From Site to Museum: a Critical Assessment of Collection History on the Formation and Interpretation of the British Early Palaeolithic Record

Abstract

The British Lower and Middle Palaeolithic record makes an important contribution to understanding the early occupation of northern Europe, in particular, through the detailed, systematic and multidisciplinary excavations of key sites. However, it is the historic collections, amassed by a large number of collectors over a 100-year period from the 1860s to the 1960s, that contribute the majority of the artefact record accounting for almost 80% of the handaxes and over 85% of finds locations. Although much of this material lacks the contextual details of excavated assemblages, it still forms an important and large body of data for the British early Palaeolithic. This paper explores the collecting practices of the individuals responsible for the majority of the old collections and demonstrates that through a study of collection history, from discovery to museum curation, the material provides a dataset that can be used in a critical way to address broad-scale questions concerning changes in material culture, demography and landscape use. Such studies also have implications for the interpretation of the Palaeolithic record, beyond the sharp focus of modern excavation.

Palaeolithic archaeology of the Bytham River: human occupation of Britain during the early Middle Pleistocene and its European context

“…comm.). It has been unclear whether the lack of archaeology from the higher gravels is a genuine reflection of human absence or the result of biases introduced by the unsystematic nature of historic collection activities (Hosfield, 1999; Harris et al ., 2019).…”

Aggregates, Formational Emergence, and the Focus on Practice in Stone Artifact Archaeology

“…In addition, once discovered, or rather defined, by an archaeologist, an artifact's current depositional association may not be final. Artifacts' use-lives continue long after their recovery during surveys and excavation, as they circulate within museums and research labs (Harris et al 2019;Lucas 2012). The current Middle Paleolithic Combe-Grenal museum collection, for example, showed substantial differences between the stored assemblage inventories and descriptions of those same assemblages made created during Bordes' excavations (Dibble et al 2009).…”

Flake tools in the European Lower Paleolithic: A case study from MIS 9 Britain

“…Worthington Smith was mainly responsible for the collections in east London from Stoke Newington, Lower Clapton and Grays, as well as the Bedfordshire sites of Kempston and Biddenham (Smith, 1894). These workers were generally assiduous in their recovery, although at times they also relied on local laborers to augment their collections (Harris et al, 2019). Generally, Treacher, Lacaille, and Smith collected more cores and flakes than their contemporaries, recognizing their importance and subsequently identifying more flake tools (though not always accurately), which may be one reason why a number of MIS 9 sites have higher numbers of flake tools attributed to them (Hosfield, 2009;Roe, 2009;Harris et al, 2019).…”