Chronology of the Lower and Middle Palaeolithic in NW Europe: developer-funded investigations at Dunbridge, Hampshire, southern England

The stratigraphy and chronology of the fluvial sediments at Warsash, UK: implications for the Palaeolithic archaeology of the River Test

“…The two sheets were mapped with independent numbering schemes, which makes upstream/downstream terrace correlation of often fragmentary deposits difficult. This is particularly significant with regard to how the archaeologically important Dunbridge deposits, where over 1000 handaxes and at least four Levallois artefacts have been recovered (Roe 1968(Roe , 1981Wessex Archaeology 1993;Harding et al 2012;Davis 2013), fit into the broader downstream Test sequence. There is some agreement in the two BGS schemes as Terraces 1 and 4 persist across both sheets, while Terraces 2 and 3 cease north of Romsey and do not appear in the south of sheet 299.…”

“…Westaway et al (2006) reinterpreted the Test stratigraphy, identifying 13 terrace levels, with the most significant alterations to the Edwards and Freshney (1987) and Booth (2002) schemes appearing above Terrace 8. Westaway et al (2006) Westaway et al (2006) erroneously placed the archaeologically important gravel pits in Terrace 3 at Warsash at ~25 m OD, around 10 m too high (Ashton and Hosfield 2010;Hatch 2011;Harding et al 2012). This issue was addressed by Harding et al (2012), who proposed a Test terrace stratigraphy with revised correlations to those of Westaway et al (2006).…”

“…Westaway et al (2006) Westaway et al (2006) erroneously placed the archaeologically important gravel pits in Terrace 3 at Warsash at ~25 m OD, around 10 m too high (Ashton and Hosfield 2010;Hatch 2011;Harding et al 2012). This issue was addressed by Harding et al (2012), who proposed a Test terrace stratigraphy with revised correlations to those of Westaway et al (2006). Harding et al (2012) adjusted the attribution of the terraces at Warsash, identifying an 'upper' and 'lower' terrace with an intervening degraded bluff between ~15 and ~20 m OD, and correlated them upstream with the Belbin and Mottisfont Terraces respectively (Table 1).…”

“…This issue was addressed by Harding et al (2012), who proposed a Test terrace stratigraphy with revised correlations to those of Westaway et al (2006). Harding et al (2012) adjusted the attribution of the terraces at Warsash, identifying an 'upper' and 'lower' terrace with an intervening degraded bluff between ~15 and ~20 m OD, and correlated them upstream with the Belbin and Mottisfont Terraces respectively (Table 1). The Levallois artefact-bearing quarries at Warsash, located in the lower terrace, were reassigned to the Mottisfont/Lower Warsash Terrace of Harding et al (2012).…”

“…The context of this record has until recently been unclear in two significant respects, firstly the lack of accurate location information for many artefact and assemblage find-spots (Davis 2013;Davis et al 2016) and secondly deficiencies in the broader terrace stratigraphic framework, due to a lack of preserved biological material, poor chronological control, and the absence of a correlative model of terrace sediments from Bournemouth through to the Test valley. The most recent reviews of the terrace stratigraphy of the River Test (the Palaeolithic Archaeology of the Sussex/Hampshire Coastal Corridor project (PASHCC, Bates and Briant 2009;Briant et al 2012) and Harding et al 2012) have produced very different interpretive models, due partly to contrasting approaches to the construction of long profile projections of terrace sediments and landforms, and also to their differing interpretations of the stratigraphic and topographic data. The same issues are apparent when comparing recent reviews of the terrace stratigraphy in the wider Solent River system by Allen and Gibbard (1993) and Westaway et al (2006) (Hatch 2014).…”