4.3.2 Mesolithic Activity

Various models have been proposed for settlement in the Mesolithic period.

Wicks and Mithen (2014) identified:

1. The arrival of one or more hunter-gatherer (Mesolithic) groups into the area around 8500 BC
2. A general increase in population until about 6200 BC
3. A significant drop in population by about 90% by 5500 BC
4. Low density settlement until about 4800 BC
5. Rising population until around 4300 BC
6. Declining population levels until about 3800 BC, at which point some Neolithic activity is observed
7. The disappearance of Mesolithic communities by around 3400 BC

Elsewhere Mithen (2017) has proposed five stages:

1. Exploration and pioneering settlement, prior to 7,400 BC
2. Residential settlement, 7400–5800 BC
3. Population decline, 5800–5000 BC
4. Re-colonisation, 5000–3800 BC
5. Transition to Farming, 4200–3200 BC

Waddington and Wicks (2017) have undertaken similar analysis for the east of Scotland and northeast England, and they identify a familiar pattern:

1. Initial colonisation around 8500–8300 BC;
2. Population spread from 8000 BC, moving into the interior around 7770 BC;
3. Fluctuating Population, 7350–6600 BC
4. Population reduction, 6600–7600 BC
5. Population rise, 5600–5400 BC
6. Decline, 5400–4800 BC
7. Transition, 4800–4000 BC

The precise details and fluctuations vary across these models, which is only to be expected given the differing nature of the separate areas and the detail available, though the overall trends hold well. While this analysis is useful for ordering our thoughts, it is worth noting that the density of Mesolithic sites across the Highlands is significantly less than elsewhere in Scotland. This means that models like the ones above cannot simply be lifted into the Highlands. They do help to provide a nice narrative, but archaeologists have to be careful because we often do not have the precise evidence on which to confirm these narratives. It is important to make sure that researchers do not bend the evidence to confirm pre-existing paradigms drawn from elsewhere; rather they need to make use of their own sites to identify trends pertinent to the Highlands first.

Waddington’s work (2015) also addresses the impact of the loss of the Doggerland landmass. His work has implications for possible interpretations of Mesolithic settlement in the Highlands in that he suggests that land loss on this scale led to social instability. This is evidenced by the arrival of new groups with narrow blade microliths and the construction of large round structures such as those excavated at Mount Sandel, Northern Ireland (Woodman 1985) and South Echline near Edinburgh (Robertson et al 2013). While his models have been much discussed and are at present controversial, they once again provide provocative research statements that could be used to direct future investigation.

The relatively small numbers of sites mean that it is misleading to map sites and to single out significant, or interesting sites; we are merely looking at locations where recent archaeologists and communities have led to deeper research. Nevertheless, it is useful to see where activity has taken place, if only to highlight the gaps and to suggest areas for further work (Map 4.1).

Click on the data point for more information about the find and a link to the HER record. This map is based on the information in Datasheet 4.1  (please note that some finds in this datasheet may be missing from the map, for example where there are no co-ordinates for antiquarian finds, so please view the datasheet for the further information).

Although many sites manifest as lithic scatters (see Tables 4.2 and 4.3) there is a need to improve how we record and deal with scatter sites (Wickham-Jones 2020a). Curiously, though lithic scatter sites comprise a significant archaeological resource (the Highland HER records over 70 lithic scatter sites), they are often poorly understood and poorly managed. There are, for example, few scheduled lithic scatter sites in Scotland. Single finds also present problems as many of these may well not be in primary locations, spread by later manuring or other activities.

The current distribution of material is very coastal, and likely influenced by modern bias (Palaeolithic and Mesolithic panel 6.1). We need to examine the interior of the country, including not just the montane areas, but also the gentler topography of glens and access routes. There are exceptions, for example at Loch Garten, Badenoch and Strathspey (MHG51764), and elsewhere in Scotland inland sites have also been identified (Warren et al 2018; Ward 2010; 2017; Wickham-Jones et al 2020).  Finally, of course, we need to consider how relative sea-level change may have skewed the picture. Intertidal sites such as Lub Dubh Aird (MHG5490; Hardy et al 2015), and Clachan Harbour (MHG52892; Ballin et al. 2010) act as a reminder that the sites we find on land do not reflect the original archaeological resource. Examination of forestry planting may provide insights, as has been demonstrated by the Biggar Archaeology Group in South Lanarkshire (Ward 2017), and should be encouraged, especially in areas destined for new planting.

The major investigations in Highlands have been very much centred on the more southerly areas of the west coast, but increasingly there has been more attention to the east with fieldwalking finds from Caithness, Easter Ross and Inverness and the Tarradale through Time project. Excavation evidence around Inverness is almost all from developer-funded studies which carry their own limitations, and at present can only suggest generalised activity. Exceptions are a shell midden at Muirtown (MHG3741) and lithic working at Castle Street (MHG3673; Wordsworth 1985). It is likely that development has destroyed much of the evidence near the Inverness shore.

Structures

There is relatively little evidence for Mesolithic structures throughout Scotland (see Wickham-Jones 2004; Palaeolithic and Mesolithic panel 4.1.2; Robertson 2013). While in the last decades more substantial evidence of hut-like structures has been found in southern Scotland (Mithen and Wicks 2018), only from Camas Daraich (MHG29196; Hardy and Estevez 2014), Kinloch, Rum (MHG3987; Wickham-Jones 1990) and Berriedale Braes, Caithness (Peteranna & Williamson 2018) have structures been proposed for the Highlands.

The use of caves and rockshelters is well documented in the Highlands on the west coast, (eg by the Scotland’s First Settlers Project; Case study Scotland’s First Settlers Project; Hardy and Wickhayesm-Jones 2009), and there are hints of early activity at Smoo Caves in northwest Sutherland (Pollard 2005, 8). Caves hold great potential for preserving Mesolithic activity. No evidence survives of east coast use of caves, but deglaciation and sea level changes are likely to have resulted in some preservation under water, as is the case to the west. However, the SFS project showed that in their study area most Mesolithic and early Prehistoric sites were not generally large rockshelters, but rather open air scatters or undiagnostic sites. This has implications on how we should prospect for sites in the future (Hardy and Wickham-Jones 2009, 9.3).