Scaley-backs vs Wooley backs

fitzcoraldo Apr 27, 2006 09:52:02

I recently had a discussion regarding occupation sites and continuity.
We were discussing how a small North Yorks fishing village may have an unbroken history as a settlement that runs way back into the Mesolithic.

This brought up the idea that a coastal site, in cliffs, at the head of a narrow river ravine could possible be the optimal place for a settlement. Food would be plentiful and available throughout the year along with good fresh water and access to resources such as cobble-flint and driftwood.
The local climate would be milder in winter as compared to inland sites and the settlement would be easily defended from both beasts and dodgy neighbours.
The site would also provide a good home base for both inland hunting expeditions and coastal trading expeditions.
There is also the idea that these communities may have been extemely slow in taking up the new fangled ways of the Neolithic. Why kill yourself farming when you the seas and shores are full of food? There would probably have been plenty of opportunities for trade between farming and fishing communities.

The only fly in the ointment that I can see as far as continuity goes is the evidence that many communities stopped eating seafood during the Neolithic, I'm not sure anyone really knows what was going on here but they must have been strange days to force a massive shift in the populations dietry habits.
However even if the population stopped using the sea as a food resource they may have continued to utilise these shore sites for all of the other reasons stated.

Any thoughts, ideas??

tiompan Apr 27, 2006 09:57:34

Replying to fitzcoraldo

Hi Fitz , Tilley pointed out that Welsh coastal Neolithic settlements were almost exclusively on Meso sites . One great advantage of the coast is you can gather at night , set the alarm for when the tides out and there's a decent moon , bosh time and a half too. The diet change is an odd one ,I think it was prior to to Neolithic up here though. Seemingly salmon skins make a fine mock mohair silver suit , a lot sharper than dull inland browns and reds .

StoneLifter Apr 27, 2006 10:11:29

Replying to fitzcoraldo

Yes, it would hold true for this place - http://www.themodernantiquarian.com/site/2887

bergman Apr 27, 2006 12:35:39

Replying to fitzcoraldo

There are many places which seem to have unbroken occupation.....most places seem to have the occupation broken as a result of climate change ie the weather getting colder and bronze age settlements on high ground being deserted. It may be that the reasonable stabilty of sea levels from the middle stone age has more impact?

moss Apr 27, 2006 15:27:45

Replying to fitzcoraldo

To go back to the Welsh sites, especially Pembs, all along the coasts are small promontory forts,/fortified settlements; the thing that you notice is that they are all near caves that could have been occupied in the mesolithic period, and some of the portal dolmens are very cavelike in appearance, especially those that are near to the ground.
Been reading an interesting book - The Sun in the Cave, which more or less argues that early mythology stems from the rebirth of the sun from within the cave, or indeed from the sea - the going down of the sun on the west coast is very striking. Rivers are also seen as the source of renewal, that is why you have the great complex round Avebury, with the 6 streams converging and reappearing from the chalk. Practical people will argue that water is a point of necessity, for fish etc, and the same could be said of coastal settlements, with farming taking a secondary role.

p.s. There is an interesting set of neolithic tombs set very near the sea, which no one seems to have visited yet, its called The Morfa Bycham Cemetery SM2207, etc, hidden in the rocky landscape Neolithic Sites of Pembs,Cards And Carms.. Geo.Children and Geo Nash..

FourWinds Apr 28, 2006 07:37:36

Replying to fitzcoraldo

Ooh! A chance to mention TC Lethbridge again!

In Boats and Boatsmen Lethbridge talks about the difference between fishing communities and farming communities. His comments were something like neither one can understand the other and neither would swap the way of life they were raised with. He was talking about 1950s Cornwall.

Fishing communities are dead now, but not so long ago they were very strong. They went and fished and let others get on with farming. They just traded fish for grain etc.

Obviously, due to transport/freshness issues sea fish was not available to people living well inland unless they were very rich. Seaside dwellers however would have had plenty of it in their diet.

I don't agree with your statement (paraphrasing now) that fish eating tapered off after the Neolithic. As the inland population grew they couldn't eat as much fish as mentioned above, but the seaside folk certainly could. The number of seaside dwellers became a smaller percentage of a growing population, so some stats will falsely show that less fish was eaten.