Arable in England and Wales: estimates from the 1801 Crop Return

This study is based on the 1801 Crop Return for England and Wales, an inquiry which took the form of an arable crops census. Over 75% of the county areas of 12 English and Welsh counties is represented in the surviving Return but under 25% for 13 others. For England and Wales together nearly 50% of the total area is represented. The national distribution of the main grain crops is investigated; and an aggregate analysis of arable England and Wales in 1801 is made. The main result is to produce two different estimates to suggest that arable England and Wales was something over 7 million acres and something under 8 million acres in 1801, the higher estimate comparing very favourably with contemporary ones. Finally, since the Return is extant at parish or township level, it is suggested that it can be subjected to further investigation and to sampling, to break free from the constraints imposed by the county approach by studying or identifying farming regions.     

Preliminary evidence for seasonal deposition patterns from member 2 of the Swartkrans hominid site,South Africa

Frequencies of specimens in juvenile age classes, based on an analysis of tooth eruption and wear sequences, in specimens of an extinct species of springbok, Antidorcas bondi Wells and Cooke, from Member 2 of the Swartkrans hominid site, suggest that the remains of this animal were deposited during summer months. These indications of seasonal activity may offer support for previous suggestions of annual game movements. Such periodic movements have implications for our understanding of the behaviour patterns of the animals, including perhaps the hominids, which are represented in the assemblages from Swartkrans and other sites in the vicinity.     

Concealed Communities: The People at the Margins

The “concealed communities” of our title are the people archaeologists have often labeled as “marginal.” Archaeologists writing about both prehistoric and historic periods have commonly made a range of assumptions about margins and marginality, and their discussions have often categorized marginality as ecological, economic, or socio-political. Whilst it has been common to privilege one or other of these categories in order to explain how societies worked, they are rarely mutually exclusive. In addition, since marginality is relative, virtually any group might be made marginal depending on people’s perspectives in the past or present. Sometimes marginality can be imposed (economically or politically), and sometimes even actively chosen. Defining the “margin” is a complex business, and the term needs sensitive, context-orientated use to make it useful for archaeologists.