A great wave: the Storegga tsunami and the end of Doggerland?

Abstract

Around 8150 BP, the Storegga tsunami struck Northwest Europe. The size of this wave has led many to assume that it had a devastating impact upon contemporaneous Mesolithic communities, including the final inundation of Doggerland, the now submerged
Mesolithic North Sea landscape. Here, the authors present the first evidence of the tsunami from the southern North Sea, and suggest that traditionalnotions of a catastrophically destructive event may need rethinking. In providing a more nuanced interpretation by incorporating the role of local topographic variation within the study of the Storegga event, we are better placed to understand the impact of such dramatic occurrences and their larger significance in settlement studies.

Full text

Research Article
A great wave: the Storegga tsunami and the end of
Doggerland?
James Walker1, Vincent Gaffney1,
*
, Simon Fitch1, Merle Muru1,2, Andrew Fraser1,
Martin Bates3& Richard Bates4
1
School of Archaeological and Forensic Science, University of Bradford, UK
2
Department of Geography, Institute of Ecology and Earth Sciences, University of Tartu, Estonia
3
School of Archaeology, History and Anthropology, University of Wales Trinity Saint David, UK
4
School of Earth & Environmental Sciences, University of St Andrews, Scotland, UK
* Author for correspondence: ✉v.gaffney@bradford.ac.uk
Around 8150 BP, the Storegga tsunami struck North-
west Europe. The size of this wave has led many to
assume that it had a devastating impact upon contem-
poraneous Mesolithic communities, including the
final inundation of Doggerland, the now submerged
Mesolithic North Sea landscape. Here, the authors
present the first evidence of the tsunami from the
southern North Sea, and suggest that traditional
notions of a catastrophically destructive event may
need rethinking. In providing a more nuanced inter-
pretation by incorporating the role of local topo-
graphic variation within the study of the Storegga
event, we are better placed to understand the impact
of such dramatic occurrences and their larger signifi-
cance in settlement studies.
Keywords: Mesolithic, Doggerland, Storegga tsunami, sea-level change, disaster archaeology
Introduction
In an age of human-induced climate change, catastrophic natural disasters appear to be occur-
ring with greater frequency and magnitude. Tsunamis, such as the 2004 Indian Ocean ‘Box-
ing Day’and 2011 Tohoku (Japan) events, are of particular note, striking quickly and with
little warning (Seneviratne et al.2012). Although such events have fuelled interest in how
people in the past responded to natural disasters (e.g. Burroughs 2005; Cain et al.2018),
archaeology has—with few exceptions (e.g. McFadgen 2007)—been slow to engage in the
Received: 1 November 2019; Revised: 27 February 2020; Accepted: 11 March 2020
© The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Antiquity Publications Ltd. This is an
Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.
org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the
original work is properly cited.
Antiquity 2020 Vol. 94 (378): 1409–1425
https://doi.org/10.15184/aqy.2020.49
1409

debate beyond historically attested examples, leaving the sciences to take the lead in palaeo-
tsunami research (Goff et al.2012; Engel et al.2020).
The Storegga tsunami (c. 8150 cal BP) provides a comparative phenomenon within
North-west European prehistory. It is geologically well attested (Figure 1), with evidence
from Western Scandinavia, the Faroe Isles, north-east Britain, Denmark and Greenland.
Caused by the largest known Holocene submarine landslides (80 000km
2
), the event dis-
placed 3200km
3
of sediment (Haflidason et al.2005) on the European continental shelf
west of southern Norway. The resulting tsunami must have been of considerable proportions
(Bugge 1983; Bugge et al.1987; Dawson et al.1988; Long et al.1989a), and has even been
posited as causing the final inundation of Mesolithic Doggerland, the now submerged
palaeolandscape of the southern-central North Sea (Weninger et al.2008). Specifically arch-
aeological evidence for the tsunami, however, is scarce.
To date, only two Mesolithic sites have been confirmed as underlying Storegga deposits
(Figure 1; Bondevik 2019: 29), although others remain a possibility (e.g. Bondevik 2003).
Hijma (2009: 140–41) notes that “an important question is whether the Storegga tsunami
had sufficient force to create a distinct deposit where it dissipated on the southern North
Sea shores”or whether “most of the energy had already dissipated […] across the shallowest
parts of the contemporary North Sea”(see also Cohen & Hijma 2008). The dearth of arch-
aeological evidence suggests the need to examine why archaeologists struggle to define natural
disasters in the past. In doing so, this article reviews models of the Storegga tsunami’s impact.
Using new data (Gaffney et al.2020), we re-evaluate the fate of Doggerland and consider the
first offshore evidence for the tsunami from the southern-central North Sea.
The archaeology of natural disasters
The archaeology of natural disasters is an emerging field (Faas & Barrios 2015) that provides
the capacity to assess such events in terms of longer-term impacts on lifeways, whereas studies
of contemporary natural disasters tend to concentrate on the immediate loss of life (Torrence
& Grattan 2002). The devastation wrought by the Indian Ocean and Tohoku tsunamis, for
example, led to both being labelled as ‘mega-tsunamis’in the media, although neither meet
the technical criteria for this description (Goff et al.2014: 13). Clearly, scales of time, space
and consequence are important for how we understand catastrophic phenomena (see Estévez
2008). It may seem obvious that for a natural disaster to qualify as truly catastrophic, a society
must have struggled or failed to adapt to changes in their environment (Oliver-Smith 1996:
303). Intuitively, however, we recognise that ‘catastrophes’and ‘natural disasters’may be
understood and experienced with a high degree of subjectivity.
Prehistoric catastrophes and the marine environment
Underwater survey and excavation techniques are among the fastest developing areas of meth-
odological advancement in archaeology (see Fitch et al. 2005; Bailey et al.2017; Sturt et al.
2018). Despite this, data collection beyond the near-shore remains challenging. The difficul-
ties of identifying specific events in such environments—even at the scale of the Storegga
slide—remain significant. Consequently, the Storegga tsunami exemplifies the paradoxical
James Walker et al.
© The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Antiquity Publications Ltd.
1410

Figure 1. a) Map showing the Storegga Slide and sites where tsunami deposits have been found; b) ‘Europe’s Lost
Frontiers’project coring locations, with ELF001A highlighted (topography: National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration 2009; bathymetry: EMODnet 2018; image by M. Muru).
A great wave: the Storegga tsunami and the end of Doggerland?
© The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Antiquity Publications Ltd.
1411

scenario described by Torrence and Grattan (2002: 4) whereby archaeological evidence for
the impact of an unusually destructive force upon extant cultures remains elusive. There is
an unwitting tendency to adopt a progressivist lens and to presume that hunter-gatherers
and early farmers of the past and present were and are less capable of dealing with extreme
environmental forces (Bettinger et al.2015: 12). This is compounded by challenges in iden-
tifying catastrophic events archaeologically on conventional, terrestrial sites—particularly in
prehistory, where hiatuses in deposition may result from many processes. The transient
nature of even ‘permanent’hunter-gatherer settlements raises questions about how we
might recognise responses to environmental change (Moe Astrup 2018: 136).
In many cases, the effects of catastrophic natural disasters may be easier to recognise than
evidence for the disaster itself. Goff et al.(2012) offer guidelines for identifying archaeo-
logical proxies of palaeotsunamis. These include changes in shell-midden composition, struc-
tural damage, geomorphological changes (e.g. uplift, subsidence and/or compaction) and
replication of these features across multiple sites. In European Mesolithic contexts, however,
these proxies can be elusive, as, for example, structural evidence is rare, and variation in shell-
midden composition may be attributed to multiple causes.
Searching for Storegga
After initial reports of the geological indicators of the Storeggatsunami emerged in the 1980s,
evidence from archaeological deposits soon followed (Dawson et al.1990). Since then, how-
ever, the number of associated archaeological sites has remained small (Figure 1; Bondevik
2003). This may reflect a lack of access to appropriate geological expertise (cf. Long et al.
1989b: 535), difficulties in distinguishing tsunami deposits from storm surges and other
transgressive episodes (Bondevik et al.1998), or a lack of contemporaneous archaeological
sites. Alternatively, the evidence may simply not exist: a tsunami needs a run-up of only
1m to be catastrophic, yet less than 5m is often too little to leave a geological record
(Lowe & de Lange 2000: 403). Furthermore, tsunamis may erode the landscape, removing
any archaeological evidence, while remaining cultural debris may have been cleared by return-
ing people, or simply missed through limited excavation strategies. Hence, a tsunami may
cause terrible damage, but leave little archaeological evidence. Finally, the Storegga tsunami
coincided with the harshest conditions of the 8.2 ka ‘cold snap’(Dawson et al.2011; Bon-
devik et al.2012; Rydgren & Bondevik 2015). Separating tsunami impacts from those result-
ing from this broader climatic downturn is challenging.
The proxies outlined by Goff et al.(2012) have so far been lacking from the North Sea
basin, with archaeological evidence comprising either unconfirmed tsunami deposits or
speculative stratigraphic relationships. Even where Storegga deposits are confirmed as overly-
ing Mesolithic occupations—including Castle Street in Scotland, and Dysvikja, and prob-
ably Fjørtoft, in Norway (Dawson et al.1990; Bondevik 2003,2019)—these cannot be
taken as reliable evidence of immediate event impact (Bondevik 2019: 29; Table S1 in the
online supplementary material (OSM)).
Reconstructions of what happened to Doggerland rely on terrestrial, primarily geological,
data, and have been impeded by a lack of clarity as to what constitutes a contemporaneous
landmass. Some have envisioned that Doggerland had all but disappeared prior to Storegga
James Walker et al.
© The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Antiquity Publications Ltd.
1412

(e.g. Edwards 2004: 67), while others have proposed that the tsunami constituted the final
inundation process (Weninger et al.2008: 13). Others still have suggested that at the time of
the tsunami, Doggerland had already become a (populated) island (Hill et al.2017: 1). Asses-
sing these different interpretations requires a nuanced history of the southern North Sea
landscape.
A three-stage history of gradual inundation
The integration of palaeobathymetry and seismic analyses (e.g. Gaffney et al.2007), and pro-
gress in refining estimates of sea-level rise (Hijma et al.2010,2019; Shennan et al.2018;
Emery et al.2019), have allowed us to characterise the nature and extent of the prehistoric
landmass in the southern North Sea (Figure 2). ‘Doggerland’typically refers to the entire sub-
merged landscape stretching from the Dover/Calais Strait to the Norwegian Sea (Coles
1998). This landmass, however, would have changed significantly in extent and character
since the Last Glacial Maximum, and the ‘catch-all’name of Doggerland may not be particu-
larly useful.
Doggerland and the Dogger Hills
The extent of Doggerland during the Late Pleistocene is debated. Early Holocene
Doggerland probably constituted a landscape stretching from Yorkshire to Denmark, with
the Dogger Hills as a modest upland zone at its northernmost limit (Figure 2a).
Subsequently, however, Doggerland became increasingly diminished and fragmented
(Cohen et al.2017: 162).
The Dogger Archipelago and Dogger Island
By 9000 cal BP, Doggerland would have been fragmented to the degree that it no longer
resembled the continuous landscape often portrayed in the literature (e.g. Coles 1998).
The uplands, comprising the current Dogger Bank, would probably have been cut off
(Figure 2b), forming Dogger Island, which survived for approximately another millennium.
The rapidity of sea-level rise around this time (Hijma & Cohen 2010) complicates assessment
of the period for which this island remained an attractive ecological zone for exploitation or
viable settlement. The broader landscape became increasingly fragmented by the formation
of estuaries, inlets and islands (Gearey et al.2017: 49). From this period onwards—and cer-
tainly following the significant sea-level rise associated with the 8.2 ka event—it would be
better to conceive of this landscape as the ‘Dogger Archipelago’.
The Dogger Littoral
Between 8400 and 8200 cal BP, the global average sea level rose (possibly in two phases)
between 1 and 4m (Hijma & Cohen 2019: 83). By the time the tsunami struck, c. 8150
BP, this higher sea level had probably reduced Dogger Island to a shallow sand bank
(Hijma & Cohen 2010,2019; Törnqvist & Hijma 2012; Emery et al. 2019). Reconstructing
the contemporaneous shoreline using bathymetry and the relative sea-level curve (Shennan
A great wave: the Storegga tsunami and the end of Doggerland?
© The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Antiquity Publications Ltd.
1413

et al.2018) indicates the possible survival of a small area (approximately 1000km
2
),
comprising the highest terrain, south of the present-day sand bank (Figure 2c)—even
assuming the maximal estimate of a 4m sea-level rise (Emery et al.2019). Many of the smaller
islands to the south may also have remained above water (Peeters et al.2009: 21; Garrow &
Sturt 2011: 63).
Around 7000 cal BP, approximately 1150 years after the tsunami, Dogger Island would
presumably have disappeared and the number of islands reduced to a handful (Figure 2d).
The shoreline of Denmark, north-west Germany, the Netherlands, Belgium and southern
Britain continued to exist someway beyond their present extents, in some cases, such as
Figure 2. North Sea coastline reconstructions for: a) Doggerland c. 10 000 cal BP; b) Dogger Archipelago c. 9000 cal
BP; c) Dogger Archipelago c. 8200 cal BP; d) Dogger Littoral c. 7000 cal BP (image by M. Muru).
James Walker et al.
© The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Antiquity Publications Ltd.
1414

the Wash in East Anglia, by several tens of kilometres. This is evidenced by the use of such
coastal margins well into the Neolithic and later—as demonstrated by sites such as Seahenge
off the UK coast and the many Late Mesolithic sites of the Danish nearshore. By this point,
the remnants of Doggerland would cumulatively have still constituted a sizeable area: the
‘Dogger Littoral’(Figure 2d).
Archaeological impact models
With a detailed understanding of the evolution of the landscape in place, competing models
of the tsunami’s impact may now be assessed. Two models relate to the impact on (extant)
terrestrial landscapes (Waddington & Wicks 2017; Blankholm 2020), while two others con-
cern the inundated southern North Sea landscape (Weninger et al.2008; Hill et al.2014,
2017).
‘Doggerland’wipeout scenario
To estimate the impact of Storegga, Weninger and colleagues (2008) used dated sediments
from Norway, Britain and Greenland that relate stratigraphically to tsunami deposits, along
with bathymetric 3D modelling of the southern North Sea. They concluded that the Dogger
Bank was probably submerged at the time of the tsunami, meaning that the wave may have
reached the northern shores of present-day lowland Europe (Weninger et al.2008). Without
the barrier of the Dogger Bank, they argue that the Dogger Archipelago would have experi-
enced devastating inundation with “a catastrophic impact on the contemporary coastal Meso-
lithic population”(Weninger et al.2008: 17).
Dogger Bank survival scenario
An alternative scenario is advanced by Hill et al.(2017) using multiscale numeric modelling.
Assuming the Dogger Bank to still have been both exposed and inhabited by Mesolithic com-
munities, they initially proposed that the tsunami may have been catastrophic (Hill et al.
2014), but subsequently revised this position, concluding that a maximal inundation
would have covered around 35 per cent of the exposed landmass—potentially similar to
an extreme high tide (Hill et al.2017: 10). The authors, however, do not consider the pres-
ence of other landforms, and the pre-Storegga submergence of much of Dogger Island
(Emery et al.2019) challenges this position.
Terrestrial models
The loss of coastline south of the isostatic readjustment margin since Storegga means that
much currently extant landmass may be peripheral to the areas worst affected. Unlike sites
along the Scottish and Norwegian coast, areas affected by the tsunami in the southern
North Sea basin are likely to be under water, making it difficult to evaluate impact. Two
recent studies, however, present archaeological evidence from north-east Britain and northern
Norway for the terrestrial impact of the tsunami (Waddington & Wicks 2017; Blankholm
2020).
A great wave: the Storegga tsunami and the end of Doggerland?
© The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Antiquity Publications Ltd.
1415

Waddington and Wicks (2017:fig. 4) observe a drop in the number of sites on the north-
east coast of Britain prior to the tsunami, with a slow population rebound centred at c. 8000
cal BP. They argue that this is due to the tsunami scouring recently deposited archaeological
remains from the Mesolithic coast. Although this interpretation is difficult to verify,
subduction-based tsunami modelling suggests that scouring is strongest during the draw-
down stage of a tsunami (Yeh & Li 2008: 100), prior to the wave breaking on land. Further-
more, there appear to be no discernible changes in settlement type or artefacts associated with
the time of the tsunami, although Waddington and Wicks (2017: 708) argue that this sup-
ports an externally induced drop in site density.
Typically, tsunami deposits rest unconformably on underlying strata, and are interpreted
as being indicative of erosive events (Dawson 1994: 88). It is, however, difficult to ascertain
the severity of the erosion and whether it was sufficient to destroy or obscure centuries of
human activity. Following the December 1992 tsunami that hit Flores in Indonesia, a con-
spicuous relationship between run-up height and erosion was observed. The maximal inun-
dation distance for this tsunami, recorded along one river valley, was approximately 600m,
but where run-up heights ranged between 1 and 4m along the northern coastal line of Flores,
erosion was restricted to a narrow coastal strip (Shi & Smith 2003: 191). Storegga run-up
heights recorded from the UK mainland rarely exceed 4m, and would probably only surpass
5m in inlets and channels where wave energy could be focused (Smith et al.2004), especially
south of the Forth estuary (Long 2018: 150).
While the Flores tsunami provides a rare example where it has been possible to investigate
this relationship, it is not necessarily a suitable analogue. For Storegga, run-up heights—as
inferred from field observations—are widely considered to represent minimal estimates
(Dawson 1994: 88), and may actually have been metres higher (Dawson 1994; Smith
et al.2004; Long 2018). Onshore tsunami geomorphology remains relatively poorly under-
stood (although see Engel et al.2020 for recent advancements), and wave run-up and back-
wash both have significant potential for surficial erosion (Sugawara et al.2008). Ultimately,
however, onshore wave velocities and, therefore, processes of sediment transportation and
reworking will have been contingent upon local coastal topography (Dawson & Shi 2000;
Gaffney et al.2020).
The Norwegian Varangerfjord study comprises a smaller area that is unrelated to the
southern North Sea basin, and further removed from the location of the slides than north-east
Britain. Varangerfjord is a relatively well protected, east-facing inlet with peninsulas to the
west (Corner et al.1999: 147). Like Waddington and Wicks (2017), Blankholm (2020)
notes a drop in the number of sites, but, in the absence of well-dated deposits, he is restricted
to correlating this with elevation (26–28m asl), approximately 2–3m above the 8100 BP
shoreline. Furthermore, there is no clear geological signature for the tsunami in this region,
perhaps because it simply did not obtain a significant run-up height. Consequently, it is ques-
tionable to what extent the tsunami had an impact here (Blankholm 2020).
Review of models
Neither the Varangerfjord nor UK models present compelling evidence of forced cultural
change (cf. Torrence & Grattan 2002) through conventional forms of material culture.
James Walker et al.
© The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Antiquity Publications Ltd.
1416

Blankholm (2020) advocates caution, given the limited available data and potential for alter-
native ethnoarchaeological and taphonomic explanations for the site distribution patterns
observed. Waddington and Wicks (2017), however, believe that the paucity of sites contem-
poraneous with—and centuries before—the tsunami results from the erosive force of its
run-up.
The work of Weninger et al.(2008) represents a tour de force of archaeological inference,
exploring effects of a severe inundation in a way not previously attempted. Their assessment,
however, does not consider the shoaling effect of the Dogger Bank. After reducing speed and
increasing in amplification while passing over the shallow bank, wave energy would have dis-
sipated upon re-entering deeper waters to the south. Furthermore, the rising waters were
probably anything but “inexorable”(Weninger et al.2008: 16). Tsunamis, like normal
waves, break and then subside. Consequently, even following catastrophic inundation, the
effect would not necessarily have led to permanent inundation. Although the tsunami
may have devastated the remnant Dogger Island, it remains uncertain whether it was inhab-
ited at this time. If it was, the hilly local topography may have offered some shelter from the
impact.
Finally, although Hill et al.’s(2014) model is not fully applicable—as Dogger Island was
probably considerably smaller than posited when the tsunami struck (Figure 2c)—it never-
theless provides insight into how Storegga may have affected other low-lying landmasses.
Even in a low-drag scenario with conservative wave-energy dissipation, it still predicts the sur-
vival of Dogger Island (Hill et al.2017)—without taking into account the effects of any
extant vegetation cover (for a discussion of the arboreal effects on dissipation and inundation,
see Cochard 2011).
Modern-day risk assessment models
Concerns about a future repeat of Storegga have prompted modern risk assessments (Chacón-
Barrantes et al.2013). One model that focuses on the Dutch coast relocates the origin point
of the tsunami to the entrance of the Norwegian trench, in order to provide a ‘maximal cred-
ible event’scenario (Kulkarni et al.2017). Despite its fast rate of travel, the simulated tsunami
failed to either breach or overtop the protective dune system on the Dutch foreshore, other
than at its natural openings. Even here, waves failed to penetrate a second dune-line, and
reached no more than 1km inland (Kulkarni et al. 2017). The peak run-up was 7.5m,
and the maximum inundation depth was 3.5m in a single, highly localised dune breach
(Kulkarni et al.2017: 28). Furthermore, the run-up for the North Sea basin to the south
of the Dogger Bank may have been less: the Storegga run-up heights (up to 5m) observed
from south of the Forth estuary typically decrease in height farther south along the British
coastline (Long 2018:fig. 6).
Variable run-up heights and sedimentation thicknesses attest to the importance of local
topography in influencing the effects of coastal, wave-derived phenomena. Dawson et al.
(2020) attribute discrepancies between field observations and numerical simulations of
run-up heights from the Shetland Islands to the influence of incising inlets and valleys.
Even microtopography can have a significant influence. A winter storm surge in the southern
North Sea in 2013, for example, produced run-up heightsthat varied byas much as 2m in the
A great wave: the Storegga tsunami and the end of Doggerland?
© The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Antiquity Publications Ltd.
1417

same locale at Holkham in Norfolk (Spencer et al.2014). This, combined with the highly
localised inundation effects modelled by Kulkarni et al.(2017), and the caution that Meso-
lithic hunter-gatherers may have exercised to avoid danger zones (Leary 2015: 80; Blankholm
2020), suggests that we may need to revise our perception of Storegga as being universally
devastating: a catastrophe for one group may be a ‘near miss’for another.
New data from Doggerland
The influence of topography on the destructive potential of tsunamis has recently been
affirmed by the recovery of the first evidence for the Storegga tsunami from the southern
North Sea (Gaffney et al.2020). In 2018, a series of vibrocore samples were taken from
palaeo-river channel systems associated with the Outer Dowsing Deep, as part of the
ERC-funded project ‘Europe’s Lost Frontiers’(Gaffney et al.2020). Several cores contained
‘tsunami-like’deposits, comprising clastic sediments, stones and broken shells, evincing a
much higher level of turbation and accelerated deposition than the laminar sediments that
bracket them. Multiproxy analyses of core ELF001A (Figure 3), including sedimentology,
palaeomagnetic, isotopic, palaeobotany and sedaDNA techniques, confirm this assessment.
Optically stimulated luminescence (OSL) dating sequences indicate that these deposits were
broadly contemporaneous with Storegga (see Gaffney et al.2020; Figure S1 & Table S2).
The location of these deposits—42km inland from the present coastline (Figure 1b)—is
striking, and their absence from other nearby cores reflects the importance of valleys and
inlets in channelling wave-energy (Smith et al.2004; Gaffney et al. 2020). Seismological
mapping shows that, during the Early Holocene, the Dogger Bank (Cotterill et al.2017),
along with other areas of Doggerland (Gaffney et al. 2007), would have featured numerous
fluvial-cut and glacial-infilled features that would have allowed for a highly variable inflow of
water. The tsunami wave run-up in the area around core ELF001A can be estimated using
bathymetry and the altitude of tsunami deposits within the core (Figures 3–4; Gaffney
et al.2020). The remnant of Dogger Island may have acted as a physical barrier to the
wave for areas to the south. The remaining submerged areas would have been particularly
shallow at the time of the tsunami, and may have sheltered some areas to the south by causing
the wave to prematurely shoal and dissipate, as seen in the Dogger Bank’sinfluence on diur-
nal tides today (e.g. Pingree & Griffiths 1982). This shallow bank or low-lying island may,
however, also have exacerbated the impact of the tsunami in other areas, focusing wave energy
to the east and west of the bank, including the head of the Outer Dowsing Deep and the
basin from which core ELF001A was retrieved (Figure 4).
Notably, sedaDNA evidence from the cores (Gaffney et al.2020) suggests a withdrawal of
floodwaters and recovery of the land on the Dogger Littoral. Hence, the eventual inundation
of the remaining parts of Doggerland resulted from the inexorable sea-level rise, rather than a
lasting inundation from the Storegga tsunami.
Discussion
The Storegga tsunami was undoubtedly devastating for some regions. What was left of
Dogger Island may have been particularly badly affected. The inlets and coastal valleys on
James Walker et al.
© The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Antiquity Publications Ltd.
1418

Figure 3. Stratigraphic units in core ELF001A (for full details, see Figure S1 & Table S2 in the online supplementary
material; image by M. Muru & M. Bates).
A great wave: the Storegga tsunami and the end of Doggerland?
© The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Antiquity Publications Ltd.
1419

the plains west of the Dogger Bank, however, may have been among the worst affected areas.
In other locations, including areas protected by the Dogger Bank/Island, the impact may
have been relatively limited. Nevertheless, the effects on any Mesolithic communities inha-
biting the southern North Sea landscape remain, at present, difficult to gauge. As localised
topographical variability is brought into focus, however, it seems increasingly untenable to
maintain scenarios of wholesale catastrophic destruction or the definitive inundation of
the last vestiges of Doggerland.
The prospect of the Dogger Littoral surviving the tsunami carries important implications
for the prehistory of North-west Europe. The potential continuity of remnants of Dogger-
land into the Neolithic—as first proposed by Coles (1999)—has been neglected due to
the popularity of the notion of a catastrophic final inundation. It is typically assumed that
‘Doggerland’had all but disappeared by the onset of the Neolithic (Cohen et al.2017:
169). In the final stages of the European Mesolithic, hunter-gatherers formed a cultural, if
not territorial, buffer between the incoming Linear Pottery Culture and the coasts. Increas-
ingly, it seems that the spread of the Neolithic across North-west Europe was a rapid and
Figure 4. Model showing the Storegga tsunami and run-up around the western sector of the southern North Sea at 8150
cal BP (image by M. Muru).
James Walker et al.
© The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Antiquity Publications Ltd.
1420

stochastic affair (Rowley-Conwy 2011), and the Dogger Littoral may have formed an exciting
staging ground for whatever adaptations, innovations and social tensions comprised the final
transition to farming (Garrow & Sturt 2011).
Conclusion
The wealth of sedimentological evidence relating to the Storegga tsunami from around the
northern North Sea basin makes the lack of archaeological evidence for the event even
more curious. It seems reasonable to suggest that the Storegga tsunami must have been cata-
strophic to those caught within the run-in zone, and the event may have had significant
knock-on effects for communities farther inland. Recent advances in palaeotopography,
hydrological modelling and, now, the first evidence of the tsunami itself from the southern
North Sea (Gaffney et al.2020) suggest that the impact of the tsunami would have been con-
tingent upon regional variations in landscape and environment; this may begin to explain the
puzzling absence of archaeological evidence.
Ultimately, the Storegga tsunami was neither universally catastrophic, nor was it a final
flooding event for the Dogger Bank or the Dogger Littoral. The impact of the tsunami
was highly contingent upon landscape dynamics, and the subsequent rise in sea level
would have been temporary. Significant areas of the Dogger Littoral, if not also the Archipel-
ago, may have survived well beyond the Storeggatsunami and into the Neolithic, a possibility
that contributes to our understanding of the Mesolithic–Neolithic transition in North-west
Europe.
Acknowledgements
We thank both Stein Bondevik and Marc Hijma for kindly sharing their work. We acknow-
ledge PGS (https://www.pgs.com/) for provision of data used in this paper, under licence
CA-BRAD-001-2017.
Funding statement
The study was supported by European Research Council funding through the European
Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme (project 670518 LOST FRON-
TIERS, https://erc.europa.eu/ https://lostfrontiers.teamapp.com/) and the Estonian Research
Council grant (https://www.etag.ee; project PUTJD829).
Supplementary material
To view supplementary material for this article, please visit https://doi.org/10.15184/aqy.
2020.49
References
Bailey, G.,J. Harff &D. Sakellariou (ed.). 2017.
Under the sea: archaeology and palaeolandscapes of
the continental shelf. New York: Springer.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-53160-1
Bettinger, R.L.,R. Garvey &S. Tushingham.
2015. Hunter-gatherers: archaeological and
evolutionary theory. New York: Springer.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-7581-2
A great wave: the Storegga tsunami and the end of Doggerland?
© The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Antiquity Publications Ltd.
1421

Blankholm, H.P. 2020. In the wake of the wake: an
investigation of the impact of the Storegga
tsunami on the human settlement of inner
Varangerfjord, northern Norway. Quaternary
International 549: 65–73.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2018.05.050
Bondevik, S. 2003. Storegga tsunami sand in peat
below the Tapes beach ridge at Harøy, western
Norway, and its possible relation to an Early
Stone Age settlement. Boreas 32: 476–83.
https://doi.org/10.1080/03009480310003379
–2019. Tsunami from the Storegga landslide, in
R.A. Meyers (ed.) Encyclopedia of complexity and
systems science:1–33. Berlin: Springer.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-27737-
5_644-1
Bondevik, S.,J.I. Svendsen &J. Mangerud.
1998. Distinction between the Storegga tsunami
and the Holocene marine transgression in coastal
basin deposits of western Norway. Journal of
Quaternary Science 13: 529–37.
https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1417
(1998110)13:6<529::AID-JQS388>3.0.CO;2-1
Bondevik, S.,S.K. Stormo &G. Skjerdal. 2012.
Green mosses date the Storegga tsunami to the
chilliest decades of the 8.2 ka cold event.
Quaternary Science Reviews 45: 1–6.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quascirev.2012.04.020
Bugge, T. 1983. Submarine slides on the Norwegian
continental margin with special emphasis on the
Storegga area (Publication 110). Trondheim:
Continental Shelf Institute, Norway.
Bugge, T.,S. Befring,R.H. Belderson,T. Eidvin,
E. Jansen,N.H. Kenyon,H. Holtedahl &
H.P. Sejrup. 1987. A giant three-stage submarine
slide off Norway. Geo-Marine letters 7: 191–98.
https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02242771
Burroughs, W.J. 2005. Climate change in prehistory:
the end of the reign of chaos. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511535826
Cain, G.,J. Goff &B. McFadgen. 2018.
Prehistoric coastal mass burials: did death come in
waves? Journal of Archaeological Method and
Theory 26: 714–54.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10816-018-9386-y
Chacón-Barrantes, S.,N. Rangaswami &
R. Mayerle. 2013. Several tsunami scenarios at
the North Sea and their consequences at the
German Bight. Science of Tsunami Hazards:
Journal of Tsunami Society International 32: 8–28.
Cochard, R. 2011. On the strengths and drawbacks
of tsunami-buffer forests. Proceedings of the
National Academy of Sciences of the USA 108:
18571–72.
https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1116156108
Cohen, K.M. &M. Hijma. 2008. Het
Rijnmondgebied in het Vroeg-Holoceen:
inzichten uit een diepe put bij Blijdorp
(Rotterdam). Groondboor & Hamer Nederlandse
Geologische Vereniging 62 (3/4): 64–71.
Cohen, K.M.,K. Westley,G. Erkens,M.P. Hijma
&H.J.T. Weerts. 2017. The North Sea, in
N. Flemming, J. Harff, D. Moura, A. Burgess &
G. Bailey (ed.) Submerged landscapes of the
European continental shelf: Quaternary
palaeoenvironments: 147–86. Chichester: Wiley
Blackwell.
https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118927823.ch7
Coles, B.J. 1998. Doggerland: a speculative survey.
Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 64: 45–81.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0079497X00002176
–1999. Doggerland’s loss and the Neolithic, in
B. Coles, J. Coles & M.S. Jørgensen (ed.) Bog
bodies, sacred sites and wetland archaeology (WARP
Occasional Paper 12): 51–59. Exeter: Wetland
Archaeology Research Project.
Corner, G.D.,V.Y. Yevzerov,V.V. Kolka &
J.J. Møller. 1999. Isolation basin stratigraphy
and Holocene relative sea-level change at the
Norwegian-Russian border north of Nikel,
northwest Russia. Boreas 28: 146–66.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1502-3885.1999.
tb00211.x
Cotterill, C.J., E. Phillips,L. James,
C.F. Forsberg,T.I. Tjelta,G. Carter &
D. Dove. 2017. The evolution of the Dogger
Bank, North Sea: a complex history of terrestrial,
glacial and marine environmental change.
Quaternary Science Reviews 171: 136–53.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quascirev.2017.07.006
Dawson, A.G. &S. Shi. 2000. Tsunami deposits.
Pure and Applied Geophysics 157: 875–97.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s000240050010
Dawson, A.G.,D. Long &D.E. Smith. 1988.
The Storegga slides: evidence from eastern
Scotland for a possible tsunami. Marine Geology
82: 271–76.
https://doi.org/10.1016/0025-3227(88)90146-6
Dawson, A.G.,D.E. Smith &D. Long. 1990.
Evidence for a tsunami from a Mesolithic site in
Inverness, Scotland. Journal of Archaeological
James Walker et al.
© The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Antiquity Publications Ltd.
1422

Science 17: 509–12.
https://doi.org/10.1016/0305-4403(90)90031-Y
–1994. Geomorphological effects of tsunami run-up
and backwash. Geomorphology 10: 83–94.
https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-444-82012-9.
50010-4
Dawson, A.,S. Bondevik &J.T. Teller. 2011.
Relative timing of the Storegga submarine
slide, methane release, and climate change
during the 8.2 ka cold event. The Holocene 21:
1167–71.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0959683611400467
Dawson, A.G.,S. Dawson,S. Bondevik,
P.J.M. Costa,J. Hill &I. Stewart. 2020.
Reconciling Storegga tsunami sedimentation
patterns with modelled wave heights: a discussion
from the Shetland Isles field laboratory.
Sedimentology. The Journal of the International
Association of Sedimentologists 67: 1344–53.
https://doi.org/10.1111/sed.12643
Edwards, K.J. 2004. Palaeoenvironments of the
Late Upper Palaeolithic and Mesolithic periods in
Scotland and the North Sea area: new work, new
thoughts, in A. Saville (ed.) Mesolithic Scotland
and its neighbours: the Early Holocene prehistory of
Scotland, its British and Irish context and some
Northern European perspectives:55–72.
Edinburgh: Society of Antiquaries of Scotland.
Emery, A.R.,D.M. Hodgson,N.L.M. Barlow,
J.L. Carrivick,C.J. Cotterill,C.L. Mellett
&A.D. Booth. 2019. Topographic and
hydrodynamic controls on barrier retreat and
preservation: an example from Dogger Bank,
North Sea. Marine Geology 416: 105981.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.margeo.2019.105981
EMODnet. 2018. Available at:
http://www.emodnet.eu (accessed 21 September
2020).
Engel, M.,J. Pilarczyk,S.M. May,D. Brill &
E. Garrett (ed.). 2020. Geological records of
tsunamis and other waves. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
https://doi.org/10.1016/C2017-0-03458-4
Estévez, J. 2008. Catastrophes or sudden changes:
the need to review our time perspective in
prehistory, in L. Buchet, C. Rigeade, I Séguy &
M. Signoli (ed.) Vers une anthropologie des
catastrophes: Actes des 9e Journées
d’anthropologiques de Valbonne (22–24 mai
2007):19–35. Antibes: APDCA.
Faas, A.J. &R.E. Barrios. 2015. Applied
anthropology of risk, hazards, and disasters.
Human Organization 74: 287–95.
https://doi.org/10.17730/0018-7259-74.4.287
Fitch, S.,K. Thomson &V. Gaffney. 2005.
Late Pleistocene and Holocene depositional
systems and the palaeo-geography of the
Dogger Bank, North Sea. Quaternary Research 64:
185–96.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yqres.2005.03.007
Gaffney, V.,K. Thomson &S. Fitch (ed.). 2007.
Mapping Doggerland: the Mesolithic landscapes of
the southern North Sea. Oxford: Archaeopress.
Gaffney, V. et al. 2020. Multi-proxy
characterisation of the Storegga tsunami and its
impact on the early Holocene landscapes of the
southern North Sea. Geosciences 10: 270.
https://doi.org/10.3390/geosciences10070270
Garrow, D. &F. Sturt. 2011. Grey waters bright
with Neolithic argonauts? Maritime connections
and the Mesolithic–Neolithic transition within
the ‘western seaways’of Britain, c. 5000–3500
BC. Antiquity 85: 59–72.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003598X00067430
Gearey, B.R.,E.-J. Hopla,I. Boomer,D. Smith,
P. Marshall,S. Fitch,S. Griffiths &
D.R. Tappin. 2017. Multi-proxy
palaeoecological approaches to submerged
landscapes: a case study from ‘Doggerland’, in the
southern North Sea, in M. Williams, T. Hill,
I. Boomer & I.P. Wilkinson (ed.) The
archaeological and forensic applications of
microfossils: a deeper understanding of human
history:35–53. London: Geological Society.
https://doi.org/10.1144/TMS7.3
Goff, J.,C. Chagué-Goff,S. Nichol,B. Jaffe &
D. Dominey-Howes. 2012. Progress in
palaeotsunami research. Sedimentary Geology
243–244: 70–88.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sedgeo.2011.11.002
Goff, J.,J.P. Terry,C. Chagué-Goff &K. Goto.
2014. What is a mega-tsunami? Marine Geology
358: 12–17.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.margeo.2014.03.013
Haflidason, H.,R. Lien,H.-P. Sjerup,
C.F. Forsberg &P.K. Bryn. 2005. The dating
and morphometry of the Storegga Slide. Marine
and Petroleum Geology 22: 123–36.
https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-044694-3.
50014-7
Hijma, M. 2009. From river valley to estuary: the
Early–Mid Holocene transgression of the
Rhine-Meuse valley, the Netherlands (Netherlands
A great wave: the Storegga tsunami and the end of Doggerland?
© The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Antiquity Publications Ltd.
1423

Geographical Studies 389). Utrecht: Koninklijk
Nederlands Aardrijkskundig Genootschap.
Hijma, M.P. &K.M. Cohen. 2010. Timing and
magnitude of the sea-level jump preluding the
8200 yr event. Geology 38: 275–78.
https://doi.org/10.1130/G30439.1
–2019. Holocene sea-level database for the
Rhine-Meuse Delta, the Netherlands:
implications for the pre-8.2 ka sea-level jump.
Quaternary Science Reviews 214: 68–86.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quascirev.2019.05.001
Hill, J.,G.S. Collins,A. Avdis,S.C. Kramer &
M.D. Piggott. 2014. How does multiscale
modelling and inclusion of realistic
palaeobathymetry affect numerical simulation of
the Storegga Slide tsunami? Ocean Modelling 83:
11–25.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocemod.2014.08.007
Hill, J.,A. Avdis,S. Mouradian,G. Collins &
M. Piggott. 2017. Was Doggerland
catastrophically flooded by the Mesolithic
Storegga tsunami? 1–18. Available at:
arvix.org/abs/1707.05593 (accessed 21
September 2020).
Kulkarni, R.,N. Zimmerman,T. Lanckriet &
A. Breugem. 2017. Inundation risk due to a
landslide-generated tsunami in the North Sea,
in C. Dorfmann & G. Zenz (ed.) Proceedings of
the 24
th
TELEMAC-MASCARET User
Conference, 17–20 October 2017, Graz, Austria:
23–29. Graz: Verlag der Technischen Universität
Graz.
Leary, J. 2015. The remembered land: surviving
sea-level rise after the last Ice Age. Debates in
archaeology. London: Bloomsbury.
Long, D. 2018. Cataloguing tsunami events in the
UK, in E.M. Scourse, N.A. Chapman,
D.R. Tappin & S.R. Wallis (ed.) Tsunamis:
geology, hazards and risks (Geological Society
Special Publication 456): 143–65. London:
Geological Society.
https://doi.org/10.1144/SP456.10
Long, D.,D.E. Smith &A.G. Dawson. 1989a. A
Holocene tsunami deposit in eastern Scotland.
Journal of Quaternary Science 4: 61–66.
https://doi.org/10.1002/jqs.3390040107
Long, D.,A.G. Dawson &D.E. Smith. 1989b.
Tsunami risk in North-western Europe: a
Holocene example. Terra Nova 1: 532–37.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3121.1989.
tb00429.x
Lowe, D.J. &W.P. de Lange. 2000.
Volcano-meteorological tsunamis, the c. 200
Taupo eruption (New Zealand) and the
possibility of a global tsunami. The Holocene 10:
401–407.
https://doi.org/10.1191/095968300670392643
McFadgen, B. 2007. Hostile shores: catastrophic
events in prehistoric New Zealand and their impact
on Maori coastal communities. Auckland:
Auckland University Press.
Moe Astrup, P. 2018. Sea-level change in Mesolithic
Southern Scandinavia: long- and short-term effects
on society and the environment. Aarhus: Aarhus
University Press.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
2009. Bathymetric data viewer. Available at:
https://maps.ngdc.noaa.gov/viewers/bathymetry
(accessed 21 September 2020).
Oliver-Smith, A. 1996. Anthropological research
on hazards and disasters. Annual Review of
Anthropology 25: 303–28.
https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.anthro.25.1.303
Peeters, H.P.,P. Murphy &N. Flemming (ed.).
2009. North Sea prehistory research and
management framework (NSPRMF). Amersfoort:
Rijksdienst voor het Cultureel Erfgoed & English
Heritage.
Pingree, R.D. &D.K Griffiths. 1982. Tidal
friction and the diurnal tides on the North-west
European shelf. Journal of the Marine Biological
Association of the United Kingdom 62: 577–93.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0025315400019767
Rowley-Conwy, P. 2011. Westward ho! The spread
of agriculture from Central Europe to the
Atlantic. Current Anthropology 52: 431–51.
Rydgren, K. &S. Bondevik. 2015. Moss growth
patterns and timing of human exposure to a
Mesolithic tsunami in the North Atlantic.
Geology 43: 111–14.
https://doi.org/10.1130/G36278.1
Seneviratne, S.I. et al. 2012. Changes in climate
extremes and their impacts on the natural physical
environment, in C.B. Field et al. (ed.) A special
report of Working Groups I and II of the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
(IPCC): 109–230. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Shennan, I.,S.L. Bradley &R. Edwards. 2018.
Relative sea-level changes and crustal movements
in Britain and Ireland since the Last Glacial
Maximum. Quaternary Science Reviews 188:
James Walker et al.
© The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Antiquity Publications Ltd.
1424

143–59.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quascirev.2018.03.031
Shi, S. &D.E. Smith. 2003. Coastal tsunami
geomorphological impacts and sedimentation
processes: case studies of modern and
prehistorical events. Proceedings of the
International Conference on Estuaries and Coasts:
ICEC-2003, November 9–11, 2003, Hangzhou,
China: 189–98. Zhejiang: Zhejiang University
Press.
Smith, D.E. et al. 2004. The Holocene Storegga
Slide tsunami in the United Kingdom.
Quaternary Science Reviews 23: 2291–21.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quascirev.2004.04.001
Spencer, T.,S.M. Brooks,I. Möller &
B.R. Evans. 2014. Where local matters: impacts
of a major North Sea storm surge. Eos 95: 269–
70. https://doi.org/10.1002/2014EO300002
Sturt, F.,N.C. Flemming,D. Carabias,H. Jöns
&J. Adams. 2018. The next frontiers in research
on submerged prehistoric sites and landscapes on
the continental shelf. Proceedings of the Geologist’s
Association 129: 654–83.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pgeola.2018.04.008
Sugawara, D.,K. Minoura &F. Imamura. 2008.
Tsunamis and tsunami sedimentology, in
T. Shiki, Y. Tsuji, T. Yamazaki & K. Minoura
(ed.) Tsunamiites: features and implications:9–49.
Oxford: Elsevier.
https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-444-51552-0.
00003-5
Törnqvist, T. &M.P. Hijma. 2012. Links between
Early Holocene ice-sheet decay, sea-level rise and
abrupt climate change. Nature Geoscience:
601–606. https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo1536
Torrence, R. &J. Grattan. 2002. The
archaeology of disasters: past and future trends, in
R. Torrence & J. Grattan (ed.) Natural disasters
and cultural change:1–18. London: Routledge.
https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203279533
Waddington, C. &K. Wicks. 2017. Resilience or
wipe out? Evaluating the convergent impacts of
the 8.2 ka event and Storegga tsunami on
Mesolithic of northeast Britain. Journal of
Archaeological Science: Reports 14: 692–714.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jasrep.2017.04.015
Weninger, B. et al. 2008. The catastrophic final
flooding of Doggerland by the Storegga Slide
tsunami. Documenta Praehistorica 35: 1–24.
https://doi.org/10.4312/dp.35.1
Yeh, H. &W. Li. 2008. Tsunami scour and
sedimentation, in H. Sekiguchi (ed.) Proceedings
of the 4
th
International Conference on Scour and
Erosion (ICSE-4), November 5–7, 2008, Tokyo,
Japan:95–106. Tokyo: The Japanese
Geotechnical Society.
A great wave: the Storegga tsunami and the end of Doggerland?
© The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Antiquity Publications Ltd.
1425