Mesolithic Features

UNIT 1 MESOLITHIC FEATURES

Contents
1.1 Introduction
1.2 Environment of Europe During Early Holocene Period
1.3 Tool Types and Manufacturing Techniques
1.4 Mesolithic Cultures of Europe
1.4.1 Maglemosian Culture
1.4.2 Tardenoisian Culture
1.5 Post -Pleistocene/Post-glacial/Early Holocene Ecology
1.6 Summary
Suggested Reading
Sample Questions

Learning Objectives &

Once you have studied this unit, you should be able to:
Ø learn about the culture that flourished in Europe during Post Pleistocene
period in Europe;
Ø know about the environmental background of the Holocene period in Europe;
Ø learn about the change in tool types and their manufacturing technique during
this period;
Ø learn about Mesolithic man and his culture; and
Ø learn about Mesolithic ecology that is the mode of adjustment of the
Mesolithic people in the changing environmental condition of early Holocene
period in Europe.

1.1 INTRODUCTION
Mesolithic is a cultural stage belonging to human beings who were completely
modern in their biological characteristics and are known as Homosapiens sapiens.
In fact, people lived almost in the same way as they did during Palaeolithic
stage. The main difference being they that lived in Europe at a time when the
climate was changing from what it was during the previous geological stage,
known as the Pleistocene epoch. The geological epoch which follows is known
as Holocene. Both Pleistocene and Holocene belong to the Quaternary period.
Holocene is also known as the Recent or Neothermal phase. We are living in the
Holocene phase. Holocene began around 10,000 years B. C.
In Europe, Pleistocene is considered as a period of climatic fluctuations.
Throughout this epoch climate fluctuated between warm and cold phases. At the
end of Pleistocene period, climate slowly became warmer. With the change in
the climatic environment areas which were under ice or under the influence of
cold climate became free from ice or its influence. Plant and animal gradually
changed. Faunas of the cold climate were replaced gradually by the faunas of the
warm climate. Plant cover changed from arctic to temperate types. Holocene
period seen the establishment of the geographical, climatic and biological 5
Mesolithic Cultures conditions of Europe as it is known today. Human beings adjusted with the
changing condition by changing this way of life.

The change was quite slow but the change took place mainly in response to the
change in the environment. However, in their subsistence level they were much
like the Palaeolithic hunter gatherers but their mode of hunting-gathering became
intensified. Man’s long experience through generations of interaction with plant
and animal in search of living, has led to his experience and knowledge about
them. For this reason, we find the people who lived in the Post-Pleistocene era
were still hunter gatherers but were species-specific hunter and gatherers. This
means that they favoured some species of plants and animals over others. Culture
that was produced by the people who lived in Europe during post Pleistocene
period that is early Holocene, are known as Mesolithic culture. Change of
environment was not uniform. Accordingly culture varied from one environmental
zone to the other.
Study of Mesolithic culture of Europe can best be studied from the following
points:
• Terminology
• Environment
• Tool types and techniques of manufacture
• Mesolithic cultures
• Post Pleistocene/ Post- glacial/ early Holocene ecology
Terminology
The term Mesolithic has got a long history of origin. In fact A.C. Carlyle (Brown,
1889) had coined the nomenclature on the soil of India. There was a general
belief that a cultural break existed between Palaeolithic, the Old Stone Age Culture
on the one hand and the Neolithic or the New Stone Age culture on the other
(Lubbock, 1865).

Carlyle found a large number of small stone implements from the caves and rock
shelters of Vindhyan hill regions of central India. The assemblage comprised of
small stone tools in forms of crescents, trapezoids, triangles and delicate knife-
lets. No tool was more than 1.6 cm. in length. The tools were never found in
association with polished or ground implements. Carlyle found enough
stratigraphic evidence to suggest that these small implements were lying
intermediate between Palaeolithic and Neolithic stages. The accompanying culture
connected with both the stages. Carlyle termed this intermediate stage as
Mesolithis. On the basis of Carlyle’s findings and on similar evidences from
other parts of Asia and Africa, Brown (1889) carried out his investigation in
Britain and Europe. His findings were similar. His evidence was based on data
found near about East Dean and Sussex, England. He found transitional sequence
of culture both on the basis of stratigraphy and typology. Zoologists dominated
the scientific discourse at that time, which undermined cultural capability of
men. They believed that man left Europe with the animals of the cold period. In
spite of the logic put forward by Brown, it was not until Piette’s discovery of
similar situation at Mas’d Azil in 1895, that the term Mesolithic gained any
popularity among the European scholars.

6
Clark, in 1932, established the term in its proper connotation. He substantiated Mesolithic Features
his opinion with data related geology, archaeology and ecology. His enquiry was
based on ecological understanding. Clark’s (1980) definition of Mesolithic is as
follows; “it is a culture of hunter-gatherers lying intermediate between Paleolithic
on the one hand and Neolithic on the other; recent in geochronology; followed
the same subsistence pattern as Palaeolithic but difference was emphasised in
terms of specialisation”. The end of Pleistocene is conventionally placed around
10,000 years B.C. The date for Mesolithic in Europe is fixed around 9500 years
B.C. Mesolithic is considered to have ended with the introduction of agriculture
around 6000 and 5000 years B.C. (Price, 1991).

In Asia and Africa the terminology differed. In West Asia, mainly Levant, Iraq,
Iran and Africa the period just preceeding Neolithic is called Epipaleolithic by
Garrod, Stekelis, Neuville, Kenyon, Mc. Burney and others. The genesis of the
culture lies well before Holocene period and into the terminal Pleistocene at
these places. In Africa, excepting in the Nile valley, no true Neolithic culture is
found. In these areas Mesolithic-like cultures are known by the term Late Stone
age. In India, the culture is also termed as microlithic culture.

1.2 ENVIRONMENT OF EUROPE DURING EARLY

HOLOCENE PERIOD
Europe was under the influence of glaciations during Pleistocene period. Snowline
marking the arctic tundra was extended up to present temperate zone. At the end
of Pleistocene period due to change in solar radiation, Europe was gradually
warming up. This led to mass scale change in geography, biology and human
culture of Europe. Post Glacial or post Pleistocene environment of present day
temperate Europe is better understood with the application of pollen-analysis.
Palynologists found that Post –glacial deposits can be divided into zones in which
the transformation of forests in response to the curve of temperature is recorded.
At first the temperature rose slowly, culminated into a peak and then receded to
some extent until present day condition was reached.

Mesolithic culture in Europe can be separated from Palaeolithic on the

basis of geological and palaeontological characters, although the criteria
vary from one region to the other. It can be distinguished from Neolithic on
the basis of its economy. Neolithic had a food producing economy, based
on agriculture and animal husbandry. Mesolithic people lived on hunting
and gathering. They did not know food production.

K. Jessen in 1934 divided Holocene Europe into nine basic zones based on pollen
analysis to understand its climatology. Pollen analysis provided a picture of forest
development in north and northwest Europe. Forest in Scandinavian language is
referred to as boreal. Europe was under Park Tundra condition (pollen Zone I-
III) by the end of Pleistocene. With the warming up of climate park tundra
vegetation made way for Birch-pine pollen zone (IV) of the pre-boreal period
that was a period through which forest development was taking place. The first
phase of forest development is known as early boreal (pollen zone V). This phase
was dominated by pine trees but hazel and birch were also found. This is followed
by late boreal (pollen zone VI). Pine and hazel trees dominated the forest together
with some elm and oak in its first phase and lime and alder at its later phase.
7
Mesolithic Cultures Pollen VII a is known as Atlantic period because the land bridge connecting
Great Britain to Europe was submerged and the climate of the area was exposed
to the influence of Atlantic ocean. The forest of this period is characterised by
the presence of alder-oak-elm-lime trees. This phase continues into a period
known as sub Boreal (pollen zone VII b). In it, elm declines slowly and hazel
increases. During the Atlantic period a climatic optimum occurred with annual
average temperature above 2 degree centigrade than what it is today.

Faunal changes also took place but fauna was not as sensitive as the plants.
Some of the most significant changes were gradual and eventual replacement of
reindeer by red deer and bison by bos.

Movements of the sea level, also known as eustatic movement and the land
surface movement known as isostatic movement, took place with the end of the
ice age. This has been studied in detail in the Baltic Sea region of the Scandinavian
Peninsula. Baltic was an Ice Lake by the end of the glacial period. During Pre
Boreal period with the melting of the ice, it became a sea and was known by the
name yoldia sea. It was named after the molluscan fauna yoldia artica. Land
surface rose during Boreal phase and Baltic became a fresh water lake and is
known as Ancylus Lake, with the characteristic presence of molluscs, Ancylus
fluviatilis. During the subsequent Atlantis period the sea level rose again and
Baltic became a sea known as Littorina Sea. This phase is identified with the
presence of common periwinkle shells known as Littorina littoria. Several
transgressions and regressions of sea took place in Atlantic. Some of the
transgressions are dated.

As the ice retreated there occurred a rapid spread of forest and the development
of new subsistence pattern. It is thought that in response to the development of
forest man developed new tool types, such as axes, adzes and picks in order to
deal with the new environment. The change was gradual.

1.3 TOOL TYPES AND MANUFACTURING

TECHNIQUE
Tools of Mesolithic culture are categorised into two groups, those made on stone
and those made on bone and antler. The stone tools can further be divided into
two categories, the microlith and the macrolith i.e. tiny tools and bigger tools,
respectively.

Microliths
Microliths are the predominating and common tool types of this cultural phase.
Technologically, this is a continuation of types from the Palaeolithic period.
Microliths occur at the last phase of the Palaeolithic culture but predominance
of the same is found during the Mesolithic stage. Standardisation of size
dimension is made by archaeologists and 3cm is taken as the limit for length for
determining a microlith. Moreover, the microliths of Mesolithic period were
made by highly skilled tool making technique. This is mainly reflected in
retouching of the working edge of the tool or blunting of the hafting edge of the
tool.

8
The technique employed was punch and pressure, which developed during the Mesolithic Features
Upper Paleolithic period. For this reason, identification of Mesolithic microliths
largely depend on the context of its finding and dates. Microliths were made by
a technique known as notch technique. A small notch was made on the edge of a
micro blade by means of abrupt retouch. The point of a small punch or perhaps
bone was then placed in the centre of the notch and the bulbar end of the blade
was removed by a slightly oblique blow. The bulbar end is found as a waste-
product, known as micro-burin. The rest of the bladelet was fashioned into a
microlith, also by abrupt retouch. However, some forms of microliths could
possibly have been made by retouching blades without using the notch technique.

Microliths are described in terms of geometric and non-geometric shapes.

Geometric ones are types such as trapeze, triangle, lunate or crescent. The non-
geometric types are named by the nature of blunting of the back, such, partly,
fully or obliquely blunted blades or after their functions such as scraper, point,
knife, blade, awl, burin and borer (fig. 1.1).

Fig. 1.1: Microliths

The tool kit of the Mesolithic people consisted of a large number of small pointed
pieces. Evidences suggest that a large proportion of these elements were employed
in composite tools for plant gathering-harvesting, slicing, grating, plant fibre
9
Mesolithic Cultures processing for lines, snares, net and traps, shell openers, bow-drill points and
awls. The pieces were hafted on wood, bone and antler. These were set in line to
give a straight cutting edge or set with slanting blades, micro-blades, broad trapezs,
notched and serrated blades in line, or lunates and triangles set vertically to give
varieties of saw edge (fig.1 ). This tradition of composite tool using must have
extended from Palaeolithic into Mesolithic.

The microlithic technique enables the maximum length of edge and number of
points to be extracted from a minimal volume of stone. The technique allows the
regular exploitation of small, nodular pebbles and even large artifacts. The
technique in turn allows permanent occupations of territories without any other
stone resources. In this way the Mesolithic people exploited extremely sharp
and hard materials like flint, chalcedony, agate, carnelian etc, which occur in
small sources. Economy of the technique is observed in the construction of
composite tools in terms of small rapidly replaceable and interchangeable,
standardised and mass produced units, which were produced in advance in large
quantity and kept in readiness for use at times of wear and tear. The procedure
was to pull out the worn out piece and plug in a fresh one in its place. A broken
Palaeolithic tool needed a complete replacement.

Macroliths
The tools which are beyond the size of microlith may be considered as macroliths.
In this category there are tools which are a continuation of the Upper Palaeolithic
types, such as, scrapers. New types are axes and picks. These are considered as
heavy duty tools. These are made on stone, mostly flint. The tools are made by
flaking and making a transverse working edge. According to the nature of working
edge these are termed as axe and adze. These are meant for wood working and
were mainly associated with cultures, which developed in the forest area. Another
type of heavy duty tool is the pick. This has a pointed working edge. There are
evidences that the axe, adze and picks were hafted in wooden, bone or antler haft
(Fig.1.2 ). These tools helped the users to cope with forest environment.

Fig. 1.2: Macroliths (Heavy duty tools)

10
Bone and Antler Tools Mesolithic Features

Bone tools are found mainly in the form of barbed harpoons. Harpoon is a type
of tool from Maglemosian culture. Harpoons vary in terms of number of barbs;
location of barbs along the shaft and in terms of nature and shape of barbs. There
are fish hooks and points. Points are grooved and made into needles or made
into leister prongs. Chisels on long bones are found. Bones were also used as
hafts for making composite tools.

Mostly shredded antlers were used for making tools. The antler were cut down
along the brow tine region and shaped into axe, adze or haft for inserting stone
axe or adze heads. Animal horn and teeth were also hafted and used as tools
(Fig.1.3).

Fig. 1. 3: Bone and antler tools. Bone tools and abraded pebble (Source: http://
www.donsmaps.com)

1.4 MESOLITHIC CULTURE OF EUROPE

Mesolithic culture of Europe exhibits dynamicity of adaptation to changing
environmental condition. Environment in Europe went through changes from
tundra park land, open steppe, forested zones and coastal environment. In all the
areas culture revealed adaptation to the local environment. According to Clark
(1980) this condition may be considered as ecological niche formation by
contemporary human beings. In the present study cultures which grew under
forest and in open grass land conditions are discussed.

1.4.1 Maglemosian Culture

The Maglemosian culture is named after the type site Maglemose. It is a Danish
word meaning “big bog”. The site is located near Mullerup, Zeeland in Denmark.
This culture is also referred to as ‘forest culture’ and is found near rivers, lake,
marshes and other low lying forested areas. The culture developed during period
II, the Boreal, that is at the time of full development of forest in northern plains
of Europe. Maglemosian culture is found in the whole plains of Europe but
richest area is Denmark and south Sweden. It appears that Maglemosian people
were especially attracted to rivers, lakes etc, which suggest that fishing and fowling
played important role in their economy.

11
Mesolithic Cultures

Fig. 1.4. Maglemosian assemblages (Burkitt 1929, p. 35)

This is confirmed by the material culture and faunal remains from the settlement
sites of Maglemosian people. Remains of pike fish are present and barbed bone
points have been found embedded in pike skulls. Faunal remains represent large
number of edible water birds, such as, duck, geese, and swan. They hunted land
mammals also for food. Important ones are auroch (wild ox), elk (deer), wild
pig, roe deer etc. Microliths of obliquely blunted type were found from the breast
region of an auroch, suggesting use of microliths in composite weapons for
hunting. There is definite evidence of use of dog for chasing the games.
Maglemosian people killed animals for fur also. Collection played an important
role in their economy. They collected nuts, berries and other fruits. Vast numbers
of hazel nut shells, broken length-wise were found.

Most of the habitation sites are on slight prominence in damp areas. Probably
they moved out from the low areas in wet season to dry zones because the areas
went under water during wet season. Settlements are small in size suggesting
small social groups.

It may be summed up that people lived in small social groups, had seasonal
migration and lived on hunting, fishing, fowling and collection.

Material Assemblages of Maglemosian Culture

Material culture of Maglemosian people shows use of diverse tool-making raw
material. These may be divided into stone, wood, amber, animal teeth, antler and
bone.

Stone tools
Most diagnostic types of tools of this culture are axes and picks. These reflect
forest environment. Those made on core outnumbering those made on flake.

12
There are numerous microliths. Commonest form of all microliths is the simple Mesolithic Features
ones blunted obliquely or down the whole of one edge. They used single microliths
as tips for arrows and more than one microlith for making inset on wood or
bone. Hollow based points, scalene triangles and crescents are found at all sites.
Presence of microburins suggests that microliths were made by notch technique.

Upper Palaeolithic types of tools are burins and scrapers. The latter are more in
proportion. Most common scrapers are horse shoe scrapers. Points and awls are
also found. Other stone tools are pebbles with countersunk hollows, pebbles
with abraded surfaces and so called mace heads with hour glass perforations
(Fig.1.1).

Antler and bone tools

Antler and bone tools are difficult to preserve. Even then a large variety of them
are found. Barbed bone points, axes or adzes of bone, spear heads, antler sleeves,
fish hook and leister prongs are characteristic types. Other bone and antler tools
include antler tines worked into sharp points, worked animal teeth, perforated
auroch phalanges, awl and bodkins and even whistles. The bone antler tools are
frequently decorated with scratched in or incised geometric designs. Stylised
animal or human figure are rare.

Wooden objects
Among the preserved wooden specimens, the important ones are: (i) ends of
rods, pointed and hardened by fire, (ii) club like objects, (iii) wooden sleeves for
inserting stone axes and adzes, (iv) wooden plaques with perforations made by
fire, (v) wooden paddle-rudder suggesting evidence of navigation of the culture,
(vi) dugout canoe made of Scottish fir tree, 6 feet long and 3 feet in breadth,
made by scooping wood out by fire. Fire was used in carpentry. The last two
items indicate navigation during boreal period.

There are fishing nets made of plant fibre, sink made of stone and float made of
plant bark.

Amber and animal teeth

Tongue shaped pendant, perforated for suspension, amber beads with conical
perforations were meant for personal adornment. Animal teeth were used both
as personal ornament and as tools. Canines of bear, otters, wild cat, and incisors
of aurock, wild boar, deer etc. were used. Wild bores tusks were set in antler
sleeves and used as adze.

Development of Maglemosian

As a result of detailed research, Maglemosian culture is divided into five

progressive chronological stages. The most significant development is found in
the microliths, axes, cores and in the ratio of flake to blade. Ancestral form of
Maglemosian culture is found in an industry called KLosterlund, which is dated
to 7250-6950 B. C. The industry is named after a place name in Denmark.

1.4.2 Tardenoisian Culture

Tardenoisian culture is named after the site of Fere-en-Tardenois at Aisne, France,
discovered by de Mortillet in 1896. The culture has a wide distribution in France,
13
Mesolithic Cultures Germany and the Iberian Peninsula. The culture seems to be concentrated around
Mediterranean basin. On the west it spread up to England and on the east up to
Poland and in southern part of erstwhile Russia. This is basically a microlithic
culture and is devoid of any heavy duty tools like axes and picks. Traces of
Tardenoisian culture is found mainly on sandy soil and on rocky surfaces. The
settlement sites showed that makers of Tardenoisian culture avoided the necessity
of adaptation to dense forest – for which their material culture was not adequate
and they lacked heavy equipment. Their main occupation was fishing, hunting
and collecting. Some kind of shelter in the form of wind break was evident in
some areas and they sometimes lived in pits. General preference was open air.
Tardenoisian men lived through pre-Boreal, Boreal and Atlantic periods. Soil of
the areas where they lived was not suitable for agriculture, so hunting gathering
way of life continued for a long time in the area.

Material Assemblages of Tardenoisian Culture

No wooden object has survived from the Tardenoisian culture. A few bone
fragments, broken at both ends have been found. Microliths were hafted on them
and used. Other bone objects were in the form of pins and points.

Microlithic tools
The only objects to survive in any quantity are microliths made on stone, mainly
flint. The industries consist of tiny stones chipped into forms of geometric shapes,
such as, triangle – equilateral, isosceles or scalene, little crescents or lunates and
at a later date, trapezes. Tools are within 3cm in length. They are mostly fine,
thin and narrow blades. Large numbers of fluted cores are found. These were
formed because blades were removed from them. A technique called notch
technique was used for blunting the backs of the blades. Blades were an important
component of Tardenoisian culture and were utilised as knives and scrapers and
more rarely as saws and awls. Scrapers are a little bigger in size than the blades
and there are a variety of scrapers found. Tardenoisian tools are both of simple
and geometric varieties. Geometric types are trapeze, triangle and crescent.
Blunting of the back is very common. These were meant for hafting and making
composite tools.

Development of Tardenoisian Culture

The development of Tardenoisian culture is found in another microlithic industry
known as Sauveterrian. The latter culture had a direct link with the Upper
Palaeolithic culture, of the region. Origin of Tardenoisian is rooted to Upper
Palaeolithic culture through Sauveterrian culture. Tardenoisian culture is divided
into three main developmental phases; Phase I or lower Tardenoisian, Phase II
or typical Tardenoisian and Phase III or final Tardenoisian. The sequential nature
of development is found at site Le Roc Allan in France. Tardenoisina culture is
found at Le Roc Martinet at Sauveterre-la-Lemance in France strigraphically
lying over a Sauveterrian industry and is having a direct link with the Aurignacian
culture of Upper Palaeolithic of Europe. The best radio carbon date so far obtained
for Sauveterrian culture is 7045+106 B. C. and date for Lower Tardenoisian is
5400+350 B. C.

14
 Mesolithic Features
1.5 POST-PLEISTOCENE/ POST- GLACIAL/
EARLY HOLOCENE ECOLOGY
Forest ecology
North of Alps and Pyrenees, the zone later occupied by the expanded temperate
forest, was initially a cool or cold corridor bounded on the north by Baltic ice
cap and on the south by glaciers of Alps and Pyrenees. It was a zone of tundra
park land and of open steppe, warmed only by the currents of Atlantic and the
Mediterranean. As conditions ameliorated, temperate deciduous forest grew up
by c. 10,000 – 9000 B. C. This gradually became an area of high biomass with a
high edible productivity exploited by numerous herds of small herbivores and
probably broken up into a mosaic of small productive Mesolithic territories. The
change in the environment is already discussed.

The birch pine forest of early Boreal phase quickly gave way to thick mixed
forest, reaching a climax in dense oak, hazel, alder, lime and elm forest in the
warm wet phase of the-Post glacial climatic optimum between 6000 and 4000
B. C. This canopy was mainly made up of deciduous plants and gave rise to
characteristic structure. This depended on the annual loss of leaves of the trees
in autumn and without any growth of fresh green for three to five months during
the long, snowy winter. Ground layer was covered by detritus formed of dead
and decaying leaves and trunks and dominated by large quantity of fungi, mosses
and liverworts, most of which were edible and available throughout the year.
Above the ground layer rose up the field layer of herbaceous plants and strands
of grasses and vegetatively propagating roots and tuber plants. The productive
field layer of roots, tubers, bulbs and rhizomes were covered by shrub layers of
hazel, berry bearing shrubs up to 15 feet height. The structure of the forest canopy
was completed by the tree crowns of oak, elm and ash rising to about 25 to 100
feet. It was broken only by outcrops, rivers, lakes, swamps and marshes. The
rich ground cover of plants also attracted such herbivorous grazing animals as
deer, auroch, and boar in large number. Mesolithic people who lived in the forest
took advantage of the vast quantity and variety of seasonal vegetal food, especially,
roots, tubers, fruits and nuts. They hunted the grazing animals. The large number
of water bodies provided with edible aquatic resources. Wide range of fishing
equipment, bone hook, fiber made lines, leister prongs, fish traps, weirs, and
fish nets and dugout canoes provided evidence for utilisation of aquatic resources.
They lived in the wooded area and took advantage of the forest with the heavy
duty tools and with fire.

Open Grassland Ecology

Mediterranean is considered as climatic and ecological buffer zone. Proximity
to equator and distance from ice cap and ameliorating influence of the sea
fashioned the climate of this region during Post Pleistocene time. The region is
marked with the continuity of stone industries from the Palaeolithic into
Mesolithic.

Between 10,000 to 7000 B. C. the cool and temperate zone at the head of the
Adriatic and Franco-Ligurian Sea was gradually colonised by warmer species of
plants. Birch pine gave way to juniper, pine and oak. Mediterranian evergreen
and drought resisting flora gradually expanded from southern Iberia, southern
15
Mesolithic Cultures Greece, southern Italy and south Balkan. The moderate annual rainfall and a late
summer drought of severe proportions at the sea level limited coastal woodlands
to mainly xerophytic and evergreen tree species, interspersed with strands of
flowers, grasses, legumes and herbs. Much of these is directly edible and could
be harvested throughout the year. Edible root plants like onion, leek and garlic
were available. European subsistence during Mesolithic in these areas was based
on gathering of pulses, bulbs, grass seeds and nuts in combination with fishing,
fowling and hunting of ovicaprids (sheep and goat), deer and auroch. Microliths
used as tips for arrows and as knives and scrapers helped the Mesolithic folk to
cope with the open grassland environment.

Fig.1.5: Reconstructed view of a Mesolithic man of Europe (Source: wesleyjohnston.com)

1.6 SUMMARY
Mesolithic is a transitional period between Paleolithic on the one hand and
Neolithic culture on the other. This culture flourished in Holocene or recent
epoch. In Europe, the environment changed gradually during early Holocene
period until the climate and environment became same as we find in Europe at
present. Prehistoric man continued with subsistence quite similar to those of
Palaeolithic men. This meant that they were still hunting and gathering food for
their livelihood but there was a vast change in the mode of subsistence in the
Mesolithic culture. They became quite specific about the animals they hunted
and plant food they collected. To this was added two new activities, fishing and
fowling. Most important feature of Mesolithic culture of Europe is the peoples’
adaptability to changing environmental condition with their tools, technology
and culture. They formed a kind of ecological niche in the specific environment
they lived in.

Suggested Reading
Brown, J. A. 1889. On the Continuity of the Palaeolithic and Neolithic Periods,
Journal of the Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland. 18: 134 –
139.

Clarke, David L. 1979. Analytical Archaeology: Studies in Archaeology. London:

Academic Press. Pp. 207 – 262.

Clark, J. G. D. 1977. World Prehistory in New Perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press. Pp. 11-115.
16
Fagan, B. M. 2004. People of the Earth: An Introduction to world Prehistory Mesolithic Features
(11th edition) Delhi: Pearson Education. 190 – 212.

Lubbock, J. 1865. Prehistoric Times. London: William and Norgate.

Price, T. Douglas, 1991. The Mesolithic and Hunter-gatherers :Myths and
Meanings. Man and Environment, 26(2): 101- 107. (Indian Society for Prehistoric
and Quaternary Studies, Pune).

Sample Questions
1) Definition Mesolithic culture.
2) What is the history of development of the term ‘Mesolithic’?
3) What is palynology? bring out the importance of the subject in understanding
Post-glacial environment of Europe?
4) What changes took place in the vegetation history of Europe during Post
Pleistocene period.?
5) What change took place at the level of geography of Baltic Sea?
6) What were the major tool types of Mesolithic culture in Europe?
7) What is a microlith?
8) Name some of the microlith types of Mesolithic culture of Europe.
9) What technique was employed in making the microliths?
10) What other tool types are found in Mesolithic culture in Europe?
11) Discuss how the stone axes and adzes were made?
12) Describe the material culture of Maglemosian culture.
13) Point out the special features of Maglemosian culture.
14) What are the characteristic features of Tardenoisian culture?
15) Tardenoisian is a microlithic culture. Justify the statement.
16) Give an account of the development of Mesolithic culture of Europe.
17) Discuss why Mesolithic culture in Europe reflects the dynamicity of
environmental Adaptation.

17