithic handaxe from Abbey Farm, Wolvey, Warwickshire. Proceedings of the Coventry and District Natural History & Scientific Society 4(8), 241–4Google Scholar
Saville, A. & Shotton, F.W. 1976. A Palaeolithic implement from Hanley Castle, Worcestershire. Transactions of the Worcestershire Archaeological Society 5 (3rd series), 79–80Google Scholar
Schreve, D.C. 1997. Mammalian Biostratigraphy of the Later Middle Pleistocene in Britain. Unpublished Ph.D thesis, University of LondonGoogle Scholar
Schreve, D.C., Bridgland, D.R., Allen, P., Blackford, J.J., Gleed-Owen, C.P., Griffiths, H.I, Keen, D.H. & White, M.J. 2002. Sedimentology, palaeontology and archaeology of late Middle Pleistocene River Thames terrace deposits at Purfleet, Essex U.K. Quaternary Science Reviews 21, 1423–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shoesmith, R. 1967. Reports of sectional recorders – archaeology, 1967. Transactions of the Woolhope Naturalists Field Club 39(1), 157–9Google Scholar
Shotton, F.W. 1930. Palaeolithic implements found near Coventry. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society of East Anglia 6(3), 174–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shotton, F.W. 1930–1931. Early Palaeolithic implements from near Coventry. Transactions of the Birmingham Archaeology Society 54, 72–3Google Scholar
Shotton, F.W. 1937. Stone implements of Warwickshire. Transactions of the Birmingham Archaeological Society 58, 37–52Google Scholar
Shotton, F.W. 1952. Two unrecorded stone implements from the Coventry district. Proceedings of the Coventry & District Natural History & Scientific Society 2(6), 177–9Google Scholar
Shotton, F.W. 1953. The Pleistocene deposits of the area between Coventry, Rugby & Leamington and their bearing upon the topographic development of the Midlands. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B237, 209–60Google Scholar
Shotton, F.W. 1960. Two Acheulean implements from the Warwickshire–Worcestershire Avon. Proceedings of the Coventry and District Natural History & Scientific Society 3(4), 110–12Google Scholar
Shotton, F.W. 1960–1961. Two handaxes from the Warwickshire Avon. Transactions of the Birmingham Archaeology Society 79, 120–2Google Scholar
Shotton, F.W. 1968. The Pleistocene succession around Brandon, Warwickshire. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B254, 387–400Google Scholar
Shotton, F.W. 1969. An Acheulean handaxe from Learn No. 4 Terrace at Radford Semele, Warwickshire. Proceedings of the Coventry and District Natural History & Scientific Society 4(4), 79–80Google Scholar
Shotton, F.W. 1972. Two Lower Palaeolithic implements from S.E. Staffordshire. Transactions of the South Staffordshire Archaeology Society 12, 1–5Google Scholar
Shotton, F.W. 1988. The Wolstonian geology of Warwickshire in relation to Lower Palaeolithic surface finds in north Warwickshire. In MacRae, & Moloney, (eds) 1988, 89–94Google Scholar
Shotton, F.W. & Osborne, P.J. 1965. The fauna of the Hoxnian Interglacial deposits of Nechells, Birmingham. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B248, 353–78Google Scholar
Shotton, F.W. & Wymer, J.J. 1989. Handaxes of Andesitic Tuff from beneath the standard Wolston succession in Warwickshire. Lithics 10, 1–7Google Scholar
Shotton, F.W., Keen, D.H., Coope, G.R, Currant, A.P., Gibbard, P.L., Aalto, M., Peglar, S.M. & Robinson, J.E. 1993. Pleistocene deposits of Waverley Wood Farm Pit, Warwickshire, England. Journal of Quaternary Science 8, 293–325CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Singer, R., Gladfelter, B.G. & Wymer, J.J. 1993. The Lower Palaeolithic Site at Hoxne, England. Chicago: University PressGoogle Scholar
Smith, C.N.S. 1958. A catalogue of the prehistoric finds from Worcestershire. Transactions of the Worcestershire Archaeology Society 34 (new series), 1–27Google Scholar
Smith, R. 1922. Flint implements of special interest. Archaeologia 72, 25–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Strickland, H.E. 1835. An account of land and freshwater shells found associated with land quadrupeds beneath diluvial gravels at Cropthorne in Worcestershire. Proceedings of the Geological Society of London 2, 111–12Google Scholar
Sumbler, M.G. 2001. The Moreton Drift: A further clue to glacial chronology in central England. Proceedings of the Geologists' Association 112, 13–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomas, G.N. 2001. Late Middle Pleistocene pollen biostratigraphy in Britain: pitfalls and possibilities in the separation of interglacial sequences. Quaternary Science Reviews 20, 1621–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tomlinson, M. 1925. The River terraces of the lower valley of the Warwickshire Avon. Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society 81, 137–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar
West, R.G. 1956. The Quaternary deposits at Hoxne, Suffolk. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B239, 236–65Google Scholar
White, M.J. 1998. On the significance of Acheulean biface variability in southern Britain. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 64, 15–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
White, M.J. & Schreve, D.C. 2000. Island Britain: Peninsula Britain; palaeogeography, colonisation and the Lower Palaeolithic settlement of the British Isle. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 66, 1–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whitehead, D. 1980. An Acheulean hand–axe from Bredon. Worcestershire Archaeology & Local History Newsletter 24 (Spring/Summer), 4Google Scholar
Whitehead, P.F. 1988. Lower Palaeolithic artefacts from the lower valley of the Warwickshire Avon. In MacRae, & Moloney, (eds) 1988, 103–21Google Scholar
Whitehead, P. 1989. The development and sequence of deposition of the Avon Valley river–terraces. In Keen, D.H. (ed.), The Quaternary of the West Midland: field guide, 37–41. Cambridge: Quaternary Research AssociationGoogle Scholar
Whiteman, C.A. & Rose, R. 1997. Early–Middle Pleistocene beheading of the River Thames. Géographie Physique et Quaternaire 51, 327–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, D. 1980. Thirty flints from north of Worcester. Worcestershire Archaeology & Local History Newsletter 24 (Spring/Summer), 1–3Google Scholar
Wills, L.J. 1938. The Pleistocene development of the Severn from Bridgnorth to the Sea. Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society 94, 161CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wills, L.J. 1948. The Palaeogeography of the Midlands. London: Hodder & StoughtonGoogle Scholar
Wymer, J.J. 1999. The Lower Palaeolithic Occupation of Britain. Salisbury: Wessex ArchaeologyGoogle Scholar
Wymer, J.J. 2001. Palaeoliths in a lost pre–Anglian Landscape. In Milliken, S. & Cook, J. (eds), A Very Remote Period Indeed; papers on the Palaeolithic presented to Derek Roe, 174–9. Oxford: OxbowGoogle Scholar