The Orkney Vole

Orkney Riddle

The Orkney Vole

"Orkney vole 

Microtus arvalis orcadensis

The Orkney vole is a sub-species of the common vole and unique to the Orkney Islands. It is larger and heavier than the common vole. It is bigger than a mouse, with a rounded head and a relatively short tail.

Behaviour

Orkney voles do not hibernate. The vole is the islands’ only rodent to be active during the day and is an important food source for hen harriers and short-eared owls. The diet of the Orkney vole consists largely of plant materials, seeds and cereal crops. Females can have several litters a year, each with 3-6 young. The young are fed by the mother for about 20 days, when they then switch from milk to normal feeding.

Size

Length: 9 – 12cm (tail length approximately one third of body length)

Average weight: 30g; up to 90g

Lifespan: 18 months

Status

Although once common, it is thought that the Orkney vole population has declined substantially over the past 50 years. This is linked to changes in agriculture, with the drainage of rough grassland and conversion to improved grasslands for livestock. More recently, their lives are threatened by stoats, which were first sighted in Orkney in 2010.

Distribution

Orkney voles are present on eight of the Orkney Islands. Formerly widespread, even in agricultural crops, Orkney voles are today confined to semi-natural habitats with maximum densities occurring in old peat cuttings and rough grassland.

When to see

January to December. It is active throughout the year, but is not so apparent in winter when it spends more time underground.

Facts

The Orkney vole has an enigmatic history. Its closest relative is the common vole which is found throughout Europe, but intriguingly not on the UK mainland or Ireland. Following numerous studies and theories, it required cutting edge DNA techniques to throw a definitive light on its origin. The most recent analysis of nuclear DNA suggests the closest match is with an archaeological specimen in Belgium.

The vole’s mode of arrival to Orkney is hotly debated. Genetic research has revealed that there is a large genetic diversity in both modern and ancient Orkney voles. This suggests that they arrived with humans, (deliberately or as unintended stowaways) around the Neolithic period when the first farmers settled on Orkney. Copious vole remains have been found in excavations of tombs and houses from that time.

The oldest known radiocarbon-dated fossil of the species in Orkney is 4,600 years old.

Locally, Orkney voles are also known as volo, cutticks, or cutoo." (Scottish Wildlife Trust)


"Much debate surrounds the origins of the Orkney vole Microtus arvalis orcadensis (Yalden 1999; Corbet 1961). It is the only vole on Orkney and is found on eight islands, while in mainland Britain the field vole (M. agrestis) is the only Microtus species. M. arvalis and M. agrestis occur widely across continental Europe with overlapping distributions (Mitchell-Jones et al 2003). It is therefore clear that M. arvalis did not colonise Orkney naturally (Haynes et al 2003; Haynes et al 2004), and although modern consensus supports a human introduction during the Neolithic (Hedges et al 1987), their geographic origin and mechanisms of introduction still remain uncertain."(Thomas Cucchi et al) 
 

THE CHANGING PACE OF INSULAR LIFE: 5000 YEARS OF MICROEVOLUTION IN THE ORKNEY VOLE (MICROTUS ARVALIS ORCADENSIS) by Thomas Cucchi et al

"In this article, our objective is to examine morphological change through time in populations of the Orkney vole, Microtus arvalis orcadensis (Major 1905)—an endemic subspecies of the common vole Microtus arvalis (Pallas 1778)—introduced to the Orkney archipelago (Fig. 1) by Neolithic farmers around 5000 years ago, from a source outside the British Isles (Martínková et al. 2013). (See below)

Large samples of archaeological Orkney voles, as well as good palaeo-environmental records revealing anthropization of the Orkney archipelago (Bunting 1994, 1996), provided an important opportunity to investigate the pace of evolutionary change in this insular rodent over the last 5000 years, within the context of an island environment impacted by humans. Orkney voles have evolved their own particular dental phenotype, likely the result of human agency influencing its evolutionary trajectory in different ways over the last 5000 years. This human influence began with its Neolithic introduction to the Orkney Mainland at a time when there were no terrestrial predators and only one competing species (the wood mouse). The Orkney vole population rapidly diverged from continental European M. arvalis to reach a new ecological optimum, that included evolutionary changes in morphology of the molar teeth. Neolithic farmers then dispersed the species to other islands of the archipelago—from Mainland to Westray and during the Bronze Age to Sanday—generating several founding events contributing to idiosyncratic differences in dental characteristics. This initial divergence and diversification in Orkney voles was not followed by morphological stasis because the Orkney environment was subjected to continued human disturbance.

The case of the Orkney vole presented here demonstrates how, from Neolithic times, humans have played a major role in species evolution and suggests that anthropogenic modifications of the environment may have repeatedly disturbed the phenotypic evolutionary stasis of insular species. Given the continental-scale and increasing intensity of human-induced impact on ecosystems in the last centuries, such changes in the evolutionary trajectories of vertebrates are likely not restricted to insular systems."

Divergent evolutionary processes associated with colonization of offshore islands, Natalia Martinkova, et al

"Colonization history of Orkney voles.

It is striking that there is substantial cytb variation in M. arvalis in Mainland Orkney and over the whole archipelago (Fig. 3, Table 3). Island populations often show low genetic diversity (Frankham 1997). This can relate to small population sizes and/or population bottlenecks associated with colonization of islands, particularly by sweepstake dispersal or human introduction. The high cytb diversity could indicate that the Orkney population of M. arvalis represents an island relict of a previously continuous mainland population, perhaps dating back to before the LGM (Beirne 1952). This would fit with the long tMRCA for the molecular variation on Orkney, potentially dating back to 25 400 BP (within the 95% CI). However, there are strong arguments against glacial survival of the Orkney vole population. First, the IMa analysis based on microsatellites and cytb and the ABC analysis based on microsatellites provide a date of arrival around 5000 BP, considerably more recent than the LGM. Second, all the other species of small mammals on Orkney are most reasonably viewed as human introductions (Yalden 1982), necessitating a special case for M. arvalis as a glacial survivor. Third, it is very difficult to make this special case given that M. arvalis is not a species currently associated with arctic or even moderately high latitude conditions. Its range extends eastward beyond Lake Baikal and yet barely traverses north of the 60th parallel (Fig. 2; Shenbrot & Krasnov2005). Orkney was under or near a glacial ice sheet at the LGM (Bowen et al. 2002) and M. arvalis is not part of the fossil fauna known from Britain from the last glacial period (Yalden 1999; Currant & Jacobi 2001). Fourth, M. arvalis is not currently found in Britain(Fig. 2). It is therefore contrary to think that M. arvalis should be a glacial relict on Orkney rather than M. agrestis, when the latter occurs further north in Eurasia (beyond the 70th parallel) and is distributed throughout Britain, including on many offshore islands, while M. arvalis only occurs on Orkney. There have been no land connections between mainland Britain and Orkney after conditions ameliorated following the LGM (Yalden 1982), and hence why M. agrestis (and other wide-ranging small mammals in Britain, such as common shrews Sorex araneus and bank voles Myodes glareolus) failed to colonize Orkney. If M. arvalis did not survive on Orkney itself during the last glacial period, the absence of the species in Britain means there are no grounds to suggest sweepstake colonization from there. It is conceivable that there could have been sweepstake colonization of Orkney from Doggerland, the landmass connecting Britain, the Low Countries and Denmarkuntil about 8000 BP (Weninger et al. 2008) – but this would require the survival of small mammals on floating mats of vegetation over a substantial marine gap between Doggerland and Orkney. Thus, human introduction is by far the most likely explanation for the occurrence of M. arvalis on Orkney.

From the IMa and ABC dates, this introduction at about 5000 BP fits well with the earliest radiocarbon dates for archaeological M. arvalis from Neolithic contexts (5100 years old: Table 2) and the beginnings of the Neolithic culture on Orkney (5600 BP: Ritchie 2001; Schulting et al. 2010). Voles could have been brought to Orkney by Mesolithic hunter-gatherers, as early as c. 9000 BP, but no vole remains have been found in the one excavated Mesolithic site on Orkney (Lee & Woodward2009), in contrast to their abundance at Neolithic and later sites (Yalden 1999; Thaw et al. 2004). If, as appears most likely, the voles were introducedby Neolithic settlers about 5000 BP, various other implications flow from our molecular data, which are of considerable archaeological interest. First, the introduction implies long-distance maritime travel by Neolithic people between continental Europe and Orkney, extending on findings from elsewhere (e.g.Broodbank 2006). Our study highlights the Belgian coastline as the most reasonable source of the Orkney voles on the basis of available genetic data. This suggests Neolithic cultural linkages between Belgium and Orkney, of worthwhile focus for future archaeological investigation. Microtus arvalis were not introduced successfully into mainland Britain, which is consistent with relatively direct transport to Orkney from the continental source area. Second, if the introduction occurred about 5000 BP, then, because the tMRCA for the Orkney voles is so long (15 400 years), substantial numbers of femalevoles must have been introduced to explain the cytbvariation observed in modern and archaeological Orkney voles. High genetic diversity is already evident in the 16 aDNA sequences dating to 4200 BP or earlier, separated by up to 10 mutations (Fig. 3 and Table S3,Supporting information) and which produce an estimate for the tMRCA (14 780 years; 95% CI of 4681–36 379 years) similar to that of the full ancient and modern data set. To explain a substantial number of voles arriving accidentally on Orkney implies transport of plentiful grass livestock bedding/fodder in which the vole stowaways could have survived. This in turn may suggest the direct movement of livestock as part of the proposed Neolithic linkage between Belgium and Orkney. Alternatively, deliberate transport of voles onto Orkney could explain the large numbers introduced (Thaw et al. 2004). It is conceivable that voles were taken as food items, pets or for cultural/religious purposes – M. arvalis is docile in captivity (Berry 2000), so could theoretically have been ‘tamed’. This suggestion of deliberate transportation of small rodents has a precedent: it has been argued that Pacific rats (Rattusexulans), now present on islands throughout Oceania, were intentionally conveyed by Polynesians as a foodsource (Matisoo-Smith & Robins 2004). Evolutionary processes affecting voles on Orkney and the continental source area Compared with continental European M. arvalis, those on Orkney and another offshore island (Guernsey) are divergent in terms of tooth morphology, including increased tooth size. For Orkney, this divergence may have occurred over c. 5000 years, if introduced during the Neolithic. In addition to having larger teeth, the Orkney and Guernsey M. arvalis have a larger body size than continental voles (Gorman & Reynolds 2008). Quick-evolving rodent gigantism has been described previously on islands of the northeast Atlantic (Corbet1961; Angerbjorn 1986), but not within such a precisely defined time frame. A range of selective factors have been proposed to explain this gigantism, including an absence of small mammalian predators (Lomolino1985), and a genetic basis for gigantism has been identified in island house mice (Chan et al. 2012). Elsewhere,we further explore the dynamics of morphological evolution for the Orkney M. arvalis using archaeological specimens (T. Cucchi, R. Barnett, N. Martınkova, et al.submitted) extending substantially on previous studies (Berry & Rose 1975; Corbet 1986). Despite their similarity in large tooth and body size,Guernsey and Orkney voles exhibit distinctive mtDNA haplotypes (Fig. 3). It is therefore most reasonable to consider that the Guernsey and Orkney voles attained their large body size independently. It is not clear whetherGuernsey was colonized naturally before it became an island, as part of the continental European late glacial/postglacial species expansion (Haynes et al. 2003; Heckelet al. 2005; Tougard et al. 2008), or whether the voles were introduced by people after it became an island (Gorman& Reynolds 2008). However, given that Guernsey voles are likely to come from the same general (northernFrance/Belgium) source area as the Orkney voles and that they are also different in mtDNA from current northern France/Belgium populations, there would be much interest in further detailed comparison of Orkney, Guernsey and northern France/Belgium voles. In addition to the operation of selection in the evolution of Orkney voles suggested by morphology, stochastic processes appear to have been important based on microsatellites. The population on the largest island, Mainland Orkney, has retained much of the microsatellite variation found in continental Europe, while all theother Orkney Islands (which are considerably smaller:Fig. 1) show very low levels of microsatellite variation,consistent with founder events and genetic drift. Similar stochastic processes can also explain microsatellite variation among Scottish Island populations of common shrew (White & Searle 2007a). Our findings with regard to morphology and microsatellites in M. arvalis are unsurprising in comparison with previous studies on island small mammals, but the results from our mtDNA analyses are more unexpected. Although the cytb sequences from Orkney andthe proposed source area for the Orkney colonization both belong to the Western-North lineage of M. arvalis, the sequences are remarkably divergent given the timeframe for colonization. Also, it might have been expected that (as for the microsatellites) variability would have been lower on Orkney than in continental Europe. In fact, the opposite is the case. Taking either the principal island (Mainland Orkney) or the whole archipelago, mtDNA diversity is higher in Orkney than in coastal France/Belgium (Table 3). Our dating analysis also shows that the mtDNA sequences in coastalFrance/Belgium have a much more recent derivation than the Orkney sequences. So, here we are seeing another facet of evolution in association with the colonization of offshore islands, in this case occurring in the mainland population. Thepresence of derived sequences in coastal France/Belgium suggests a replacement event in M. arvalis, with one mtDNA type (the current type) replacing another(the Orkney type), similar to aDNA findings in other species (Barnes et al. 2002; Pergams et al. 2003; Hofreiteret al. 2007). The fact that there is an affiliation between coastal Belgium and Orkney on the basis of microsatellite genotypes argues against a complete population replacement (e.g. by extinction–recolonization) as an explanation for the mtDNA result. Instead, within-population processes of selective sweeps or genetic drift are implicated, and more likely expressed in the mtDNA data, as a single locus with small effective population size than in the microsatellite data. We cannot be surewhat environmental factors promoted the replacement. There could, for instance, have been a local, unrecorded disease outbreak. However, it is notable that the replacement occurred over a period when M. arvalis populations would have changed dramatically due to human land-use change, and this appears the most likely driver of the replacement. Over several thousand years, sustained forest clearance in continental Europe (Rackham 1998; Cyprien et al. 2004) created new agricultural habitats and associated selection pressures that essentially expanded the opportunities for M. arvalis as a species that particularly exploits managed grassland(Niethammer & Krapp 1982). In such a habitat, M. arvalis populations can undergo massive population expansions and crashes (Delattre et al. 1992) that reduce longterm effective population size, promoting genetic change through drift. On Orkney (which saw the rapid decline of low shrubs and tree species with the arrival of Neolithic farmers: Bunting 1996), M. arvalis utilizes a range of open habitats and does not show the same dramatic population fluctuations as seen in parts of continental Europe (Gorman & Reynolds 2008). 

Offshore islands as field laboratories 

There has been a tendency to view offshore island populations of small mammals (and other organisms with low density and low dispersal) as genetic deviants fromthe ‘norm’. This is because studies of various species have shown results similar to ours for morphology(substantial change) and microsatellites (loss of variation) (Lomolino 1985; Frankham 1997; Boessenkool et al.2007; Millien 2011). These have included detailed studies on small mammals such as wood mouse Apodemussylvaticus (Angerbjorn 1986; Michaux et al. 1996),masked shrew Sorex cinereus (Stewart & Baker 1992)and common shrew (White & Searle 2007a,b, 2008).However, as we have demonstrated with our M. arvalis mtDNA studies, island populations can also represent genetic ‘arks’, retaining the ancestral genetic variation,while evolutionary and other processes on the mainland may lead to a loss of that ancestral variation. Islands may have importance therefore in conservation of genetic variation. A further example involving human introduction of a small mammal onto an offshore island is provided by the Eurasian red squirrel Sciurus vulgaris. Thus, Irish red squirrels have genetic variants that apparently derive by introduction from Britain, but these are now absent in that source population (Finnegan et al. 2008; Searle 2008). For low density and low dispersal organisms such as small mammals, we suggest that genetic surveys of mainland areas should, where available, include populations from neighbouring offshore islands. It is very likely that those island populations will provide a new perspective on the temporal and spatial dynamics of the genetic variation in that region.The ‘ark’ concept that we discuss here is of course more general. Populations colonizing new areas will take the genetic and nongenetic characteristics of the source population, and some of those characteristics may subsequently be lost in the source population but retained in the population in the new area. In this way, for instance,the United States is a ‘linguistic ark’ for various English words that would have been common in the British Isles at the time of settlement of North America by the British, but which have subsequently fallen into disuse in the homeland (e.g. ‘fall’ meaning ‘autumn’). Returning to genetic characteristics of offshore islands, in addition to their potential as genetic ‘arks’, they also hold potential as field laboratories to study genetic change in the islands themselves. Compared with the classic evolutionary studies on oceanic islands, those based on offshore islands will tend to view events over shorter timescales and thus provide a different perspective on evolutionary processes. Offshore islands are particularly valuable for studying initial stages of diversification, with the opportunity (as in the current study together with T. Cucchi, R. Barnett, N. Martınkova,et al. submitted) to follow island populations from their foundation to the present day using advanced genetic and morphometric tools as applied to modern and ancient populations of different ages. Extremely accurate dating of ancient populations may be possible (e.g. in archaeological settings). With this short time duration and close proximity to the mainland, there is also a greater chance to find the precise source area for the island colonization, which allows interesting comparison of evolutionary processes on the mainland and island. This brings us back to the value of offshore island populations in interpreting mainland processes. Offshore islands are an underutilized resource for evolutionary analysis, with great potential. In some ways, they represent study systems intermediate between those in a continental setting and those on oceanic islands; they have the simplicity of the oceanic island system yet are clearly relevant to continental situations."

Recent research suggests that s population of European Vole origin survived in south-west england during the final deglaciation of Britain, about 11,000BP,. The report on this research is entitled "Diverse responses of common vole (Microtus arvalis) populations to Late Glacial and Early Holocene climate changes e Evidence from ancient DNA" by Mateusz Baca et al

"Two radiocarbon dated specimens from Trou Al’Wesse (Belgium) yielded a pre-LGM age, 30,000BP to 28000BP. They belonged to the Western/Northern lineage although they diverged earlier than the coalescence of the extant populations. This suggests that population continuity existed in the region throughout the last 30 ka rather than there being a turnover, even if the population decreased in numbers as a result of the LGM. Although the genetic evidence is still very limited this is concordant with the cryptic northern refugium hypothesis (Stewart and Lister, 2001). The other interesting case is the single specimen from Bridged Pot cave dated to the Early Holocene. At present there are no common voles in the British Isles with the exception of the Orkney Isles, where they have been introduced by humans ca. 5000 years ago (Martínkova et al., 2013
). Microtus arvalis has not been considered to be part of the British fauna of the Last Glacial and only the field vole has been identified in the fossil record (Coard and Chamberlain, 1999; Currant and Jacobi, 2001) although there are problems distinguishing these two species based on dental characters (Navarro et al., 2018).

Recently, a number of common vole remains were identified using collagen fingerprinting from Pin Hole cave (Creswell Crags, UK) (Buckley et al., 2018). Although the deposits Pin Hole have been shown to be mixed (Stewart and Jacobi, 2015), this suggests that the common vole was present in the British Isles during the Late Pleistocene and/or early Holocene. The phylogenetic position of the individual from Bridged Pot cave suggests that it was a part of the continuous population of mainland Europe. Given the age of the specimen, 11,000BP, possible scenario explaining its presence in the British Isles may be that the common vole may have expanded to Britain during the Late Glacial warming and their local extinction was then caused by either YD cooling or the Holocene reforestation. The disappearance of the connection between the British Isles and continental Europe during the Early Holocene may have prevented the species’ subsequent recolonization. In other small mammals inhabiting Britain today such as the field vole, bank vole (Clethrionomys glareolus), water vole (Arvicola amphibius) and pygmy shrew (Sorex minutus) the populations of these taxa, which colonized Britain during Late Glacial, retreated to fringes of the island possibly as a result of YD cooling (Brace et al., 2016; Searle et al., 2009). Subsequent populations of all these species were able to recolonize Britain at the onset of the Holocene. This was not the case for the common vole. Recently Martínkova et al. (2013)
showed that recolonization of the northern areas of France and Belgium by the common vole was relatively late and started not earlier than 2000 years ago, long after the disappearance of land connecting the British Isles and mainland Europe"

Radiocarbon dating of vole at Bridget Pot Cave , UGAMS 43,314 MI1371 11,125BP

   

Fig. 2. Distribution of mtDNA diversity of common vole in Europe. 

A modern, 

B Holocene, 

C post-LGM.

Colour correspond to mtDNA lineages 

pink, Eastern;

yellow, Central; 

orange, Italian; 

green, Western-North; 

violet, Western-South; 

navy blue, Balkan. 

*

All views and opinions expressed are my own, but it remains a work-in-progress for which positive criticism and comment is welcomed.

Jeffery Nicholls 

South Ronaldsay 

Orkney 

The Orkney Riddle (index here) is a series of blogs promoting the notion that Neolithic people walked from Scotland to Orkney to build the Ring of Brodgar. 

#Orkney #archaeology #Neolithic #prehistory #British #SkaraBrae #NessofBrodgar #BIIS ##Britice-Chrono 

Neolithic Migration to Orkney

 

 The Orkney Riddle

The Neolithic Migration to Orkney 

There are a large number of reports, large and small, that have been written following excavation of Neolithic sites on Orkney.  

These reports include plans, sections, find reports, bone reports, dating reports, and any other data investigations that are relevant to the site.  At the end of the report, the findings are discussed, and sone tentative conclusions are drawn. 

In discussing the conclusions that could reasonably be drawn from the data supplied by the work of excavation, many odd features are, very sensibly left in a kind of limbo. Better to conclude nothing than to assert something that no qualifying evidence supports.

Across the mass of evidence derived from the excavations of Neolithic Orkney there are enough of these archaeological peculiarities, that if collected together, they form a pattern.

The pattern does not prove the concept, but it does shift the discussion in different ways.

The following is an outline to demonstrate how the occupation of Orkney by Neolithic migrants may have developed over time.

Nomads

The Neolithic people of Britain were a nomadic group of cultures that entered the country from the Dutch region of northern Europe from before 7000 years ago until after 6000 years ago.

They came on foot, across a land bridge that is now shallow water between Holland and East Anglia, in England. 

These people brought with them a suite of technologies,  including pottery, domesticated animals, landscape structures, economic systems, community activities, timber joinery, structural engineering, and small-scale industries.

They had boats, but these were limited to dugout canoes for use on inland waters, lakes, harbours, and perhaps for crossing rivers.

These were people who had arrived in Northern Europe from the south, gathering in the Scheldt valley. As a group of various peoples we call these the Swifterbant Culture, and it was much later that the various groups included here, having established mobile populations across Britain, arrived in Orkney. 

To Orkney 

The earliest arrivals in Orkney were in 3500BC, and these people built cairns that are believed to have been designed for the housing of the prehistoric people who had died. Their human habitations for the living were mostly light timber structures that may have looked like teepees or bivouacs. With rare exceptions these structures were not designed to endure an Orkney winter. If the winter wind did not dismantle them the ground around them would have rapidly turned to mush from repeated footsteps in Orcadian heavy rainfall.

In spite of their construction of cairns, these people retained their nomadic lifestyle, at least here in Orkney. They would cross from Caithness to South Ronaldsay along a strand made up of geologically soft  ground linking those locations. 

They crossed from Scotland to Orkney every summer, returning to the south when the weather turned. As they crossed, from year to year, the people would have noted that the strand of land linking the two regions was narrowing. Sea levels were rising and coastal beaches were being eroded by strong tides.

At the very end of the 4th millennium BC, before 3000BC, when sea-level wasn't yet high enough to cause concern, the summer solstice, and the Orkney Simmerdim, became an annual event, drawing hundreds of people to settle in temporary campsites around the Harray Loch. 

While they were temporary residents, camping in Orkney, these huge groups built some of the monuments of the Orkney World Heritage Site. These include the Maeshowe Chambered Cairn, the Stones of Stenness, the Ring of Brodgar, and a couple of other henges in the area.

As seasons progressed, and people returned to Orkney, to continue this great work, the level of the sea rose, and whittled away at the strand that joined Caithness to Orkney. 

Castaways 

At a critical point in the erosion of the strand between Caithness and Orkney, most people would have read the signs, and realised that Orkney would no longer be a viable meeting place for their summer retreat. Either they would, in future, not be able to cross between the two places, or if they did they might not be able to return to Scotland. 

The greater number of people did not return to Orkney. Their campsite was abandoned just after 3000BC, and the stone circles that they were building remained, incomplete. 

The very few people that remained in Orkney formed into small co-habiting communities, and built solid structures of stone and timber, with covered drains, and great windbreaks, or covered interconnecting passages. 

The buildings that these people constructed were among the most complex and revolutionary structures built in Britain at the time, but their longevity was distinctly limited by the deterioration of the roofing timbers.

These communities were based at Skara Brae,  and the Ness of Brodgar.

Mariners

In the middle of the 3rd millennium BC boats were being developed , and mariners were setting out, from Britain and Europe, to explore offshore islands, like Orkney. 

The mariners arrived at several coastal locations in Orkney, where they set up camp in the ruins of the dwellings that had housed the earlier inhabitants of Orkney.

In some places they appear to have visited the islands briefly, pulled their boats onto land, and hunted the wild aurochs and other beasts roaming the landscape. In other places more permant settlements may have been established. 

When the mariners in their boats arrived in Orkney in the second half of the 3rd millennium BC it is possible that they met face-to-face with some of the surviving ancestors of the Neolithic Orcadian Founding Population.

*

 Map of Orkney,  showing Neolithic sites

Jeffery Nicholls 

South Ronaldsay 

Orkney 

The Orkney Riddle (index here) is a series of blogs promoting the notion that Neolithic people walked from Scotland to Orkney to build the Ring of Brodgar. 

#Orkney #archaeology #Neolithic #prehistory #British #SkaraBrae #NessofBrodgar #BIIS ##Britice-Chrono 

The Vole at Skara Brae

The Vole at Skara Brae 

There follows edited extracts from a research document about the bones of rodents that were found at Skara Brae. 

It details the volumes of vole and mice bones found in midden materials,  both inside and outside the monument, drawing conclusions about the possible utilisation of the vole as a food item.

The report is :-

Rodents: food or pests in Neolithic Orkney, by 

Andrzej A. Romaniuk, Alexandra N. Shepherd, David V. Clarke,  Alison J. Sheridan,  Sheena Fraser, László Bartosiewicz, and Jeremy S. Herman.

The Orkney archipelago, situated to the north of the British mainland, is renowned for its outstanding collection of Neolithic sites, a core group of which have been recognized with World Heritage status.

Among the wealth of material recovered from the Orcadian Neolithic sites are copious rodent remains from two settlements, one the celebrated site of Skara Brae, and the other Links of Noltland, Westray. 

These remains are from contexts that have been radiocarbon-dated to the late fourth and early third millennium BC, using either the rodent remains themselves or other associated bone material. 

Most are from the Orkney vole, a form of the European common vole Microtus arvalis (Pallas, 1778) that is found on some islands of the archipelago, where it is isolated from its nearest conspecifics in mainland Europe. The rest are from the wood mouse Apodemus sylvaticus (Linnaeus, 1758), a common species found throughout western Europe and mainland Britain.

Neither could have survived the Pleistocene glaciations in this location and it is generally accepted that small mammals were subsequently introduced to Orkney by human agency. 

The excavations in 1972–1973 and 1977 at Skara Brae yielded over 1.1 kg of sieved micromammal bone material, of which 815 g could be attributed to rodents. The excavations comprised four trenches (I–IV; figure 1), whose location and good preservation provide a remarkable opportunity to study both the human and natural deposition of remains. 

 

Trench I and its stratigraphy represents an undisturbed area inside the settlement complex, covering three phases (phase 0, 1 and 2) of human inhabitation, lasting from ca 3360 to ca 2440 cal BC, with a hiatus of some length (possibly as much as 300 years) between phase 0 and phase 1. Trench II represents the build-up of deposits at the northeastern edge of the settlement, dating from ca 2900 to ca 2490 cal BC. Unlike Trenches I and II, which are located within the core and periphery of the main settlement, respectively, Trenches III and IV were excavated 30–45 m to the west of the modern guardianship area around the settlement. These latter trenches showed only basal survival of in situ occupation deposits; otherwise they mainly comprised natural accumulations of sediments, principally sand with some redeposited anthropogenic material associated with interludes of plough cultivation. The dating reflects this, with dates for the basal in situ deposits lying between 2880 and 2470 cal BC, with later material from around 2300 to 2040 cal BC and much later activity still between cal AD 600 and 900.

The sieved microskeletal material included 816 g of identifiable rodent remains. These comprised 30 524 skeletal fragments, including 8369 isolated teeth, attributable to at least 1674 individual animals. Only two species were identified, Orkney vole and wood mouse, supporting the notion that only these two rodents had been introduced to Orkney by the time of the Neolithic.

 

The evidence from Skara Brae indicates that the accumulation and burning of Orkney vole remains were most likely the result of deliberate actions by the inhabitants of the settlement, carried out over a considerable period of time, and the most plausible explanation is the utilization of the voles as a source of food. It is notable that the rodent remains were not found in isolation, but within deposits that contained waste products from a range of other foods, including mammals, fish and shellfish. The presence of bones within the hearth deposit itself may be due to roasting of voles between the embers, as previously seen in two other regions of the world, South Africa and Patagonia. Another possibility is cooking or boiling of animals in a pot, known from some ethnographic studies and also suggested for assemblages from the Pampean region in Argentina. In all of these cases, the burnt elements include mandibles and teeth, as in the case of the Skara Brae material. The predominance of older individuals in the sample from Skara Brae may point towards selective or seasonal ‘hunting’, which would not require any more sophisticated techniques than pit-trapping. 

It is also possible that the vole remains are the outcome of agricultural pest control, although it is unlikely that this was their only source, given their location and intermingling with household refuse.

The presence of Orkney Voles on Orkney in prehistory has only been noted in archaeological contexts where the primary question is to establish the presence of humans.

I have suggested elsewhere that it is likely that the vole was surviving in cold, but ice-free locations east of Scotland and Orkney through the last glacial maximum, and the following deglaciation. 

It is possible therefore that the vole may not have been brought to Orkney by humans, but arrived on its own feet at any time after the retreat of the ice sheet over Orkney. 

The relative abundance of mice and voles, as demonstrated in the graphic suggest that there are background populations of voles in external areas around Skara Brae, in areas where there are relatively few mice.

In contrast, the background population of mice is in the structures of Skara Brae. 

There are also high intensity populations of voles also within the buildings. 

Initially I was skeptical about the idea that voles were a potential food item, but as the idea that these people were likely to be comparatively underresourced survivalists as castaways on Orkney developed, I began to reconsider.

Finding that mice were a common co-inhabitant of Skara Brae dwellings suggests that they were a very present feature of life in neolithic Orkney. It is highly unlikely that this mouse population was a welcome guest, and more likely to have been an outright pest.

In light of that ,some interesting features of the architecture of the dwellings suggest how neolithic people adapted to the invasion of rodents.

Besides the risk of being walked over by tiny feet in the middle of the night, the major risk from the mice would have been two-fold, firstly, eating their stored food, and secondly defacating in the stored food that they didn't eat.

As a result of this very real threat they may have developed a couple of counter measures which we find at Skara Brae. 

 

 

 

A well designed "dresser" would present a significant obstacle to the trespass of mice onto a food storage area. A wooden version of this can be found in the Kirbuster Farm Museum in Orkney which was built in the 18th century,  a piece of furniture that performed the same function up until the early/mid 20th century. 

 

The other major defence against rodent transgression was the lidded container.

Fixed versions of these were the cut into the floor of Skara Brae dwellings. These would have been designed with a lid which would be lifted to access the contained food within.

A more obvious example of the lidded container is the bucket shaped pottery that was developed at around this time.

  

These vessels were also furnished with lids, finely worked stone discs of thin stone, like the item that is propped up against the bedding place wall in the image below. 

  

It's quite likely that the development of the dresser and the development of flat based pottery are not entirely coincidental.

The pottery that precedes bucket shapes was round based which would not sit well on a dresser, and it is possible that for some reason mice were a less serious problem in the earlier years of the Neolithic migration into Orkney. 

A different approach to food is also possible, flat based pottery intended for long term storage, while round based pottery was used for freshly gathered ingredients. 

This might tell us much about the lives of the people who lived in grouped settlements, as compared to those who lived in the more isolated mainland settlements.

Jeffery Nicholls 

South Ronaldsay 

Orkney 

In Conclusion

 

The Orkney Riddle 

Conclusion

The Theory here, begins with people in Early Neolithic times being able to walk from Caithness to Orkney until 3000BC., it continues by suggesting that a land bridge that joined Caithness to Orkney was washed away at that date. 

The evidence that I hope I have demonstrated to support the theory is as follows:-

The population of Orkney drops after 3000BC. 

Barnhouse and many small settlements are abandoned in 3000BC. 

The Stones of Stenness and Ring of Brodgar are abandoned, unfinished, probably at that date. 

The Westray islands are (mostly) abandoned at 3000BC, and not colonised again until the second half of the 3rd millennium BC. 

Skara Brae, and the Ness of Brodgar, both have dated deposits from before 3000BC indicating some kind of occupation, but not till after 3000BC are the revolutionary solid structures with stone lined drains and other necessary amenities designed and constructed. 

The dates of the human bones found in the cairns are largely assessed to before 3000BC, and the dates of the animal bones, which were arguably being eaten by people, are largely after 3000BC, when a few groups of people isolated from mainland Britain, may have sought desperate refuge. 

It is possible that the people of the early Neolithic in Northwestern Europe were wholly nomadic, leaving only footprints before 3000BC. 

As sea levels rose it also likely that Atlantic tides broke through land bridges between Ireland and Britain, and between Britain and Europe. 

It was only after 3000BC that the first features of Stonehenge were installed, and not until the second half of the 3rd millennium BC that seagoing vessels were developed. 

*

All views and opinions expressed are my own, but it remains a work-in-progress for which positive criticism and comment is welcomed.

Jeffery Nicholls 

South Ronaldsay 

Orkney 

The Orkney Riddle is a series of blogs promoting the notion that Neolithic people walked from Scotland to Orkney to build the Ring of Brodgar. 

#Orkney #archaeology #Neolithic #prehistory #British #SkaraBrae #NessofBrodgar #BIIS ##Britice-Chrono 

The Swifterbant Culture

 

The Orkney Riddle

The Swifterbant Culture 

The Swifterbant Culture represents the tribes that occupied northern Europe,  and are likely to have interacted with Britain in the 5th millennium BC. 

 

From:-

"New evidence on the earliest domesticated animals and possible small‑scale husbandry inAtlantic NW Europe" by Philippe Crombé, et al

"The coastal lowlands of Northwest Europe are situated at the periphery of the extensive loess belt of Centraland West Europe, which was colonized in the course of the 6th millennium cal BC by migrating farmers from the Near East and Anatolia. The transition from (Mesolithic) hunter-gatherers to (Neolithic) farmers-herders in this coastal lowland area  has been debated by numerous scholars over the past decades. The debate centers around two opposing models. The frst advocates a long-term and gradual transition towards farming and herding starting early in the 5th millennium cal BC, a process in which local hunter-gatherers played asignifcant role (acculturation/cultural difusion model). The second model, on the other hand, considers a rapid introduction of domesticates near the end of the 5th millennium cal BC, more precisely around ca. 4300 cal BC in the Netherlands and ca. 4100/4000 cal BC in theUK, northernGermany and southern Scandinavia. According to some, the speed of transition suggests demic difusion of pioneering farmers from Central Europeinto the lowlands of NWEurope, as recently supported by genetic evidence, although not all scholars agree on this."

"The Neolithization process of the Lower Scheldt basin. 

The presence of domesticated animals and possible small-scale husbandry from ca. 4800–4600 cal BC onwards, implies that farmer/hunter-gatherer interaction along the NW border of the agro-pastoral frontier was much more intense and drastic than previously thought, and may have involved more than mere exchange of “exotic” goods.

Indeed, local stock breeding demands a transmission of knowledge e.g. through training by skilled specialists which implies direct and prolonged involvement of farmers/herders from the loess areas. This is corroborated by the material culture, which also underwent drastic changes at precisely the same moment. Between 4800 and 4600 cal BC new knapping techniques appeared within the local “Mesolithic” lithic traditions, focusing on the production of thick fakes and new tool types, such as splintered and facetted tools. This was accompanied by new activities, as indicated by new types of micro- and macroscopic use wear traces on lithic tools, e.g. crushing and grinding of animal bone. The start of local pottery production by hunter-gatherers of the Scheldt river valley (Swiferbant Culture), using local clays, must have started during this same period. These new technologies present clear affities with post-LBK cultures, in particular with the Blicquy/Villeneuve-Saint-Germain Culture (ca. 5000/4950 – 4750/4650 cal BC) and later the Rössen Culture (ca. 4700 – 4450 cal BC). 

As such, these changes point to increased infuence of farmer-herders from the loess area. The transfer of technological know-how must have required close and long-term interactions between the farmer-herders and hunter-gatherer population groups, which might have involved the migration of specialists or even inter marriage. This is certainly the case for the pottery production, which represents an entirely new technology in hunter-gatherer context, that required new knowledge of raw materials and the development of new motor habits, i.e. motions and body postures that were previously not used for other activities. The same holds for keeping local livestock consisting of diferent species.At first glance, all this seems in contradiction with genetic evidence from the Central European loess area mainly from central and southern Germany, which points to limited (< 10%, max. 17%) interaction and admixture between both populations before ca. 4000 cal BC, and thus genetic continuity over a period of ca.1500 years. 

However, the first recently published genetic evidence from northern France, demonstrates much more hunter-gatherer ancestry in early farmer’s genes in western Europe compared to central and SE Europe,which fits the conclusions of the present study. Interestingly, the predominance of cattle over sheep/goat within the assemblage of Bazel perfectly mirrors the livestock within the different succeeding agro-pastoral Cultures of the loess region, characterized by a cattle-based economy in which sheep/goat only played a minor role (ca.6/10% to 20%). This cattle-based economy has been linked to increased milk consumption based on the recurrent detection of dairy residues associated with early Neolithic pottery, traces of which have recently also been detected in some Swiferbant Culture potsherds from Bazel (research in progress).

Conclusions. The present study irrefutably proofs the presence of domesticated sheep/goat and most likely also cattle from ca.4800/4600 cal BC along the NW margins of the agro-pastoral frontier, and hence supports the model viewing the neolithization of NW Europa as a long-term process. In addition the isotope data, although not yet fully conclusive, seems to be in favor of small-scale husbandry from the very beginning. If this is confrmed by future, more in-depth isotope analyses, it demonstrates that farmer-herders had a considerable impact on hunter-gatherer’s subsistence as early as the frst half of the 5th millennium cal BC. Clearly before 4800/4600 cal BC contact and interaction with farmer-herders from the LBK was limited to the exchange of “exotic” commodities, such as decorated pottery. This changed markedly with the development of the subsequent Blicquy/Villeneuve-Saint Germain and Rössen Cultures. Contact intensifed resulting in a transfer of knowledge on pottery production,the production of new stone tools (with new functions) and likely also herding. In this sense the frst half of the 5th millennium cal BC was a turning point for hunter-gatherers living in the lowlands along the margins of the agro-pastoral frontier, corresponding to the “substitution phase” or “Introduction phase”. It was the start of a totally new lifeway which probably would culminate into a fully agrarian society in the course of the second half of the 5th millennium cal BC, around 4000 cal BC at the latest. The latter might have been triggered by the tidal fooding events in the Lower Scheldt valley which certainly will have reduced the availability of edible plants and wild game considerably. On the other hand flooding might have offered better conditions for local agriculture, through the deposition of more fertile tidal mud, including clay and silt, in an overall sandy environment."

*

Jeffery Nicholls 

South Ronaldsay 

Orkney 

The Orkney Riddle (index here) is a series of blogs promoting the notion that Neolithic people walked from Scotland to Orkney to build the Ring of Brodgar. 

#Orkney #archaeology #Neolithic #prehistory #British #SkaraBrae #NessofBrodgar #BIIS ##Britice-Chrono 

'Dem Bones, Dem Bones

 

The Orkney Riddle

'Dem Bones, Dem Bones 

A study of the bones and consequently, of the people who owned the bones has been carried out by David Lawrence, in his thesis, ”Orkneys First Farmers, Reconstructing biographies from osteological analysis to gain Insights into life and society in a Neolithic community on the Edge of Atlantic Europe”.

At Isbister, he studied a group of skeletons who represented a group of 85 people, half of whom were younger than 25 years old, and half older.

In those that he could establish a gender, 15 were probably female, and 28 probably male. 

The most striking feature of David’s and other studies of Orkney skeletons is the high prevalence of evidence of violence, as 20% of those skulls that survived at Isbister Cairn carried evidence of injuries that might have been caused by direct blows to the head using various types of weapon. Both sexes and all ages were affected. 

Another fracture wound which was present in 10% of little finger bones that were found was thought to be caused by a poorly delivered fist punch.   

In his “Summary of Trauma” David says:-

“The large number of crania with fractures reflects (often deadly) interpersonal violence. Fracture form included circular blunt force trauma consistent with a direct mace blow or slingshot strike, linear and ovoid blunt force trauma consistent with clubs, weapon hafts or rocks, narrow penetrating trauma consistent with a pointed weapon such as a spear or arrow with a sharpened tip or an antler pick; and sharp force trauma consistent with a glancing axe. The Multiple lesions of IS(7284) and IS(1973) particularly indicate close contact rather than missile attack, with IS(1972) probably being ‘finished off’ with a cluster of blows after being stunned: the shape of the anterior lesion implicating a blunt weapon with circular cross-section, whilst the lateral lesions suggest use of considerable force producing fractures of similar size and therefore all consistent with a single weapon. The stone fragment embedded in IS(7114) might be taphonomic but, associated with a closely fitting endocranial hinged spall seems more likely to be part of a broken weapon, perhaps carved intentionally but possibly a weapon of convenience. The close Similarity of the circular penetrating lesions in IS(1957) and ABDUA90046, with peripheral crushing also seems more likely to derive from hand weapons, as do the examples of sharp force trauma (IS7280) and IS(2640). Other blunt force trauma has punched out Bone discs and sometimes split crania (e.g. IS(7207)). Fractured or dislocated mandibles (IS(1973), IS(6703) and ABDUA90037) however could equally result from empty-handed assault (consistent with observed metacarpal fractures) as armed attack.

The majority of longbone fractures observed seem, in contrast, consistent with an accidental origin. All those recorded were well-healed, which supports a distinction in aetiology from at least some cranial fractures. Radius fracture seems rather common (about 4% of right adult radii) and there is a greater Prevalence of radius trauma to the right side than the left, as there is of distal Degenerative Joint Disease. This may imply that trauma relates to handedness , which might suggest that it does not occur only as a result of symmetrical activity but the sample of fractures alone is small and the difference In numbers is statistically insignificant. Perhaps more importantly, Colles Fracture tends to occur in adults after the age of 40 years and is not common in youth (Adams 1962:139-140). This would be consistent with an age-related Element to some of the vertebral crush fractures recorded, whilst other cases of vertebral trauma are more likely violence related.

It may be significant that the right metacarpals also seem to have been more prone to injury than the left, including both trauma and enthesopathy but not Degenerative Joint Disease. The prevalence of fifth metacarpal fracture is highly suggestive of interpersonal violence, which supports observations on the crania but has no obvious direct relationship to trauma of the radius.”

Also, of some significance, is the frequency of severe wounds, including head injuries, that had been survived, and had healed, allowing the individual to return to some sort of active life. 

In some cases, these healed wounds, in spite of healing well, led to secondary osteoarthritis, and secondary degenerative joint disease in the adjoining bones, affecting bodily posture.

“One individual had two healed lesions to the left posterior parietal and one had a healed left Superior parietal lesion as well as apparent damage (crushing or subluxation?) at the left Squamosal suture.”

“One individual had healed wounds that may have been delivered following a stunning blow anteriorly, face-to-face; this might also suggest an initial swinging blow delivered laterally to the point of the jaw or possibly a kick after the individual had fallen.”

Lawrence commented that, “Although some recorded lesions may have been caused by accidents, face-to-Face violence seems to have been endemic.” 

In Summarising Trauma in the Radius bone of the arm Lawrence describes an injury that may have been caused by a fall broken by the outstretched hand, leading to tenderness, osteoporosis and Restricted use of the fingers, hand and wrist (McRae 1994:178). The well-healed appearance of the break suggested that the ulnae may not have been similarly affected or that a repair was effected by the use of a splint.

Finding a fractured finger bone, he describes ”a healed Case of a spiral (or possibly oblique) fracture, typically caused by shearing Forces whilst delivering an unskilled blow with a clenched fist, or by twisting of The little finger (Dandy 1993:224). “

In a Lower Limb injury :- “ The near normal alignment and the well-healed nature of the lesion suggest that this is the result of a green-stick fracture in youth . “

And In a foot injury:- “This appears to be a well-Healed oblique fracture that may have been associated with soft tissue damage. Apposition remained close but rotation and displacement of the distal element may have deformed the foot and caused ambulatory difficulties.”

Serious Injury of the individual did not automatically foretell an early death.

All views and opinions expressed are my own, but it remains a work-in-progress for which positive criticism and comment is welcomed.

*

Jeffery Nicholls 

South Ronaldsay 

Orkney 

The Orkney Riddle (index here) is a series of blogs promoting the notion that Neolithic people walked from Scotland to Orkney to build the Ring of Brodgar. 

#Orkney #archaeology #Neolithic #prehistory #British #SkaraBrae #NessofBrodgar #BIIS ##Britice-Chrono 

Aurochs

 

The Orkney Riddle

Aurochs 

The following commentary is from:- "Excavation of a Neolithic farmstead at Knap of Howar, Papa Westray, Orkney" by Anna Ritchie

And is in :-

"APPENDIX 4: ANIMAL BONE FROM KNAP OF HOWAR, B A NODDLE, Department of Anatomy, University College, Cardiff"

There, the author discusses the dimensions and probable sizes of cattle bones found on the site, suggesting that they are close to aurochs in size.

"As Watson stated in his Skara Brae report, the cattle are indeed large. The measurements set outin fig 20 are considerably larger than the writer has encountered at other periods, being roughly similar toa collection of Friesian beef cattle in her collection (these were not fully grown animals). Fig 20 also contains an estimate of body weight reduced from various measurements on the astragalus which originallyderived from these same Friesian cattle in part (Noddle 1973). The lightest of these animals overlap theheaviest weights found for later animals (Saxon, from Norfolk; Noddle 1975). Fig 21 comprises a comparison of the width of the first phalanx compared with two groups of English Neolithic cattle from Durrington Walls (Harcourt in Wainwright & Longworth1971,265-76) and Windmill Hill (Grigson in Smith1965,141-67) and with a collection of Danish Maglemosian aurochs taken from Grigson (1969). The Knap of Howar specimens are rather larger than both these English examples and overlap the lighter aurochs. Furthermore, they form a continuous series, whereas both English sites include a few discrete larger specimens which were designated wild aurochs by their authors. The Knap of Howar specimens are comparable with certain continental examples discussed by Grigson (1969) and believed by her and the continental authors to be recently domesticated aurochs. This explanation would seem to apply to Knap of Howar material."

The following chart extracts dates of death of cattle/aurochs in Orkney for the Neolithic period. The sources for this work are:-

To cut a long story short: formal chronological modelling for the Late Neolithic site of Ness of Brodgar, Orkney by Nick Card et al

Beside the Ocean of Time: a chronology of Neolithic burial monuments and houses in Orkney, by Seren Griffiths 

The limits of the dates of death of each beast are given by the sources as better than 95% accurate, and this leads to some lengthy periods of time in which an animal may have died. Over-lengthy periods of death possibility have been removed from the chart.

The sites covered include the Knap of Howar, the Ness of Brodgar, and many Orkney cairns. 

All views and opinions expressed are my own, but it remains a work-in-progress for which positive criticism and comment is welcomed.

Jeffery Nicholls 

South Ronaldsay 

Orkney 

The Orkney Riddle (index here) is a series of blogs promoting the notion that Neolithic people walked from Scotland to Orkney to build the Ring of Brodgar. 

#Orkney #archaeology #Neolithic #prehistory #British #SkaraBrae #NessofBrodgar #BIIS ##Britice-Chrono