IIIFACES IN A CLACTONIAN CONTllXT AT LrnLIl TIWUROCK, GUA

Mark While and Pmli i'elliu
Dibble, H . lmd Montc t-Whi tc. A. (cd,) Upper I'ltis/vcene I'r~loi>/vry of lVestem iJ'urosiu .
l'hildclphia, University of I'cuIlsylva llj a. 161 - 180.
Roncn. A. {cd. 1982. 1"IU! TrUluilioJlfrom l..o ...u 10 Midtlle 1"lklev/ilhic amf the Origitl of M",fem
Mal<. Oxford. IJAR Internati ona l ~rie~. 15 1.
Stiner, M. 1994. fiOlwr llt/Wllg TMeves; A Zootlrc/ule%gi<',,/s/udy of Nemllienlw/ I*ology.
PrincclOn, Uui versily ['ress.
Tuffrcau. A. 1994. Co>lIiue lll al cOllll,;u-isons. Unpublished paper IJI"scllIcd at the Imcmat iOllal
Sylllposiun l o n 111e I!"nglislo I'(I/aeolilhie H~view.!{I. Society of Antilluaries of Londo n. 28 th
Oclober 1994.
Tllr,!, A. 1989. Approchc tedUlologiqlle Cl ecormlllique du fades Mou~tcl'ieu de Iype Quina: elilde
I'rdiulillaire. /Jul/e/iJl tie /ll Societe /'dhi>lOri'lue ,.·f<lllf<.ise 86, 244-256.
'fuI11. A. 1992. I~ aw 1I~ltcljals and tec hnological st lldies of Ihe Quina Monl lcrian in Pcrigortl. In
Di bble.H. aud Mclbt~, P. (cds) 1he Mi,/,Ile 1',<I"evli/l.ic: Adllplll/io .., lldmviou rand
Vll,i(./Jiiily. Philaddphia, University MU.s.:U II I. 74-85 ,
Villa , 1'. 1983. Terra Amlllil wulllle Middle l'/ei~/oce1J~ Arc/weologic«/ Record of SOI,than
"ranct. Uni ve1sity of California Publications iu Anthropo logy 13. Londou, Uni versity of
CJliforui11 l'rcss.
.
White, M .l. 1995. [taw materiuts "nd bifacc vari ability in SoudlCrn ilrit"iu; a prclituitt at y
cX'II11in~lion. Lilhics 15. 1-20
40
IIIFACES IN A CLACTONIAN CONTllXT AT LrnLIl
TIWUROCK, GUA VS, ESSEX
Bcrnard Conway
58 JJr()(u/way Cardenl', Milcilllfll
Recent thought-provoking pape rs by McNabb ;md Ashton (1992) and Ashton
and McNabb (1993) motivated the author to re-examine lithic material t:olJected
from lemporary seclions at Little Thurrock, Grays, Essex (COHWUY 1965; Harl
1(65), Deposits yielding a ClaclOnian lilhic industry were cxposed at the Cclcon
Works, Little Thurrock from mill- I 959 10 carl y 1964 dllriug the couslnu;lioll and
extension of industrial plant. The Celeon Works occupy the e;lslm"l\ PilfL of
Globe Pit, adjacent to Overdiff und Rectory Roads.
'111e Pleisloccnc deposits of the Little Thul"luck area have been well
known for over a hundred and fifty ye:lrs and have been descrihed by lllallY
authors from Morris (1 836) to Bridglalld (1994, which also sce for fu ll
bibliography). The main preoccupation of earl y workers was with the I:lrge
quantities of mammalian bones and freshwater molluscs found in the ollce
extensive brick-workings. Lilhic material was fO!Jlld in 1883 and 1884 (Oakley
and Lcakey 1937), 1892 (Spun-el 1892), 1904 (Kclluard 1904) and in 1910
(Wymer 1(57); it was not until 1957 when Wymer excavated gmvels containillg
a rich assemblage idclltified as Clactonian, that serious interest was shown in il.
Mr R O. Wymer found numerous flakes at the site in 1910 (Wymer ibid.) but
was nnable to explain the absence of bifaces, the Clactonian not having been
recognised at the time. The absence of bifaces probably explains the lack of
interest shown by early workers in Ihis lithic material. Wymer (ibid.) described
the assemhlHge as comprising ullspecilllised fl ake tools, cores and hammer
stolLes of a Clactouian industry. Roe (198 1, 143) agreed that the material
appeared to be typically ClaCllmian, but also cOlllmented that "there is no dear
tmce of halldaxe manufacture". Were there "unclear" tmces of hiface
pmdllclioll?
KelLnard ( 1904) recorded an Acheulian st:rapcf from the "Middle Gravels"
a t Globe Pit. 111e stratigraphic context of this gravel is ambiguous, but may refer
10 the Upper Gravel, bed I, Figure 3_Three possible bifaces, found ill Globe Pit,
have beel! described by SHelling (1964) as "nodule" tools of a type recognised
at Clacton by Warren (1951). They arc from the same stral igraphic level as
Wymcr's assemblage, viz. hed I, Figure 3. Bridgland (1994, 236) has recorded
finding two biface thiuuillg flakes, without giving their stratigraphic context.
A series of temporary sections ill the Celcoll Works, Globe Pit were
eXilmined by the author and John Mt:A. Hart betwet":1I July 1959 and March
1964 which yielded 288 artefacts. These co nsi ~ t of core and flake material (with
and without retouch) and have heeil examined 1111d described by Wymer (1985,
31Q) IHi Cf!Wt(]llian il1ld IIfC similar to his material froill hed 1. Also withiu the
assemblage were a smull num ber of pebble tools and what I now perceive to be
two bifaces of non-classic form (Fig. I and Fig. 2a) with two biface tllinning
flakes (Fig. 2b and 2c).
41
lJerl/urd COIUlmy
JJif(lce.~
ill
tI
CllI/;If)lIicm
COlllext ill
Little Thu rrot'k
a
b
Fig . J l1iface made Ort irregular black tabular f/illl from surface cemented
la)'er, bell 2a, of Lower Gravel
LT64/D33 (Fig. I). This large biface measures 17.5 x 11.5 x 6.0 cm and is
worked o n a wcdge-shaped piece of irregularly tabular black flint with dark grey
conex remaining over about Iwo thirds of the surface area. An attempt was
Illllde 10 remove Iwo protubel"llnces by flaking and battcring on onc face.
c
LT64/A2 (Fig. 2a). This is possibly a biface, measures 7.0 x 4.0 x 2.5 cm and
was made on a small , flattened, elongated nodule of black flint with much while
cortex rcmaining. The base of the piece has been "squared off' by the rcmoval
of three or four high angle flakes.
L'1'59/17 (Fig. 2b). This small thillning flake measurc!\ 4.0 x 2.2 x 0. 5 Clll and
was struck from mottled black flint. It has a small area of dark grey cOltex
w mailling.
J.McA.H. (Fig. 2e). A thinning flake whieh measures 6.0 x 3.7 x 1.4 CIIl struck
frolll pale brown monied flinl wilh about 20% of one surface eomisting of
"knobhly" brown cortex.
42
Fig. 2. (I. lJiface mmle Oil black flint nodule f rom upper parI of Lower Gravel,
bed 2. h. Biface thintting flake made on blackjlint from upper part of Lower
Gravel, bed 2. c. B.i/ace thinning flake made on pale brown flint, rel·ting on
l1wnel Sand beneath topsoil and stony loam, /ltul 6
43
Hiftlces in a CI(IC/Ollillll cOII/ext (It Lillie
lJertwrd COlllvay
'nll/rrock
Raw Male.·jals
J
A majority of the pieces of the artifact ussemblage fmm the Lower Gravel, be d
2, Figure 3, were lIIade Oil moUled black/grey mnt with inler-scar ridges and
edges showing very slight ahrasion. Their surfaces vary from a lustrous shine
10 a thin bluciwhite palilla. '!lIe raw mnlerial derives principally fmm irregular
nodu les with a white cortex and some frOIll tabular masses with a dark grey
cortex. A small lIumUcr of artifacts were made on well-rounded black flint
I>cbbles wilh a thick bmwll skin.
Nodular anti tabular flint was freely availablc within a few mctres of the
marg in of the Lower Grave l in the Clmlk at the cliff face and the o verlying
Rullhead Bed at the base of the Thanet Sand.
,
,
•
•
•
"l-___,_,-_'_'.:_'._~:._"_._._. ._._. '_. . ._~
_'_;s;:___=
',~~"
~""~.:.'·'---.-.~--l·J
•
Stralignlphy
The stnlligrapliic context in which the bifaccs and thinning flakes were found
is shown in diagrammatic form in Pigure 3, modifit:d after Conway (1965). 111e
investigations of Wymer (1957) al](l of Snclling (1961) wcre largely restricted
to the Uppe r Gravel, bed I; Bridgland's examination (1994) extended from the
Upper: Gravel, bed I , to the solifluction deposits, beds 3a and 3b, which
evelopcd and degraded the cliff face (= channel margin). 111e author's
ex:mlination extended the section ftom the solifluctioll deposits eastwards 10
include the Middle nod Lower Gmvels, beds 5a, 2 and 2a) and fCmllanlS of the
"Brickearth", bed 4.
-'111e Lower Gravcl, bed 2, with a maximum thickness of 0.95 Ill, rests on
an irregular potholcd surface of Chalk at 9.0 m OD, the irregularities arc infilled
with a lag deposit of flint cobbles ill a sandy grey clay matrix. The main body
of the salldy gravcis is matrix dominated, the gravel grade becoming finer ill Ihe
uPI>cr 30 C UI . Silt· filled ice-wedge casts arc pendant from the upper surface of
the gravels and extend to depths of about 50 CIIl. The smface 5 to 8 cm of the
gravels arc iron-cemented and it was ill this surface, bed 2a, that the large biface
il1ustmtcd in Figure 1 was found. 'nle small biface (Fig. 2a) and the thinning
fl ake (Fig. 2b) were found in.the fine sandy gmvel about 15 cm below it. 'nlc
surface cemcnted layer, bed 2a, also yielded several large Clactonian flakes with
a pronounced white patina. Little by way of faunal remains were found in the
Lower Gravel - a number of unidentifiable weathered bonc fragments and a
poofiy preserved metalID'sal of J)icerorhinos.
The larger thinning flake (Fig. 2e) was fou nd resting on the surface of the
Thanet Sand, beneath surf:lcc materials, north of the northern margin of the
Upper Gravels, hed 1.
44
KEY 6.
5.
5,.
4.
3b.
3,.
2.
2,.
L
A.
B.
Topsoil and stony loam
Ye llow cross-bedded ~llds
Middle Gr..tvc1
Gree nish-grey laminated silty clay (="Brickearlh)
Soliflucted gmvel
Solifluctcti Th:mct Sand
Lower Gruvcl
Fe-ct:mellted surface of Lower Gruvel
Uppcr Gravel
Position of bifaces and thinning flake
I'ositioo of thinning flake
Fig. 3 Di(lg rallll/udic section throllgll tl/e Pieistm;elle (lep(J.~its of the ct!lItml
part of ,lie eastern side of Globe Pit, Little 'f/lllrrock, Grays, ES.fex (Rt/sed 0/1
CO/IIV(IY /965
))utiug
nridgland (1994, 237) argues that bed I al~d bed 2 ar~,onc _.coLllill.U{)US ~m~e1
unil and can be assigned to the I.ynch I1111/Clll'ht~ts I.ey l'oCtunlton ot lIud-,
Saalian age _ cu. 350,IX10 years GP. However, Ihe SectlOIIS cut t~ the .south ~I
Ilridgland's by the uuthor, dt:monstmte that bed 2 underlies the so\JfltLclllm ILIlI~S
3a IUld 3b, and sit 011 n sepemte lower bench tn that of hed I. Whetl~er tillS
lower bench can also be assigned to the LYllch Hill/Corbets Tey FonuatlOll has
still to be nsccl'tained .
45
lIemflrl/
COIl way
A REEXAMINATlON OF TIlE JlRITISH lIIFACE DATA
CouclllsiOJl
The flake and core assemblages found at Globe Pit, Grays previously describcd
by Wymer as Claclonian, contains a small number of nOli-classic bifaccs and
biface ~hil~Hing . flakes which appear to form au integral part of the asscmblage.
Can this site stili be regarded as Clactonian?
Ucf"crcllccs
Ashton . .N. and ~k.N~hb, J. 1993. lIifa<;cs in IlC l"SllCc(i ve. In Ash(QII, N. and J)avid, A. (cd s) S/O,;es
If! SIO"~. Lull,c S(udlcs Society Occasiollat I'aper No.4. 182- 19 1.
Jl"i(lgliil~d , D.R. 1993. Dati ng of t owc r P:llacol ithi c illJu~llie5 within Ihe fralllework. of Ihe Lowe r
Illa",c" (c'nlce scquence. In Asjuon, N. and David, A (eds) SlOries ill SlOlIe, Lilhie S(lIdies
Socie(y Occ;.sional 1~~llCr NoA, 228-40.
1I,;" gbnd, D.R. 199-1. Quatenwry of liIe 'I1"",ws. l.::on<loll. ChJI""JII & HJII.
COllway, Il.W. 1965. A ClaclOnian i.uhl>lry frOlIl a 30 Ft Thamcs 1~lra.;e a( Unle ·n,u,r"ck. Grays
Es>cx. UllpulJlishcJ illS.
'
•
Conway. B.W. 1970. Wri((eo discussion 10 1~'llCrtakell as read: 11 Aprill%9. Proc. Geol. Assoc. 8 1
177- 179.
'
H:m. I. MeA. 1;>65. A prev iously un-named ·nUlIlle, (errace of Grea( Inlcr!;laci al Age at Grays, Esse~.
Unpublished illS.
KeHn:Lrd, .I)..S. 1'.lO4. Notes on a Pala.;ulit h fwm Gr~y.~, Essex. Essex NlllIomll~1 13, 112-113.
McNal>l>: J. amI AshcOII, N. 1992. 111e CUlling edge, I>ifaces in Ihl) ClacColliall. Lilhics 13, 4- 10.
MOlTIs, J: 1836.,?u a f]"es hwa(crlkl>osi(, eOlllaillillll mamma lian ]"emaiIlS, rCCO:II(Iy di scovered a( Orays,
bsn. l11e Magml"" of Nll/ural /Jislory 9,261-264.
Oakley, K.!'. and Leakey . M. 1937. \{eport 011 cxc3v:uions HI Jaywick. Sauds, Essex (1 934), wilh 1iQ1l\C
ol>scrvJuolls Oil Ihe CI~cllI n ia n indu stry, amI on (he fauna alld geolog ical signifiCaJlcc of (he
Ctaclon channel. Proc. I'rehlsl. Soc. 3, 2 17-260.
Roe. D.A. 1981. nle I.ower ami Middle 1'"I"eolil/';c Periods III llriUlill . London, ROllllcdgc ali<I
Kcgan 1'01111.
Suc lling, A.J.I~. 1964. E~cavatjons at Ihe Globe I' i( , Linle 1l,urrock, Grays, lI$sex , 1961. The l:ssex
Natumllsl 3l(iii), 199-208.
Spu llcll, F.J.C . 1892. Excursion to Grays, 11IUlTock., Essex. I'roc. Geol. Assoc. 12, 194.
W,n"CII. S.H. 195 1. 'Il le ClaI;(ollian flinl industry - a uew in(crpre tat ioll. Proc. Geol. Assoc. 62, 107-
135.
Wyuk:r, J. 1957. A Claclo"iall flin( illdu.\lry all.inle l1lUlTock, Grays, Essex. I'roc. Geol. AJSoc. 68,
159- 177.
Wy llk:r, J. 1985. Pulueolililic situ of Hast AIIglia. Norwich, Gco Dooks.
46
Slmunon McPherrou
Department of Anthropology, fli.~hop All/seWII, 1525 Bemice Street,
HOIIOlulll, HI 96817
I ulnulllctillU
During the 1960s, Roe (1964, 1968) both defined il new way of measuriug
hiface morphology and, as a result, our current understanding of Illorphological
varial.lility in Lower Paleolithic hifaces of Great Britain. Roe's empirical
method resulted in the discovery of a l.Iimodal distrilmlion, at the assemblage
level, in oue aspect of biface shape, Roe then orgauized Ihc British asscmblagcs
into the Ovale and Pointed Traditions based on this bimodal pallernillg. 'Ille
pattern itself has since bcell verified by others with more powerful stati st ical
techniqucs (Donlll and Hodson 1975, Callow 1976). Its meaning, however, has
remained unclear. At the time, Roe thought thut it lIIight reflect chrollological
change in preferred biface shapcs. The lack of well dated sites made this
hypothesis difficult 10 test, though the site of S·wanscombe provided some
stratigraphic support. Bettcr dates now exist, and it has become d ell!" that the
chronological hypothesis is unsupporlablc (cf. Ashton et aL 1992), Roe (1981)
has also suggested that there are possible funct ional differences between thc two
groups though this hypothesis remains untested.
Ncw studies have explicitly de-emphasized the importance ot" traditional
stylistic and fu nctional modes of explanation and i n~tead focused on the rote of
raw materials (Ashton and McNabb 1994; White 1995) and intensity of biracial
reduction (McPherron 1994) in structuring thcse assemblages. Ashton and
McNabb (1994) argue that the shape of the nodule or flake blank has an
important and previously understated role in de termining hiface shape. Thick,
long, and narrow nodules, for instance, lend themselves more easily to pointed
forms than rounded form s, On tile other halld, in installces where the raw
matcrial is judged to be more neutral, lending itself cqually to an ovate or
pointed form, ovates seem to havc been manufactured. As a result. both Ashton
,lIld McNabb (1994) and White (1994) argue Ihal ovate bifaces were the
preferred shape presumable because they maximized the functionallltility of the
piece.
'11lis paper emphasizes the complimclltary role of reduction iuteusity ill
structuring thc variability documented by Roe. It will he argued that this
variability is in very largc part dlle to dift"erenccs in the intensity of bifacia l
reduction at these sites. This hypothesis is based 0 11 studies of Acheulian
asscmblages in northem Fmnce that show a strong relationship betwccn all
measures of shape alld a singlc measure of biface size, namely tip length, where
tiplenglh is defined as the distance from the point of maximum width to the tip
(McPhemm 1994). While the upper limit on tip length is constrained in "lfge
part by raw material size. variability in lip length is attribntable to the intcnsity
of bifacial reduction. 'nle same paHerus w·e demonstrable at the assemblage
47