0

RESponse of humans to abrupt Environmental Transitions

A Consortium Project funded by

the Natural Environment Research Council (UK)

[January 2008 to Summer 2013]

Finale Meeting

‘When Europe was covered by Ice and Ash’

The British Museum, London 6 to 8 June, 2013

PROGRAMME & Abstracts

1

INDEX

The RESET Project …………………………………………… 2

RESET Remit and Mission Statement ………………………. 3

RESET Consortium partners and principal investigators ….. 4

RESET Research team ………………………………………... 5

Work Packages & RESET Advisory Panel ………………….. 6

RESET Collaborators …………………………………………. 7

Key tephra layers referred to during the meeting …………… 10

Meeting programme …………………………………………… 11

Abstracts for talks ……………………………………………… 16

Abstracts for posters …………………………………………… 35

Published papers reporting RESET results …………………... 48

2

The RESET Consortium Project The RESET consortium involves scientists from four UK institutions: the Geography and Earth Science Departments of Royal Holloway University of London, the School of Archaeology in Oxford University, the National Oceanography Centre and the Department of Archaeology in Southampton University, and the Natural History Museum, London. In 2007 the consortium was awarded £3.4 million by the Natural Environment Research Council (NERC) from its Consortium Project competitive fund to develop a novel approach for assessing how humans may have responded to rapid environmental changes in the recent past. RESET (RESponse of Humans to Abrupt Environmental Transitions) brings together experts from a number of different academic fields: human palaeontology, archaeology, oceanography, volcanology and past climate change in order to investigate how our ancestors coped with rapid changes in climate during the last 100,000 years. The project commenced in January 2008 and will wind down before the close of 2013. Synopses of the remit, aims, strategy and organisation of the RESET project are provided in the following pages. This Finale Meeting was conceived with the principal aims of (a) taking stock of what the project has achieved, (b) highlighting key developments and problems with the methods used, and (c) identifying promising methodological or conceptual pathways for the future. The foundation of the project was the construction of a ‘tephra lattice’ for Europe, comprising a series of volcanic ash isochrons that enable environmental and archaeological records to be synchronised. The lattice includes a number of cryptotephra layers – volcanic ash layers not visible to the naked eye. The latter in particular provided many challenges in terms of their detection, chemical classification and dating. Over the five years that the project has been running, a wealth of new information has been assembled, that is stored in the RESET data-base, which is to be made available to the scientific community. The data-base and further details about the project can be found on the RESET web site, at http://c14.arch.ox.ac.uk/reset/ .

This project would not have been possible without the generous help and enthusiastic encouragement of a host of international collaborators, who are listed in this document. We thank them all most warmly, and hope that they consider the effort to have been worth while. We also thank the external members of the RESET Advisory Panel, who provided incisive scientific steer as well as encouragement over the five years: they are Clive Oppenheimer, Jørgen-Peder Steffensen, Martin Street and Barbara Wohlfarth. We are also, of course, most grateful to the NERC for providing the funds, and to the British Museum, for generous support and assistance in the mounting of this meeting. Finally, the RESET Principal Investigators thank the talented staff, students and associates who comprised the RESET collective, and who generated the data: it has been a pleasure to stride out with them, on an enterprising steep learning curve.

3

RESET Remit: to test the hypothesis that major shifts in human

development were causally linked to Abrupt Environmental Transitions (AETs)

For example….

origins and spread of modern humans

link between modern humans and Neanderthal extinction

rapid population expansion and contraction during the Last Glacial

RESET MISSION STATEMENT

The inability to synchronise records precisely compromises palaeoenvironmental and prehistoric archaeological research.

Our mission - to overcome this impasse by developing a novel approach which exploits physical time markers (mainly tephra layers) co-registered within key sedimentary archives.

To exemplify its power and potential benefits across the entire palaeo-environmental agenda, RESET will use this new approach to re-assess the precise temporal relationships between environmental and archaeological events.

The objective is to test robustly the hypothesis that major shifts in human development coincided with, or immediately followed, specified abrupt environmental transitions (AETs).

4

Consortium partners Royal Holloway, University of London

Centre for Quaternary Research (Geography) and Department of Earth Sciences

Natural History Museum (London)

Department of Earth Sciences

University of Oxford

School of Archaeology (Research Laboratory for Archaeology and the History of Art and Institute of Archaeology)

Southampton University

National Oceanography Centre and Archaeology Department

Principal investigators

Royal Holloway University of London John Lowe: Project Co-ordinator. Terrestrial records. Tephrochronology. Age modelling. Rupert Housley: Project manager. Palaeolithic archaeology Martin Menzies: Tephrochronology. Volcanic systems. Argon-argon dating. Simon Blockley: Tephrochronology. Age modelling. Clive Gamble: Palaeolithic archaeology a

Oxford University Mark Pollard: Palaeolithic archaeology. Glass chemistry. Statistical methods. Chris Bronk Ramsey: Radiocarbon dating. Age modelling. Data syntheses. Nick Barton: Palaeolithic archaeology.

Natural History Museum, London Chris Stringer: Palaeoanthropology..

Southampton University Eelco Rohling : Ocean records. Palaeoclimatic reconstructions. b Andrew Roberts : Palaeomagnetic stratigraphy; palaeocanography b William Davies: Palaeolithic Archaeology Clive Gamble: Palaeolithic archaeology a

a changed institutions during project

b now at Australian National University, Acton, Australia

5

RESET Research team

Appointed Staff

Victoria Cullen (RLAHA, Oxford) - Technician, WP-4 & WP-6

Katharine Grant (NOCS, now ANU) - PGRA (half time), WP-5

Rupert Housley (Geography, RHUL) - Project Manager & PDRA, WP-3 Christine Lane (Leverhulme Trust Early Career Fellow, RLAHA, Oxford) - formerly PDRA, WP-6

Mark Lewis (Natural History Museum) - Technician (part time), WP-1

Alison MacLeod (Geography, RHUL) - formerly PDRA, WP-3

Emma Tomlinson (Earth Science, RHUL, nowTrinity College Dublin) - formerly PDRA, WP-4

Dustin White (Institute of Archaeology, Oxford & Southampton Universities) - PDRA, WP-1 & WP-2

Tied & Associated PhD Studentships

Paul Albert (Earth Sciences, RHUL; Reid studentship) - WP-4 Mark Hardiman (Geography, RHUL; NERC studentship) - WP-6

Sharen Lee (RLAHA, Oxford; NERC studentship) - WP-7 Anna Oh (RLAHA, Oxford) - WP-2

Christopher Satow (Geography, RHUL & NOCS; NERC studentship) - WP-5

Anna Todman (Earth Sciences, RHUL; Thomas Holloway studentship) - WP-4

Joanna K. Cross (Earth Sciences, RHUL; Thomas Holloway studentship) - WP-4

Cassian Bramham Law (RLAHA, Oxford; NERC studentship) - WP-3

Associated Researchers

Anna Bourne (Geography, RHUL, now Swansea University) - associated with WP-5

Ian Matthews (Geography, RHUL) Wolfgang Mueller (Earth Sciences, RHUL) - associated with WP-4

Victoria Smith (RLAHA, Oxford) - associated with WP-4 & WP-6

Sabine Wulf (GFZ German Research Centre for Geosciences, Potsdam) - associated with WP-4 & WP-6

6

Work Packages and Lead Investigators

WP-1 Neanderthals and modern humans in Europe (60 to 25 ka BP) (Stringer)

WP-2 Impact of AETs on early modern human populations in North Africa (Barton)

WP-3 Re-populating Europe after the Last Glacial Stage (Gamble)

WP-4 Geochemical fingerprinting of tephras (Menzies)

WP-5 AETs and tephras in marine sediment cores (Rohling)

WP-6 AETs and tephras in continental records (Blockley)

WP-7 Data synthesis and age modelling (Bronk Ramsey)

RESET Advisory Panel Terms of reference To consider and advise on RESET’s overall strategy and progress and how the project can most profitably develop synergistic links with other cognate international research programmes

Membership External advisers:

Barbara Wohlfarth Stockholm University Jørgen Peder Steffensen Niels Bohr Institute, Copenhagen Martin Street MONREPOS Archaeological Research Centre, Neuwied

Clive Oppenheimer Cambridge University

NERC representative: Sally Palmer (2008), Michal Filtness (2009-10) Consortium institution reps: Chris Stringer (NHM), Eelco Rohling (Southampton),

Mark Pollard (Oxford), John Lowe (RHUL)

Project Manager: Rupert Housley (RHUL)

7

RESET Collaborators by Work Package

The following individuals are warmly thanked for arranging access to field sites and sampling profiles, providing supporting data and assisting with sampling procedures, thereby greatly assisting the RESET team in meeting its strategic goals. WP-1: Neanderthals and modern humans in Europe

Tincova, Coşava II and Romanesti-Dumbravita I – M. Anghelinu (Department of History and Letters, University of Valahia Târgovişte, Romania); Grub/Kranawetberg – W. Antl-Weiser (Natural History Museum Vienna, Austria); Kebara – O. Bar-Yosef (Department of Anthropology, Peabody Museum, Harvard University, USA); Tabula Traiana – D. Borić (Cardiff School of History, Ancient History, Archaeology and Religion, Cardiff University, UK); Riparo L’Oscurusciuto and Grotta di Santa Croce – P. Boscato and A. Ronchitelli (Dipartimento di Scienze Ambientali, U.R. Ecologia Preistorica, Università di Siena, Italy); Siuren I, Kabazi II, Zaskalnaya V and Karabai II – V. Chabai and A. Veselsky (Crimean Branch of the Institute of Archaeology, National Ukrainian Academy of Sciences, Simferopol, Ukraine) and Th. Uthmeier (Institute of Prehistoric Archaeology, University of Erlangen, Germany); Franchthi - †W. Farrand (University of Michigan, USA); Shpella e Hurdhës, Shpella e Blaz and Shpella e Zezë – I. Gjipali and R. Ruka (Institute of Archaeology, Tirana, Albania); Üçagizli I – E. Güleç (Antropoloji Bölümü, Ankara Üniversitesi, Turkey); Mujina pećina and Velika pećina in Kličevica – I. Karavanić (Department of Archaeology, University of Zagreb, Croatia); Lakonis I, Klissoura 1 and Theopetra – P. Karkanas (Ephoreia of Palaeoanthropology-Speleology of Southern Greece, Athens, Greece); Azokh – T. King (Yerevan Institute of Man, Armenia); Romualdova pećina – D. Komšo (Archaeological Museum of Istria, Croatia); Klissoura 1 – M. Koumouzelis (Ephoreia of Palaeoanthropology-Speleology of Southern Greece, Athens, Greece); Theopetra – N. Kyparissi (Ephoreia of Palaeoanthropology-Speleology of Southern Greece, Athens, Greece); Szeleta – G. Lengyel (Department of Prehistory and Archaeology, University of Miskolc, Hungary) and Z. Mester (Institute of Archaeological Sciences, Eötvös Loránd University, Budapest, Hungary); Vedrovice V, Moravsky Krumlov IV and Kůlna – P. Neruda (ústav Anthropos, Moravské zemské museum, Brno, Czech Republic); Beregovo, Molodova V and Kostenki 14 – P. Nigst (Department of Archaeology, University of Cambridge, UK) and P. Haesaerts (Royal Belgian Institute of Natural Sciences, Brussels, Belgium); Lakonis I – E. Panagopoulou (Ephoreia of Palaeoanthropology-Speleology of Southern Greece, Athens, Greece); Golema Pesht – L. Shalamanov-Korobar and I. Tolevski (National Institution Museum of Macedonia, Skopje, Republic of Macedonia); Kostenki 14 – A. Sinitsyn (Institute for the History of Material Culture, Russian Academy of Sciences, Saint Petersburg, Russia); Kozarnika and Redaka II – N. Sirakov and A. Guadelli (National Institute of Archaeology and Museum of Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, Sofia, Bulgaria) and J-L. Guadelli and C. Ferrier (Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Université Bordeaux 1, France); Ondratice I-Zelec and Bohunice-Brno 2002 – P. Skrdla (Institute of Archaeology, Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic, Brno, Czech Republic); Grotte Mandrin – L. Slimak (CNRS, TRACES, Université de Toulouse le Mirail, France); L’Arbreda – N. Soler and J. Soler (Institut de Recerca Històrica, Universitat de Girona, Spain); Les Cotté – M. Soressi (Institut national de recherches archéologiques preventives, Saint Cyr-en-Val, France); Bondi and Undo – N. Tushabramishvilii (Georgian National Museum, Tbilisi, Republic of Georgia); Cueva Antón – J. Zilhão (Departament de Prehistòria, Universitat de Barcelona, Spain) and D. Angelucci (Dipartimento di Lettere e Filosofia, Università degli Studi di Trento, Italy). Laboratory processing for WP-1 and WP-2 was conducted by P. Albert, C. Bramham Law, V.L. Cullen, P. Lincoln and R. Staff. †deceased

8

WP-2: Impact of AETs on early modern human populations in North Africa Aïn El-Guettar and Oued El Akarit – N. Aouadi-Abdeljaouad (National Museum of Raqqada, Kairouan, Tunisia) and L. Belhouchet (Institut National du Patrimoine, Tunis, Tunisia); Haua Fteah – G. Barker (McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research, University of Cambridge, UK); Taforalt, Dar es-Soltan I and Rhafas – A. Bouzouggar (Institut National des Sciences de l’Archéologie et du Patrimoine, Rabat, Morocco); Sodmein – P. Van Peer (Prehistoric Archaeology Unit, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Belgium) and K. Kindermann (Institute of Prehistoric Archaeology, University of Cologne, Germany).

WP-3: Re-populating Europe after the Last Glacial Stage Oldendorf / Schünsmoor - K. Gerken (Neustadt, Germany) and H. Niemann (Breman, Germany); Howburn - R. Tipping (School of Biological and Environmental Sciences, University of Stirling, UK), A. Saville (National Museums Scotland, Edinburgh) and T. Ward (Biggar Archaeology Group, Biggar, UK); Ahrenshöft LA58D - I. Clausen and M.-J. Weber (Centre for Baltic and Scandinavian Archaeology, Schloss Gottorf, Schleswig-Holstein, Germany); Grabow 15 - K. Kaiser (Faculty of Geography, University of Marburg, Germany), J.F. Torksdorf (Institute of Prehistoric Archaeology, University of Marburg, Germany), F. Turner (Institute of Geobotany, Leibniz University of Hannover, Germany) and S. Veil (State Museum of Lower Saxony, Germany); Lille Slotseng - N. Nygaard (Department of Geology, University of Copenhagen, Denmark) and S.D.F. Pyne-O’Donnell (Department of Earth Science, University of Bergen, Norway); Węgliny - M. Masojć (University of Wrocław, Institute of Archaeology, Wrocław, Poland), D. Nalepka and A. Jurochnik (W. Szafer Institute of Botany, PAS, Kraków, Poland); Mirkowice 33 - J. Kabaciński (Institute of Archaeology and Ethnology, PAS, Poznań, Poland); Dourges - P. Antoine (UMR CNRS 8591 – Laboratoire de Géographie Physique – France); Étiolles - M. Olive and M. Christensen (UMR CNRS 7041 – Université de Paris 1 – France); Pincevent - P. Bodu, G. Debout and M. Orliac (UMR CNRS 7041 – Université de Paris 1 – France); Arendonk De Liereman and Lommel Maatheide - M. De Bie and M. Van Gils (Flemish Heritage Institute, Brussels, Belgium); Opgrimbie - E. Paulissen (K.U. Leuven, Belgium); Alzette - L. Brou (Section Préhistoire, Musée national d’histoire et d’art, Luxembourg); Neuchâtel - D. Leesch, P. Hadorn and N. Thew (Office et musée cantonal d’archéologie, Neuchâtel, Switzerland); Ahrenshöft LA58D, Oldendorf / Schünsmoor, Tolk - F. Riede (Institut for Antropologi, Arkæologi og Lingvistik, University of Aarhus, Denmark); Wesseling-Eichholz - M. Heinen (Institut für Ur- und Frühgeschichte, Köln, Germany); Breitenbach - O. Joris (MONREPOS Archäologisches Forschungszentrum und Museum für menschliche Verhaltensevolution, Neuwied, Germany); Lengefeld-Bad Kösen - J. Richter (Institut für Ur- und Frühgeschichte, Köln, Germany) and Th. Uthmeier (Institut für Ur- und Frühgeschichte, Erlangen, Germany); Reichwalde - M. Knipping, H.-P. Stika and M. Friedrich (Universität Hohenheim, Institut für Botanik und Botanischer Garten, Stuttgart, Germany); Hohle-Fels - N. Conard and M. Malina (Universität Tübingen, Abteilung Ältere Urgeschichte und Quartärökologie, Tübingen, Germany); Hohlenstein-Stadel - C.-J. Kind and Th. Beutelspacher (Regierungspräsidium Stuttgart, Landesamt für Denkmalpflege, Esslingen a.N., Germany); Hasselø and Lundby Mose - M. F. Mortensen (The National Museum of Denmark, Copenhagen, Denmark); Łęgoń 5, Olbrachcice 8, Siedlnica 17 & 17A and Strumienno 1 - J. M. Burdukiewicz (University of Wrocław, Institute of Archaeology, Wrocław, Poland) and A. Szynkiewicz (University of Wrocław, Institute of Geological Sciences, Wrocław, Poland); Dzierysław 35 - M. Połtowicz-Bobak and D. Bobak (University of Rzeszów, Institute of Archaeology, Rzeszów, Poland); Sowin 7 - A. Wiśniewski (University of Wrocław, Institute of Archaeology, Wrocław, Poland); Ćmielów 95 / Mały Gowroniec and Podgrodzie 16 / Lysowody 119 - M. Przeździecki (University of Warsaw, Institute of Archaeology, Warsaw, Poland); Hłomcza - P. Valde-Nowak (Jagiellonian University, Archaeological Institute, Kraków, Poland) and A. Muzyczuk (Krosno Museum, Poland). Laboratory processing was conducted by C. Bramham Law, V. L. Cullen, L. Davies, P. Lincoln and A. MacLeod. Additional field assistance provided by P. Morgan (Department of Geography, University of Southampton, UK).

9

WP-4: Geochemical fingerprinting of tephras Erkan Aydar & Evren Çubukçu, Hacettepe University,Ankara (Turkey); Richard Brown, University of Durham (Ischia); Mauro Coltelli & Deborah Lo Castro, INGV, Catania (Etna); Raffaello Cioni, Universita' di Cagliari, Italy (Vesuvius); Rosanna DeRosa & Paola Donato Univ Calabria, Italy (Tyrrhenian Coast); Alessio Di Roberto, INGV, Pisa (Tyrrhenian Sea); Ralf Gertisser, University of Keele (Azores); Guido Giordano, Roma Tre, Rome (Colli Albani, Aeolian Islands); Mike Branney & Nina Jordan, University of Leicester (Pantelleria); Jörg Keller Univ Freiburg Germany (Ionian Sea, Aeolian Islands); Helen Kinvig, Jo Gottsman & Jon Blundy, University Bristol (Nisyros); Michael Marani, ISMAR, CNR Bologna (Tyrrhenian Sea) Giovanni Orsi, Lucia Civetta, Ilenia Arienzo, Antonio Carandente, INGV Naples (Vesuvius, Campi Flegrei, Ischia, Pantelleria); Mauro Rosi & Giovanni Zanchetta, University of Pisa (Campi Flegrei, Vesuvius, Aeolian Islands); Ioan Seghedi, Institute of Geodynamics, Bucharest, & Alex Szakacs, Sapientia University, Romania (Ciomadul); Roberto Sulpizio University of Bari (Campi Flegrei) ; Thor Thordarson, University of Edinburgh & Reykjavik (Iceland); Sabine Wulf, Potsdam (Campanian)

WP-5: AETs and tephras in marine sediment cores Fabio Trincardi and Luigi Vigliotti (ISMAR, Bologna); Alesssandra Asioli (Istituto di Geoscienze e Georisorse del C.N.R, Padova); Andrea Piva (SPES, Sedimentology, Petrography and Stratigraphy); Sabine Wulf (GFZ, Potsdam)

WP-6: AETs and tephras in continental records

M. Andrič (Institute of Archaeology, Scientific Research Centre of the Slovenian Academy of Sciences and Arts); A. Brauer and S. Wulf (GFZ Potsdam); P. de Klerk (Staatliches Museum für Naturkunde Karlsruhe); M-L. Filippi (Museo Tridentino di Scienze Naturali, Department of Geology); W. Finsinger (Centre for Bioarchaeology and Ecology, University of Montpellier ); L. Galović (Croatian Geological Survey); T. Jones (Lancaster Environment Centre, Lancaster University); A. Lotter (Institute of Environmental Biology, Palaeoecology, Laboratory of Palaeobotany and Palynology, University of Utrecht ); U. Müller and J. Pross (Institute of Geosciences, Goethe University Frankfurt); J. Mangerud, Ø. Lohne and S. Pyne-O’Donnell (Department of Earth Sciences & Bjerknes Centre for Climate Research, University of Bergen); S. Markovic (Faculty of Sciences, University of Novi Sad); I. Matthews (Centre for Quaternary Research, Royal Holloway University of London); R. Pini and C. Ravazzi (Istituto per la Dinamica dei Processi Ambientali, Laboratorio di Palinologia e Paleoecologia, Milan); F. Riede (Institut for Antropologi, Arkæologi og Lingvistik, Aarhus Universitet ); M. TheuerKauf (Institute for Geography and Geology, University of Greifswald); C. Tzedakis and V. Margari (Department of Geography University College London); D. Veres (Laboratoire de Glaciologie et Geophysique de l’Environnement / Romanian Academy, Institute of Speleology "Emil Racovita"); S. Wastegård (Department of Physical Geography and Quaternary Geology. Stockholm University); J. E. Ortiz, T. Torres and A. Díaz-Bautista (Laboratory of Biomolecular Stratigraphy, E.T.S.I. Minas de Madrid, Madrid); A. Moreno and B. Valero-Garcés (Pyrenean Institute of Ecology, Zaragoza); S. Lowick (University of Bern); Lusia Ottolini (CNR-Istituto di Geoscienze e Georisorse, Pavia). Laboratory processing was conducted by V. L. Cullen and Katy Flower.

10

Key tephra layers referred to during the meeting:

Tephra unit Volcanic Source

Age range (see RESET database)

Mediterranean marker tephra *distally defined

Suduroy* Katla (?), Iceland 78980-8250a

Vasset-Killian* Massif Central 9265-9400a

Ulmener Maar West Eifel, Germany 10700-11300b

AF555 Katla (?), Iceland 11200-11790a

Asjka-10* Askja, Iceland 10702-10991a

Pomici Principali (TM-7b) Campi Flegrei, Italy 11915-12159a C-1

Solheimer Katla, Iceland

Vedde Ash* Katla (?), Iceland 12007-12234c

Laacher See (LST) East Eifel, Germany 12840-12920b

Borrobol* Unknown, Iceland 13950-14140a

Neapolitan Yellow Tuff (TM-8) Campi Flegrei, Italy 13900-14320a C-2

Biancavilla Ignimbrites Etna, Italy 16965-17670a Y-1

TM-11* Etna, Italy 17640-18324b#

Greenish tephra (TM-12) Vesuvius, Italy 18820-19384a

Cape Riva Santorini, Greece 21088-22329a Y-2

Pomici Di Base (TM-13) Vesuvius, Italy 21405-22220a

TM-15* Campi Flegrei, Italy 29350-30160d#

Y-3

VRa Campi Flegrei, Italy 30100-30500a

Codola (TM-16b)* Vesuvius, Italy 29234-30842a C-10

Campanian Ignimbrite (TM18) Campi Flegrei, Italy 39135-39225d Y-5, C-13

Green Tuff Pantelleria, Italy 48850-50005a Y-6

Upper Nisyros Pumice Nisyros, Greece

MEGT (TM-19) Ischia, Italy 51000-59000e Y-7, C-18

TM-25* Campanian region, Italy 101000-109000b X-5

TM-27* Campanian region, Italy 105000-113000b X-6

Unit P Pantelleria, Italy 121400-136200e P-11

Kos Plateau Tuff Kos, Greece 160000-168100+ W-3

amodelled 14C age, using

Intcal09, 95% probability range quoted;

bvarve age,

cGICC05 age, converted to BP

dmodelled age (mixed age types: 14C, Ar/Ar, varve)

eAr/Ar age

IMPORTANT: Key tephras referred to during the meeting have been placed in their relative stratigraphic order; ages

presented are two sigma ranges based on the most reliable age determinations currently available. The 14

C, varve and 40

Ar/39

Ar ages quoted, and relevant source references, can be found on the RESET database. Unpublished ages (marked #)

from ongoing RESET work are currently either submitted or in the final stages of preparation for publication; they

are provided here for the benefit of the meeting but should not be cited until through peer review.

11

When Europe was covered by ice and ash: Environmental hazards and human survival during the last 100,000 years

The British Museum, London

6th to 8th June, 2013 This three-day meeting will explore the links between abrupt environmental change and human dispersal and development during the Middle and Upper Palaeolithic periods. It constitutes the Finale Event of the RESET Consortium Project (http://c14.arch.ox.ac.uk/reset/), funded by the Natural Environment Research Council. The RESET team, in association with many collaborators in Europe and beyond, has been testing the degree to which non-visible volcanic ash layers (termed ‘cryptotephra’) can refine the chronology of important environmental and archaeological events during the past 100,000 years or so. At the core of the RESET strategy has been the construction of a ‘tephra lattice’, the main tool employed for synchronising events. The principal outcomes of the RESET project will be presented over the course of the three days, the aim being to take stock on what we understand about the links between humans and abrupt environmental change over the period of interest. To widen the perspective and debate beyond the lens of RESET, several invited Guest Speakers will offer tangential views on the subject, and the meeting will close with an Open Forum on issues aired during the meeting, and a forward look. The meeting has two components, an Open Science Meeting (Thursday 6 and Friday 7 June), intended for research scientists, and a Public-Engagement–with-Science Day (Saturday 8 June), aimed at students and interested adults.

______________________________________________________________________

RESET Science Meeting (6th-7th June) Thursday 6th June

1. CONTEXT and GOALS 0930-0945: Welcome address: John Lowe (RHUL & RESET)

Chair: Mark Pollard (Oxford & RESET)

0945-1010: Dorthe Dahl Jensen (Niels Bohr Institute, Copenhagen)

The environmental backdrop to RESET 1010-1035: Giovanni Orsi (Osservatorio Vesuviano, INGV)

The volcanic backdrop to RESET 1035-1100: Francesco d’Errico (Université Bordeaux 1)

The archaeological backdrop to RESET COFFEE/TEA 1130-1150: John Lowe (RHUL & RESET)

Conception and aims of the RESET project

12

2. TOOLS DEVELOPED BY RESET 1150-1210: Victoria Smith (Oxford & RESET)

Building the tephra lattice 1210-1230: Emma Tomlinson (Trinity, Dublin & RESET)

Determining source of key tephra layers

1230-1250: Chris Bronk Ramsey (Oxford & RESET) Age model development and RESET data-base

1250-1300: DISCUSSION LUNCH 1400-1430: Poster session

3. CASE STUDIES – ARCHAEOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE 1430-1440: Nick Barton (Oxford & RESET) Introducer & Chair

Archaeological aims of RESET 1440-1455: Dustin White (NHM, Oxford & Southampton, & RESET)

Discoveries and uses of tephra layers in caves and rock shelters

1455-1510: Rupert Housley (RHUL & RESET) Discoveries and uses of tephra layers in open-air archaeological sites

1510-1530: William Davies (Southampton & RESET)

Case studies: linking archaeological to terrestrial and marine archives using tephra isochrons

1530-1545: DISCUSSION COFFEE/TEA 1615-1700: Posters

13

Friday 7th June

4. CASE STUDIES - ENVIRONMENTAL SYNCHRONISATION 0930-0935: Simon Blockley (RHUL & RESET) Introducer & Chair 0935-0955: Andrew Roberts (ANU, Canberra & RESET)

The oceanographic perspective

0955-1015: Mark Hardiman (RHUL & RESET) Testing age-depth models using tephrochronology

1015-1035: Ian Matthews (RHUL), Anna Bourne (Swansea University)

Prospects for marine-land correlations

1035-1055: Paul Albert (RHUL & RESET) Key tephra isochrons; major struts of the lattice

1055-1110: DISCUSSION COFFEE/TEA

5. FUTURE POTENTIAL 1140-1145: Martin Menzies (RHUL & RESET) Introducer & Chair 1145-1205: Sabine Wulf (GFZ Potsdam)

Prospects for adding to the tephra isochron record 1205-1225: Siwan Davies (Swansea University)

Prospects for linking to Greenland ice-records

1225-1245: Christine Lane (Oxford University & RESET) Tephra layers as high precision isochrones: realising the potential

1245-1300: DISCUSSION LUNCH

6. APPRAISAL & LEGACY 1400-1405: Chris Stringer (NHM, London & RESET) Introducer & Chair 1405-1430: Simon Blockley (RHUL & RESET), Clive Gamble (Southampton & RESET) Key RESET outcomes and issues

14

1430-1450: Jean-Jacques Hublin (Max Planck Inst., Leipzig)

A palaeoanthropologist’s perspective on future potential 1450-1510: Chronis Tzedakis (UCL)

A climate stratigrapher’s perspective on future potential COFFEE/TEA 1540-1700: Open Forum

Chair: Mike Walker (U. Wales, Lampeter) Commentary: Chris Turney (University of New South Wales)

1700-1715: Wrap-up remarks from the members of the RESET International Advisory Panel Clive Oppenheimer (Cambridge University)

Jorgen-Peder Steffensen (Niels Bohr Inst., Copenhagen)

Martin Street (MONREPOS Archaeological Research Centre, Neuwied) Barbara Wohlfarth (Stockholm University)

1730: WINE RECEPTION

15

Our Explosive Past How humans survived catastrophe

Saturday, 8th June 2013

Over the past 100,000 years, Neanderthals and then modern humans survived abrupt changes in climate and massive volcanic explosions in Europe. Did adverse conditions eventually lead to Neanderthal extinction and how did modern humans survive? Come and meet the scientists engaged in piecing together our fascinating prehistory. Learn about the climate record locked in the Greenland polar ice cap, the discovery of invisible volcanic ash particles transported thousands of kilometers from origin, the changing behaviour and technological advantages of the human colonisers who displaced the Neanderthals, and how they survived the throes of environmental turmoil. 0930-0945: Welcome and introduction John Lowe (Royal Holloway University of London) 0945-1015: Humans in Europe. Chris Stringer (Natural History Museum)

1015-1030: Open Forum 1030-1100: The Greenland ice core records. Jørgen Peder Steffensen (Niels Bohr Institute, Copenhagen)

1100-1130: Coffee/Tea & posters

1130-1200: Large explosive volcanic eruptions. Clive Oppenheimer (Cambridge University)

1200-1215: Open Forum 1215-1245: Cryptotephra (hidden volcanic glass) Christine Lane (Oxford University) for RESET team

1245-1300: Meet the Experts

1300-1400: Lunch

1400-1500: Ice Age Giants Alice Roberts (Broadcaster & Academic, University of Birmingham) Including Open Forum 1500-1530: Coffee/Tea

1530-1700: Displays, Activities & Meet the Experts

16

Abstracts for talks

On the following pages abstracts are arranged in order of presentation during the meeting

17

The environmental backdrop to RESET

Dorthe Dahl-Jensen

Center for Ice and Climate, Niels Bohr Institute, University of Copenhagen, Denmark

Understanding past climate changes is based on archives of palaeo-records from very different sources with

quite different temporal resolution. Ice core records from Greenland with an annual resolution reaching 60,000

years back in time reveal a series of very abrupt and dramatic climate warmings and coolings during the glacial

period. When combined with ice-core records from Antarctica, marine sediment cores (especially from the

Atlantic) , stalagmite records from the subtropics and sea-level records from the Red Sea an amazing story

emerges: during the cold periods, or stadials, the thermohaline circulation slowed or stopped thereby cooling

the North by the absence of heat transport. While the North was cold and sea ice expanded, the South

warmed up. The large ice sheets in both the North and South surged, liberating vast numbers of ice bergs into

the ocean and thereby increasing sea level by tens of meters. The cold periods in the North ended very

abruptly, with temperatures over Greenland rising 10-16 oC in less than one hundred years. The Greenland ice

cores, with their high temporal resolution, show that abrupt warming is preceded by decreasing dust

concentration. The dust originates from the subtropics and the change is interpreted as a shift in position of

the Inter-tropical Convergence Zone (ITCZ) causing increased monsoon activity making the dust source regions

more humid, thereby reducing the amount of dust transported to Greenland. This amazing sequence of events

documents the ability of the climate system to cause very large regional climate changes even in the absence

of external forcing. A very important question arises: could this happen in the future? The key to understanding

and prediction is dependent on improved understanding of how it happened in the past. Precise dating of the

various palaeo-records that are used to generate climate reconstructions is the key to linking the records and

understanding the physics of the system and thus to assess the risk of similar abrupt changes in the future.

18

Expectations, data and models to build a transition: the archaeological backdrop to RESET

Francesco d’Errico1,2 and William Banks1

1CNRS, UMR PACEA, University of Bordeaux

2Department of Archaeology, University of Bergen, Norway

Our presentation will be aimed at placing the so called Middle to Upper Palaeolithic (MUP) transition into the

broader context of the emergence of human cultures comparable to ours. We will discuss the extent to which

data from other regions of the world are changing our view of this event and show how the more or less

explicit stances researchers take on the causes that have driven cultural evolution in our lineage influence the

way they collect, analyze, and interpret data pertaining to the MUP transition. Fifteen years ago, the saga of

Neanderthal extinction and colonization of Europe by modern humans served as a narrative to explain the path

our species followed to attain ‘modern’ behavior. This path was thought to be short, abrupt, exclusively

associated with anatomically modern humans, and best reflected in the cultural traits associated with the

‘Aurignacian’, seen at the time as an indissoluble package of fully modern cultural traits. Many of us now see

the MUP transition as but one regional example of a process that occurred at different times, rates, and that

followed a variety of historical paths in multiple parts of the world. In some cases these transitions occurred

without any perceptible population replacement. Still they produced behavioral outcomes comparables to

those observed in Europe. Some regions are marked by multiple transitions. Some occurred in periods of

relative climatic stability, while others were contemporaneous with abrupt climatic change. This suggests that

when investigating the archaeological, environmental, and chronological records in our attempts to answer the

crucial questions about Who, When and How pertaining to the MUP transition, we should first ask ourselves

what are the causes that we privilege to explain human expansions, cultural changes, and in particular, the

emergence and maintenance of innovations. The primary problem with most of the scenarios proposed in the

past to explain the MUP transition is that they are based on single cause models. Such models are founded on

the teleological notion that a unique cause (climate, cognition, demography, disease, etc.) acted continuously

as the sole, or dominant, factor in producing the observed outcome. These causes, however, are not sufficient

to explain the complex paths and multitude of events that a growing body of archaeological, chronological and

paleoanthropological data, including those generated by RESET, are bringing to the fore. Once announcement

effects fade away and data are properly scrutinized, a pattern that identifies numerous regional cultural

trajectories emerges, each representing a cohesive adaptive system's response to environmental and cultural

stimuli. While the biological affiliation of populations at the moment of and after contact becomes more and

more elusive, new archaeological, chronological, and paleoenvironmental data, in conjunction with modelling

techniques, are transforming single cause models in historical scenarios.

19

Conception and aims of the RESET Project

John Lowe

Department of Geography, Royal Holloway University of London

The ideas behind the RESET grant proposal began to germinate in 2004 when collaborative ties in

tephrochronological research were being forged between Oxford and Royal Holloway universities. Personnel at

both institutions were playing leading roles in the discovery and analysis of non-visible volcanic glass preserved

in sedimentary archives. These tiny glass particles, frequently concentrated in discrete ‘cryptotephra’ or

‘microtephra’ layers, represent the distal components of volcanic ash erupted from major volcanic centres,

such as those in Italy, Iceland and Germany. Some of the layers can be traced over considerable distances from

source. By 2004 it was evident that cryptotephra layers are far more widespread and abundant in Europe and

its adjacent seas than previously realized, prompting questions about their traceable distributions, the number

deposited during recent geological time, and their potential for high-precision correlation and palaeo-

environmental research. Interaction with archaeology and palaeoanthropology colleagues based in Oxford,

Royal Holloway and the Natural History Museum in 2005 and 2006 seeded wider discussions about the nature

of the links between abrupt environmental changes on the one hand, and human responses on the other. The

scope of the debate was widened further when colleagues from the National Oceanography Centre,

Southampton, joined the consortium. By early 2007, a core focus had emerged: that cryptotephra layers could

provide useful isochrones for synchronising, with improved precision, archaeological, terrestrial and marine

records spanning the last 100,000 years, and at the continental scale. The idea proposed to NERC by the RESET

Consortium Project was that a ‘tephra lattice’ could be generated that would underpin the synchronization of

sedimentary archives throughout Europe and adjacent seas: if successful, it would offer the potential for

addressing key questions about late Quaternary environmental change with significantly improved temporal

precision. The RESET Consortium bid was submitted to, and approved by, the NERC during 2007, with funding

allocated from the start of 2008. During this Finale meeting, the degree to which the RESET goals have been

achieved will be reported and examined. This talk is a preface to the discussions that will ensue: it will recall

the scientific context that prevailed when the RESET proposal was being prepared for submission, introduce

the project’s key aims and rationale, and set the timbre for the intended purpose of the ‘Finale’ meeting.

20

Building the tephra lattice

Victoria C. Smith

Research Laboratory for Archaeology and the History of Art, University of Oxford, Oxford OX1 3QY

One of the aims of RESET was to develop a robust tephrostratigraphic framework (lattice) for Europe and the

Mediterranean region. The lattice builds on pioneering tephrostratigraphic work of Keller et al. (1978) and

Paterne et al. (1988) in the Mediterranean, and Haflidason et al. (2000) and Davis et al. (2001) in the North

Atlantic. It is comprised of widespread volcanic ash (tephra) layers from volcanoes across the region (France,

Greece, Germany, Iceland and Italy) and key sedimentary archives (e.g., Lago di Monticchio; Wulf et al., 2004).

This framework underpins the correlation of palaeoenvironmental and archaeological records in RESET,

allowing relative and absolute timings to be assessed. Our work has further developed the lattice and made it

more robust by: geochemically characterising the glass in widespread tephra units from distal records and the

proximal eruption units to ensure accurate correlations (distal-distal and proximal-distal); and refining the

distribution of the units through the identification of distal non-visible ash layers (cryptotephra). The records

that contain tephra layers from multiple volcanic centres are important in the lattice as they connect regional

tephrostratigraphies, which has enabled us to correlate archives on the continental-scale and refine the

absolute ages of key isochrons (e.g., Lane et al. 2011). Where multiple common tephra layers are found within

more than one palaeoenvironmental archive, it becomes possible to compare and contrast not just the timing,

but also the rates of environmental responses to climatic forcing.

References

Davies, S.M. et al. (2001). Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London A 360, 767-802.

Haflidason, H. et al. (2000). Journal of Quaternary Science 15, 3-22.

Keller, J. et al. (1978). Geological Society of America Bulletin 89, 591-604.

Lane, C.S. et al. (2011). Quaternary Science Reviews 30, 1013-1018.

Paterne, M. et al. (1988). Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research 34, 153-172.

Wulf, S. et al. (2004). Quaternary International 122, 7-30.

21

Determining the source of key tephra layers

Emma Tomlinson

Department of Geology, Trinity College Dublin

The principal aims of RESET are dependent on the ability to establish tephra correlations with a high degree of

certainty. The most effective tool is grain specific geochemical analysis of volcanic glass, both distally (ash) and

proximally (juvenile magmatic clasts). Major element compositions are widely reported but are not always

diagnostic. Complications arise when highly evolved magmas, particularly those from a single volcano, are

compositionally similar. These cannot always be confidently distinguished using major elements alone. For this

reason, we have implemented routine analysis of major, minor and trace elements in distal and proximal

tephra using both EPMA and LA-ICP-MS. Trace elements show greater variability than major elements because

they are more strongly affected by differences in source composition and by sub-volcanic magmatic processes

such as fractional crystallisation and assimilation. The geochemical variability within a tephra population can be

an additional diagnostic tool, thus we report individual shard compositions not averages.

The ability to import high-precision ages (e.g. 40Ar/39Ar, 14C,U-Th) from proximal locations into distal settings

depends on accurate correlations. Prior to RESET, this was hampered by the sporadic availability of of major

element glass data and the absence of trace element glass data for proximal tephras. The RESET database

provides major and trace element glass data for samples taken throughout the pyroclastic fall and flow

stratigraphy of key eruptions in Iceland, Germany, Portugal, Italy, Greece and Turkey and thus provides a

robust tool for proximal-distal tephra correlations. Detailed studies of successive eruptions from single volcanic

centres also provide important information about the similarity of products from long-lived magma systems

(e.g., Campi Flegrei Naples), thus highlighting the most diagnostic chemical features of each individual

eruption.

Europe is an ideal location for tephrochronology because of the presence of a large number of highly explosive

, frequently active volcanoes. These volcanoes occur in a range of geodynamic settings leading to a range of

magma chemistries. The compositions of tephra from subduction, post-collision and intraplate settings provide

a framework for determining the provenance of unknown tephras.

22

Age model development and RESET database

Christopher Bronk Ramsey

Research Laboratory for Archaeology and the History of Art, University of Oxford

The RESET project has involved the generation of a large amount of data relating to tephra from volcanic

eruptions that has potential to tie together archaeological and environmental records. The research

undertaken by the consortium has also involved the use of published data from other researchers in the field.

To facilitate this research a web-based database has been developed. This has major element analyses on over

24,000 samples of tephra, some half of which have been made as part of this project. There are a further 3,400

trace element analyses (all from the RESET project) made on samples where major elements alone are

insufficient for tephra identification. These analyses relate to over 300 sites (100 directly within RESET).

Overall the database holds tephra related information on nearly 900 sites, 180 of which have been studied in

this project.

In addition to the large data compilation, the database has tools to enable researchers to manipulate and plot

information, and to test the significance of identifications of tephra to specific eruptions. The publication of

this database and open access to the tools developed will represent an important output of the RESET project.

Tephra layers provide a key element in the development of age models for sites and environmental sequences

studies in the project. Putting this information together with other chronological information has involved the

development of new chronological modelling tools. These tools give us better ways to develop age-depth

models for environmental sediments and to study the shifts in human behaviour evident in the archaeological

record. The methods developed have been incorporated into the open access OxCal software widely used in

Archaeology and Environmental Science.

23

Discoveries and uses of tephra layers in caves and rock shelters

Dustin White

Archaeology, University of Southampton

Stratified archaeological sequences in caves and rock shelters comprise an integral part of the record of human

prehistory. One of the key aims of RESET was to enhance the spatio-temporal resolution of this record,

specifically as it relates to the Middle-to-Upper Palaeolithic “transition” in Europe and the late Middle and

Later Stone Age periods of North Africa, through the methodological application of cryptotephra and its use

both as an innovative chronological tool and as a means to correlate geographically dispersed archaeological

and palaeoclimate archives. Prior to RESET, the potential for recovery of cryptotephra in caves and rock

shelters had yet to be tested. From September 2006 to May 2013 a total of thirty-seven sites were sampled of

which significant levels of tephra were successfully identified in ~60% of the caves and ~23% of the rock

shelters under study. Of those sites where tephra was found ~50% preserve a record of more than one distinct

cryptotephra layer. The majority of positive results have come from sites across the Balkans and the northern

fringe of Africa, whereas sites in Western Europe and parts of northern Central Europe have all produced

generally negative results. Despite the complex geogenic and biogenic/anthropogenic processes which occur in

caves and rock shelters during site formation, the association between identified cryptotephra layers and

archaeological materials is often robust. This observation has allowed RESET to correlate site archaeological

assemblages (and hominin populations) and palaeoclimate archives through common tephra marker horizons,

highlighting both the significance and potential of this interdisciplinary methodology in Palaeolithic research.

24

Discoveries and uses of tephra layers in open-air archaeological sites

Rupert Housley

Department of Geography, Royal Holloway University of London

At the time when RESET was first proposed few investigations of cryptotephra from archaeological contexts in

open-air Palaeolithic sites existed. This contrasted with records from palaeoclimate archives (peat bogs, lake

basins and marine sequences) where previous tephrostratigraphic studies had shown identifiable cryptotephra

layers were present. Thus, one of RESET’s first objectives was to determine if cryptotephra horizons were

recoverable on archaeological open-air sites. For should in-situ isochronous tephra horizons be present in such

sites, then correlation of high-resolution palaeoclimatic sequences and cultural events would improve thus

enhancing the resolution of the Palaeolithic timeframe. Sampling of forty-four open-air sites between 2008 and

2013 demonstrates ~20% of sites have cryptotephra in analysable concentrations. Detailed examination

suggests higher rates of success are achieved if certain depositional conditions are met, with tephra recovery

reaching ~35% where low-energy organic sedimentation is present. Other significant factors include the level of

human activity at the sampling point (reflected by variations in stone tool concentration), the geographical

location of the site relative to zones of tephra dispersal and fallout, and the prevalence of post-depositional

sedimentary processes on site responsible for remobilising tephra. Due to the non-uniqueness of some

eruption chemistries, independent contextual dating may be critical in pinpointing a specific volcanic event.

Overall, it is fair to say that several factors influence the potential of cryptotephra as applied to open-air

archaeological sites.

25

Case studies: linking archaeological to terrestrial and marine archives using tephra isochrones

William Davies

Department of Archaeology, University of Southampton This paper will explore the effects of Abrupt Environmental Transitions (AETs) on the behaviour of Palaeolithic

hominins. Unlike environmental events such as Heinrich Event 4 (whose effects are extrapolated from marine

cores to archaeological sites), (crypto)tephra occurrences in archaeological sites allow them to be connected

directly to archaeologically-visible behaviours as well as to the isochronous tephras in marine and lake cores.

Thus, changes (or consistency) in hominin behaviours can be related to AETs and contemporary environmental

proxy records.

Archaeologists are apt to generalise from the particular. Cryptotephra isochrons allow us to test the validity of

such assumptions of universality. Universalist “phases” of hominin development can be evaluated, and

piecemeal changes over time and space (i.e. time-transgression) can be identified. The creation of the tephra

“lattice” allows us not only to test for variation of hominin behaviours at or within a given isochron (such as the

Campanian Ignimbrite, ~39,000 BP), but also to identify other, older and younger, tephrochronological events,

often within the same site stratigraphies. This lattice creates a chronological framework for comparing

archaeological records across a wide temporal and spatial distribution, allowing us to move beyond the range

of radiocarbon chronologies, as well as to compare –for example – eastern European records with those from

North Africa. Thus, models of universal phases or contingent local occurrences can be tested more confidently.

26

Testing age-depth models using tephrochronology

Mark Hardiman

Department of Geography, Royal Holloway University of London A key task of geochronologists is placing temporal controls on geological deposits and in the case of long

sedimentary sequences developing age vs depth profiles. These chronostratigraphies are often developed

using either independent dating methods, such as radiocarbon dating, and/or via proxy alignment techniques.

Alignment tends to increasingly be used with older records as independent techniques become unavailable

(e.g. radiocarbon at 50 ka BP) or have inhibitive age uncertainties (e.g. OSL). Tephra layers may be dated via a

wide array of both direct (e.g. Ar/Ar) and indirect (e.g. varves) methods making it a particularly powerful tool

for testing the validity of age-depth models constructed using other methods. This talk will illustrate this

potential using RESET examples from the Mediterranean region, by comparing new tephrochronological results

to pre-existing chronological models. The results often reveal significant temporal off-sets, but can help to

validate other chronological evidence.

27

Prospects for marine-land correlations

Anna Bourne* and Ian Matthews

Department of Geography, Royal Holloway University of London

Present address: Department of Geography, Swansea University

Palaeoenvironmental records from both marine and terrestrial archives in the Mediterranean region show

responses to the broad-scale glacial-interglacial climate changes. Furthermore, millennial-scale climatic

oscillations have also been inferred in Mediterranean marine and terrestrial records (e.g. Fletcher et al., 2010;

Cacho et al., 1999; Sànchez Goñi et al., 2002). These records of both millennial-scale climatic oscillations and

broader-scale glacial-interglacial climate changes are often aligned between sequences, with dates from

stacked marine records imported into terrestrial sequences to improve their chronological control.

However, synchronising the records from the marine and terrestrial environment requires precise and robust

chronological control, which is frequently unavailable using traditional chronological techniques. Here, the

presence of cryptotephra layers from marine sequences in the central and southern Adriatic sea are used as

isochronous marker horizons to make direct comparisons to palaeoenvironmental events in both marine and

terrestrial contexts. The tephra layers also provide independent age control for the sequences allowing the

chronology of key climatic events to be assessed and related to other key regional palaeoclimate archives.

The results demonstrate that tephrostratigraphy supports the broad-scale glacial-interglacial regional climatic

correlations based on oxygen isotope stratigraphy, biostratigraphic markers and sapropel layers. In particular,

the tephra results demonstrate that recent attempts to match proxy records from the Mediterranean spanning

the last glacial cycle (e.g. Allen et al., 1999, Piva, et al., 2008), with the series of Dansgaard-Oeschger cycles in

the Greenland ice-core records need additional verification in order to robustly test these associations. The

tephra-derived age models allow direct comparisons between key regional climatic archives and a sequence of

environmental events is proposed for MIS 5 and the last termination (18-11ka). Moreover, the independent

correlation of palaeoenvironmental records suggested here indicates that precise links can be established

between terrestrial and marine sequences when cryptotephra are used, and caution is advised when aligning

or tuning proxy records without independent verification.

Allen, J.R.M., et al. 1999. Nature, 400, 740-743. Cacho, I., et al., 1999. Paleoceanography, 14, 698-705. Fletcher et al., 2010, Quaternary Science Reviews, 29, 2839-2864. Piva, A., et al. 2008. Geochem., Geophys., Geosys, 9(3), 1 – 21. Sànchez Goñi, M. F., et al., 2002. Climate Dynamics, 19, 95-105.

28

Key tephra isochrons: major struts of the lattice

Paul Albert

Department of Earth Sciences, RHUL and RLAHA, Oxford

The Ionian Sea sedimentary archives provide an important record of key tephra isochrons which underpin the

tephrochronology of the central Mediterranean region. The pioneering investigations of Keller et al., (1978)

recognised a large number of visible tephra layers sourcing from the volcanic centres of Italy. Given the

distance of these sedimentary records from volcanic source these visible tephra layers represent some of the

largest Late Quaternary volcanic eruptions in the region. Tephras associated with these eruptions are the most

likely candidates for identification as cryptotephras in the distal realm. For the continued development of a

robust Mediterranean tephrochronology it is essential to verify their proximal and distal counterparts, and

hence their age. Presented herein is a detailed geochemical characterisation (EMPA and LA-ICP-MS) of glasses

from two of these key Mediterranean isochrons the Y-3 and the Y-1 tephras;

(1) Y-3: The Ionian Sea Y-3 glass geochemistry confirms Campi Flegrei as the source of this tephra [1]. Diagnostic

glass geochemistry demonstrates that the Y-3 tephra can be used as a reliable tephrostratigraphic marker for

synchronising archives over significant distances. The Y-3 tephra is identified as a cryptotephra layer in the

Tenaghi Philippon (Greece) sedimentary archive over 800 km east of Campi Flegrei. Glass geochemistry reveals

that this isochron is not the distal equivalent of the VRa eruptive unit as previously suggested [2,3].

Consequently, the proximal 40Ar/39Ar age of the VRa deposit should not be used as an age for this distal tephra.

A 14C based Bayesian age-depth model at Tenaghi Philippon provides a reliable age constraints for this tephra

of between 29,350-30,160 cal yrs BP*.

(2) Y-1: The Ionian Sea Y-1 tephra is correlated precisely to the Biancavilla Ignimbrites, Mount Etna and a

proximal age of 16,965-17,670 cal yrs BP [4] can be exported distally. Confirmed distal equivalents[5] include an

ash layer identified within the archaeological stratigraphy at Haua Fteah, North Africa. Some reported ‘Y-1’

tephras are geochemically distinguishable from the Ionian Sea Y-1 and Biancavilla ignimbrite glass

compositions. Investigations suggest that ‘Y-1’ tephras reported across the central Mediterranean do not

represent a single synchronous volcanic event[5] and care should be employed when synchronising distal

archives using these Etnean tephras.

*Further details on the work surrounding the Y-3 tephra can be found on a poster presented at this meeting. [1] Keller et al., 1978..Geol. Soc. Am. Bull. 89, 591–604. [2] Zanchetta et al., 2008.JVGR 177,145-154. [3] Di Vito et al., 2008. JVGR 177,

19-48. [4] Siani et al., 2001.Science, 294, 1917. [5] Albert et al., in revision, JVGR.

29

Prospects for adding to the tephra isochron record

Sabine Wulf

Helmholtz-Centre Potsdam, GFZ German Research Centre for Geosciences

The use of distal (crypto) tephras as time and synchronisation markers requires a reliable correlation with

either proximal or other distal tephra layers that are well defined by source, age, stratigraphical position and

geochemical composition. Medial-distal, annually-laminated lake sediment basins are ideal repositories since

they can provide long and continues records of tephra deposition from nearby volcanoes. For the

Mediterranean region, the most comprehensive tephra repository available is the Lago Grande di Monticchio

(LGdM) sediment sequence that contains ca. 350 tephra layers, constituting the most complete history of high-

explosion eruptions for Campanian and other southern Italian volcanoes spanning the last 133 ka. Many of the

widespread Mediterranean tephra markers, for example the Y-1, Y-3, Campanian Ignimbrite (CI), MEGT, X-5

and X-6 tephras, form thick deposits in the LGdM sequence and are well dated by a varve and sedimentation

rate chronology, and hence are ideal reference markers for proximal-distal and distal-distal correlations. Within

the RESET programme more than 50 Monticchio tephra marker layers were re-analysed in terms of major and

minor elemental glass composition and newly characterised by trace elemental composition to enable detailed

comparison with proximal deposits and with cryptotephra layers in the Eastern Mediterranean. The results

generated thus far have underpinned new correlations to Monticchio tephra layers that are helping to

strengthen the Eastern Mediterranean tephrostratigraphical framework. The future potential for further

development of this network lies in trace-element and isotopic characterisation of Monticchio tephras and of

proximal deposits in Campi Flegrei and Ischia, since these are difficult to discriminate using major and minor

element glass compositions alone.

30

Prospects for linking to the Greenland ice-cores

Siwan M. Davies

Department of Geography, College of Science, Swansea University, Singleton Park, Swansea, SA2 8PP, UK Email: siwan.davies@swansea.ac.uk

Little has challenged our understanding of climate change more so than the abruptness with which large-scale

shifts in temperature occurred during the last glacial period. Atmospheric temperature jumps occurring within

decades over Greenland were closely matched by rapid changes in North Atlantic sea surface temperatures and

major re-organisation of the deep ocean circulation. Although these climatic instabilities are well-documented

in various proxy records, the causal mechanisms of such short-lived oscillations remain poorly understood,

largely due to the dating uncertainties that prevent the integration of different archives. Synchronisation of

palaeoclimate records on a common timescale is inherently problematic, and unravelling the lead/lag

responses (hence cause and effect) between the Earth’s climate components is currently beyond our reach.

Our work exploits the use of microscopic traces of volcanic events to precisely correlate the Greenland ice-

cores with other disparate palaeoclimatic archives. Several new, previously unknown eruptions have been

identified in the Greenland ice-cores - several of which fall close to rapid climatic jumps imprinted in the proxy

records. We discuss the prospects of tracing these horizons in North Atlantic marine records and explore how

these time-lines can be used to constrain the lead/lag responses between the atmospheric and oceanic

systems during the last glacial period.

31

Tephra layers as high precision isochrones: realising the potential

Christine Lane

Research Laboratory for Archaeology and the History of Art, University of Oxford

The RESET tephra lattice developed over the last five years provides a far-reaching framework within which we

can correlate and compare records using sound stratigraphic principles and with improved chronological

precision. The precision achieved within different parts of the lattice reflects both the demands of the range of

research questions under investigation and the variability in the number and accessibility of tephra layers and

samples for study within the scope of the project. When cryptotephra layers are used as direct dating tools in

palaeoenvironmental sequences, often in combination with other dating methods and Bayesian age-modelling

techniques, multi-centennial resolution may be reduced significantly around the position of the tephra layers

themselves. Inter-site correlations further benefit from the translation of chronological precision from one

archive to another at these important pinning points. Furthermore, co-registered tephra layers found in

multiple sites allow comparisons of rates of change within intervals of equivalent duration. Differential dating

between tephra layers may reduce the uncertainties of correlation of these intervals further still, allowing the

timing of abrupt changes to be compared on multi-decadal timescales. One aim of RESET was to evaluate

possible leads and lags in the timing of local environmental responses to past climatic forcing over.

Cryptotephra work carried out in annually laminated sequences, with decadal resolution, has allowed one

example of an abrupt environmental transition to be studied in detail within Europe. We reveal that at least in

some cases, environmental transitions may be time-transgressive within the same continent, which has

important implications for the way we evaluate and compare past records of climate change.

32

The RESET Legacy: Key RESET Outcomes and Issues

Simon Blockley1 and Clive Gamble2

1Centre for Quaternary Research, Department of Geography, Royal Holloway, University of London, Egham, Surrey TW20

0EX 2Department of Archaeology, University of Southampton, Avenue Campus, Highfield, Southampton, SO17 1BF.

This talk will draw together the key outcomes of the RESET programme. It will note important issues in

tephrochronology, such as the nature of the distal to proximal record. It will highlight tephra layers that have

played particularly important roles in the RESET project and summarise a number of advances that have

enabled these layers to be used as isochrons. The chronological, palaeoenvironmental and archaeological

outcomes and legacies of the project will then be addressed, developing themes explored in previous talks,

with a focus on how the RESET project has added significantly to the refinement of age models constructed for

key palaeoenvironmental and archaeological records. It will then prime discussion of the impact that RESET

science may have made on our understanding of the complexities of the climate system and the nature of

environmental response to climate forcing: in particular, the identification and quantification of leads and lags

in these systems through the use of tephra-based correlation.

The chronological theme will also be explored in the archaeological legacy of RESET. There have been several

dating revolutions since radiocarbon became an established technique. With each change in precision and

accuracy new questions and approaches have been asked. These range from an interest in process as applied

to cultural systems to the study of significant events such as the timing of the Human and Neolithic revolutions.

One of the stated aims of RESET was the synchronisation of the archaeological record with marine and

terrestrial records – the aim being to analyse the combined archive at the scale of a human generation. RESET

has made the first steps towards such a lattice and presents us with the opportunity to compare hominin

responses to AETs between different segments of the Upper Pleistocene. There are still issues to investigate

and these include the mesh size of the lattice and the applicability of tephrochronology to all regions and types

of archaeological sites. Once these are resolved we will be able to measure a key parameter in human

evolution such as dispersal rates, test archaeological models of population dispersal with archaeogenetics

archives and examine environmental push and pull factors in human dispersal. We will also be able to provide

the much needed chronological framework for the anticipated explosion in ancient DNA and stable isotope

data that will transform the study of the past.

33

A paleoanthropologist’s perspective on future potential

Jean-Jacques Hublin

Department of Human Evolution, Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology

The replacement of local archaic humans in Eurasia by modern humans after 50,000 BP is one of the most

spectacular events in recent human evolution. Still, the exact process of this replacement is widely unknown

and its precise conditions are poorly documented. Europe is the only region that has been investigated enough

to produce palaeontological and archaeological evidence allowing the establishment of tentative scenarios for

the transition period. Unfortunately, human remains are still very scarce for the considered time period.

Although a number of lithic assemblages immediately post-dating the last Middle Paleolithic industries of

Europe have been identified, the biological nature of their makers generally remains unknown. So-called

‘transitional’ assemblages have long been considered as possibly having been produced by late Neandertals.

These assemblages may in fact encompass some genuine initial Upper Paleolithic industries, actually made by

modern humans moving into Western Eurasia before the Aurignacian, often considered to be an archaeological

proxy for the first modern colonization of Europe. Another issue relates to the exact chronology of the

succession of these different populations and to the duration of possible chronological overlap of late

Neandertals and early modern humans on a continental scale. The debates surrounding this question cannot

be resolved by simply analysing archaeological stratigraphies at sites. In the context of the permanent

improvement of radiometric methods to establish a fine timing of the transition, pan-European geological

markers provide invaluable means of control of the chronological framework.

34

A climate stratigrapher’s perspective on future potential

Chronis Tzedakis

Environmental Change Research Centre, Department of Geography, University College London

A persistent handicap in the study of Pleistocene sequences has been the general lack of sufficiently precise

timescales. With few exceptions, direct geochronological dating often contains large uncertainties, while

regionally or globally synchronous stratigraphical markers have not been identified or have not been explored

fully. This complicates long-distance comparisons and an assessment of the local or regional significance of

reported events and precludes any meaningful phase comparisons between palaeoclimatic archives. In view of

these constraints, a multi-pronged approach relying on the synchronization of different archives needs to be

adopted. The RESET tephrostratigraphic lattice combined with secure climatostratigraphic synchronization and

alignment provides an opportunity to develop an expanded stratigraphic framework where phase relationships

between different parts of the climate system are better constrained.

35

Abstracts for Posters

Presented in alphabetical order (surnames of first author)

36

RESETing the Caucasus: assessing the synchronicity of Middle

and Upper Palaeolithic cultures across the Caucasus using tephra isochrons

Victoria. L Cullena *, Victoria Smitha & Simon Blockleyb

a Research Laboratry for Archaeology and the History of Art, University of Oxford, Dyson Perrins Building, South Parks Road, Oxford, OX1 3QY. *victoria.cullen@rlaha.ox.ac.uk.

b Department of Geography, Royal Holloway, UCL, Egham Hill, Egham, Surrey, TW20 0EX

The Caucasus is a natural corridor between the Black and Caspian seas that links Africa, Eurasia, and Europe,

and is believed to be a possible migratory route for both Neanderthals and Anatomically Modern Humans

(AMHs). A key cultural change between the Middle Palaeolithic, associated with Neanderthals, and the Middle-

Upper Palaeolithic (~130-30 ka) that is linked to AMHs, is recorded in numerous cave sites. However, the

precise timing of this change and synchroniety across the region remains unclear as many of the sites have

poor chronological control. The aim of this work is to link archaeological sites across the Caucuses using

volcanic ash layers (tephra) to assess relative timings of the cultural changes. We have sampled and identified

visible and non-visible volcanic ash layers (cryptotephra) at key sites. A key finding is a tephra isochron that

links Ortvale Klde, Georgia and Lusarket, Armenia. This shows that AMHs where in Georgia (with similarities to

the Ahmarian UP culture from the Levant) at the same time as MP assemblage were been produced and used

in Armenia, possibly by Neanderthals. Our preliminary results show that previous models of human migration

across the region need to be revised.

37

Late Glacial or Early Holocene Icelandic Cryptotephra from an open-air archaeological site in Northern Germany: Ahrenshöft LA58 D

Rupert Housley, Christine Lane, Vicky Cullen, Sharen Lee, Felix Riede, Mara-Julia Weber, Clive Gamble

Royal Holloway University of London Research Laboratory for Archaeology and the History of Art, University of Oxford

Institut for Antropologi, Arkæologi og Lingvistik, University of Aarhus Zentrum für Baltische und Skandinavische Archäologie Schloss Gottsdorf

Faculty of Humanities (Archaeology), University of Southampton

Cryptotephra of Icelandic origin from the open-air archaeological site of Ahrenshöft LA 58 D

(Kr. Nordfriesland, Schleswig-Holstein), northern Germany overlies a Late-glacial Havelte lithic assemblage,

previously dated by 14C and biostratigraphy to the earliest part of the Late-glacial interstadial (GI-1e to GI-1c3).

Peaks in ash shards are observed in three profiles. Major and minor element geochemistry indicates volcanic

ash originating in the Katla system. Precise correlation to previously described tephra is uncertain due to

overlapping chemical characteristics. The Ahrenshöft 14C determinations, litho- and bio-stratigraphy encompass

a broad age-span for the cryptotephra bearing sediments, from the end of the Allerød to the Preboreal. The

most plausible volcanic eruption correlates are the Vedde Ash (mid Younger Dryas), tephra AF555 (late Younger

Dryas) and the Suðuroy tephra (Preboreal/Boreal). These three tephra have been dated to, respectively, 12,171

± 57 yr b2k in the NGRIP ice-core, c.11,500 cal BP, in Scotland and c.8000 cal BP, by radiocarbon from the Faroe

Isles. The site has proved valuable for better understanding the preservation of cryptotephra in open-air

archaeological settings.

38

Stratigraphy of pre-Green Tuff (Y6) peralkaline welded ignimbrites, Pantelleria (Italy), and preliminary proximal-distal tephra correlations

Nina Jordan, Rebecca Williams, Mike Branney and Mike Norry

University of Leicester (njj5@le.ac.uk)

A revised volcanic stratigraphy is presented for the ignimbrites of Pantelleria, a peralkaline caldera volcano

situated in the submerged continental rift between Africa and Sicily. The volcano has been active for ≥325 ka

(Mahood & Hildreth, 1986), producing eight major ignimbrites from large central eruptions (189 to 50 ka),

which appear to have alternated with numerous minor pumice falls and lavas from scattered local centres. The

main ignimbrites can be traced along superb coastal exposures and have been logged in detail. Eruption-units

have been defined by the position of palaeosols and a type section designated. Lithic breccias and pumice fall

deposits associated with these major ignimbrites are interpreted as part of the same eruption overcoming

correlation problems encountered by previous workers (cf Mahood & Hildreth, 1986).

The ignimbrites are 2 to >20 m thick, welded to rheomorphic and cover most of the island, recording

devastating, radial, high-temperature density currents. Five of the eight major ignimbrites contain lithic

breccias, which have commonly been interpreted as recording caldera collapse events, but the details of

individual calderas are not clear.

Distal peralkaline tephras have been found around the Mediterranean as far away as ~1200 km. With only this

volcano erupting peralkaline compositions, it suggests that eruptions from Pantelleria have had a substantial

impact on their environment. Proximal-distal tephra correlations are reviewed in the light of new whole-rock,

glass and mineral analyses.

References Mahood, G.A., Hildreth, W., (1986) Bulletin of Volcanology 48, 143-172.

39

The Hominin Sites and Paleolakes Drilling Project: testing hypotheses of climate-driven human evolution and dispersal

Henry F Lamb* and HSPDP members

*Department of Geography and Earth Sciences, Aberystwyth University, UK

Numerous hypotheses linking climatic trends, events and variability to human origins, evolution and dispersal

have been debated in recent decades. Long palaeoenvironmental records from continental sites that may allow

tests of these hypotheses are only now becoming available, but most are distant from fossil human sites. The

Hominin Sites and Paleolakes Drilling Project (HSPDP), which involves more than 50 scientists from eight

countries, aims to obtain long continuous sediment cores spanning critical intervals of human evolutionary

history from lacustrine sites close to and stratigraphically tied to globally-significant hominin sites in East Africa.

Together the five sites – Northern Awash and Chew Bahir, Ethiopia; West Turkana, Baringo Basin, and Lake

Magadi, Kenya – will provide multi-proxy palaeoenvironmental records spanning the last 4 million years,

allowing us to correlate and compare environmental changes to the more fragmentary record of human and

mammalian evolution, dispersal, extinction, and cultural innovation. The project will evaluate models of

climatic and tectonic forcing of environmental processes and landscape resources, and test hypotheses linking

climate change and variability to physical and cultural evolution. Supported by the International Continental

Drilling Program (ICDP), NSF (USA), DFG (Germany) and by NERC (UK), HSPDP will begin drilling in early June

2013 in Kenya, continuing in Ethiopia from November 2013 through early 2014.

40

Tephra records of East African changing environments

Christine S. Lane

Research Laboratory for Archaeology and the History of Art, University of Oxford, UK.

Volcanic ash (tephra) from explosive eruptions can be preserved as discrete layers within sediment records

(lakes, soils, archaeological sites), 1000 km’s from their source, often as microscopic layers. Tephra can be

characterised using the chemical composition of the glass shards and correlated either to proximal outcrops

(which can be radiometrically dated) and/or to other distal occurrences of the same layer. These layers are

isochrons, deposited instantaneously and rapidly buried. During the Late Quaternary there have been many

explosive volcanic eruptions along the East African Rift (EAR), which produced widespread tephra layers. As

well as its rich archaeological history, the EAR is also home to some of the longest lake sediment records in the

world, which provide insight into past environmental and climatic conditions. Work is under way to detect

(crypto-) tephra layers within Late Quaternary sediments from a number of lake records and archaeological

sites in East Africa, with the aim of building a regional tephrostratigraphic framework which will: (i) Enable

more robust correlation and dating of palaeoclimate records and archaeological sites from across tropical

Africa, by building stratigraphic tie-lines between archives; and (ii) provide age constraints for individual site

chronologies, in particular beyond the limits of radiocarbon dating.

41

Tephra at Kostenki: the current state of research in the light of new evidence

A.A.Sinitsyn

Institute for the History of Material Culture, Russian Academy of Sciences Dvortsovaia nab., 18., 191186 St-Petersburg

26 Upper Palaeolithic sites comprise the Kostenki group of Palaeolithic sites: 21 at Kostenki and 5 in the

adjacent village of Borshchevo. 7 of the sites contain evidence of volcanic ash: often as a thick horizon,

sometimes as a level of thin, interrupted lenses. As a rule, ashes are mixed with loessic loamy sediments, but in

some sections the tephra is pure, almost without outside admixtures. Ash horizons typically lie between two

humic beds and serve as a basic marker for the subdivision of two ancient chronological groups of the Kostenki

Palaeolithic.

During the first (pre-analytic) period of tephra study at Kostenki its origin was linked with activity of the

Caucasian volcanoes, the volcanic province closest to the site. In the 1980’s, on the basis of new analytic

studies, the origin of Kostenki tephra was correlated with the large catastrophic eruption of the Campanian

Ignimbrite (CI) at Phlegrean Fields (Campi Flegrei) in Southern Italy, and corresponding to horizon Y5 of bottom

sediments of the Mediterranean Sea (Melekestsev et al. 1984). Further analytical research has confirmed this

conclusion (Pyle et al. 2006; Giacco et al. 2008).

Cultural layers with lithic assemblages of Aurignacian attribution were identified at Kostenki 14 (Markina gora)

in 2000 in direct correlation with the CI volcanic ash horizon. Initially these results seemed to indicate that

settlement at the site had been interrupted by this catastrophic event (Sinitsyn, 2003). Later evidence

suggested that in situ cultural layers with hearths and structures of everyday life (such as storages and areas of

bone tools production) lie directly on the ashy sediments, indicating that the functioning of the settlement

continued after the ash fall. Important was the identification of the associated fossil soil, formation of which

began before the tephra sedimentation and proceeded after it (Sedov et al., 2010), which seems to be an

additional argument in favor of the absence of principal changes of natural living conditions after this

catastrophic event.

For a long time the basic problem connected with Kostenki's volcanic ash and its link to a specific cultural layer

was a chronological problem. Radiocarbon dates on charcoal from the associated cultural layer provided a

series of dates at ~32 ka C14 yr BP. The age of the CI tephra is estimated at 39.3-40 ka yr BP. However,

42

subsequent ABOx pretreatment of charcoal from this level yielded an age of 35 080 ± 240 C14 yr BP (OxA-

19021) (Douka et al., 2010), which when calibrated produces an age of ~40 ka yr BP, fully corresponding to the

age of the CI tephra.

Results of these analytic studies and new evidence resolved problems not detected earlier. The most important

questions of the current stage of reflection and supposed for discussion in the present paper are as follows:

- the high degree of variability in stratigraphy at the Kostenki's sites shows that tephra can be connected with

different lithological sediments, correlation of which appears to be a complex problem;

- absence of a normal volcanic plume remains without explanation: more than 80 sections with CI tephra exist

in the Voronezh and Rostov regions, no more than 10 in Ukraine, and no more than 10 in Central Europe;

- consequences of a catastrophic event for ancient populations and relation to archaeological changes remains

open although Kostenki's materials provide mostly evidence for an absence of its principal influence on both.

Grants: Presidium RAS, RFFI-ofi-m-13-06-12061 References Douka R., Higham T., Sinitsyn A. 2010. The influence of pretreatment chemistry on the radiocarbon dating of Campanian Ignimbrite-aged charcoal from Kostenki 14 (Russia). Quaternary Research 73, 583-587. Giaccio B., Isaia R., Fedele F., Di Canzio E., Hoffecker J.F., Ronchitelli A., Sinitsyn A.A., Anikovich M.V., Lisitsyn S.N., Popov V.V. 2008. The Campanian Ignimbrite and Codola tephra layers: two temporal/stratigraphic markers for the Early Upper Palaeolithic in southern Italy and eastern Europe. Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research 177, 208-226. Melekestsev I. V., Kirianov V. Yu., Praslov N. D. 1984. Catastrophic eruption at the area of Campi Flegrei (Italy) - a possible source of the volcanic ash in Upper Pleistocene sediments at the European part of USSR. Volcanology and Seismology 3. Moscow, 35-44 (in Russian). Sedov S.N., Khokhlova O.S., Sinitsyn A.A., Korkka M.A., Rusakov A.V., Ortega B., Solleiro E., Rozanova M.S., Kuznetsova A.M., Kazdym A.A. 2010. Late pleistocene paleosol sequences as an instrument for the local paleographic reconstruction of the Kostenki 14 key section (Voronezh oblast) as an example. Eurasian Soil Science 43, 876-892. Sinitsyn A.A. 2003. A Palaeolithic "Pompeii" at Kostenki, Russia. Antiquity 77, 9-14. Pyle D.M., Ricketts G.D., Margari V., van Andel T.H., Sinitsyn A.A., Praslov N.D., Lisirsyn S. 2006. Wide dispersal and deposition of distal tephra during the Pleistocene 'Campanian Ignimbrite/Y5' eruption, Italy. Quaternary Science Reviews 25, 2713-2728. Wood R.E., Douka K., Boscato, P., Haesaerts P., Sinitsyn A., Higham T.F.G. 2012. Testing the ABOx-SC method: dating known age charcoals associated with the Campanian Ignimbrite. Quaternary Geochronology 9, 16-26

43

Identification and correlation of visible tephras in the Lake Suigetsu SG06 sedimentary archive, Japan

Victoria C. Smitha*, Richard A. Staffa, Simon P.E. Blockleyb, Christopher Bronk Ramseya, Takeshi Nakagawac,

Darren F. Markd, Keiji Takemurae & Toru Danharaf

a Research Laboratory for Archaeology and the History of Art, University of Oxford, Oxford OX1 3QY b Centre for Quaternary Research, Royal Holloway University of London, Egham TW20 0EX

c Department of Geography, University of Newcastle, Newcastle upon Tyne NE1 7RU d Argon Isotope Facility, Scottish Universities Environmental Research Centre, East Kilbride G75 0QF

e Beppu Geothermal Research, Faculty of Science, Kyoto University, Beppu 874-0903, Japan. f Kyoto Fission-track Co. Ltd., 44-4 Tajiri-cho, Ohmiya, Kita-ku, Kyoto 603-8838, Japan.

The Lake Suigetsu SG06 sedimentary archive from Honshu Island, central Japan, provides a high-resolution

palaeoenvironmental record (Nakagawa et al., 2012), including a detailed record of explosive volcanism from

Japan and South Korea (Smith et al., 2011; 2013). More than 30 visible tephra are recorded within the 73 m-

long SG06 core that spans the last ~150 kyrs. Some of the distal tephra units have distinct major element glass

compositions, which make them ideal marker layers for correlating sedimentary archives. Utilising the large

number of radiocarbon measurements (n>600) from terrestrial plant macrofossils in the Lake Suigetsu SG06

record and the core’s chronology (Staff et al., 2011; Bronk Ramsey et al., 2012) we are able to provide precise

and accurate ages for all the tephra from eruptions within the last 50 kyrs. The SG06 chronology has allowed us

to improve the ages for two of the most important tephra markers across Japan, the K-Ah (7.165-7.303 cal. ka

BP at 95.4% probability range; SG06-0967) and AT tephra (30.009 ± 0.189 SG062012 -2650).

These tephra compositions and revised ages for the widespread volcanic deposits will help to improve age

models for sedimentary records and synchronise SG06 with other east Asian/west Pacific palaeoclimate

archives.

References

Bronk Ramsey, C. et al. (2012) Science 338, 370-374.

Nakagawa, T. et al. (2012) Quaternary Science Reviews 36, 164-176.

Smith, V.C. et al. (2011) Quaternary Science Reviews 30, 2845-2850.

Smith, V.C. et al. (2013) Quaternary Science Reviews 67,121-137.

Staff, R.A. et al. (2011) Radiocarbon 53, 511-528.

44

Colonization and climate-induced population collapse? The 6000-year history of Mesolithic settlement in Western Scotland

Karen Wicks and Steven Mithen

University of Reading. K.wicks@reading.ac.uk

We present the results of a chronological analysis of all radiocarbon dates from the Mesolithic of Western

Scotland to reveal a previously unsuspected pattern regarding colonization and the impact of climate change,

notably the 8.2Kyr event (c. 6.2K BC). Thirty-one Mesolithic sites are currently known in Western Scotland from

which 226 radiocarbon dates have been acquired. Scrutiny showed that 135 of these are reliability associated

with Mesolithic artefacts. These were integrated within a single Bayesian model comprised of modules that

defined the stratigraphic relationship of the radiocarbon record within individual sites, a range of calibration

curves and weighting- factors for potential old wood effects to produce a single summed probability

distribution for the chronology of Mesolithic settlement. This acts as a proxy for human population levels and

was validated by a comparison with site distribution and the number of activity events. The population pattern

was compared with climate-proxy data from the GISP 2 ice core and local pollen sequences to explore the

impact of climate change on human settlement. This demonstrated (1) a phase of pioneering colonization

between 8500 and 7000 BC; (2) established settlement with activity throughout the islands and adjacent

mainland between 7000 and 6200 BC; (3) dramatic population collapse immediately following the climatic

deterioration at 8.2Kyr event, (4) settlement only returning to a significant extent after 5000 BC which then

dramatically disappears after 3800 BC that marks the appearance of the Neolithic.

45

Other posters

The NERC Argon Isotope Facility @ SUERC: High precision 40Ar/39/Ar dating of the Late Pleistocene and Holocene

Antony Hinchcliffe & Darren Mark

SUERC, University of Glasgow. a.hinchliffe.1@research.gla.ac.uk

Constraining rapid climatic transitions in the North Atlantic

Adam Griggs University of Swansea. 607416@swansea.ac.uk

Improved tephrochronology of the LGIT: new horizons and correlations from Greenland ice cores

Eliza Cook University of Swansea. 580708@swansea.ac.uk

46

Poster for Saturday 8th June: ‘Our Explosive Past’

Humans in Europe

Chris Stringer

Department of Earth Sciences, The Natural History Museum London

The species Homo heidelbergensis, present in the Middle Pleistocene of Europe, Asia and Africa by about

600,000 years ago, seems to have given rise to at least three descendant lineages: Homo sapiens (Africa),

‘Denisovans’ (eastern Eurasia), and Homo neanderthalensis (western Eurasia). Although fossil material

indicates that early modern humans (Homo sapiens) were briefly present in western Asia about 100,000 years

ago, there is currently no reliably dated physical evidence that they extended any further out of Africa at this

time. Their subsequent re-establishment in the Levant is often estimated from genetic data to be at about

60,000 years ago, but the age of their first dispersals into Europe is still unclear. This is partly because of the

paucity of early sites with extensive evidence, but is also a reflection of the chronological problems we have

faced in dating material near, or beyond, the practical limits of radiocarbon dating.

Work by the RESET project in central and eastern Europe has demonstrated from archaeological proxies that

modern humans were already established in these regions by the time of the major Campanian Ignimbrite (CI)

eruption about 40,000 years ago, and were seemingly not seriously affected by it, while Neanderthals had

already largely disappeared by this time. However, CI cryptotephra does not seem to have dispersed

westwards, and hence RESET has not yet been able to help resolve some of the chronological problems further

to the West. Nevertheless, recent improvements in radiocarbon sample pre-treatments have helped to clarify

some important issues. While some of the most ancient Homo sapiens fossils have no diagnostic archaeological

associations (e.g. Oase, Romania), others have at least Initial Upper Palaeolithic associations (e.g. Kent's Cavern

4, England; Cavallo, Italy). It now seems likely from the Cavallo evidence that at least one pre-Aurignacian

dispersal traversed the south of the continent. Despite attempts based on chronological and morphological

grounds to question recent research on Kent's Cavern 4, an additional pre-40ka movement is likely to have

reached western Britain, but the archaeology associated with this earliest known northern dispersal may have

been Aurignacian or pre-Aurignacian. The physical nature of the populations concerned remains obscure,

however, given the fragmentary nature of the record prior to the Oase fossils, dated by radiocarbon to about

40,000 years. While it is possible to correlate these dispersals with brief warming events (interstadials), it is

47

currently unknown whether the populations concerned were able to survive subsequent cold stages (stadials)

prior to 40,000. And further issues remain to be clarified, one of which is whether there were even earlier

dispersals of modern humans into Europe, for example one associated with the enigmatic Bohunician industry.

New genetic data continue to add detail and complexity to the early dispersal history of modern humans. It is

currently unclear whether there was one, several, or multiple 'hybridisation' events between early modern

humans and Neanderthals, and it is equally unclear whether the relatively low level of extant remnants of

introgression is due to the rarity of the interbreeding itself, or to cultural or biological limitations on its success.

Beyond Europe, there is evidence of Denisovan-modern human interbreeding, but it is so far unclear when and

where the hypothesised introgression occurred, although it must have been quite limited geographically, and

perhaps even beyond the Wallace Line. And only beginning to be explored is the likelihood and impact of

Neanderthal-Denisovan hybridisation, which surely also occurred, given the extensive spatial and temporal

overlap of these evolving Eurasian lineages.

48

Published papers reporting RESET and RESET-related results

So far the RESET team has generated or contributed to the published scientific papers listed below. A number of additional papers are currently at review stage, and a special issue of Quaternary Science Reviews is planned for late 2013 or early 2014. 1. Albert, P.G., Tomlinson, E.L., Smith, V.C., Di Roberto, A., Todman, A., Rosi, M., Marani, M., Müller, W., Menzies, M.A., 2012. Marine-continental tephra correlations: Volcanic glass geochemistry from the Marsili Basin and the Aeolian Islands, Southern Tyrrhenian Sea, Italy. Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research, vol. 229-230, 74-94. doi.org/10.1016/j.jvolgeores.2012.03.009. 2. Barton, R.N.E., Bouzouggar, A., Collcutt, S.N., Schwenninger, J.-L., and Clark-Balzan, L., 2009. OSL dating of the Aterian levels at Dar es-Soltan I (Rabat, Morocco) and implications for the dispersal of modern Homo sapiens. Quaternary Science Reviews, vol. 28, no. 19-20, 1914-1931. doi:10.1016/j.quascirev.2009.03.010. 3. Bourne, A.J., Lowe, J.J., Trincardi, F., Asioli, A., Blockley, S.P.E., Wulf, S., Matthews, I.P., Piva, A., and Vigliotti, L., 2010. Distal tephra record for the last ca 105,000 years from core PRAD 1-2 in the central Adriatic Sea: implications for marine tephrostratigraphy. Quaternary Science Reviews, vol. 29, no. 23-24, 3079-3094. doi:10.1016/j.quascirev.2010.07.021. 4. Bramham-Law, C., Theuerkauf, M., Lane, C.S., Mangerud, J. 2013. New findings regarding the Saksunarvatn Ash in Germany. Journal of Quaternary Science, vol. 28, no. 3, 248-257. doi: 10.1002/jqs.2615. 5. Brock, F., Lee, S., Housley, R.A. and Bronk Ramsey, C., 2011. Variation in the radiocarbon age of different fractions of peat: a case study from Ahrenshöft, northern Germany. Quaternary Geochronology, vol. 6, no. 6, 550-555. doi: 10.1016/j.quageo.2011.08.003. 6. d’Errico, F., Vanhaeren, M., Barton, N., Bouzouggar, A., Mienis, H., Richter, D., Hublin, J.-J., McPherron, S.P. and Lozouet, P., 2009. Additional evidence on the use of personal ornaments in the Middle Paleolithic of North Africa. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of America, 106, 16051-16056. 7. Finsinger, W., Lane, C.S., van den Brand, G., Wagner-Cremer, F., Blockley, S.P.E. and Lotter, A.F., 2011. The late-glacial Quercus expansion in the southern European Alps: a rapid vegetation response to a late Allerod climate warming? Journal of Quaternary Science, vol.26, 694-702. doi: 10.1002/jqs.1493. 8. Grant, K.M., Rohling, E.J., Bar-Matthews, M., Ayalon, A., Medina-Elizalde, M., Bronk Ramsey, C., Satow, C., and Roberts, A.P., 2012. Rapid coupling between ice volume and polar temperature over the past 150,000 years. Nature, vol. 491, no. 7426, 744-747. doi:10.1038/nature11593. 9. Housley, R.A., Lane, C.S., Cullen, V.L., Weber, M.-J., Riede, F., Gamble, C.S., and Brock, F., 2012. Icelandic volcanic ash from the Late-glacial open-air archaeological site of Ahrenshöft LA 58 D, North Germany. Journal of Archaeological Science, vol.39, 708-716. doi:10.1016/j.jas.2011.11.003

49

10. Lane, C.S., Andriè, M., Cullen, V.L., and Blockley, S.P.E., 2011. The occurrence of distal Icelandic and Italian tephra in the Lateglacial of Lake Bled, Slovenia. Quaternary Science Reviews, vol. 30, no. 9-10, 1013-1018. 11. Lane, C.S., Blockley, S.P.E., Bronk Ramsey, C., and Lotter, A.F., 2011. Tephrochronology and absolute centennial scale synchronisation of European and Greenland records for the last glacial to interglacial transition: a case study of Soppensee and NGRIP. Quaternary International, vol. 246, no. 1-2, 145-156. 12. Lane, C.S., Blockley, S.P.E., Lotter, A.F., Finsinger, W., Filippi, M.L. and Matthews, I.P., 2012. A regional tephrostratigraphic framework for central and southern European climate archives during the Last Glacial to Interglacial Transition: comparisons north and south of the Alps. Quaternary Science Reviews, vol. 36, 50-58. 13. Lane, C.S., Blockley, S.P.E., Mangerud, J., Smith, V.C., Lohne, O.S., Tomlinson, E.L., Matthews, I.P., Lotter, A.F., 2012. Was the 12.1 ka Icelandic Vedde Ash one of a kind? Quaternary Science Reviews, vol. 33, 87-99. doi:10.1016/j.quascirev.2011.11.011. 14. Lane, C.S., de Klerk, P. and Cullen, V.L., 2012. A tephrochronology for the Lateglacial vegetation record of Endinger Bruch, Vorpommern. Journal of Quaternary Science, vol. 27, 141-149. doi: 10.1002/jqs.1521. 15. Lee, S., Bronk Ramsey, C., 2012. Development and application of the trapezoid model for archaeological chronologies. Radiocarbon, vol. 54, no. 1, 107-122. 16. Lowe, J., Barton, N., Blockley, S., Ramsey, C.B., Cullen, V.L., Davies, W., Gamble, C., Grant, K., Hardiman, M., Housley, R., Lane, C.S., Lee, S., Lewis, M., MacLeod, A., Menzies, M., Müller, W., Pollard, M., Price, C., Roberts, A.P., Rohling, E.J., Satow, C., Smith, V.C., Stringer, C.B., Tomlinson, E.L., White, D., Albert, P., Arienzo, I., Barker, G., Borić, D., Carandente, A., Civetta, L., Ferrier, C., Guadelli, J., Karkanas, P., Koumouzelis, M., Müller, U.C., Orsi, G., Pross, J., Rosi, M., Shalamanov-Korobar, L., Sirakov, N. & Tzedakis, P.C. 2012. Volcanic Ash Layers Illuminate the Resilience of Neanderthals and Early Modern Humans to Natural Hazards. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 109, 13532-13537. 17. Menzies, M.A., Tomlinson, E.L., Müller, W., Thordarson, T., Lane, C., Smith, V.C., Blockley, S.P.E., and the RESET Consortium, 2010. Icelandic tephrochronology - matching the provenance of proximal and distal volcanic glasses using LA-ICPMS trace element data, Iceland in the Central Northern Atlantic : hotspot, sea currents and climate change, IUEM Plouzané: France. 18. Osborne, A.H., Vance, D., Rohling, E.J., Barton, N., Rogerson, M., and Fello, N., 2008. A humid corridor across the Sahara for the migration of early modern humans out of Africa 120,000 years ago. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of America, vol. 105, no. 43, 16444-16447. 19. Riede, F., Bazely, O., Newton, A.J. and Lane, C.S., 2011. A Laacher See-eruption supplement to Tephrabase. Investigating distal tephra fall-out dynamics. Quaternary International, vol. 246, no. 1-2, 134-144. 20. Roberts, A.P., Rohling, E.J., Grant, K.M., Larrasoana, J.C., Liu, Q., 2011. Atmospheric dust variability from Arabia and China over the last 500,000 years. Quaternary Science Reviews, vol. 30, 3537-3541. 21. Rogerson, M., Bigg, G.R., Rohling, E.J. and Ramirez, J., 2011. Vertical density gradient in the eastern North Atlantic during the last 30,000 years. Climate Dynamics. 39, 589-598. 22. Rohling, E.J., Grant, K., Hemleben, C., Kucera, M., Roberts, A.P., Schmeltzer, I., Schulz, H., Siccha, M., Siddall, M., and Trommer, G., 2008. New constraints on the timing of sea level fluctuations during early to middle marine isotope stage 3. Paleoceanography, vol. 23, PA3219.

50

23. Rohling, E.J., Grant, K., Bolshaw, M., Roberts, A.P., Siddall, M., Hemleben, Ch., and Kucera, M., 2009. Antarctic temperature and global sea level coupled over the past five glacial cycles. Nature Geoscience, doi:10.1038/ngeo557. 24. Rohling, E.J., Liu, Q.S., Roberts, A.P., Stanford, J.D., Rasmussen, S.O., Langen, P.L., and Siddall, M., 2009. Controls on the East Asian monsoon during the last glacial cycle, based on comparison between Hulu Cave and polar ice-core records. Quaternary Science Reviews, vol. 28, no. 27-28, 3291-3302. doi:10.1016/j.quascirev.2009.09.007. 25. Rohling, E.J., Braun, K., Grant, K., Kucera, M., Roberts, A.P., Siddall, M., and Trommer, G., 2010. Comparison between Holocene and Marine Isotope Stage-11 sea-level histories. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett., vol. 291, no. 1-4, 97-105. doi:10.1016/j.epsl.2009.12.054. 26. Siddall, M., Rohling, E.J., Blunier, T., and Spahni, R., 2010. Patterns of millennial variability over the last 500 ka. Climate of the Past, vol. 6, 295-303. doi:10.5194/cp-6-295-2010. 27. Stanford, J.D., Rohling, E.J., Bacon, S., Roberts, A.P., Grousset, F.E., Bolshawa, M., 2011. A new concept for the paleoceanographic evolution of Heinrich event 1 in the North Atlantic. Quaternary Science Reviews, vol. 30, 1047-1066. doi:10.1016/j.quascirev.2011.02.003. 28. Tolksdorf, J.F., Turner, F., Kaiser, K., Eckmeier, E., Stahlschmidt, M., Housley, R.A., Breest, K., Veil, S., 2013. Multiproxy analyses of stratigraphy and palaeoenvironment of the late Palaeolithic Grabow floodplain site, northern Germany. Geoarchaeology, vol. 28, no. 1, 50-65. doi: 10.1002/gea.21429. 29. Tomlinson, E.L., Arienzo, I., Civetta, L., Wulf, S., Smith, V.C., Hardiman, M., Lane, C.S., Carandente, A., Orsi, G., Rosi, M., Müller, W. & Menzies, M.A. 2012. Geochemistry of the Phlegraean Fields (Italy) Proximal Sources for Major Mediterranean Tephras: Implications for the Dispersal of Plinian & Co-Ignimbritic Components of Explosive Eruptions. Geochimica Et Cosmochimica Acta, vol. 93, 102-128. 30. Tomlinson, E.L., Kinvig, H.S., Smith, V.C., Blundy, J.D., Gottsmann, J., Müller, W. & Menzies, M.A. 2012. The Upper and Lower Nisyros Pumices: Revisions to the Mediterranean Tephrostratigraphic Record Based on Micron-Beam Glass Geochemistry. Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research 243–244, 69-80. 31. Tomlinson, E.L., Thordarson, T., Lane, C.S., Smith, V.C., Maqnning, C.J., Müller, W., Menzies, M.A., 2012. Petrogenesis of the Sólheimar Ignimbrite (Katla, Iceland): implications for tephrostratigraphy. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, vol. 86, 318-337. doi.org/10.1016/j.gca.2012.03.012. 32. Tomlinson, E.L., Thordarson, T., Müller, W., Thirlwall, M.F., Menzies, M.A., 2010. Microanalysis of tephra by LA-ICP-MS - strategies, advantages and limitations assessed using the Thorsmörk Ignimbrite (Southern Iceland). Chemical Geology, vol. 279, no. 3-4, 73-89. doi:10.1016/j.chemgeo.2010.09.013. 33. Trommer, G., Siccha, M., Rohling, E.J., Grant, K., van der Meer, M.T.J., Schouten, S., Hemleben, C., Kucera, M., 2010. Millennial-scale variability in Red Sea circulation in response to Holocene insolation forcing. Paleoceanography, vol. 25, PA3203. 34. Trommer, G., Siccha, M., Rohling, E.J., Grant, K., van der Meer, M.T.J., Schouten, S., Baranowski, U., Kucera, M., 2011. Sensitivity of Red Sea circulation to sea level and insolation forcing during the last interglacial. Climate of the Past, vol. 7, 941-955.

51

35. Veres, D., Lane, C.S., Timar-Gabor, A., Hambach, U., Constantin, D., Szakács, A., Fülling, A., Onac, B.P., 2012. The Campanian Ignimbrite/Y5 tephra layer - A regional stratigraphic marker for Isotope Stage 3 deposits in the Lower Danube region, Romania. Quaternary International, in press, doi:10.1016/j.quaint.2012.02.042. 36. Weber, M.-J., Clausen, I., Housley, R.A., Miller, C.E., Riede, F., & contribution by Usinger, H., 2010. New information on the Havelte Group site Ahrenshöft LA 58 D (Nordfriesland, Germany) - Preliminary results of the 2008 fieldwork, Quartär, vol. 57, 7-24. 37. Wulf, S., Keller, J., Paterne, M., Mingram, J., Lauterbach, S., Opitz, S., Sottili, G., Giaccio, B., Albert, P.G., Satow, C., Tomlinson, E.L., Viccaro, M. & Brauer, A. 2012. The 100–133 ka Record of Italian Explosive Volcanism and Revised Tephrochronology of Lago Grande Di Monticchio. Quaternary Science Reviews, vol. 58, 104-123.