Earlier Prehistoric Pottery Production and Ceramic Petrology in Britain 9780860547396, 9781407318509

Table of contents :
Front Cover
Copyright
Contents
Figures
Tables
Preface
Chapter 1: INTRODUCTION: THE TOPOGRAPHICAL AND GEOLOGICAL BACKGROUND
Chapter 2: THEORETICAL APPROACHES
Chapter 3: THWING: THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL BACKGROUND
Chapter 4: THE TYPOLOGY OF BRONZE AGE POTTERY
Chapter 5: TECHNOLOGY
Chapter 6: ARCHAEOLOGICAL EVIDENCE OF POTTERY PRODUCTION
Chapter 7: THE ANALYSIS OF PREHISTORIC CERAMICS
Chapter 8: QUANTIFICATION AND SAMPLING
Chapter 9: ANALYTICAL TECHNIQUES
Chapter 10: RESULTS: EARLIER BRONZE AGE POTTERY
Chapter 11: RESULTS: THWING
Chapter 12: RESULTS: OTHER LATER BRONZE AGE SITES
Chapter 13: CONCLUSIONS
BIBLIOGRAPHY
APPENDIX: PETROLOGICAL RESULTS

Citation preview

Earlier Prehistoric Pottery Production and Ceramic Petrology in Britain Peter Wardle

BAR British Series 225 1992

Published in 2019 by BAR Publishing, Oxford BAR British Series 225 Earlier Prehistoric Pottery Production and Ceramic Petrology in Britain © Peter Wardle and the Publisher 1992 The author’s moral rights under the 1988 UK Copyright, Designs and Patents Act are hereby expressly asserted. All rights reserved. No part of this work may be copied, reproduced, stored, sold, distributed, scanned, saved in any form of digital format or transmitted in any form digitally, without the written permission of the Publisher. ISBN 9780860547396 paperback ISBN 9781407318509 e-book DOI https://doi.org/10.30861/9780860547396 A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library This book is available at www.barpublishing.com BAR Publishing is the trading name of British Archaeological Reports (Oxford) Ltd. British Archaeological Reports was first incorporated in 1974 to publish the BAR Series, International and British. In 1992 Hadrian Books Ltd became part of the BAR group. This volume was originally published by Tempvs Reparatvm in conjunction with British Archaeological Reports (Oxford) Ltd / Hadrian Books Ltd, the Series principal publisher, in 1992. This present volume is published by BAR Publishing, 2019.

BAR

PUBLISHING BAR titles are available from:

E MAIL P HONE F AX

BAR Publishing 122 Banbury Rd, Oxford, OX2 7BP, UK [email protected] +44 (0)1865 310431 +44 (0)1865 316916 www.barpublishing.com

CONTENTS

1 2 3

4 5 6 7

8

9 10 11

12 13

Foreward . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Introduction: The Topographical & Geological Background Theoretical Approaches . . . . . . . . . .. . Thwing: The Archaeological Background ......... The Typology of Bronze Age Pottery. . . .. Techno 1 ogy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Archaeological Evidence of Pottery Production .... The Analysis of Prehistoric Ceramics . . .. . . . . . . Quantification and Sampling. . . . . . . . . ... Analytical Techniques. . . . . . . . . . . . Results: Earlier Bronze Age Pottery. . . .. Results: Thwing. .. . . . . . . . . . . . .... . Results: other later bronze age sites ......... Conclusions. . . . . . . . . . . .... . Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Appendices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

.

.

. 1

•

• 3

. . .

. .

. .

. . . .

11 29 37 55 63 75 87 95 103 109 117 133 139 145

FIGURES Figure Figure Figure Figure

1.1: 1.2: 2 .1: 2 .2:

Figure

2.3:

Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure

2. 4: 2 .5: 3 .1: 4 .1:

Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure

4. 4. 4. 4. 4. 4.

5: 6: 7: 8: 4. 9: 4 .10: 4 .11: 5 .1:

Figure Figure

6 .1: 7 .1:

Figure

7.2:

Figure Figure

10.1: 10.2:

Figure Figure Figure

11.1: 11.2: 12.1:

Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure

12.2: 12.3: 12.4: 12.5: 12.6: 12.7: 12.8:

4.2:

3: 4:

Thwing Location map ................. 4 Simplified clay geology of Yorkshire ....... 6 The direct access zone for the Speeton Clay .... 16 The direct access zone for the outcrop of Malvernian rock . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17 The direct access zone for the secondary deposits of Malvernian rock. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 The direct access zone for the Speeton clay . 20 Frequency distribution of clay procurement . 21 Thwing: The prehistoric phases . 28 Beaker Typoology (from Clarke, 1970) . 38 Frequency distributions of sherd wall thickness for the Durrington Walls and Belle Toute assemblages . 41 Collared Urn typology ............... 42 Food vessel typology (from Gibson, 1978) ..... 44 Bucket Urns and related vessels (from Manby, 1980) .48 Bucket Urns and related vessels (from Manby, 1980) .48 Thwing pottery . 49 Thwing pottery ..... 50 Thwing motifs . 53 Staple Howe . 53 Scarborough . . . . . 53 Examples of thin sections showing pottery manufacture features . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 Thwing: The Pottery Production Pit . 70 Gabroic Pottery fall-off with distance from source . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78 Dendrogram of jars from Weybridge, Runnymede Bridge and Petter's sports field. . ........ 84 Grog tempered sub-fabrics ............. 105 The distribution of earlier Bronze Age pottery with igneous rock fragments .............. 108 Thwing: Clay and temper resources ......... 110 Thwing: Fabric series ............... 114 Staple Howe, Heslerton and Devil's Hill clay and temper resources ..... . .. 118 Staple Howe: Fabric Series .119 Devil's Hill: Fabric Series ... . .121 Heslerton: Fabric Series ... . .123 Scarborough Castle Hill: clay resources .124 Scarborough Castle Hill: Fabric Series .126 Grimthorpe: Fabric Series ..... . .127 The distribution of later Bronze Age and Iron Age pottery with igneous rock fragments ..... .132

TABLES Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table Table

1.1: 1.2: 2 .1: 4 .1: 4 .2: 4. 3: 4. 4: 7 .1: 10.1: 11.1: 11.2: 12.1: 12.2:

Comparison clays of Yorkshire and newer glacial clays Comparison of older of analysis Methods Comparison of food vessel typologies of post Deverel-Rimbury typologies Comparison Origin of motifs variations Chronological of form and decoration Proportion of vessel with on site fabric Grog tempered sub-fabrics Comparison of different void types Thwing: Fabric series Principle and the distance fabrics source to clay in Yorkshire Inter-site trade

8 9

14 43 51 52 54 84 .104 .112 .114 .128 .130

Earlier Prehistoric

Pottery Production

PREFACE. This volume ts virtually the Ph.D thesis: 'Bronze Age Pottery from Eastern Yorkshire: A study of tlie site at Towing and its environs.

published as part of the Thwing Excavation report. However, the remainder is inappropriate for either a 'level 3 or level 4' report, particularly the baclQ!round and national surveys. I decided that publishing my thesis intact was the best option even tliough there would be a small amount of duplication with other publications. This, at least, ensured that it was published relatively quickly and as a coherent volume. There are a number of disadvantages - some areas of research clearly need following up and I hope that these will be become the subject of successive papers. Equally I was required to present many things in my thesis in order to pass the exam whicn would either be presented differently or omitted in a monograph of this type.

An examination of the pottery from the Neolithic

and Bronze Age henge monument and hillfort at Thwtng in the wider context of its production and distribution in Southern Britain ." submitted to the Department of Archaeological Sciences at the University of Bradford in 1991 . The research was initially funded as a Science and Engineering Research Council as a Co operative award in Science and Engineering. This was sponsored by the Prehistoric Research Section of the Yorkshire Archaeology Society: Towing Excavation project, with the approval of English Heritage, their funding body . The award was held from October 1983 to December 1985 and the full time research was carried out in the Postgraduate School of Physics at the University of Bradford : Atlantic Trading Estate management funded Glamorgan - Gwent Archaeological Trust Ltd to excavate, amongst other things, a prehistoric pottery production site. The project was Jointly supervised, with great patience, by Dr Stanley Warren, University of Bradford Postgraduate School of Physics, and Teny Manby, Doncaster Museum.

The principle difference is that in the appendices only summaries of the analytical results are included and fuller accounts can be found in the thesis and the shortly to be published Thwtng excavation report.

The basis of the original research for this monograph meant that that some of it would be

Oxford 8.8.92.

I am grateful to all the people, too numerous to mention, who helped me with both the research and production of this volume . In particular, I would like to thank Diane Williams for her continual and constructive criticism .

1

Earlier

Prehistoric

Pottery Production

Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION: THE TOPOGRAPHICAL AND GEOLOGICAL BACKGROUND 1.1 Introduction Thwtng ts situated on an upland chalk massif known as the Yorkshire Wolds (see Fig 1. 1), an area that has been the subject of intense archaeological study over the last two hundred years . The bulk of archaeological material from eastern Yorkshire comes from this area, and provides both a logical and practical core area to this project. Other sites have been excavated, and material found, tn areas surrounding the Wolds, including the vales of York and Pickering, Holderness, ancI the North Yorkshire Moors. The Humber tn the south provides a natural boundary to the study. Thus the core area of the project ts the Wolds with Holderness, the vales of York and Pickering, and the North Yorkshire Moors being peripheral to it .

A remarkable prehistoric site has recently been excavated tn Yorkshire, known as Paddock Hill, Thwtng or simply Thwtng (National Grid Reference TA 030706). It consists of a later neoltthtc-earlter Bronze Age henge monument that was converted into a hillfort tn the later Bronze Age ( 1200 be). The longevity of occupation, over a millennium, gtves rise to a continuous sequence of ceramics from Grooved Ware and Beaker pottery to post DeverelRimbury ceramics. In southern England there ts a twenty-five year tradition of analysing ceramics from archaeological excavations, out Yorkshire ts not so fortunate. The complexities of glacial drift have, to a large extent, precluded the use of thin section petrology, and this project was conceived as an attempt to investigate the feasibility of ustng petrological anafysis to provenance prehistoric pottery in a complex geological area.

The temporal limitations of the project were fixed by the period of occupation of Thwtng itself, that is circa 2200-800 be. However there are several sites, considered to be slightly later and dated to the first half of the first mill ennium, which are considered to be later Bronze Age by most chronologies. These have been included to provide information about ceramic use after the · decline of Thwtng, although it is argued later that some are contemporary. As the bulk of the ceramic material from Thwtng ts later Bronze Age in date, this project concentrates on the later material from the period 1200-500 be.

A reconsid e ration of the methods and assumptions normally made in ceramic petrology was therefore necessary . Similarly, it was felt that the petrological data should be integrated with technological, typological and functional data about the pottery being considered. Thus this thesis encompasses many disciplines, from traditional archaeology to statistics and computer science - each used in order to fulfil the ori~al aims. Where a method has been adoptea directly from a nonarchaeological dtsctpltne then no discussion ts included about the principles upon which the method is based. Instead, discussion ts restricted to the application of that method to this study.

It was felt that the results of this study should be put into a national context, both tn terms of ceramics and other archaeological evidence. Few attempts have been made to review several of the key areas in the study of prehistoric ceramics. In particular the theoretical basis of ceramic petrology, provenance studies, technology, and the evidence for pottery production have not previously been considered in any detail. Pottery production ts commonly regarded as an activity carried out at every settlement wtthou t producing recoverable archaeologtcal evidence. This thesis attempts to demonstrate that consideration of evidence on a national scale ts vital to any consideration of prehistoric pottery. Reviews are based upon a literature survey of all the major and county archaeological Journals and monographs, though it ts inevitable that

Thwtng is a natural starting point for the study of Bronze Age ceramics in the north of England as no other site has such a large, diverse and above all else, well excavated assemblage of ceramics. It ts the type site for the middle Bronze Age - later Bronze Age pottery tn the north, ~ving rise to pottery 'known as Thwtng Ware. Thus the spatial limitations of this project can be defined in terms of Thwtng's location and its proximity to other contemporary sites.

3

Introduction some evidence wm have been missed. It ts estimated that some 8000 papers were consulted, and of necessity, only a few have been selected for particular reference. The spatial and temporal limitations of these reviews vary; the review of ceramics ts restricted to England and Wales and excludes the Iron Age as inclusion of these areas would greatly have increased the size and scope of the thesis . In contrast the

paucity of published evidence for pottery production technology led to the consid eration of Iron Age and Scottish data in this field. This thesis ts therefore not only an attempt to bring together all the background elem en ts necessary to interpret the data generated, but ts also a review of prehistoric ceramic studies and techniques used tn petrological analysts .

Figure 1.1: Thwing Location map

(}trl

1 ·'

-· I

,,,o,

NORTH SEA

200F t.

'--••

.. 61M.

:~ ,~·~, 400Ft . ~-:122M .

1000 Ft. 0

;i~ 5

305M . 10

:' ·~,...,·:.

·..-~:.-~.-·-· ..... ·39~...~.~

30

Miles

.',,..,-..\

4

Earlier Prehistoric Pottery Production

1.2 The topographical

background would have occurred. This would result in the rejuvenation of valley bottoms, and the creation of valley benches.

Thwtng itself is located upon the Yorkshire Wolds which form the most northerly piece of English chalk country, almost 300km 2 in area, extending from the Humber to Flamborough Head. Technically the Wolds themselves are a dissected plateau and are a striking example of chalk countryside, consisting of steep scarp slopes with gently rolling h1lls in the interior, dissected by deep, often dry, valleys. The Wolds are capped by patches of remnant glacial drift, this mantle increasing in thickness to the sou th-east, with almost continuous cover south of Driffteld.

These three phases of planation essentially gave rise to the current drainage pattern. Virtually all tlie streams are misfits and most of the valleys are dry. Exceptions are the rivers and streams which dissect the western scarp slopes, and some streams in the north-western Wolds which flow on top of clay deposits. Lewin (1969) argues that the valley system originated during the early Tertiary planation and was only modified by the subsequent erosional episodes. Several explanations exist for the formation of the dry valleys (Lewin, 1969):

The form of scarp slope varies considerably (Lewin, 1969), dipping to a hei~t of 100m at its lowest point at Swariland in tne south. On the western margins it reaches a maxim um height of about 270m at South Wold and is generally above 200m until Staxton Wold, from which it declines in height to Humanby where it is masked by glacial drift.

1. The melt-water hypothesis

Reid (1887) suggested that tundra conditions existed during the Devensian glaciation and that the valleys were formed by fluvtal erosion from the melt-water of glaciers.

The variab1lity of the scarp form is due to the presence and exposure of underlying Jurassic rocks which include the Oxford, Ktmmeridge and Speeton Clays. Clays of one sort or another are exposed at every point along the scarp.

2. Subsurface collapse Solution of the chalk by the ground waters can lead to the formation of underground caverns which then collapse. Trollers Gill in West Yorkshire is an example of this, and Clay-with-flints would result from such a process.

Three phases of planation can be recognised on the Wolds plateau, as follows: 1. Pre and early Tertiary Wooldridge and Linton ( 1955) noted that clay-with-flints containing early Tertiary material is associated with this phase of planation. The recognition of clay-with-flints preserved beneath a long barrow at Kilham (Manby, 1976) suggests that they may have been more extensive in the Bronze Age than at present. Mapping of this surface would allow the maximum extent of these deposits to be estimated.

3. Desiccation

Retreat of the scarps causes a massive lowering of the water table - in this model, the valleys would have been formed by streams. 4. Headward erosion

Streams erode weaker rock at the heads of the valleys. Evidence is contradictory for each of these hypotheses. For example the chalk gravels of the valleys at Garton Slack support the melt-water hypothesis. On the other hand, the incidence of river capture suggests that headward erosion may have been important. Finally clay-withflints ts formed as the result of massive solution of chalk.

2. The mid Tertiary Peneplain Wooldridge and Linton (1955) have argued that a hilltop surface exists at about 2'70m which post-dates the Alpine orogeny, and the fact that some Wold summits reach this height suggests that they may be correct. 3. The Early Pleistocene Transgression Sea level fluctuations related to oscillations in ice sheets would have resulted in drowning of the landscape to a height of 70m, but as no marine sedtmen ts have been found in the Wold interior (Sissons, 1954) this surface may not be preserved. During the intervening cold periods a drop in the sea level of about 150m

It is clear that the topography and drainage was broadly the same in the Neolithic and Bronze Age as it ts today. The only exceptions to this are due an increase in run-off caused by cultivation, which in turn has given rise to colluvial and alluvial sediments in the valley bottoms.

5

Introduction

1.3 The geological Yorkshire

background: the clay deposits

of eastern

ability to dtsttngutsh between the different clay sources available in eastern Yorkshire. With the exception of the relatively clean bands of marl occurring within the chalk, these clays can be distinguished by the non-clay components present. The problems of erratics and the very complex drift geology mean, however; that no single rock type ts likely, on its own, to be diagnostic of a particular locality. Tables 1. 1 and 1.2 summarise these differences.

Eastern Yorkshire ts an area consisting essentially of mesozoic and later sedimentary rocks, which are more or less horizontally bedded or very gently dipping. There are virtually no igneous or metamorphic rocks, except the Cleveland dyke in the very north of the county. This ts to be contrasted with the carboniferous and earlier geology of the Pennines and western Yorkshire. Tfie Va1eof York, where predominantly Triassic rocks are found, separates these two very distinct areas.

The following section l!tves a brief the clays, marls and otner materials have been used for potting, without their proximity to archaeological Figure 1.2 shows the extent of tfiese

Here ts not the place to prects the entire geological literature on the Yorkshire Wolds. fnstead, certain aspects which are crucial to later arguments are introduced, particularly the

□

Latustrint Clay

§

Boulder Clay

summary of which could reference to sites, and deposits.

N

1

LJ

Sputon Clay

il]

Kimmtridgt Clay

~

OdorC:Clay 10 km

Figure 1.2: Simplified clay geology of Yorkshire

6

Earlier

1.3.1

Prehistoric

Pottery Production noted that the trace elements in their concentration.

Lower Liassic - Planorbis beds

are highly variable

The lowest Hassie beds are pre-Planorbis, only occurring in the north near Northallerton, where they consist of 12m of bedded shales and clays. Beds of pre-Planorbis and Planorbis limestone form a ridge from North Cave to Market Weighton.

At both the coastal and inland outcrops the Speeton Clay proper is often covered by mud flows. These have the effect of concentrating the finer fractions, hence removing the fossil and glauconite-pyrite components.

1.3.2

1.3.6

Hackness

Beds and Oxford Clay

Ampthilll

Clay-with-flints is normally regarded as being formed by the solution weathering of chalk. On the Wolds, clay-with-flints has been recorded in several locations, including below the Kilham long barrow (Manby, 1976) and beneath the Rudston Roman villa (Steer, 1937). This may indicate that it was more extensive before the advent of deep ploughing . The Yorkshire deposits of clay-with-Hints consist of 70% clay, principally montmorillonite, and a coarser fraction of flint and quartz, the flints being up to 300mm in size. Mathews (1981) divided the clay-with-flints into two types based upon particle size analysis, suggesting the coarser clay-with-flints to be a solifluxion deposit with an aeolian component. The finer clay-with-flints ts much closer in particle size distribution to a brickearth .

Clay

Kimmeridge

1.3.8 Pre-Ipswichian older glacial drift

Cretaceous

- Speeton

Deposits

or

During the Pre-Ipswichian glaciation most of Yorkshire was covered with an ice sheet originating within Britain (Penny, 197 4) . This gave rise to erratics consisting of vein quartz, quartzite, chert and occasional rocks from the Lake District. Such deposits are found on relatively high ground, such as the Triassic islands of the Vale of York, or on the Wolds.

Clay

The Kimmeridge Clay is rar ly seen, as the bulk of it underlies the sediments of the vale of Pickering, although it is exposed along the southern flanks of the Wolds and the Moors. It ts generally unfossiliferous, consisting of a mixture of brown, grey and mottled shales followed by black shales and clays.

1.3.5

and is

1.3. 7 Clay-with-flints

Wright ( 1976) demonstrated the presence of clay deposits, called the Ampthill Clay, within the Corallian series north of Market Weighton and at Melton. They consist of cyclic thin beds of limestone, clay and sandstone. The clay itself is fossiliferous and contains some glauconite.

1.3.4

- Chalk

The chalk is occasionally fltn t bearing interbedded by bands of marl.

In Yorkshire the thick Oxford Clay deposits are replaced by arenaceous beds overlain by grey shales; the Hackness beds. Between Filey and Scarborough the Hackness beds are succ eed ed by 40m of Oxford Clay, which also form s low banks at the foot of the Wolds. The Yorkshire deposits of Oxford Clay can be correlated with the Upper Oxford Clay of southern England (Wright, 1983). The Oxford Clay contains 20% clay - the rest of it is silt and fine sand (Wright, 1983), and along the Wold margins it contains beds of septarian nodules which often yield fine calcite crystals Pyrah ( 1977) notes that this clay was used for brick manufacture up to 1950 when it was replaced by Kimmeridge Clay. The Oxford Clay passes gradually into the arenaceous beds of the Corallian series; the coarser components of the Oxford Clay therefore increase towards the upper margins.

1.3.3

Cretaceous

The basement tills of the coast are correlated with these deposits (Catt and Penny, 1966) which have a very characteristic suite of erratics including those from North Yorkshire, Durham (dolerite) and Scandinavia (rhomb-porphyry, lardalite and larvikite). The Scandinavian erratics are g nerally well rounded suggesting that they have been incorporated from secondarydeposits. This till is essentially de-calcified, with very few limestone or chalk particles remaining.

Clay

The Kimmeridge Clay is overlain by up to 102m of Speeton Clay, which is exposed in coastal sections, particularly the Speeton Gap in Filey Bay. It occurs inland, but not in exposure, along the northern Wold scarp slope, and is com prised of a complex sequence of clays. marls, and shales. Of particular note is the occurrence of glauconite and pyrite in the clays. The composition is variable, with the kaolinite/ilHte ratio decreasing as the beds get younger. The clay fraction generally consists of 80-90% illtte and 10-20% kaolinite (Neale, 1974). It should be

1.3.9

Devensian

deposits

The Devensian glaciation accounts for the bulk of the glacial deposits of Yorkshire, including the Holderness and south Wolds deposits. Most of the erratics are British Carboniferous or Triassic rocks with some rare reworked Scandinavian erratics.

7

OXFORD

KIMMERIDGE

Fauna

LOWER CHALK

CLAY WITH FLINT

OLDER DRIFT

NEWER DRIFT

Off shore basin

ORIGIN Description

SPEETON

Grey silty slightly calcareous

Grey mottled

Bivalves

Ostrea delta

Gryphea

Shaley

Marl

Grey Blue

Till clays

Foraminerfa Molluscs

Pecten Nicula Ammonites Clay 00

~ ....

Minerology

i

Kaolinite

15%

tr

Montmarillonite

85%

28%

~....

42%

;:s

Smecite

.... 0

Chlorite Glauconite Pyrite Siderite

Aplastic Minero logy

Quartz

36%

Quartz Angular Flint

Exotics

Comments

Self firing

Table 1.1:

Comparison

of Yorkshire clays

Quartz Vein Quartz Decalcified sandstone

Quartz

Rhomb porphyry Lardalite Larvikite

Triassic Rocks

Newer

Older

Colour

Erractics

co Erratic Origin

Dimlington

Flamborough

Blue

Greenish

Grey

Decalcified or shelly vein Quartzite Quartz Glauconitic sand

Glauconitic sand

Lake District Locals rare

Grey

Ipswichian (drab)

Devensian (purple)

Chocolate Brown

Pinkish

10 YR 3/2

5 YR 4/2

Hessle Brown

Chalk Silt Shale Sandstone Coal Carboniferous Triassic

Pinkish

Brown

tlJ SYR 4/4

~....

Chalk Flint Sandstone

~

....

1

:r

r:

s

~ Pennine predominates

Scottish predominates

d' .... ....

~ Table 1.2: Comparison of older and newer glacial clays

1 Q.

~....

.... 0 ;::,

Earlier

Prehistoric

Pottery Production

Chapter 2 THEORETICAL APPROACHES 2.1

Introduction Tite ( 1988) warns of the dangers of applying science to archaeology, suggesting that scientists produce naive archaeology and archaeologists naive science, because they do not understand the subtleties of each other's discipline. Arnold (1985) suggests that it is of little value, while Howard ( 1981) suggests that provenance studies are of no value whatever. Gaffney & Gaffney (1987) and Wardle (l 987a&b) outline a more optimistic view.

The rise of New Archaeology 1n the 1970s and 1980s has meant that like all other areas of archaeology, several theoretical approaches to the study of ceramics have been proposed. These range from comprehensive overviews of the relationship of ceramics with cultural process, to specific aspects of analysis. In addition there is a wealth of publications on the theoretical basis for studying trade and archaeology in general. At the same time there was a growing disillusionment with theoretical archaeology amongst professional field archaeologists, who saw the whole exercise as pointless.

2.2 The methodological

problem

Ever since Peacock's ( 1969b) suggestion of specialist production and long distance trade in prehistory, there has been contest and debate (e.g. Blackmore et al., 1979) about the validity of his interpretation. Many archaeologists still find Peacock's interpretations unacceptable, despite the overwhelming evidence he has generated and its agreement with the earlier work of Liddle (1934) and Cornwall and Hodges (1963). Ten years later it provoked three independent reviews, all coming to different conclusions (Wardle, 1987a; Peacock, 1988; Quinnell, 1988). This debate has tended to concentrate on contrasting the traditional archaeological approach to pottery with the evidence of ceramic petrology. Peacock (1979) clearly states that

evidence, 1t is necessary for trade in raw materials to be distinguished from trade in the finished product. If this cannot b~ done then it has to be assumed on the basts of ethnographic evidence that trade in raw materials is very unusual (Peacock, 1979); clearly a dangerous assumption. To assume that pottery should be provenanced to the nearest occurrence of that material is equally dangerous. There are difficulties in detecting trade in raw materials, usually it can only be done if a distinctive clay is mixed or tempered with equally distinctive materials. It would, for example, be virtually impossible to detect the mixing of two glacial clays. This is discussed later with reference to individual examples, particularly the gabbroic day.

"There is a misconception that appears to be gaining ground in certain circles: namely that typological analysis is an alternative to fabric study. In fact the two are complimentary; each providing information with a different emphasis."

Thus one of the few examples of ceramic petrology having an impact on archaeology has led to numerous attempts at its falsification by archaeologists. Therefore 1f an empirical inductive piece of work is unacceptable, then all other probabilistic approaches will be equally unacceptable. This is a problem facing ceramic petrologists.

There is no doubt that gabbrotc clay is a special case, both in terms of the clay itself, its potting properties, petrological fingerprint, the attention that has been paid to it and the way it was used in prehistory. It is therefore a useful case study to test ceramic petrology methodology. In order for ceramic petrology to provide unambiguous

The basis for traditional archaeological classification (typology) is discussed in Chapter four, which sets out the need to define specific questions in order to measure the correct

11

Theoretical Approaches their funding body. The adoption of a scientific method will follow the publtcation of a piece of science that demonstrates the value of a particular technique.

attributes. It follows that scientific studies in archaeology are no different, and that the formulation of a set of questions is a prerequisite for any study. The first post war review paper on the petrological examination of ceramics (Hodges, 1963) sets out just this view:

Innovation comes from the sctenttftc community, not the archaeological community. The scientist is therefore totally dependent upon the archaeologist to pose new questions that can be solved by the appltcation of a new method. This worked well when the questions were obvious, such as ''was pottery traded?" and there was no theoretical basts for archaeological interpretation. It does not work so well 1f the question is "was pottery traded by a gift exchange mechanism or via down the line trade?" The concepts are more complex and more difficult to prove by inductive logic.

"Furthermore the aim of this type of work, in common with all analytical research, is to provide answers to specific questions by comparing one analysis, or group of analyses, with others. This is far too seldom understood by archaeologists generally. There is perhaps nothing more infuriating to the ceramic technologist than to be gtven a single pot sherd and asked to analyse it. Stated in these bald terms this is virtually a meaningless request, for unless the archaeologist is prepared to explain the nature of his problem the ceramic technologist is at a loss to know with what to compare the section he has prepared. Ideally the selection of sherds to be sectioned should, in fact, seldom be left to either the archaeologist or the ceramic technologist alone."

A falsification approach could be taken when archaeologists propose a hypothesis which is tested by science, and this in many ways is how archaeology functions. This approach does allow the application of some stages of an empirical approach and therefore allows the worthwhile application of archaeological science. This ts all very well, but having done this, can the same data be used to construct new paradigms which are better than the previous ones, and gtve archaeologically meaningful information and hence have an impact on the subject? Again the best example is Peacock's work on gabbroic pottery. The difficulty is avoidance of "context conflict" trying to use data out of the context that it was collected so therefore the choice of context is crucial.

Day ( 1990) reports in meticulous detatl the petrology of some Collared Urns and discusses ,the posstbiltties that some may be of non-local ortgtn, setting the falsification case for his own arguments and the probab111stic conclusion to be drawn from this data. Ell1son states in her descriptive discussion of two of the vessels that he thought were imports:

It could be argued that this approach is totally ne~ative in its application to archaeology, to judge by the papers en masse in "Pragmatic Archaeology: Theory in Crisis?" (Gaffney & Gaffney, 1987). It ts all too easy to say that there is either too little data to interpret or the data cannot be interpreted at all. The essential suggestion is that everything in archaeology is based upon assumptions that are often impossible to test. This is clearly a danger and should be avoided. The application of falsification, which is a key part of any empirical inductive science, has to be taken in perspective; it cannot be totally destructive.

"There ts evidence of local manufacture of both forms by the same craftsman and these two vessels from Watnwick do seem to provide clear evidence of such a process'. Similarly Freike and Holgate ( 1990) state that: "As expected the pottery ts locally made, the variations observed are explainable in functional and chronological terms. The latter ts therefore useful tn site interpretation, as was the case tn recent work on the pottery from Borwick in Cumbria (Day, 1988)." Thus not only did the paymasters, the archaeologists, choose to ignore the weight of scientific observation, albeit probabltstic, they used part of the same analytical programme to falsify it. This can be compared with the interpretation of radio-carbon dates discussed in chapter one. In such a situation scientific analysis ts totally fruitless; however good the analysts, all it can ever achieve ts proving the accepted.

This discussion has tried to outline the framework of both this thesis and the analytical work that it contains. It was formulated before, during and after the analytical work, but it arose essentially from trying to deal practically with complex scien tiftc data that did not ft t conventional methodology or interpretation. In many ways this thesis is about the evol u tton of this approach and the falsification of the work that was carried out. The concept of a dynamic theoretical basis ts a key part of a pragmatic approach.

Archaeologists will start using science when they think that it is of value to them, when it can provide the information they need to support their interpretations, or when forced to do so by

The remainder of this chapter tries to outline possible theoretical frameworks for provenance studies using ceramic petrology as a whole, and in particular the present investigation.

12

Earlier Prehistoric Pottery Production

2.3 Theoretical frameworks for ceramic petrology: that ceramic petrology has to answer

questions

A suitable starting point 1n the formulation of a theoretical basis for ceramic petrology is a consideration of the questions that ceramic petrolo~sts have sought to answer in the past. By definition the practitioners must have thought these worthwhile and solvable at the time they were posed.

These questions are dependant upon the underlying assumptions that have been made concerning the basis and nature of pottery production discussed in the following chapters. Williams is possibly guilty of falling into the trap that Hodges (1963) suggests for the ceramic technologist:

Wlll1ams (1979) clearly listed the questions that a ceramic petrologist should answer for a given site, but not the questions an archaeologist should ask the ceramic petrologist, or the questions that the ceramic petrologist and archaeologist together should ask about pottery. The questions Williams posed are as follows:

"that they may equally make a selection of different body fabrics from a group while remaining unaware that each body fabric belongs to a different stylistic group."

1. What are the range

and variations mineralogical compositions used manufacture of the pottery?

In more stating sampling questions

of the in the

modern terms, Hodges was essentially that the choice of technique and strategy are also dependant upon the that are being posed.

A variety of scientific techniques are available for the study of pottery (Peacock, 1970). They can be used to measure different, but overlapping, attributes and therefore define and limit what questions can be asked. The methods and the attributes they measure are listed in table 2. 1. All of these methods have been successfully used to answer specific questions , on their own and together with other techniques . Hand specimen analysis encompasses the traditional typological study of pottery which is often excluded from scientific study. However, it is necessary to integrate typology with scientific data (and vice versa), as both these attribut es are nearly always essential to any ~tudy of pottery. This view is not shared by all, WHliams (1989) regards form and decoration as being of "secondary importance" to the ceramic petrologist. Peacock ( 1979) warns against not working within a traditional typological framework, and more to the point that petrology and typology are complementary, not alternative, techniques. His work has demonstrated on many occasions that a petrological definition of typology is more useful than one based simply upon form. Peacock's classic works on the Malvernian, Gabbroic, and Glastonbury ( 1968, 1969a, 1969b) were all carried out in the first instance within a strict typological framework.

2. What changes occur in mineral composition used during the history of the site? 3 . If the differences in mineralogical composition can be related to typological groupings, do they reflect the various cultural phases of the site? 4. Can the mineralogy of the pottery be tted down to a specific geological environment? 5. Does the geological information on the choice of a particular clay or temper reflect the underlying organisation of pottery manufacture for that particular type of fabric? These questions are different to those posed in the present study, they miss the cr~cial points of scale and contact between different human groups. Williams also seems to be assuming that all pottery production was entirely local. Williams is referring to a sinjVe "site", not to a social-economic system whidi is both complex and dynamic, with activity taking place at a variety of locations. Equally WHliam's questions are only appropriate to a settlement, not a burial site.

The same philosophical arguments about typology discussed in chapter four apply to determining methodology in archaeological science . This point is worth repeating. The choice of which attributes to measure entirely depends upon the questions that are being asked; i.e. which are going to be essential and which are going to be irrefevant (Clarke, 1968). For example, pottery is an inessential attribute in this study because only pottery is being considered. Scientific analysis is measuring different attributes to those of traditional pottery studies, and therefore it is just another facet of typology.

The term "cultural phases" is totally inappropriate since it infers that ceramics only changed with culture. He ts possibly confusing the terms cultural with constructional or more correctly stratigraphic phases, and therefore with question 2 . A more correct approach would be to use the objective that Clarke used in his classification of Beakers; the successful detection of human groups. This question is the nearest Williams gets to considering the possib111ty of trade - he perhaps thought it irrelevant to ceramic petrologists.

13

I

Theoretical

Approaches

I

Attributes

Method

I

Hand specimen

fabric, Form, decoration, and method of manufacture

Microscopy

Method of manufacture fabric

Petrological Qualitative

microscopy

Quantitative Chemical X-ray

X-ray

Bulk chemical

Fluorescence

Neutron

Chemical fabric

Activation Diffraction

Scanning

Method of manufacture Mineralogy of aplastics of

Amount and size aplastics analysis

composition

composition

of

Chemical composition trace elements

of

Clay mineralogy Firing temperature

Electron

Firing temperature Clay mineralogy

Microscopy

Mode of deposition quartz (A)

Heavy Mineral

Mineralogy a plastics

X-Ray Radiology

Method of manufacture

Mossbauer

Firing

PIXE

( B)

OES

Bulk Chemical

A: Wardle B: Tite

& Warren

(1986)

Methods of analysis

14

of

of some

Temperature

(1989) Table 2.1:

and

Analysis

Earlier Prehistoric

Pottery Production Malvernian pottery, illustrating the point that classifications are dynamic not static.

In most sctenttftc studies the traditional types of analysts are carried out by the "archaeologist" who then poses specific questions to be answered by the "scientist". For example, was Iron Age Duck Stamped Pottery manufactured at one particular place? In this case typology was an inessential attribute because the pots considered had the same typological attrtbu tes they were Duck Stamped Pots. This study showed that generally this attribute was redundant and could be replaced by the term Malvernian, which described the place of manufacture and fabric, not the decoration. Thus a typology was in use based upon a "scientific" attribute. Further work has now shown that there is non-Ducked Stamped

2.4 The limitations

The sampling strategy was quite simple; the target population was closely defined and small, consisting entirely of Duck Stamped Pottery. Hence it was possible to analyse virtually the whole study population. Several questions were not answered, the most important of which was: were other types of pottery made at the same time at the same place? Others include the mechanism by which the pottery was traded; why was it traded, and what did this trade signify? All are valid archaeological questions that archaeologists try and answer using typology.

of ceramic petrology 2.4.1 zone

The resolution possible with petrology is usually considered to be a function of the "distinctiveness of the geology involved and on the choice of and methods of preparation of clay used in manufacture" (Williams, 1979).

The size of the direct access

The size of the direct access zone for raw materials defines the resolution possible in petrological provenance studies. The absolute size of the direct access zone is a function of the nature, number and extent of clay and temper resources and the maxim um distance of raw material procurement. If raw material homogeneity is assumed, then it will not be possible petrologically to disttngutsh the products of two or more known production centres within the direct access zone. If the location of production centres is not known, then trade cannot be dtstin~ished from direct access to the raw materials. Six kilometres is the accepted maxim um distance for raw material procurement (Wardle, 1987a).

There ts an implicit assumption that petrology seeks to provenance sherds to a geological environment, not a production source. Williams (1979) states in his list of questions outlined earlier, that one question the petrologist should answer is: can the mineralogy of the pottery be tied down to a specific geological environment? This approach is based upon the idea that pottery is a rock and can be treated in the same way. Williams (1983a). for example, suggests that: "Indeed, to the ceramic petrologist a sherd of pottery can be regarded as a metamorphosed sedimentary rock, for the fabric of a sherd consists principally of elastic 12:rains held in a clay matrix, both partially altered during firing."

Geological sources are not point sources, but cover an area which depends upon the local geological and geomorphological situation. For example, Speeton Clay outcrops as a thin band at the base of the Wolds scarp and tn a cliff section at Speeton itself. The total area over which it is exposed amounts to about 2km 2 ; effectively a point source, or more precisely a linear source. The size of the access zone to this clay, assuming 6km maximum procurement distance, ts 300km 2 and the maximum possible distance between po ten ttal prod uctton sites which could not be distinguished by petrology is 38km (see Figure 2.1).

In petrographic terms this is correct, but there again uftimately everything is a collection of molecules and the same type of argument could be used to suggest that the study of Descartes' "Discourse on method" ts a branch of nuclear physics. This view of pottery as a rock divorces the thin section from the vessel from which it was taken, and therefore the people who made and used it. Mortimer Wheeler ( 1954) reminded everybody that "we are digging up people not things". This raises the possibility that some geological techniques may not be wholly applicable to the study of prehistoric pottery. Trade in raw material (discussed in chapter seven), for which there ts no geological equivalent, defeats this conventional approach to archaeological ceramic petrology.

The situation ts worse for tern per sources, which can occur as pebbles in secondary deposits such as streams. For example, Malvernian rock, another linear source, has a direct access zone, ignoring secondary deposits and assuming a 6km maxim um procurement distance, covering about 13km 2 (see Figure 2.2). However, fragments of Malvernian rock can be found in streams 10km from its outcrop, therefore the direct access zone covers an area about 33km by 45km ( l 440km) 2 , with a maxim um distance between production sites of 46km. Therefore the area to which this rock ts being provenanced ts

15

' 'I

'I

I

I

I I

>-

~

I I

I /

u

C: 0

~

I

QI QI

I I

c.. Vl

I

□. .

/

''

/

''

/

/

/ /

',

______ .,,.'

...... ..._

'

/

/

E

e

.x

.:i:::

- - - ------

....

-.,D

0

.......

.,,,... /

/

'

......

'

/

/

/

I

\

I I

\

E

\

...:x:::

I

\

,,,,.-._-------.....,

I I

~

'\\

\\

~-·.-...... \.

·:.

.........

..

\

\

\

' \

"\

\.

\

\

', ',.....

\

/

\

',

I I I

I

.\

\

I I

\

I I

I

I

I

l

\

\

\

\ \

\

\

\

'

, J

\ \

'

I

\

\

\

\

\

\

I I I

',

\

\

\

\

\

\

\

\

\

\

\

\

\

\

\

\

0

I I

I I

I I

I \

I I

I

I

(

\ \ I

\

I

I I I I

\

\

/

\

'

' \. \

\.

\

,

\ \ \

\ _____ ,. I

I

I

\

I

I I

I

\

I

\ \

I

16

I

QJ

~

..

..-4

Earlier Prehistoric

Pottery Production

N

/

------

,,,,

i

.......

/

......

''

/

I

I I

'

\

\

,.- ....,

I I

I

I

I

'

'

I

I I I

(

\

\ \

\ \ I

I

I

,,

I

,

I

I

'

I

I

I

I I I I

I

I I

I

I I

I I

I

I

I

I

I

,, , ,,

I /6km

\I 1km

I

I I

I I

I I

I

I I

~ ·

I

I I

' J I,

'\

\

\

\

10km

I

' ,

I I I I

I

\ \

\

I

\

I I

' ,_.,, /

\

I \

'' 0

\

I I

'

......

........._

/

/

------/ .,,,,,,,,.

MALVERNIAN ROCK

Figure 2. 2: The direct access zone for the outcrop of Malvern1an rock

17

Theoretical

Approaches

N

i

10 km

I

0

MALVERNIAN

ROCK Figure 2.3:

I

I I \ \ \ \

The direct access zone for the secondary deposits of Malvernian rock 18

Earlier Prehistoric the drainage basin immediately surrounding Malvern Hills (see Figure 2.6).

Pottery Production reduced in size to 52km 2 , with a maximum distance between production sites of 28km . Trade between sites within this band cannot be detected; in other directions there ts a much higher resolution. Outside the direct access zone imports can be detected, even if a precise production site cannot be established (see Figure

the

Pebbles of Malvernian rock have been found at Atlantic Trading Estate, Barry, South Glamorgan, associated with prehistoric pottery production; a distance of about 120km from the outcrop. It could be argued that the direct access zone for Malvernian rock is the en tire Severn-Wye drainage basin, covering an area of 9900km 2 • These examples make the figure of 20km suggested by Arnold ( 1985) for the resolution of ceramic petrology seem rather optimistic.

2.4).

There is some Justification for this approach; Arnold (1985) suggests that potters prefer to obtain raw materials within 1km. It can be argued, using least cost analysis, that production centres are located on or near clay sources. Nicklin ( 1979) argues against this however, suggesting that nearest market is a more important factor.

If these

examples represent the best possible situations, with point or linear sources containing distinctive raw materials, then characterisation studies will fail to detect the bulk of trade, and therefore will concentrate on long distance trade that will always be, by definition, across social boundaries. For exam pie there is no obvious supply zone/direct access zone for neolithic gabbroic pottery, although there is in the Bronze Age.

Arnold's ethnographic study shows that 32% of potters obtain their clay, and 50% their temper, within 1km (Figures 2.5, 2.6, 2.7 and 2.8). At 2km the figures are 52% and 64% respectively. This distribution is following a negative exponential fall off with distance, and is therefore conforming to the least cost model, in effect a poisson distribution. The 6km distance is therefore clearly pessimistic and a reduction in this figure is Justified. The effect of this would be to exponentially increase resolution (see the 1km line on Figures 2 . 1, 2.2 and 2.3).

Thus definitions of fabric in terms of geological provenance, with a maximum raw material distance of 6km, are wholly inappropriate for studying the bulk of trade, even if the raw materials are highly distinctive with a limited outcrop. All that will ever be concluded for prehistoric Britain is that raw materials are locally available and there is no trade in ceramics, and therefore no point in ceramic petrology. Ceramic petrology will virtually always be proving the obvious: every site was producing its own pottery.

The mean distance for clay procurement is 4.6±0.5km, and 3 . 1± 1.6km for temper. Cut off points could be chosen at one, two or three standard deviations. In subsequent analysis the likelihood of trade could be assessed in a probabilistic way using a Student's t test.

The figure of 6km for the maxim um distance for raw material procurement has been set somewhat arbitrarily, based upon empirical ethnographic observation. It will be argued in chapter seven, with reference to gabbroic pottery, that this is a dangerous assumption, since there is ethnographic and archaeological evidence for long distance procurement. This therefore removes the remaining archaeological validity of conclusions drawn from ceramic petrology.

Examples of long distance procurement, stressed in this thesis, will have an effect of disproportionately increasing the value of a mean distance in this situation. In these cases the least cost law clearly does not apply. Arnold ( 1985) suggests a maxim um distance of 9km before it becomes uneconomical to manufacture pottery. Long distance procurement could be due to special potting properties or "ritual", that is non-functional, reasons. Arnold ( 1985) argues that it is time distance, not geodetic distance, that is important; moving clay by canoe is easter than by foot. He also argues that the same amount of labour is expended by visiting a distant clay source twice a year or a near source regularly. Calculation of a mean distance from his data is therefore clearly an over estimate.

Clearly, non-empirical alternatives have to be sought and there are a number of possibilities. Arnold ( 1985) argues that technological features, form and decoration have an important part to play in provenance studies as well as petrology.

2.4.2

The probabilistic

It can be argued that the distance/frequency distribution presented in Figures 2.5-2.9 represent a poisson distribution at small distances and a normal distribution at great distances, due to the above processes. These two populations could be separated at 16km and the mean recalculated. This evidence can be com pared with the distance to clay sources for archaeological production sites cited in chapter six and that suggested from petrological evidence in chapter seven .

approach

A probabilistic approach could be taken based upon the survey of ethnographic evidence presented by Arnold ( 1985), and the archaeological evidence presented in this thesis. This would be a logical progression from a wholly empirical science to a probabilistic one . If the maxim um distance of raw material procurement is normally less than 1km a much more optimistic resolution is possible . In the case of the Spee ton Clay the access zone is

This whole approach assumes that there is a clay deposit within a given distance, and that

19

N

t .,,,,..,...--

I

I

I

I

I

/

~

'

'

'

'\.

I

\

\

;t 0 ;

\

('D

/

,/ / .,,,_,,. / _1 _,.,~:.: ·.~,_....- - - .,,..,,. .,,..,,.----

~-

\ ,.

,::.

.....

\\

(")

\

~

v,3;22

0

(

'

I

,_ ---

---' '

I

::t ('D GI

\

~

''

' .....

_.,,.---

.,,./

-__

I /

.,,,,,,,,,,.,,,,.,,,,,

□

Lacustrine Clay

§

Boulder Clay

l\fj{[I Speeton Clay 0

Figure 2.4:

~

I \\ '

The direct access zone for the Speeton and other clays

'J! a

10km

[ill Kimmeridge Clay

Earlier Prehistoric

Pottery Production

lt~

jij

i~

, JU u

'u w

'' j

~ ~

~

C V

1~

'I U

~

rn

~

~

~

~

l~ll l~-U l~U Distance (kt-1)

H

Figure 2.5: Frequency distribution procurement

t~

m

l~-1'

~J

H

1~11 1~-1' ,~?!

Figure 2.6: Frequency distribution distance for temper procurement

of distance to clay

m

Distance (k11)

of

iOO:

:ro. ,0:

'

"

:,

:,

10

r.t

u

C

u

70:

a

a

,o:

" II. I.

II.

.,''

... .,

'

t

C II

II I. II

'

...

~ ...

..:, C

40 JO:

j

:,

:,

t.)

(J

·O: 1.0

m

-o: 5.0

10,0

10.0

15.0

Distance

!~.0

l.0

;0.0

Figure 2. 7: Cumulative frequency distribution distance for clay procurement

5.0

10.0

Distance

(kt'I)

15.0

(kn>

20.0

l'..0

Figure 2.8 Cumulative frequency for distance to temper procurement

of

21

Theoretical

Approaches applying his work to archaeology and Williams is a geologist applying geological technique to archaeology. This is a clear example of context conflict.

there are no alternative clay sources. To use the Speeton Clay as an example, there are alternative sources of clay at a maximum distance of 1.5km from the outcrop (see Figure 2.4). It could be suggested that the maximum distance for procurement is 750m, and that the direct access zone covers an area of 36km 2 • This in turn suggests that the distance of 5. 2km at three standard deviations can also be pessimistic in some circumstances, and more to the point indicates that general models are not applicable. Similarly it could be argued that different clays have different potting properties and therefore this also controls procurement distance, and the position of such boundaries should be weighted.

Howard (1981) applied the ecological approach to a case study based upon Windmill Hill; she termed this "ceramic technological ecology". This sought to establish the "versatility of pottery in providing archaeological information" rather than simply linking an archaeological site to a geological outcrop; i.e. mapping fabrics. She argues that: "The third reason why British workers should be reluctant to undertake production studies ts geology. It is generally assumed that pottery vessels were made from clays containing natural inclusions determined by the underlying geology. However, ethnographic research fias sbown that clays as dug are seldom used and a form of tern per is usually added. If fabrics do not contain fragments of diagnostic rock further fabric or resource studies are considered to be unproductive."

These factors sug~est that for any given geological situation tfie resolution possible with ceramic petrology must be established in these terms, and will vary with direction. This has been called "cultural ecology" (Howard, 198 la; Arnold, 1985). ·

2.4.3 The cultural ecological approach The basis for this approach Arnold (1985):

is summarised

by

This is just a reiteration of the limitations of petrology originally suggested by Peacock ( 1968), with the inference that analytical techniques other than optical petrology may be needed. Howard sought to survey resources available, establish which were used and consider the technology of paste preparation. She established that there was a relationship between fabric and function; specific recipes being used, for example for cooking pots, which in turn was related to the suitability of that recipe for cooking pots. She also demonstrated that six suitable clays were available within 7km of the site. She concluded that two groups of potters were operating within the Windmill Hill area, responsible for most of the non-imports (that is, non-gabbroic pottery).

"Since ceramics are one kind of exploitative technology, an ecological approach to ceramics should first analyse the relationship between the ceramics to the other subsystems of culture like the social and belief subsystems. Indeed, the environmental relationship with ceramics has more potential for generalisation at this time than relationships of ceramics to other aspects of culture. Once such relationships are understood, one can then examine how the ideological and social structure subsystems articulate with ceramics."

This work serves to demonstrate that even a careful consideration of the local geology may not improve the resolution possible with optical petrology. It could be argued that within the current theoretical archaeological framework, optical ceramic petrology and provenance studies are of little or no value to archaeology.

It is therefore no surprise

that he concluded that petrological study is of secondary 1m portance to the study of form and decoration. Arnold's view is the antithesis of William's view. It could be that this reflects the cultural context in which each of them works - Arnold is an ethnographer

2.5

Definitions

of "fabric" and "a fabric"

Given that there appears to be a prevailing view in archaeology that ceramic petrology is of little value, it is perhaps appropriate to start from first principles in the formulation of a theoretical framework. Gaffney ( 1986) suggests that considering the basic building blocks of archaeology ts a vital part of the development of a theoretical approach.

2.5.1

Fabric as composition

Despite having been referred to many times in this thesis, the term fabric has yet to be defined. Literally it means the material of which ceramics were made (Peacock, 1970). The prevalent archaeological usage of the term fabric is a way of inferring composition, for example for a sandy fabric, rather than actually describing it. It can also be used as a term for variables that imply composition, referring to such things as colour .

22

Earlier

Prehistoric

Pottery Production

It is common amongst Roman pottery specialists to talk in terms 01 fabric being a synonym for colour, suggesting that fabrics are red or grey for example.-While colour may be related to composition, what is being said under such a definition is that this sherd is made from clay which has turned red upon firing, which is a function of mineralogical composition.

"diagnostic" materials in them are classified, or put another way the vessels with non-diagnostic aplastics are thought to be locally made . It is appropriate for studying a portion of pottery in isolation from the remainder of the assemblage. Mineralogical composition is the common denominator to all of the questions that Williams {1979) suggested a petrologist should answer. Therefore it would be logical to make variations tn mineralogical composition the basts of the definition of a fabric type, which is entirely in accord with the above definition of fabric.

It is generally unknown for archaeologists to refer to fabrics such as kaolinite fabrics - that is, the mineralogy of the predominant and essential component of the pottery, the clay. In fact, in common archaeological usage, fabric is used as synonym for the composition of the non-clay components of pottery. This is due largely to historical reasons, in that traditionally pottery has been considered in terms of its visible components. In many ways this is realistic given the difficulties in identifying clay mineralogy .

If the objectives of this study are accepted Un essence the detection of human groups) as a general model for ceramic petrology or pottery studies in general, then trying to achieve a simplistic definition of a fabric in terms of variation of composition is unacceptable. Production sources are ignored.

Thus pottery fabric could be defined as the nonclay mineral and organic composition of the material from which pottery was made . However, the only acceptable definition of fabric is something more general, such as the material from which the pottery was made; this is the definition used in this thesis. In strict terms it does not infer any information about technology and hence colour is irrelevant, Just like vessel form or decoration. Thus terms such as wheel made fabrics , red fabrics or decorated fabrics are avoided. Having defined what th e fabric of pottery actually is, a definition of a single fabric must now be sought.

2.5.2 Definition fabric

If the opposite

assumption is made, that is all production sites are known, which might be appropriate for the Roman period in Britain, then a different definition will result. It might be better to define a fabric as the recipe used at one production site and characterise 1t as such. It therefore follows that we must be clear about precisely what is being studied and why . The essential point is that a fabric is a characterisation; a fingerprint that allows the classification of a particular sherd to a production site, geological environment or archaeological region.

of a single pottery

2.5.3

Types of characterisation

It has

already been stated that the fabric of pottery is made up of two components, clay and added temper. This can be r efined , since pottery is made up of the following:

Given the above definition of fabric , then a single pottery fabric could be defined as a different composition, mineralogical or chemical, used to make pottery. Peacock (1969b) uses a Clarkian type definition and defines a fabric as a useful division of pottery composition data. This could be taken further if the purpose of this study was simply provenance . Therefor e if only the mineralogical and chemical constituents are considered, a fabric can be defined in terms of a combination of diagnostic minerals, rocks and elements which allow a sherd to be provenanced. Once these diagnostic constitu ents have been identified , then only these need to be considered further. Unfortunately this logic has several flaws:

1. plastic clay 2 . non-plastic 3. naturally minerals 4. deliberately

non-clay

added aplastics.

It is to be hoped that tern per will be readily distinguishable from the aplastics which occur naturally in the clay ustng one of the following parameters; size, shape, composition and concentration. This will be discussed tn some detail in chapter five. For example , grog must have been added as a tern per as it is man made. In effect we are ana1ysing two separate . compositional populations, a natural component and a man made component. It follows , therefore, that there are three possible types of characterisation:

1. It is assumed that all production sites are known and therefore all fabrics are known . 2. It assumes

minerals clay minerals occurring non-plastic

that fabrics are homogeneous.

3. It assumes that the diagnostic indicators are present in every sherd .

1. clay characterisation 2. temper characterisation 3. clay and temper characterisation.

This represents a classification of simply what the pottery is made of, and hence according to a Clarkian view of classification must be useful, and is therefore related to the questions that are being posed. Effectively only vessels with

This may or may not be important , depending upon the objectives and more to the point the material itself .

23

Theoretical Approaches Each of these types of classification may be useful in different circumstances, but the way they are treated and the assumptions that are made will be different. For example only clay characterisation can be used to identify a clay source, or similarly temper characterisation is used to provenance the tern per. These exam pies may seem obvious but in practice they are difficult to apply, and the usual situation is that clay and temper characterisation is used without an assessment of the validity of this assumption. The assumptions that are made depend on how important this division of characterisation is considered to be. These will affect not only the method of analysis but also the limitations of the eventual interpretations. If the clay and temper were obtained at the same locality then the results will be the same in terms of provenance for all three methods and will therefore be irrelevant. If, at the other extreme, there has been trade in raw materials , then an understanding of what has actually been analysed will be crucial to the interpretation of the same analytical data. Equally if there are regional preferences for the selection of a particular temper, such as that suggested for the later Bronze Age by Ellison ( 1980), then using tern per characterisation alone would suggest a pattern of entirely localised production and no trade (apart from between the different regions if they have different tempers), or entirely centralised production. The analysis has therefore failed to answer even the most basic question that the ceramic petrologist should answer. It should be noted that the detection of regional preferences in temper constitutes valuable information in its own right, telling us a great deal about the organisation of that society, but not about the detail of where pottery was being produced. It may indicate tribal grouping, the temper being a symbol of group unity, and in this instance it would be irrelevant if production was local or centralised. It would be hoped that these differences do not simply reflect what is commonly available for pottery production. The point is that this is an example of compositional data suggesting non-provenance information, i.e. archaeological information.

The definition of fabric is also controlled by practical considerations , for example it must be recognisable, and be sufficiently homogeneous for an unknown sample to always (or in say 95% cases) be assigned to that fabric . These practical considerations make fabrics useful divisions, and therefore they too are controlled by the questions that are being asked. For example, reference has already been made to different mineralogical recipes being used in different parts of a vessel, and thus under the above definition two or more fabrics are present in the same vessel. If the rim and body sherds are found separately and cannot be joined then under the above definition a different provenance would be inferred. The definition of fabric must therefore take this into account. It could be argued that fabric cannot be defined in terms of composition if different sherds from

the same vessel cannot be assigned to the same fabric and therefore provenance. It follows that in such cases fabric study has no meaning. Similarly it may be easiest to define a fabric based upon the presence of somethinR; distinctive, for example a fragment of exotic rocl< like Lizard gabbro. However, if that rock is only present in very small quantities then it may not occur in every sherd and may not be in every thin section, and so cannot be used to characterise a particular fabric. It can be seen that no general definition of what constitutes a fabric can be attempted, as it will vary from study to study and material to material. Given that prehistoric production centres have not been generally recognised, it is difflcul t to assess the assumptions which could be used to characterise a fabric for this analytical context.

The degree to which temper can be detected therefore defines the limitations of the reliability of the results. This argument leads back to the discussion about sampling strategy and the questions that are being posed. If the sample unit is a fabric, and in turn the definition of fabric is also dependant upon these questions, then the argument to an extent is entirely circular.

2.6 Theoretical

The definition of a fabric depends upon the assumptions that are made, and at the same time defines these assumptions. Peacock's ( 1979) suggestion that a fabric is a useful division of pottery is a realistic one, even if it is a somewhat arbitrary definition. This is in accordance with Clarke's hypothesis that a typology must work. It follows that a useful division will be one which answers the questions that are being asked of the data. If the questions posed are always the same, then the definition of fabric will remain constant. For exam pie, if the desired result is the isolation of one workshop's products, and the assumption is made that a constant mix was used to obtain a constant product, then clay and temper characterisation would be appropriate . If however the source of the raw materials is sought, then clay and temper must be considered separately.

basis for trade

A different approach is to consider the various models for trade that have been proposed, to see

if they can help validate some assumptions and help in the formulation of some of these

24

Earlier Prehistoric

Pottery Production

definitions. The models for trade that are st111 prevalent in archaeology have arisen from scten ttflc charactertsa tton and are interpretations of that data. The key model ts the one formalised by Renfrew (1975), who states that trade ts "the mutual appropriate movement of goods between hands. This movement need not be over any great distance and may operate within social units (internal units) or across cultural boundaries." He further stresses that trade ts the key approach to the study of the origins of civ111sations and states, because trade implies organisation and social order. Both Renfrew (1975) and Clarke (1978) state that it is unimportant whether raw materials or finished product were traded. The key to these models in trade was that the frequency decayed with distance. This was a pattern that emerged from characterisation studies. The law of monotonic decrement was formed:

This is perhaps developed.

a theme

that

should

be

Transport costs form part of the value of an object. An object may be valuable simply because it has been transported a long distance, for example, a Jadeite axe. The greater the distance to the manufacturing source the greater the transport cost, and therefore the greater the cost of the object. It follows that absolute frequency wtll decrease with distance. The exception to this is when transport costs are small compared to the overall cost of the object. It ts this ratio which controls the extent of the supply zone.

2.6.1

The economic approach

Archaeological theory can be used to demonstrate that the mapping of the petrological distributions is meaningless, except in exceptional conditions, usually involving exotic raw materials and long distance trade via middlemen. An alternative approach to using archaeological theory is to build a theory for investigating ceramics, rather than falsifying the interpretation of scientific analysis. It can be argued that:

"In circumstances of uniform loss or deposition and in the absence of highly organised directional (that ts preferential, non homogeneous) exchange, the curve of frequency or abundance of occurrence of an exchanged commodity against effective distance from a localised source will be a monotonic decreasing one."

1. All types of trade produce

fall off in quantity with distance, but in several stages relating to the distribution mechanism . .

2. What is being mapped is discard rate, not use rate, and therefore at the manufacturing centre maximum discard will occur due to the fact that manufacturing waste will be discarded, as well as the use waste of a commonly available material .

Variations in the form of this curve are used to distinguish different types of trade. Renfrew form ufated ten types of trade, although many were simply stating where the trade took place. For example, home base reciprocity, boundary reciprocity, down the line trade and central place market exchange are all examples of direct contact trade. If discard occurs at place of use, not place of exchange, then these different patterns cannot be distinguished from one another. In addition we cannot resolve what the quantitative relationship between direct contact and trade is. The amounts traded will be in relation to need and availabiUty; Just because A ts trading pots, it does not follow that B will be trading pots back. The reverse is far more likely. The model for down the line trade su~ests that there is a plateau in the decay rate of quantity with distance, called the supply zone, which ts followed by an exponential fall off or contact zone. The implication ts that within the supply zone the material is freely available, there ts direct trade between the manufacturers and user, while the exponential fall off is implying the existence of middle men who may or may not be specialist traders. Therefore this cannot be distinguished from Renfrew's middle man trading.

3. A manufacturing site may have access to several different clay sources which may be exploited for different purposes. Different manufacturing centres using the same recipes for tbe same type of vessel manufactured in the same way can never be distinguished. The "economic approach" suggests that considering a theoretical ceramically selfsufficient "settlement" may be of use in resolving these difficulties. This involves a group of people living together, producing and using all their pottery made from locally available raw materials. Such a group of people will require the following in order to manufacture pottery: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

An important

issue ts transport cost; Renfrew does argue that sea based trade virtually excludes down the line type of trading, and notes that seas, rivers and deserts are effective barriers to trade. However, sea trade does tm ply trade via a port and the presence of middlemen.

the desire the ability a suitable a suitable a suitable

Such a ceramics they are ceramics

25

to manufacture pottery to manufacture pottery clay temper material to fire the clay.

settlement will therefore only import 1f they contain a commodity in which not self- sufficient. They will export in two circumstances:

Theoretical

Approaches

1. to a settlement which ts not self-sufficient 2. as a container for a commodity they wish to export.

3. workshop industries where the potters derived most of their income from their potting activities.

The precise trade mechanism ts irrelevant because it produces the same net effect. It also follows that the value of the container ts very much less than the commodity it contains, or that the container will be continually reused.

To these concepts must be added that of localised production and specialist production often referred to in the literature (Cunliffe, 1974b). Localised production is often regarded as a synonym for household production, while long distance trade ts a synonym for specialist production in a workshop ind us try. In order to avoid these implications with household production and use , an alternative term ts generally used; on site production and use. This denotes the situation where the producers of the pottery are also the users. This does not imply that they did not export or import any other ceramics. Localised trade is used to denote the sort of trade that would be expected between a central place and satellite settlements.

If the

same community cannot produce a particular type of vessel because they are deficient in one or more of the above list of prerequisites, then they may wish to import the commodity they are deficient in. If they have the technological expertise but not the raw materials they may import a completed vessel or the raw materials. The choice will depend upon the more likely place of breakage, during firing or manufacture. This can be compared with the trade in stone axes where the most difficult stage, "roughing out" , was carried out at the source of the rock, while polishing took place where the axe was gotng to be used.

Regional trade denotes trade between sites that are linked in some way, such as within a tribal area. Although this implies long distance trade, up to about 40km, the distance is considered unimportant. Hodder (1981) notes that place of manufacture is a strong tribal identifier and thus trade would be expected to occur . Inter regional trade is used to describe trade across some kind of boundary. Long distance trade is reserved for trade between non-adjacent regions. This is an important distinction because it implies the use of middlemen.

In contrast, if the settlement does not have expertise they must import that expertise either in the form of a potter, who may or may not bring his raw materials with him, or in the form of a complete vessel. A non-pottery producing settlement would import all its ceramics. If the manufacturing source ts a self-sufficient group of people, then the importing settlement will obtain a limited range which would mirror that manufacturing source, with the exception of containers received from elsewhere. It would be expected that this entirely imported assemblage would be much smaller than that found at . the manufacturing site. If this framework ts used, then the theoretical composition of an assemblage could be created and then tested by analysts. For exam pie, the analysts of assemblages from ..very important" sites which produced the bulk of their own ceramics would indicate a pattern of localised production by non-specialists . Similarly the analysis of non-producing sites dominated by one such "important site" would also produce evidence of entirely localised production. Thus even 1f production was carried out by specialists, it would not be possible to detect them, particularly where the same raw materials are available over a large area. It also follows that if pottery is going to be assigned to a group of specialist potters then these potters must have been using distinctive raw materials which were restricted to their use. A distinctive manufacturing method, firing temperature, or typology may equally be used to suggest the presence of specialist potters. Peacock ( 1981) defined pottery production: 1. household production

three

categories

A different approach is to divide trade into two types; direct trade and trade via middlemen. This could therefore be used to distinguish the supply zone from the direct access zone; the absolute numbers of discarded vessels will be higher at direct access sites. If the number of manufacturing sites is restricted, the concept of a direct access zone is irrelevant; those sites which where not manufacturing pottery are not part of the supply zone. Th ere are three factors to consider : 1. availability rates 2. take up rates 3. discard rates . Direct trade is the trade between the producer or a member of his comm unity (the two cannot be distinguished), and the user. In this situation either the user goes to the producer or the producer goes to the user, and as stated before the place is irrelevant because the product will be discarded at the place of use not place of trade. Down the line trade is direct trade between two groups , neither being the actual producers.

of

1. Non-specific fabric groups A fabric group can therefore be defined as the grouping of fabrics on the basis of a recurring combination of minerals, which are interpreted as indicative of the use of a particular geological deposit. These may or may not represent the products of a particular workshop and therefore does not imply exact provenance. Account must be

and no exchange

2. household production with exchange - used to supplement income in an otherwise subsistence farming economy

26

Earlier Prehistoric

Pottery Production represents a site specific fabric, even if there is variation in the temper used.

taken of the variation within the geological source of that material. These fabric groups can .be used to detect trade beyond the occurrences of that material.

2.6.2 The criterion of abundance site specific fabrics

2. Specific fabric This is defined as a regularly recurring combination of temper and clay that was used at one particular manufacturing centre. Account is taken not only of variations in source material but also variation in the recipe used. This can only be regarded as uniquely characteristic of that production centre if it can be demonstrated that no other production site was using the same recipe.

The so-called criteria of abundance suggests that a fabric occurs more commonly near its source. This could be extended to define a fabric as a recognisable combination of minerals which predominat e at a particular locality. Thus the products of a particular manufacturing site are defined, as well as a group of sites using similar sources of raw materials in the same manner, and is therefore a combination of the two definitions given above.

3. Site specific non-temper fabrics If it ts found that the non-temper component is always specific to a particular find spot (or less precisely site) within a given area or region, then it can be suggested that the composition of the non-temper component

Under such a definition, more fabrics will be defined as apparent inhomogeneities are recognised, as mor~ material from more sites becomes available for study.

2. 7 Conclusions There are several general trends that can be picked out from the above discussion . Currently archaeologists think that ceramic petrology is of little value to archaeological study. In order for it to be valuable then it must seek to: 1. answer

valid

important

In other words, petrological studies must be fully integrated with other lines of evidence, whatever they are. In the following chapters reference is made to the fact that technology, typology and fabric are retailed, and the need to integrate these variables has been already been emphasised. Perhaps then the erm fabric should be abandoned in favour of an integrated definition of type. Composition ts after all Just one variable of many that can be used to define a type. If the products of a particular potter can be established by using fingerprints, , then all that petrology can con trtbu te is where the raw materials were obtained. It ts highly likely that these were locally available and could be determined without much analysts.

archaeological

questions 2. be carried out within technological framework

a typological

and

3. detect production sites u tiltstng archaeological evidence, which therefore makes the interpretation of petrological data more valid 4. assess the validity of interpretations light of previous analysis.

in the

27

N

t ,.

... -........... ... ... ······... ····· , ..

100m henge ditch

.... .. •'. .. .. . •

. ··.

.~

. •,

·-.. ...·--

Figure 3.1:

Thwing: The prehistoric phases

28

Earlier Prehistoric

Pottery Production

Chapter 3 THWING: THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL BACKGROUND 3 .1 Thwing across the inner ditch. This ditch had been deliberately filled, before the enlargement of the site and sometime before 950±70 be (Har-139 8), by the construction of the box rampart and the oute r ditch .

Thwing ha s been described as a remarkable site (Selkirk, 1977), with its very varied and complex sequence of construction, occupation, and destruction. The site was originally located using aerial photography by Prof . St. Joseph (1971), as a crop mark site with two concentric ditches separated by a berm and a bank. Two opposed entrances were present as well as extensions to the main enclosures. The site was interpreted as a class 2a henge monument overlain by a Romano-British settlement. This was the first time a Yorkshire type of henge had been found on the Yorkshire Wolds. Excavation began in 1973 on a large area of the outer ditch, on the northern side of the site. Large amounts of pottery were recovered as well as the remains of a box rampart similar to the one found at Grimthorpe hillfort. The pottery was also similar and Thwing was therefore dated to the Later Bronze Age and reclassified as a hillfort.

Excavation after 1981 revealed the existence of a chalk rubble bank on the outside of the inner ditch, preserved downslope under a layer of hillwash . The bank was associated with sherds of rusticated Beaker and hence was dated to the later Neolithic and earlier Bronze Age. This prompted a return to the earlier ideas about the site , and it is currently interpreted as a class 2a henge monument, which was transformed into a hillfort somewhere around the beginning of the first millennium be. Excavation also revealed the remains of a burnt mound, metalworking, and a middle saxon settlement and cemetery . Thwing's uniqueness is due to many factors , the most important being its continuity from henge to hillfort, as henges were generally abandoned at the end of the fater Neolithic - earlier Bronze Age. This suggests either that it possessed a very different pattern of social organisation from the rest of Brita in, or that the case for this abandonment has been overstated.

Subsequent excavation showed a pre-later Bronze Age phase to be present and that the site consisted of several main elements, including a large circular building with two phases of construction . Inside this building there was a large hollow containing a cr emation in half a bucket urn. An avenue of po s ts led from this structure to the entran ce of the s ite; a cause way

3.2

The henge phase at Thwing hanging lint els, and ther e is only on e site wh er e t he pr e sence o f suc h a fe a t ur e c an b e demonstrated, namely Stoneheng e it self. The t erm adopted a wider m e aning with t he discovery of sites which contained c ircles of posts such as Woodhenge (Cunnington, 1929), Arminghall (Clark, 1936a) and the Sanctuary (Kendrick and Hawkes, 1932). Kendrick and Hawkes ( 1932) extended the meaning of the term henge monument to group together "a number of prehistoric 'sacred places' which I cannot or dare not, sort into period chapters." They included stone circles and 'empty rings' , arguing that they were all "ceremonial sites, tfiat is to say 'temples or meeting places." Sites with a primary burial function were excluded from this new category of monument.

The earli est stru ct ur es at Paddock Hill ar e dated to the later Neolithic -earlier Bronz e Age, be. The nature of these fea tures suggest that the site should conventionally be classified as a "henge monument" (Atkinson in Atkinson et al., 1951) (see figure 3.1). Clare ( 1986; 1987) demonstrated that the pottery assemblages on henges cannot usefully be analysed due to the very small amo unts recovered and they are therefore not covered any furthe r in this thesis.

3.2.1

Definition

of the term henge

The term henge now covers a variety of sites which are far removed from the original meaning of sites. Henge monuments on strict etymological grounds mean sites which possess

29

Thwing 3.2.2

Clark ( 1936a) described the common features that had been found at henge monuments .

The function

of henges

Investigation of the form and features found within henges might help elucidate the function of henges. and therefore allow a precise definition to be made. However it should be remembered that a religious site may have secular functions as well. For example a medieval cathedral had a religious, administrative , commercial and political role. Similarly burials were often placed inside a cathedral, which was not built to house burials, and the people so buried had an unusually high social status.

"At the centre of all of them is a more or less circular area on which stands stone or timber uprights, occasionally lintelled but often monolithic. The central area is defined by a bank, and where the material for this can more easily be quarried from the ground, by a ditch; as a general rule the ditch is placed within the bank, and where there are two ditches the inner one is larger. Access to the central area is by a single or often by two opposed entrances; where there is a ditch the entrance is repres ented by an unexcavated causeway. This is sometimes approached by an avenue which may extend to another monument."

3.2.3

Henge banks and ditches

All henges except the Ring of Brodgar have a bank. There ar e five possible purposes of such a bank:

Thus the essential featur e of a h en ge was th e presence of a free standing structur e of posts or ston es. When Atkinson (in Atkinson el al. , 1951) revi ewed th e us e of th e term hen ge . th e pr es enc e of a timber or st.one circle was no longer regarded as essential to the definition. He also excluded st.one and timber circles without a bank such as the Sanctuary. Continuous earth banks and monuments which were not later Neolithic - earlier Bronze Age in date were also excluded. He stated that

1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

a a a a a

spoil h eap from ditch diggin g physical b arrier ritual barrier grandstand fand mark.

A physical barrier implies that physical control of the enclosed area is required. This can be either to keep people and animals within the monument or to exclude them. Thus an internal ditch is a more logical arrangement to keep animals within the enclosure, while a defensive barrier implies an external ditch. In order to be an effective physical barrier the entrances themselves would also have a physical barrier, yet only at Stonehenge is there evidence of any such structure . A defensive function of henge banks can be ruled out because of the lack of any kind of palisade, indeed henges can be distinguished from palisaded enclosure sites such as Meldon Bridge. What could be important is the control of point of entry. for example the restricted entrances to sports grounds in order to collect an entrance charge, or the symbolic restriction of entrance into a church via the south -west door.

"In their present state the henge monuments exhibit so great a variety of structure and detail that a comprehensive definition of the term 'henge· would become a definition by enumeration . The most common feature of the henge monuments is the presence of a surrounding earthwork, in the form of a ditch within a bank. which is circular, or nearly so. in plan. and is broken by a single or double opposed entrances. This earthwork may enclose a setting of stones. posts or pits, and in some cases one or more burials ." Wainwright ( 1975) adopted this statement by Atkinson as a definition of henge monuments despite Atkinson's warning that a definition was not actually possible. Catherall ( 1976a) not es that the term henge is a "catch -all" for sites of the later Neolithic-earlier Bronze Age which cannot otherwise be categorised.

Ritual barriers are symbolic of the separation of the sacred from the profane and are effective because of social pr essure . The altar rail in a church is an example of this; it is only crossed at the invitation of a priest to take a momentary part in a ritual. The open stone circles could be regarded as an example of this, but the massive nature of most henge banks argues against this being their primary function . The bank could have been a screen to prevent the masses from viewing ritual activities, like an alter screen, but the size of many monuments, such as Durrington Walls, would mean that activities at the centre of the monument would be virtually invisible anyway.

There is some difficulty in applying this , or any other. definition which is a combination of morphological and functional features. This is particularly problematical due to the supposed ritual nature of the sites (which is very difficult to prove) and the great diversity of morphology. Even the fact that all henge monuments are later Neolithic - earlier Bronze Age in date is now ~pent~ question; Mucking Big Rings (Jones and Bond, 1980) is regarded as an example of a later Bronze Age - early Iron Age henge. Similarly Thwing in the hillfort phase could be included in this category.

The opposite of the proposed; i.e. that grandstands. (Kendrick While any bank could grandstand, it seems primary function. For

30

above has long been the banks acted as and Hawkes, 1932) . have been used as a unlikely that it was a example at Avebury an

EO!lter Prehistoric

Pottery Production

area of 200 000m 2 would have been available for spectators - an implausibly high number. Stmtlarly, there are practical difficulties in getting onto and staying on such a bank in bad weather. At smaller henges, such as Woodhenge, the use of a bank as a grandstand would have been impractical as the presence of a timber circle or building close to the bank would have restricted the view. This also argues against the explanation that the internal ditch served to define the inner sanctum. Finally, a bank could have had the purpose of advertising the position of the site in order that it could be found. At Thornborough the bank was coated with white gypsum , c 1ear 1y enhancing the display value of the site, though it could equally well have been intended to consolidate the surface of the sand and gravel bank or to prevent the growth of turf. If the main purpose of banks was display, then they would be expected to be located in situations which emphasise this, as at Severn-Cotswold Tombs (Darvill, 1982). It is still unclear what the function of the bank and ditch actually was.

3.2.4

bank was not detected by aerial photography or geophysical survey. It should be noted that the digging of a ditch produces material that has tobe put somewhere, hence the debate over whether ditches were simply quarries. Similarly the occurrence of ring banked sites tn areas of very hard rock coula be explained by it being easter to construct a bank by scraping earth or clearing fields of stone, rather than by digging a ditch. 3. Sites with no known internal features. Over two thirds of the sites quoted by Clare fall into this category, probably helped by the fact only when a site ts fully excavated will internal features be revealed. Even 1f a site ts fully excavated, it may be that no internal features survive due to later destruction, for example, ploughing. However, only thirteen sites are quoted by Clare (1986) as having been excavated with no internal features found, and for only two of these, Condtcote and Cassilly, can the explana tton of destruction be accepted. All the others were excavated as part of larger complexes at which small features have been detected elsewhere. 4. Sites with irregular features Another of Clare's sub-types comprises those sites with "irregular features, possibly settlement". He afso suggested sites without internal features to be connected with settlement. In addition he states that the "possibility that the form of secular and religious sites was mutually influential is suggested by Paddock Hill (Thwtng) which is later Bronze Age in date ." Later on in this chapter a number of sites which change from being ritual monuments in the later Neolitbic-earlier Bronze Age, to settlements in the later Bronze Age, are discussed. Clare's arguments are implausible; a settlement can only really be suggested by the presence of buildings demonstrated to have been used as houses, whereas Clare's argument at some of these sites ts based just upon the presence of "occupation debris" . He also states that some other henges with internal features contain occupation debris, suggesting either that there is a settlement function to henges or that this debris ts due to activities other than simple settlement . In either case there is no reason to exclude sites with no internal features from the list of henge monuments.

Clare's hypothesis

Clare (1987) argues that banks and ditches are unimportant, and that sites without them, but with similar internal features, can be considered to have the same function. He uses the presence of ring ditched, ring banked and open sites to support this hypothesis. Several arguments against Clare's hypothesis can be suggested: 1. Burial sites. Two of Clare's sub-classes are defined by the presence of cremation burials. In the case of his sub-type of "numerous, essentially primary, cremations in pits", no true henges are included. Most of this sub - type are relatively small ring ditches with little else comparable to a henge monument. Cremation tended to be introduced later on in the Bronze Age and some of Clare's sites such as Catfoss can be seen to be later Bronze Age urnfields. These facts argue in favour of burial being a secondary function of henges and therefore against these sites being "henges". In addition it should be noted that the large number of ring cairns and ring barrows with inhumattons have been excluded. Such sites suggest that this subtype of Clare's belongs with ring ditches and ring banks rather than henges.

5. Open Sites. Clare (1986) suggests that thirty-six sites (out of three hundred and fifteen) are unenclosed henges, and of these at least eleven are associated with other enclosed henge monuments. It is artificial to separate these from their nearby enclosed henges, as it has been clearly demonstrated (Wainwright, 1975) that henges were often part of "ritual landscapes". The same argument about banks not being preserved to form ring ditches could be used to explain these sites; that is they are ring banked sites where the bank has not been preserved. Sixteen of these

2. Ring ditches and ring banks. In most cases the fact that a bank has not been detected by aerial photography or excavation does not mean that a bank never existed. Thwtng provides a good example of this, as the henge ditch was back-filled when it went out of use, using the chalk rubble from the bank. It was only detected during excavation for a small proportion of its circuit, on the downslope side where it had not been destroyed by ploughing. The henge

31

Thwing sites are circular arrangements of posts and stakes . However , excluded from this list is the large number of stake circles found beneath barrows (described by Fox, 1959) . For example Catholme 1397 can be paralleled with Sheeplays 293 , Llantwit Major, South Glamorgan (Fox, 1959) . In contrast sites such

as Balbirnie roundhouses.

phase

1 could

simply

be

There is therefore strong evidence that banks, and to a lesser extent ditches, are key elements to henges; enclosure being the most important factor .

3.3 The later Bronze Age phase at Thwing - t he hillfort Th e h enge contin ue d in u se into th e later Bronze Af!,e , as shown by the presence of large numbers of u mfleld pins dated to th e Pennard phase of th e Bronze Age (1050-900 be). At the same time the central hollow was back-filled, an d a cr ema ti on buri a l as soc iated with a Devere lRimb m y bu ck et um was pl ace d inv erted into th is b ack fill. The bucket um could be u s ed to argue for an earlier date for thi s act if Barrett's ( 1980) chronology for Deverel-Rimbmy ceramics is accepted.

can be classified as a hillfort according to Dyer's ( 1981 ) definition . Also contempo rary with the construction of the hillfort defenc es wa s the construction of th e only obvious buil ding at Thwing, built slightly off cen tr e to the hillfort. The building was circular, constructed using an outer beam slot about 0. 75m wide which supported a continuous series of uprights. There was also an inner ring of posts about 2m from the beam slot. There were two entrances to this building aligned with the gates to the hillfort. The terminals of the beam slot contained a much deeper larger post hole.

In general, the great ritual monuments and burials of individuals in round barrows disappeared (Burgess, 1980), to be replaced by Deverel-Rimbury society and Umfield culture. A second hiatus seems to have occurred in Bronze Ag,e society during the Pennard Phase, which is cliaractertsed by the construction of hillforts.

The overall diameter of this structure is about 25m, much larger than the normal type of roundhouse known in later prehistory, but in constructional detail it is similar to many other round houses. Its size makes it more analogous with the large structures found within henge monuments such as Durrington Walls (Wainwright and Longworth, 1971) and Woodhenge (Cunnington, 1929). There has been much debate over wfiether these structures were roofed or not; it has been suggested that they were open circles of timber similar to stone circles but Musson (1971) shows how the structures could have been roofed, and The beam slot at Thwing, with its terminal post holes, argues very strongly for these structures being buildings.

Towing follows this pattern; at about 1000 be the henge ditch was back-filled with the chalk rubble that had been used to construct the bank. The site was enlarged, with the construction of a box rampart and a ditch. This new structure was again circular and .had two opposed entrances with the same orientation as the henge entrances. The area enclosed was increased by a factor of four to 8659m 2 ; the hillfort having a diameter of 105m, exactly do u ble that of the henge. The box rampart consisted of a beam at the front with a con tinuou s series of uprights, and at the bac k a series of paired post hol es sp aced 2m ap art. The fr on t p os ts of this back p a ir ret a in e d the ra m p ar t, while th e rea r se t p r e suma bly supported a walkway . At regular intervals in the oute r b eam slot t here were large posts which corresponded in position with a pair of doub le p osts at t he r ear of t he rampart. This is interpreted as evidence for a series of tie beams from the front of the rampart t o the rear . The inner pair of posts can be interpreted as a fixed ladder lead~ to the walkway. The box rampart was filled wttn the upcast from the ditch, which was 4m wide and 3m deep with near vertical sides and deepening near the entrances. Similarly, the spacing of the rear post holes decreased near the entrance, and their size increased. At the entrances the sleeper beam turned inwards and joined the rear line of post holes, an arrangement interpreted as a gatehouse.

A large barbed spearhead from the fill of the central h ollow bel ongs to the Heath ery Bum (Ewart Pa r k) peri od (80 0 -6 00 BC - Manby , 1980) . This evidence su gges t s th at Towing was ab an done d some time aft er 800 -600 BC. Th ere is clear evidence of m et a lworking on the site , with a foundry h aving b eing loca ted together with all t he assoc ia t ed arte f ac t s such as mou lds , crucibles and droplets of metal. Morphologically , this phase of Th wing is most closely paralleled with the Mucking Rings (Jones and Bond, 1980), situated on a low gravel terrace of the Thames. At neither of the two rings is there evidence for a rampart, and so they cannot be considered to be hillforts . An industrial function is suggested for both of the Mucking rings; metals and pottery at the south ring and salt production at the north ring (Jones and Bond, 1980). No similar monument has been found in East Yorkshire, but a number of sites that are contemporary to the later Bronze ~e phase have been investigated (see below and figure 3.1).

A terminus post quern for this phase of construction is given by a radio-carbon date of 950±70 be (Har-1398) on charcoal sealed beneath the rampart. This date and the construction of a rampart mean that the phase

32

. Earlier Prehistoric 3.3.1

Pottery Production exca va ted by Rutter (1959) some years later. Bet ween forty a n d fifty pits were excavated, varying in size from 0.5m to 2m wide and up to 1.8m d eep (Elgee and Elgee, 1933). Smith (1927) n otes that som e of these pits contained deposits of clay. Other structures located were a scatter of p o st holes (Rutter, 1953) and a series of circular or oblong cobbled hearths. Several vessels were found submerged into the ground , which were interpreted as cooking pots.

Th e Grim tho rpe hillfo rt

The hillfort at Grimthorpe excavated by Stead ( 1968) provides close parallels to Thwing, and has already been mentioned. It is situated on the western Wold edge overlooking the vale of York. Unlike Thwing, the defences follow a natural feature, the 150m contour. Grimthorpe is fairly circular, even if it is somewhat irregular, with an internal diameter of 115m. The rampart structure is very different to Thwing, consisting of a berm 3.5m wide before a double line of posts 2m apart , and the ditch is shallower (2m) but wider than Thwing. The reconstruction of the rampar t by Cunlifte (1974b) as a "box rampart" is wildly incorrec t , as the volum e of chalk excavated from the ditch and assumed to have filled the "box ram part" is that such a ram part would be at least 6m high, if not 12m allowing for air voids . The width of the berm suggests that the rampart may have been constructed in exactly the same manner as Thwing, with a front beam slot which has subsequently been eroded away.

The re is a considerable assemblage of metalwork from th e site, with evidence for metal working. A crucible, bronze scoriae and a jet from casting w ere found. The metalwork included two Yorkshire type socketed axes , a socketed gouge, a bracelet, and harness trappings - all dated to the Heathery Burn phase of the Bronze Age (800-600 BC). Challis and Harding (1975) re-interpreted th e site , suggesting tha t it was actually a promontory fort and that there were two phases of occupation on the site : 1. The

pits dated to th e seventh century, characterised by pottery with finger tip decoration and round shoulder forms.

No real entrances are known at Grimthorpe, and thouJ;!h there is a causeway across the ditch the south -west of the sit e , there is no apparen t break in the circuit of the rampar t. The only internal features found were a scatter of post holes which were interpreted as "four pos t structures" and a fence line. How ever, only a very small area of the interior of the site was excavated.

2 . Occupation deposits dated to the sixth century, characterised by sharp angled bowls and jars. Virtually all the metalwork comes from the occupation layers not the pits . This phasing is impossibl e as the pits wer e cu t through the occupation layer and therefore the occupati on layer must be earlier than the pits . The metal work itself suggests a date before 600 BC and thus the occupation deposits, at least, a r e c o ntemporary with the later phases of Th wing.

No metalwork contemporary with the hillfort was found. The two radio-carbon dates were on bone recovered from the ditch; these are secondary contexts and therefore do not date either the construction or the destruction of the hillfort. Stead ( 1968) and Biek ( 1968) accepted the two dates of 970±130 be. and 690±130 be with some caution. Stead (1968) stated that

3 .3.3

"Both dates seem too early for the archaeological material, and even more disconcerting there is no overlap between t he two d ates."

Staple Howe enjoys a panoramic location similar to Th win g, being situated on a scarp slope, in thi s ca se over loo king the Vale of Pickering. The sit e wa s a lm o st t o tally excavated by T".C.M. Bre wst er (196 3 ) bet ween 1951 and 1954, a n d wa s found to b e a multi-phased palisaded enclosur e d ate d to t h e Iron Age. In itia lly t h e d e fe nc e s consi s ted of a continuous pa lisade, with a singl e gap a s a n ent r ance. Th is was replaced by a palisad e e n cl osi ng a larg er ar ea, which bifur c at e s n e ar the entra n ce. Thr ee buildings wer e identifi ed. Hu t I was a round house construct ed from a s ingl e r ing of uprigh t posts, with an extra pair marking th e door. Hu t II was constructed in a similar mann er but was more irregular and was oval in shape. Hu t III, in contrast, was defined by an eav es drip gully on the southern side. No stru c tural evid enc e was found on the northern sid e of this building . Additional structures wer e a five post granary and a quarried hollow similar in form to hut II.

In fact t h ese dates do reflect their d iffere n t strati gr aph ic pos itio ns in th e dit ch. Pr e- hillfor t occup a tio n was d isc overed in th e form of a single sh erd of se condary series Collar ed Urn , and this rais es th e possibility t ha t th e m a terial in th e ditch is residual , although this see ms unlikely given th e larg e quantiti es of oth er occupation debris d e posit e d in the ditch . It can b e sugg est ed, with som e caution , tha t the earliest dat e gives a terminus ante quern for the construction of th e rampart and th e later date gives a terminus post quern for its destruction . Thus it can be sugg ested that Grim thorpe is exactly contemporary with Thwing .

3.3.2

Scarborough

Staple Howe

Castle Hill

Staple Howe produced a coll ec tion of Hallstatt C razors . Other metalwork includ ed two socketed axes, tweezers , awls and a chis e l dir e ctly comparabl e to on e from Castl e Hill . All th e

During the cours e of th e excavation of a Roman signal station at Scarborough Castle Htll, a series of pits containing pr e- roman pott ery wer e locat e d (Smith, 1927). Furth e r pits w e re

33

Thwing Scarp, overlooking the Vale of Pickering. It was excavated between 1965-69 and 1980-1981 by T.C.M. Brewster who died before the post excavation work was completed. The site consists of a double palisade enclosure, like Staple Howe. but it is three times larger. The two palisades are apparently contemporary.

metalwork is dated to the Heathery Bum Phase of the Bronze Age (800-600 BC) and is therefore contemporary with the metalwork from the later phases of Towing. Unfortunately only one piece of datable metalwork came from a construction context; a razor was found in the infilling of the first phase palisade. Brewster ( 1963) notes the "much eroded" state of the palisade trench. The sections reproduced (ibid fig 11 A&BU) show quite clearly that a post pipe was present, thus inferring that the fill of this feature relates to its destruction not construction. The razor therefore gives a terminus ante quern for the destruction of the phase I palisade and a terminus post quern for the construction of the phase II palisade . Therefore Staple Howe was founded before 600 be at the latest, and could have been founded before 800 be .

A third of the interior was excavated but no obvious buildings were found, instead there was a scatter of post holes and pits. One four poster was suggested. Of particular note was one pit which contained more than 12kg of calcite and a hammer stone. This is discussed in greater detail later. A Beaker phase of occupation was indicated by the presence of N4 Beaker pottery. Brewster (pers. comm.) suggested that the site was contemporary with phase two of Staple Howe, based upon the presence of finger Up decorated pottery and the absence of carinated vessels.

The single radio-carbon date for Staple Howe, 450±150 (BM-63) is used by Brewster (1963) to give a terminus post quern for the foundation of the site as the end of the sixth century be. The sample comes from a deposit of grain at the bottom of the quarried hollow which is stratigraphically unrelated to another structure. It therefore cfoes not date any other other structure, particularly the foundation or abandonment date. All that can be said is that the grain was burnt at 450± 150 be, and that this infers that the site was being used at this time.

3.3.5

West Heslerton is located just off the Wolds, in the Vale of Pickering. Later Bronze Age or early Iron Age activity was detected over an area greater than 10 000m 2 • Eight buildings were suggested together with a number of four post structures (Powlesland, 1986). The site is interpreted as an open settlement within the territory of a central place, such as Staple Howe or Devil's Hill, i.e. a defended enclosure. Interpretation of the buildings is more problematical in that only one of them contained a hearth, suggesting that they were not houses. Reynolds (1979) does point out that houses are not the only type of buildings found on prehistoric settlements: barns and byres are also to be found.

Traditionally Staple Howe has been firmly regarded as Iron Age: for example Cunliffe ( 197 4b) us~s Staple Howe as a type site for a regional grouping in the sixth century. He does suggest that some sites in this group (Castle Hill) do- belong to an "ultimate Deverel-Rimbury phase" and are part of the later Bronze Age. The metalwork clearly suggests that the first and possibly the second phase are contemporary with the later phases of Towing, and as such are later Bronze Age.

3.3.4

West Heslerton

The entire dating evidence for this phase of activity is ceramics dated by comparison to the Staple Howe and Scarborough assemblages to the period 900-500 BC (800-400 be). Thus although West Heslerton was occupied in the earlier Bronze Age. it was completely abandoned and woodland regenerated in the middle of the Bronze Age.

Devil's Hill

Devil's Hill is located on a small hillock, an outlier of chalk, away from the northern Wold

3.4 Parallels to Thwing Thwing's uniqueness has already been alluded to, in particular the continuity from earlier to later Bronze Age. Burgess's (1980) suggestion that a hiatus occurred in the Pennard phase has already been noted. Similarly Collis ( 1977) referring to henges stated that "no continuity can be demonstrated on any site." Proving continuous unbroken occupation of a site is notoriously difficult. Simply because a site has occupation in two different periods does not necessarily mean that occupation was continuous. For example Towing was reoccupied in the Anglo -Saxon period. This ls especially difficult where henges are concerned, given that

most do not have any kind of artefact assemblage, Internal features or multiple phase construction even to suggest stratigraphic or artefact continuity. Likewise, proving the presence of an earlier ritual phase on a settlement characterised by a lack of artefacts and structures is not without its problems, and even if such evidence does exist it may not demonstrate continuous use. What is apparent is the general lack of such evidence for continuity. although it can sometimes be suggested as having occurred, for both henges and later settlements.

34

Ea~lier Prehistoric

Pottery Production

The following survey ts restricted by the need to re-interpret excavated evidence, and therefore only sites where the evidence ts obvious or has been recognised by the excavators have been included. Continuity suggested by burial practice has been excluded.

3.4.1

assemblage was recovered. There was Beaker and Collared Urn pottery in the ditch, which was continually recut. The bank was used deliberately to fill the ditch some time before 1060±70 be (Har-197). At around 1060±70 - 1030±70 be (Har-197 Har-461) a palisade was constructed in the ditch, and house structures were built tnstde the enclosure. This was refurbished about 1050±90 (Har-231), and included the construction of gateways which are very similar to those at Thwing. These later phases of activity are also accompanied by a greatly increased deposition rate of artefacts - principally pottery. Barrett ( 1975) states that the diversity of pottery fabrics present suggests a special function for Rams Hill. The -fa unal remains show a great predominance of Joints of meat butchered away from the site, su pporttng this hypothesis.

Stonehenge

Atkinson (1967) suggests that the Avenue was extended around about 1100 be. This was based upon a series of radio-carbon dates on antler from the Avenue ditch, as follows: 800± 100 be (1-3216) 975±115 be 1070±180 be weighted (BM-1079) 1345±190 be

mean

= 1075±100

Atkinson does not suggest that there is any structural or artefact evidence for the use of the monument itself in the first mtllennium, although he does report the finding of pottery dated to the third century be 1n hofes Yl6 and Zl6.

3.4.2

Bradley and Ellison (1975) interpret Rams Hill as a communal monument occasionally occupied by people from a range of settlements, but there is little evidence of craft specialisation or long distance trade. However, the overall pattern is the same as a later neolithic-earlier Bronze Age ritual focal point which evolved into a defended focal point in the tenth century be .

Llandegai

The henge phase at Llandegai (Houlder, 1968) consists of a class 1 monument with an internal bank of 35m radius. This was superseded to the south by a class 2 henge of similar size. The second was associated with beakers, and a cremation in a large pit near the centre of the site was found. A nearby contemporary settlement was also found.

3.4.4

At this site in South Glamorgan there is evidence of a ritual phase associated with Beaker and Collared Urn pottery, followed by a later Bronze Age settlement (Wardle, 1991) . The sequence is very complex but can be summarised as follows:

During the "Iron Age" (this phase is undated) a large round house was constructed. This had a diameter of 17.4m and was built with an inner ring of posts and an outer gully. This sequence parallels Thwing but lacks the craft specialisation in the later period, or the large quantities of artefacts.

3.4.3

Atlantic Trading Estate

1. Interrupted

ditch system. This phase is undated but pre-dates Beaker activity and is characterised by a total lack of artefacts.

2. Beaker "settlement". Beaker fine and heavy duty wares are associated with the construction of buildings.

Rams Hill

3. Defended collared urn settlement. This consists of a double palisade and gateway that is similar in many ways to the fiillfort phase at Thwtng . A number of round houses are associated with this phase.

It should be noted that the following discussion

is based upon a reappraisal of the published sections, and differs from the views originally expressed by the excavators. While in a strict sense Rams Hill (Berkshire) is not a henge monument under conventional definitions, 1t was considered to be a "rogue henge" by its excavators (Bradley and Ellison, 197'5). The principle reason for 1t not being considered a henge monument is that it is sub oval in shape. However, some sites which are not totally circular are considered to be henges, for example Mount Pleasant and Marden (Wainwright, 1975). In its initial stages Rams Hill consisted of a ditch with an internal bank without any kind of revetment . Internally no features can be definitely assigned to this period. This phas e is characterised by the lack of datable artefacts, although a small flint

4 . Post-Collared Urn settlement. The site was divided up into plots of land by fences, with further construction of buildings. 5. Later Bronze Age settlement. This appears to consist of an open settlement extending over a large area. Continuity of fence line orientation can be used to suggest true structural continuity from the earlier to later Bronze Age. The earlier Bronze Age phases are characterised by very small artefact assemblages compared to the later Bronze Age . This is regarded as evid e nce of a ritual function to the earlier phases.

35

Thwing 3.4.5

Shearplace

3.4.6

Hill

A stray sherd of Collared Urn (Stead, 1968) is used to suggest an earlier ritual phase of activity. As noted earlier, the circular form of Grimthorpe is like Thwing (Collis, 1977). The sole evidence is the sherd of Collared Urn and it will be demonstrated later that this does not necessarily demonstrate "ritual" activity .

This settlement in Dorset began life with an "enigmatic" phase followed by Deverel -Rimbury and post Deverel-Rimbury settlement. By implication the earliest phase must be ritual in nature and therefore like Rams Hill could be interpreted as a henge. The later settlements consisted of palisaded enclosures (Rahtz and Apsimon, 1962).

3.5

Grimthorpe

Discussion 3. They are associated with craft specialisation.

There are many problems with trying to carry out a survey such as this, in particular with regard to Devere!- Rim bury chronology. Assigning an earlier Bronze Age date to this material does increase the number of sites with continuity from 1200-1000 be . Barrett ( 1980) does however point to the general abandonment of DeverelRim bury settlements. The above survey considers those sites which were in use throughout the second millennium be and survived into the first millennium be. Four general features can be associated with such continuity:

4. They are associat Collared Urn .

e d with

non -funerary

While this last t rend could b e a function of chronology, the general paucity of Collared Urn settlements (Longworth , 1984) argues against this. Collis ( 1977) argues that "Iron Age Henges" (all these sites except Danebury are later Bronze Age) can be paralleled by the contemporary Irish sites, which are all ''royal". Perhaps this evidence of continuity can be interpreted as the last vestiges of a tribal system which generally broke down and was replaced by the Iron Age tribal system.

1. Continuity

is from later neolithic-earlier Bronze Age ritual sites to very high status settlements.

2. They are defended and located on hilltops.

36

Earlier Prehistoric

Pottery Production

Chapter 4 THE TYPOLOGY OF BRONZE AGE POTTERY 4.1

Introduction The traditional approach to pottery typology is to describe the form (shape), function and decoration, with brief remarks about the fabric (See Longworth, 1984 for an example of this). This is the currently accepted norm, and manufacturing method ts never mentioned. Similarly method of surface finish is not used, except burnishing which is regarded as a form of decoration. This has come about because of the evolution of the typologies and the attributes which were considered essential.

A fundamental process in traditional archaeology, known as typology, is the division of cultural material into attribute, artefact, assemblage, culture, and culture group (Clarke, 1968). Unfortunately these terms are themselves ambiguous. For example type can be used as a synonym for "typical" which can mean the commonest. Equally "type" can mean the indicator of a particular "type" assemblage. Similarly type can be used on several different levels for example a winged palstave, is a bronze weapon, an axe, a palstave, and a winged palstave. The definition of type depends entirely upon the requirements of the typology.

Thurnam's ( 1896) original typology of Bronze Age pottery was based entirely upon function. He divided the material into drinking vessels, food vessels and burial urns. Despite the obvious arbitrary nature of this classification, it remains the basic typological division of Bronze Age pottery.

In essence typology is the ordering of specific attributes into a coherent pattern, therefore a typology must "work" in order for it to be valid. However, an artefact contains an infinite number of attributes and therefore there are an infinite number of typologies possible . It also follows that certain attributes will be chosen in order to answer the specific questions that are being asked of that typology (Clarke, 1968).

Abercromby (1912) subdivided these types using decoration and Calkin (1962) used form to divide the vessels from the so called Deverel-Rimbury Culture. He proposed a tripartite division based upon similarity to modern day artefacts, barrels and buckets.

The aims of this study are to provenance pottery to particular manufacturing sites within a chronological framework. The use of typology in this study is therefore two fold; to provide a chronological framework (because most of the vessels considered are not associated with radio-carbon dates) and to isolate any feature that may help elucidate provenance. Radiocarbon information from Thwing is awaited.

Clarke ( 1970) took a totally different approach to Beaker typology, defining his aim as the "successful" detection of human groups. He used a mixture of form, decorative motif and location as a basis for his classification. He was working within Thurnam's functional classification, that is he only considered drinking vessels. The interpretation of Beakers as an intrusive element in the British Bronze Age led Gibson (1982b) to define domestic beakers (i.e. non- drinking drinking vessels). Thus Thurnam 's functional classification had evolved into a name for a cultural grouping of people who did a lot of drinking!

The main attribute considered is "fabric", and in a sense the formation of fabric groups is a typology. This may be related to chronology, but it is unlikely to be so. Peacock ( 1979) clearly warns of the dangers of not carrying out analytical work within a "typological framework". In this study a detailed, accepted typology does not exist for much of the material.

When faced with largely undecorated later Bronze Age ceramics, Ellison ( 1980) divided the pottery up into fine, everyday and heavy duty wares. Put another way cups, cooking vessels, and urns used for storage, sometimes of the dead. This almost duplicates Thurnam's classification. Clarke (1970) also suggested a similar division for domestic beakers.

The following section outlines the different attributes which have been used to form typologies of Bronze Age pottery. It ts followed by summaries of the current typologies used, then by consideration of the main assemblages studied in this thesis.

37

Typology Barrett (1980) divided post Deverel-Rimbury ceramics according to form into cups, bowls, large and small, and Jars, large and small. Put another way drinking vessels, food vessels, and storage Jars . Thus archaeological endeavour over a hundred years has managed to define the basic .activities that pottery was used for in the Bronze Age; eating and drinking, preparing food and storage .

4.2

In the following sections Beakers, Food Vessels and Collared Urns are considered in isolation. Similarly Deverel-Rimbury ceramics are considered, in the first instance, without reference to the Yorkshire material. This is done in order to define the terminologies used to describe the Yorkshire material.

Beaker typology

Abercromby (1912 ) originally classified Beakers into three groups, ca1ling them A, B and C, based upon chronological developm ent. Piggo tt (1963), using Abercromby 's corpus, replaced this with a similar tripartit e div ision, bu t this tim e based upon form .

1. shape 2. decorative motifs 3. position of decoration 4. past e and firing.

Cl a rk e ( 1970) sugg este d se v e n w aves o f migration into Britain by Beak er users , and his typology is summarised in Figur e 4 . 1. Th e e arli e s t of th e s e is mark e d b y t h e appearance of all over corded Beakers (AOC) with a bell shaped body sometimes with a slight carination . The diagnostic featur e is tbe impressions of two stranded cord over part or all of the vessel. Van der Leeuw (1976) suggests that this is in fact the impressions of a wrap rather than decoration. These occur over most of Britain.

Clarke (1970) produced a new compl ete corpus of British Beak er material. He no te d t h e contradiction that occurred in the A,B,C classifications, namely that the same motifs occurred on both B and C types of pottery. He argued that pottery shows four major variable qualities, all of which can vary regionally and with passing time:

\

I

Kl'D

E .Ang.

S4

Sl

Figure 4.1:

Beaker 'fypology (from Clarke, 1970) 38

Earlier Prehistoric

Pottery Production

4. S2: A long neck is distinctive in this type, with the frequent use of hexagonal. floating lozenge. and panel forms of decoration.

The second wave brought the "European Bell Beakers"(E). These are similar to AOC Beakers in form but in some cases have a slight cartnation, or a slight cordon or collar near the rim. They are distinguished from AOC in particular by the use of comb decoration to provide all over, repeating patterns of decoration or decoration arrangecf in horizontal bands of lattice, zigzag or triangular pattern.

5. S3: The long neck continues and becomes more cylindrical with the same sorts of motifs as in S2 6. S4: These are similar in form to S3 and included all the handled Beakers. Decoration is now virtually always incised. with hexagonal motifs being the commonest.

The third group, the Wessex -middle Rhine group (W /MR), are so named because of the dense concentration in Wessex. In form they are slimmer, with the rim diameter more or less equal to the belly diameter, and a rather short neck is also diagnostic. Decoration is also made with a comb in zones using lattice, ladder and chequer patterns .

Clarke's aim when producing a typology of Beakers was not a rigid division of the material into classes but an attempt to detect, define and isolate human groups. He argued that continuous contact and development between groups of people means that there will be a considerable degree of overlap between the groups . The situation arises where Beakers can oelong to more than one group, as when northern Beakers occur in Wessex. This prompted Lanting and van der Waals ( 1972), when reviewing Clarke's 1970 corpus. to propose an alternative interpretation of Clarke's groups based upon their work in Holland. They suggested a single migration from the lower Rhine to Britain introducing AOC Beakers, at around 2100 be . From thiS group emerged seven regional centres. each with a sequence of typological development in up to seven steps. Only Wessex shows a continuous sequence . This interpretation does not expl i n why the associations with Beakers vary from region to region, or why the internal sequences are virtually the same from region to region.

Contemporary with this group north of the Thames is the northern middle Rhine group (N/MR). These have similar forms to the W /MR but are distinguished by predominant motifs of herring -bone decora ti on or s imple pendant fringes. In the north the North ern British/Northern Rhine is seen to be cont emporary with both W /MR and N/MR. These vessels have short squat globular profiles with recurving necks and waists below the rim. Decoration on the belly using incised lines or grooving, frequently zoned, is common. Two further isolated groups are distinguished. The barbed wire group contains globular forms decorated with impressions made with a thread wound stamp. Secondly the East Anglian group (E. Ang.) is seen as an insular group with ovoid or globular forms and simple decoration in the form of horizontal lines.

Case ( 1977) proposed a return to a simple division of Beakers into early, middle and late based upon radio -carbon dating.

The last of Clarke's (1970) migrations is characterised by the north British -north Dutch group (Nl/D). These are smaller than all the earlier forms, and have a distinctive neck separated from the ovoid body by a marked waist. Clarke ( 1970) su~gested that all subsequent development of British Beakers evolved from this group. This development was based upon separate development in northern and southern Britain, both of which are divided into four stages.

Savory's ( 1980a) discussion of the Welsh Beakers emphasises an Iberian connection for the origins of Beakers, and notes earlier radiocarbon dates for their appearance in Iberia. In particular he notes that Beaker bowls have their origin in Iberia. He proposes a simple tripartite division into continental, and early and late BritiSh Beakers, with AOC Beakers in the early group. There 1S general agreement at least that these represent the first Beakers manufactured in Britain. His early group. in effect, conststs of the long necked Beakers of Piggott's 1963 classification. "'

1. N2: Decoration

on the neck consists of zones with larger panels on the body. Incised decoration is more common.

While Lanting and Van der Waals' classification does show clear types compared to Clarke's, they do not attempt to resolve the problem of defining types when there 1S a continuous development. They see the development of Beakers in terms of diStinctive sharp steps. An independent check on all the typologies suggested above is provided by the Beaker graves where more than one vessel is present. In 62% of these the Beakers are of different types. This points to many different types being in use at the same time or that the interpretations are incorrect.

2. N4: These only occur in Scotland and are distingutshed by two zones of decoration on the neck and body. 3. S 1: These have an angular profile with a well defined waist, decoration is made with a comb using motifs from the W-MR group. This in itself contradicts Clarke's ( 1970) suggestion that S 1 Beakers evolved from Nl/D types.

39

Typology These typologies are based upon a knowledge of the complete vessel, and emphasise the importance of decoration. With the result that emphasis is placed upon burial Beakers. Clarke ( 1970) for example divides Beaker pottery into fine, everyday and coarse wares and notes that effectively only the fine wares are present in burials, while on settlements, where only Beaker pottery was found, all three types are present. The domestic vessels tend to be dominated by undecorated vessels or vessels with all over rustication (Gibson, 1980). It can be argued that on other non-funerary sites where Beaker pottery is found with other types, it represents a fine ware component of the assemblage . This can be illustrated by comparing the frequency distributions of sherd wall thickness for the Durrington Walls mixed Grooved Ware and Beaker assemblage and Belle Toute, a solely Beaker settlement (Figure 4.2). Richards and Thomas ( 1984) argue in the case of Durrington Walls and Marden that the Beaker pottery represents a chronological component (i.e. later) of the assemblages. At both these sites Beaker pottery does not occur in secondary contexts, but a sequence of Beakers is present which conforms to the constructional sequences. The implication is that the Beaker pottery is a traded component. At virtually all the sites where nonfunerary Collared Urns have been found, Beaker

pottery is found as well. This is discussed more detail later.

in

Beaker pottery is known in the British Isle's in contexts which pre-date 2000 be, such as the blocking of New Grange or at causewayed enclosures. At Skendleby (Phillips, 1936) Bell Beaker pottery was found with the construction of the long barrow . Re -excavation of this site (Evans and Simpson, in press) has allowed the sherds to be given a terminus ante quern of 3055±150 be (BM-192), one of the earliest dates for Beaker pottery in Europe (Case, 1977). At Tinkinswood long barrow a Beaker bowl was found in one of tlie terminal chambers, while at West Kennet and 1y -Isaf sherds of Beaker were found. At the Kilham long barrow Manby (1976) noted the presence of AOC Beaker post-dating its use. In fact most cases of early and middle phases of Beaker activity pre-date 2000 be. Essentially Beakers with continental influence pre-date 2000 be and the British sequence begins somewhere after 2000 be . The latest radio-carbon dates for Beaker pottery occur in the fifteenth century at Mount Pleasant. The inception of Deverel-Rimbury is discussed later, but can be seen to overlap considerably the very late Beakers for a period of about 400 years.

4.3 Collared Urns The publication of a corpus of Collared Urns by Longworth ( 1984) provides the definitive study of the typology of these vessels, which is almost universally used. He extended his original study (Longworth, 1961) which divided Collared Urns into a primary and secondary series of urns, all sharing the common feature of a collar below the rim. Thus the most essential feature of this type is defined by the presence of a collar, which is often ref erred to as an overhanging rim in earlier literature.

4. Well executed herring-bone, or repetitive vertical or diagonal short line motifs, repeated on the collar and the neck 5. Decoration extending below the shoulder or greatest body diameter and onto the body of the vessel 6. The use of whipped cord.

4.3.2

His approach is very different to Clarke's analysis of Beakers, producing a simpler and clearer classification. He firstly defined a series of e~ht basic forms and the range of motifs used for cfecoratlon (Figure 4.3).

4.3.1

The secondary series is divided up into three styles which are as follows

4.3.2.1

The primary series

The South-East style

Despite the name this style occurs as far north as Yorkshire, with the expected concentration on the Wolds. It is distinguished by the use of pointed comb decoration, the use of horizontal, vertical and diagonal lines on the collar, and horseshoe motifs on vessel forms B2 and B3.

This series are those vessels which show traits which can be seen to have their origin in the Neolithic. These traits are defined by the following:

The North -West style This group extends as far east as Yorkshire. Vessels take forms 3 and 4, with linear incised decoration as well as lattice patterns applied to the neck, or Jabs on the shoulder.

1. The presence of internal moulding 2. The presence of a simple, pointed, rounded or flattened rim with simple expanded rim bevels · 3. The collar form is convex or straight external surface

The secondary series

Others Vessels which fall into none of the above categories belong in this group. Longworth's

on the

40

Earlier Prehistoric Pottery Production

Durrington

Walls

::,'I (J

C

QJ

:,

C'

QJ Ii.

.... "C

QJ U'1

... l'IJ t

Ii.

0

z

6

8

7

9

10 Wall

11 12 13 Thickness

14

15

fffl Beaker

17

18

Es!GroovedWare

Bel le

jl (J

16

MM

Toute

20

C

QJ.

:,

C'

QJ Ii.

15

.... "C

QJ U'1

... l'IJ

10

t

Ii.

0

z

5

0

5

6

7

8

9

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Wall Thickness MM ~

18

19

20

21

Grooved Ware

Figure 4.2: Frequency distributions of sherd wall thickness for the Durrington Walls and Belle Toute assemblages

41

Typology forms 1, 2, 4 and 8 are common. Decoration is confined to the rim and collar if present. Motifs include herring-bone, filled triangles and hurdles.

herring -bone decoration. The forms are defined differently but are equivalent to Longworth's. Trait 3 is amended to a convex or straight narrow collar. Burgess adds narrow upright collars and shoulder grooves as early traits. The late traits he defines are again similar and he defines form by description rather than illustration. The middle group are those vessels which have both early and late traits. Burgess ( 1986) suggests that a more formal analysis of vessel forms allows the removal of some of the anomalous vessels in Longworth's scheme. Of more importance is the lack of primary Collared Urns in Northern England, which comprise of just fifteen vessels.

Burgess (1986) makes some minor criticisms, noting some chronological problems and in particular suggesting that it is too simple a classification. He took a different approach, dividing Collared Urn assemblages based upon associations with radio-carbon dates and other datable artefacts. His early traits more or less coincide with Longworth's, except the use of well executed

ill , SECONDARY

SERIES

PRI MA RY SERIES

Figure 4.3 : Collard Urn Typology (from Longworth)

42

SE

STYLE

Earlier Prehistoric Pottery Production

4.4 Food vessels used. These divisions are based upon variations in the shoulder and rim forms.

Burgess (197 4) sug~ested that Food Vessels were "various ceramic forms lumped together". In Thurnam's ( 1896) classification they were the vessels which were not obviously drinking vessels or burial urns. An intermediate category of Food Vessel urn has also been suggested. Food Vessels proper are divided into bowls (the Irish form) and Vases (the Yorkshire Form). Abercromby ( 1912) divided them into six different classes based upon form, and Manby ( 195 7) revised this classification into four basic forms with sixteen subclasses. Burgess (1974) criticised Manby's typology as oeing "too complicated". although a complex typology would be expected from such a diverse range of ceramics.

Manby (1957) and Abercromby (1912) both distinguished the bowl as a separate class, while Manby ( 195 7) noted that vases were generally found in Ireland. He distinguished two classes of them. having a globular or cylindrical form and secondly the presence of three grooves between the rtm and the shoulder. The remainder were divided by the presence. or absence, of lugs. These classes were subdivided using the rtm and shoulder form. Both Manby (1957) and Gibson (1978) use the shoulder and rim form to distinguish different types, but Manby sees lugs ana form as the more essential attributes. The Abercromby (1912). Manby (1957), and Gibson (1978) typologies are compared in Table 4.1 and Figure 4.4. Gibson (1978) uses a similar approach to the classification of Food Vessel Urns. In the present study Manby's (1957) classification of Food Vessels is used.

Gibson ( 1978) suggested a much simpler classification into bipartite, tripartite and bowls. The bipartite vessels are divided into: simple moulded rtm, non -moulded rim, Yorkshire Vases with shoulder groove and stops, bipartite with shoulder groove only. and handled vessels. He also notes that decoration could not be used because of the diversity of motifs and techniques

Table

4.1

Comparison

of

Food

Type

typologies

Manby

Abercrornby TYPE 1: truncated + stops

Vessel

IRISH

Low body & lugs

lA

TYPE 1B

Gibson FORM 3

Type lA Lugged Type i narrow shoulder groove luqs

no decoration

ii

centrally

Broad

shoulder

groove

iii Very broad clay strips

shoulder

&

iv

between

neck

Distinction

1B: 2 rows

of

lugs

in

lugs

decorated represented

groove

&

FORM 5 Bipartite handled

between

2 separtate

by

has

FORM 5 Bipartite

gone

I

shoulder groove

grooves

&

stops

.......

lC:

TYPE 2 Similar

to

without

lugs

lA

Lugs

in

groove

below

the

rim

&

shoulder

TYPE 2 WITHOUT LUGS IN THE SHOULDER GROOVE i Narrow shoulder groove & moulded rim ii iii

Deep

shoulder

Moulded

groove

r i m replaced

neck

&

moulded

by a simple

43

rim rim

I

Typology

basic forms

food vessel

.liQI I.C.

.s..c.ALE.

food vessel ..u.r.n.

Figure 4.4:

basic forms

Food vessel typology (from Gibson, 1978)

44

Earlier Prehistoric

4.5

Deverel-Rimbury

Pottery Production

pottery

Until the late 1950s the traditional view of later Bronze Ap,eceramics was that the latest were the series of barrel. bucket. and globular urns from the type sites at Devere! and Rimbury in the south of England. In contrast the Food Vessel and Collared Urn tradition was still in use in the highland zone. The Wolds were included in the highland zone. despite being considered as part of the lowland zone for all other discussion.

2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.

Radio-carbon dating and new material suggested that the Deverel-Rimbury pottery started -being manufactured sometime in the middle of the second millennium (Burgess, 1974). This left a gap in the ceramic sequence between the end of Deverel -Rimbury and the All Cannings Cross style of Iron Age pottery. Radio-carbon dating also produced dates for the construction oT hillforts at Grimthorpe (Stead, 1968) and Croft Ambrey (Stanford, 197 4). which were regarded at the time as impossibly early and were consequently ignored. The excavation of the hill slope enclosure at Rams Hill produced a range of ceramics which conventionally would be considered to be Iron Age. These were dated to the period 1000 -800 be. which still a left gap in the ceramic sequence for the seventh, sixth and fifth centuries be. These so called post DeverelRim bury ceramics consist of a more diverse range of forms and a greater proportion of fine wares. Annable and Simpson ( 1964) first defined the familiar categories of vessel associated with the Deverel-Rimbury "culture", which are outlined below.

4.5.1

rounded bodies concave necks pinched out rims lugs double lugs horseshoe motifs finger nail prints below. or on top of. the rim & on the shoulder 9. stabs and slashes 10. shoulder cordons or grooves 11. ribs on or above the shoulder 12. holes below the rim 13. rustication 14. vertical smoothing. He suggested that most of these features were derived-from later neolithic-earlier Bronze Age types. and developed sequences from this assumption. He also defined three regional groups. outlined below. 1. The Dorset group These have a girth groove at shoulder level, and generally occur in a fine. grit-less fabric. 2. The Bournemouth group These generally do not show the classic form of straight tapering sides, instead their sides curve downwards and are sometimes incurving at the top. 3. The Essex group These are distinguished of rustication.

4.5.2

by the extensive use

Barrel Urns

These were defined by Calkin (1962) as a type, he describes them as urns which have a convex body. more or less concave neck. and a flat or sometimes internally bevelled rim which is expanded outwards. It can be entirely lacking in ornament but is more usually decorated on the shoulder. or on an applied shoulder cordon, and sometimes on the outer edge of the rim with finger tip or finger decoration. He also notes the presence of vertical ribs and extra cordons below the rim . Lugs are absent. He defined three types;

Bucket Urns

These form the most important component of the domestic Deverel -Rimbury assemblage (Barrett. 1980). They are straight sided, bipartite and occur in coarse fabrics, but are sometimes slipped, an innovation. They are decorated only by finger impressions, lugs and applied bands. Most vessels have a capacity of between 500- l 600ml (Barrett, 1980). Piggott ( 1963) also defines tubs. which are vessels in this category with capacities of less than 1000ml. Annable and Simpson (1964) note that the commonest feature is a horizontal cordon with finger tipped decoration. Smith ( 1961) sees these vessels as a simplified version of the "biconical" urns of Wessex.

1. The South Lodge type These exhibit comparatively rare features such as a band of swag. or chevrons on the neck as well as extra cordons or ribs. 2. 1ype A

These are defined by the presence ribs.

Calkin (1962) notes that they occur in much coarser fabrics, usually with flint temper, and that they are seldom vesicular. He uses the term to describe all Deverel-Rimbury material that cannot be considered to be either globular or barrel urns. He lists fourteen traits that are common on this type:

of plain

3. 1ype B

This group has distinctive fine tip decoration on the ribs. Usually the fabric used for these was generally fine with flint temper. Walls were generally thin and the cordons and ribs well applied. They

1. straight sides tapering downwards

45

Typology occur in a limited area of Wessex and the type sites of Deverel or Rim bury.

3. Class III. Coarse bowls These represent coarser forms of Class IV.

4.5.3

4. Class IV. Bowls These were previously regarded as indicative of the early Iron Age, and Barrett states that they represent a marked deviation from the Deverel-RJmbury tradition. However, th~ can be seen to have their origin in the ..tubs that make up part of the Deverel - Rimbury assemblage. Most bowls are made in fine fabrics and have refined surface finishes, particularly burnishing or haematite slips. This again seems to have its origin in the Deveref-RJmbury complex.

Globular Urns

These are defined by their globular form, which is a spherical body with a constriction above it leading to a more or less vertical portion below the neck. Lugs are common, as well as the base having a small nick in it . Calkin ( 1962) and Ellison (1980) define five types as follows. 1. 1ype 1

Distinguished by very light decoration impressed with a blunt tool. An upper zone of chevrons, swag or hatched triangles is common. The fabrics are generally vesicular or tempered with flint.

5. Class V. Cups These represent the smallest range of vessels and again have their origins in the Deverel Rimbury tubs. No distinction is made between fine and coarse wares.

2 . 1ype 2 Catkin's second category are those vessels which were more highly fired than the 1ype 1, with a coarser but grit -less fabric . The upper zone of decoration often consists of horizontal furrows or incised lines.

4.5.4

Deverel-Rlmbury

chronology

At Knight's Fann there is a terminus post quern for this type of post Deverel- Rimbury assemblage of 1050±100 be (Har-2929). while another date gives a terminus ante quern of 600±80 be (Har - 1012). At Aldennaston Wharf (Bradley et al., 1980) a radio -carbon date of 1290±135 be (BM-159) is associated with such an assemblage. This should be contrasted with the very late dates from Deverel-Rimbury assemblages in Wessex at Simons Ground (White, 1982), where dates from the ninth to the sixth century have been obtained. In contrast, at the Knighton Heath cemetery the dates range from 1200±49 be (BM-870) to 1102±50 be (BM-1102). Similarly the assemblage from West Overton consists of the full range of DeverelRimbury urns together with sherds of Potterne type pottery; the fatter is dated by Gingell (1980) to the sixth century, contemporary with the All Cannings Cross type of pottery. At the Kimpton cemetery a date range of 2060± 180 be (Har -4316) and 1470±100 be (Har -4317) was obtained for an assemblage of not only DeverelRim bury urns but also two post DeverelRimbury jars. Dacre and Ellison (1981) note that these dates are somewhat earlier than expected.

3. 1ype 2a

Tiiese have a series of 5- 1O furrows or incised lines around the neck, and occasionally fingertip impressions were added.

4. 1ype 2b These have strongly incised lines on the neck. Usually there were either a large number of lines (up to 20) or they alternate with lines of chevrons .or swag. It should be noted that Whitchurch Urn A.395 has a haematite fabric. 5. 1ype Miscellaneous Calkin also defined a fifth group consisting of 1ype 2 vessels with a fype 1 fabric. Ellison (1980) noted that globular urns represent the fine ware element in Wessex Deverel Rimbury assemblages, and should be equated with Sussex Jars, Thames Jars, and Trevisker Jars. Barrett ( 1980) considered the pottery assemblage from the very end of the later Bronze AJ!.eor the very early Iron Age, with the intention of defining ceramic assemblages which must post date Deverel-Rimbury pottery. He defined five types of vessel found in the assemblages from Knights Fann, Brooklands, Stoke Clump Jack's Hill, Long Wittenham, and Mill Hill, Deal: These are as follows.

It can be seen that the post Deverel-Rimbury

and the Deverel-Rimbury assemblages have overlapping date ranges, although DeverelRimbury pottery does seem to start being manufactured earlier. Cunlilf e (197 4a) similarly sees Deverel-Rimbury carrying on to the very end of the later Bronze Age, before it is replaced by the All Cannings Cross style of pottery.

1. Class I. Large coarse ware jars These may represent the continuation of the Bucket Urn tradition. In general they are made from coarse fabrics, and where decoration occurs it takes the form of applied cordons and finger impressions.

The assemblages used by Barrett to demonstrate the presence of post Deverel-Rimbury pottery all come from sites outside Wessex, except Rams Hill which overlooks the Thames Valley. It is apparent that outside of Wessex there is a very different sequence of ceramics, with both Globular Urns and Barrel Urns not occurring outside of this area. Barrett sees Sussex Jars and Trevisker Jars, as representing the fine war~ tradition of Devere I-Rim bury outside Wessex .

2. Class II. Fine ware Jars These occur in a wider range of sizes than Class I Jars, and carry incised line and stamped motifs .

46

Earlier Prehistoric Pottery Production Age. Outside Wessex, Barrel Urns are contemporary with the very latest use of Beakers, Collared Urns and Food Vessels. They represent an intermediate phase between this tradition and the post Deverel -Rimbury assemblages defined by Barrett. This also coincides with the apparent shift in settlement away from Wessex in the later Bronze Age (Bradley, 1984).

These middle Bronze Age um assemblages have a tenninus ante quern of about 1100 be, while the later assemblages all occur after this date. Thus there is a clearer sequence. The Barrett phenomena is purely a spatial difference, not a temporal one. In Wessex the Deverel -Rimbury culture has its origins in the the Wessex culture itself and continues to suIVive to the early Iron

4.6 The typology of Deverel-Rimbury

ceramics in Yorkshire

In the previous section it has been suggested that the Deverel -Rimbury tradition of ceramics may be a purely Wessex phenomena. However some elements of this ceramic style have been found in Yorkshire, examples of which are illustrated in Figure 4 .5 & 4.6.

The only true "Urnfields" are at Catfoss and Garton Slack. At Catfoss a total of 10 burials were placed within, and outside, a penannular ditch. The urns were a mixture of bucket and barrel forms. Decoration included finger grooves, a beaded rim, finger tip decoration and a simple groove below the rim.

The only Globular Um in Yorkshire comes from Barrow 160, Hutton Bushel (Manby. 1980). This vessel is undecorated but has a moulded rim and an internal bevel. Two urns from Malton, now lost, are Bucket Urns complete with decoration. One has an applied rib half way down the body which has been decorated with fingertip decoration. The other has a line of finger tip decoration on the body.

At Court Green, Wilton, eighteenth century workmen found five urns arranged in a circle beneath a pavement. These urns were "flower pot" shaped, probably Bucket Urns. One was decorated with rows of semi-lunar indentations made with the finger nail (Elgee, 1930). Unfortunately these vessels are now lost. A number of other vessels have been found in burial contexts which can be suggested to be Bucket or Barrel Urns. Domestic assemblages of bucket and barrel urns have been found at Towing and beneath the barrow on Ampleforth moor (Wainwright and Longworth, 1969).

At Towing itself a Bucket Um was found in the central hollow. This had a cuIVilinear rim and can be compared to the vessel from Marley Coombe Hill. The Towing um also has very fine finger rims, a characteristic of Deverel -Rimbury pottery.

4. 7 Post Deverel-Rimbury

ceramics in Yorkshire

The bulk of the material considered in this thesis belongs to the ceramic phase currently called "Post Deverel -Rimbury", first formulated by Barrett ( 1976). This style of pottery was in use in the first half of the first millennium be, corresponding to Burgess's (1974) Wallington and Heathery Burn industrial phases. Apart from Towing the material considered belongs to the Heathery Bum period .

This work is an aside to the main project, so it is . largely based upon published material rather than consideration of the pottery itself. Where a form or quantity is derived from the primary material this is indicated . The results for Devil's Hill are based upon the actual material and the archive drawings of it made available by the East Riding Archaeological Research Committee. The data from Towing is based upon obseivations of the material itself and the pottery archive prepared by T.G. Manby and the author.

At Thwing, some of the pottery is Deverel Rimbury type bucket and barrel forms, however these will b-e discussed along with the true post Deverel -Rimbury ceramics found on other sites. (see figures 4. 7 and 4.8)

The assemblages will be Ellison's (1980) division into coarse wares. Several criteria to decide upon the "fineness"

No accepted typology exists for Yorkshire in this period, although several distinct forms have been isolated. The following sections try to provide a typology that is equivalent to southern England. This has the aim of trying to isolate features of the pottery that may be related to either chronological changes or place of manufacture, and bence provide a chronological framework for this thesis.

1. 2. 3. 4.

compared using fine, everyday, and are normally used of a vessel:

wall thickness amount and size of aplastics presence of burnishing visual appearance of the vessel.

In this study an attempt has been made to define the "fineness" of the vessels by measuring the wall thickness of the sherd . This is not

47

I ' I I

I I I ,

I

•••11A~,~••••••'

. I

,\DQ]

I/

I

'

rn QJ\JJ.I Drn CD

~

00

12

OJ

o

0

__

i..... 0

~

~'\\

111111111111111111111111111 Vertical Incised lines

IDO

000

;:r

;·

:J. (')

d' ....

! ~

lnfilled Triangles

l6

.... ....

C) ~ /\lii'i'S;\Mi~ Y U1t11,7 l.Yl.P\;Y V CY

::a

Cabling

Figure 4.9: Thwtng motifs

Figure 4. 10: Staple Howe motifs

Figure 4.11: Scarborough motifs

Typology

Fingertip - fingernail decoration

Howe. At Scarborough the cordons are invariably fingertip impressions. At Thwing and Staple Howe diagonal fingernail impressions are sometimes present.

This represents the simplest form of decoration, and can be found on ceramics of virtually any prehiStortc period! However, it is a very common element in Deverel-Rimbury and continental Urnfield ceramics. This has led many writers to suggest that this material derives from the continent rather than from an indigenous Deverel-RJmbury pottery tradition. In the Yorkshire assemblages into three basic types:

At Staple Howe alone complex patterns of fingernail decoration on cordons are known, very similar to some Deverel-Rimbury motifs. The use of fingertip or fingernail impressions is common to ·all the assembfages. It occurs in the following forms:

it can be divided

1. on added cordons 2. straight onto the vessel wall 3. complex patterns .

1. fingertip impressions on the rim 2. fi!}gertip impressions on the shoulder 3. fingertip impressions on both the rim and shoulder 4 . widely spaced impressions on the shoulder.

The use of applied cordons is commonest at Scarborough, is a predomina n t feature of the Staple Howe decorated pottery , and also occurs at Towing. It is virtually absent at Devil's Hill and Grtmthorpe . Brewster ( 1963) no tes th at this decoration is commonest in phase 1 of Staple

At Devil's Hill there is a unique example of the use of fingernail decoration on the top of the rim . At Staple Howe and Towing several vessels have beading or cabling on top of the rim, and Staple Howe it also occurs around the shoulder . It is a very rare element in the other assemblages.

4.8

Conclusions

The chronological changes of the form and decoration of tne post Deverel -Rimbury pottery

considered in this thesis following table.

are shown

Table 4.4: Chronological variations of form and decoration I

I

C14 Date

DATE

Site

1200 be

Thwing Grimthorpe

1100 1000

Forms

Decoration

DeverelRimbury Barrels Bucket urns

Finger Ribs Fingernail & tip on cordons

As above+ carinated shoulder

&

900 Carinated & furrowed bowls More angular

800 700 600

Staple Devil's

Howe II Hill

very angular Globular

. 54

Fingertip on rim

in the

Earlier

Prehistoric

Pottery Production

Chapter 5

TECHNOLOGY The preceding chapter discusses the typologies of the vessels considered in this study, and one fundamental point that emerges ts that typology and function are linked. This can be seen in Thurnam's original classification (1871) and and Ellison's division (1980). Both are typologies based solely upon function. Woods ( 1986 a& b) notes that the form, method of manufacture and types of fabrics used for cooking vessels does not vary very much from the Neolithic to the postmedieval period - i.e. a period of five thousand years, virtually the entire time man has been making pottery in Britain. A post-medieval change was brought about by mechanisation and the cheap production of metal cooking vessels.

neck is restricted by the size of the potters hand. A plastic clay could be used, or the walls could be thinned by scraping to allow the use of a less plastic clay. The use of coils/rings would result in the neck being too big and the walls could not be thinned without becoming too weak to prevent sagging during drying. An alternative would be to use a wrap, such as string or reed, to support the vessel during construction. The tendency is for a flared form to result. As each coil is added, the clay is forced upwards and outwards by the potters fingers. The solution that the manufacturers of Dutch beakers used was quite simple. The base was modelled from a single lump of fairly plastic clay, thinned and allowed to dry to leather hardness, then the rest of the vessel was made by coiling, using a wrap to support it. A similar example is that the requirements for a rim coil are obviously different to those in the body. A rim has to be more plastic in order to shape it, and does not have to support anything other than itself .

Burnishing (Smith, 1974), lugs (Smith, 1974; Manby, 1980; Barrett, 1980) and lids (Barrett, 1980) can be considered to be purely functional or technological features. Longworth ( 1984) suggests that the collars on Collared Urns may relate to their use as drums, or at least an organic covering. Morris ( 1985) also notes the use of a special fabric for the manufacture of briquetage. Howard ( 1982) notes the use of special clays for inner moulds but coarser, more readily available clays for the outer moulds.

The inference is simple; the potter was not bothered about sample homogeneity or mineralogical com position, he was simply trying to make pots that people could use. This chapter aims firstly to review the evidence for the technology of pottery and suggest what effects this may have on analyttcaf data. It overlaps somewhat with the following chapter on production sites. The distinction is that this chapter seeks to outline processes and the evidence from the sherds themselves. The following chapter outlines the archaeological manifestations of these processes.

Few analytical studies of pottery have considered in detail the effect technology has on analytical results, and in particular the relationship between function, form and fabric. Similarly many of the assumptions that are made in provenance studies are about the way pottery was produced. For example widespread trade in raw materials would render provenance studies meaningless. A knowledge of the production history of a sherd is crucial to the interpretation of thin section data. A particular clay /aplastic recipe may control the production method or vice versa. For example the late roman calcite gritted pottery made in East Yorkshire has the same range of forms and method of manufacture as the later Bronze Age pottery considered in this thesis (see Evans 1985).

Of fundamental importance is the actual clay mineralogy which is discussed below. Strictly, a clay is a sediment where over 75% of the constituents have a shott axis size of less than 11256mm. Theoretically at least, any mineral such as quartz can gain this size class and be considered to be a clay mineral. Several groups of minerals commonly occur in this size class and are referred to as the "clay minerals". Many of them, but not all, share several properties which give rise to the non-scientific definition of a clay. Notably they are plastic when wet and harden when heated - these are the properties that allow clay to be used to make pottery. These properties are described in more detail later. To the more primitive potter this is all that is important. Essentially clay minerals are hydrolysed alumino-s111cates with a sheet

There are many stages in the manufacture of pottery; they are all interrelated and represent practical solutions to practical problems. The prehistoric potter was trying to produce pottery for a variety of practical purposes. For example, consider the practical problem of producing a tall fine vessel with a narrow neck, a beaker, and the solution offered by Van der Leeuw (1976). If the vessel ts modelled then the the size of the

55

Technology structure (Pettijohn, 1975 ), and this suggests on e possible origin for clays; the weathering of feldspars. In order to avoid difficulties in nomenclature throughout this thesis the term clay and clay mineral are used exclusively to describe these plastic minerals, and not as a particle size class. The many minerals which commonly occur in the clay size grade, such as quartz, but are not plastic, are termed aplasttcs and no size distinction is made. This is a useful term because it overcomes the problems of definition and can also be used to describe all non-organic or plastic particles in pottery, whether they occur naturally or are deliberately added.

A very plastic clay can be made less plastic by the addition of aplastics, a process known as tempering. There are several desirable properties for a temper. It must have a thermal expansion rate close to the clay itself, the clay must be able to adhere to the particles, and it should not disintegrate during firing. Rye (1976) compared the different properties of tempers used and noted that basic igneous rocks make the best tempers, "quartz the worst". Calcite is better than grog (crushed pottery) in some respects but it disintegrates at around 750 C. The presence of particular tempers and aplastics can give an indication of firing temperature (table 5.1). Clays may already contain aplastics, for example glacial clays often have a high proportion of quartz present . Similarly gabbroic clays contain fragments of basic igneous rocks.

The exact properties required by the potter depends upon what he intends to do. For example there is no point in producing a porous pot to hold water. However Woods (1986 a&b) notes that the "primitive" potter's primary purpose is to obtain potting clays which promote easy firing. As plasticity is caused by water being absorbed between the plates, high plasticity also means high shrinkage during drying and firing. Thus pure montmorillonites cannot be used for potting (Sheppard, 1954). Montmorillonites are formed by the chemical erosion of basic igneous rocks partially in sub-aerial or sub-marine

5.1 Obtaining

conditions (Leeder, 1982). In contrast kaolinite, formed by the chemical erosion of granites, does not absorb water readily, so it can be used on its own for potting. Its low plasticity means that it has to be manufactured when very wet.

In summary, the raw materials for making pottery can be divided into two types, clay and aplastics, and a potter mixes and makes use of the properties of both of them to manufacture a vessel.

raw mate rials Potting is no t the only activity which requires clay to be available on a settlemen t. Others include daub production , building ovens or making pits impervious. Cunliffe and Brown (1984) interpret a dump of clay at Danebury as being imported for daub production. Mortimer (1905) notes that many of the barrows on the Wolds contain "foreign clay" imported from valley bottoms and that burials were sometimes covered by boat shaped pieces of clay to protec t them from percolating ground water.

The presence o f clay mining pits on archaeological sit es is discussed in chapter six. Detecting pits which wer e dug exclusively to mine clay is virtually impossible using archaeology. It is only when a pit is irregular and has no apparent function that t11ey are suggested to have been used for mining clay, for example Stacey Bushes (Green, 1976). The reverse situation is also impossible to prov e; any cut feature in an area of clay subsoil will produce copious amounts of clay which could be used in potting. Th e upcast from any such feature is usually waste which has to be disposed of. In addition beds of clay not normally exposed may be revealed . This is the case at Thwtng where beds of marl were exposed during the course of ditch digging .

While the technological requirements of potting clay may be different to these other uses , the presence of such clay demonstrates it was being either imported or extracted.

5.2 Preparing the clay Virtually no clay can simply be mined and then used for potting. There are various reasons for this, all connected with improving the potting properties of the clay. A clay with a low proportion of aplastics is difficult to dry and fire but is easy to work. A recipe with a higher proportion of a plastics is harder to work but it is stronger. ·

requirements depend upon the precise method of manufacture that w111 be used and the required end product. This is discussed in more detail later. Essentially the more vigorous the manufacturing method, or the more elaborate the form, the more plastic the clay has to be. In contrast the larger the vessel the less plastic the clay has to be.

The fundamental property which a potter will try to alter is the plasticity of the clay. The exact

It is often assumed that temper was always added to clay before manufacture , but the

56

Earlier

Prehistoric

Pottery Production

5.2.3

reverse situation also occurs; some clays contain too many tm purities and so have to be refined. There are other properties which are also important. One example ts allowing gases to escape during firing. This again is at least in part related to the compositi on of the paste that ts used. The clay and temper have to be thoroughly mixed by kneading to ensure both the removal of air pockets and that the clay and temper adhere.

In many ways the key to successful provenance studies ts the successful detection of tern per. It has long been assumed that this ts easy to do. Sheppard ( 1954) suggests the various properties that can be used to detect temper in thin section: 1. Size 2. Composition 3. Shape

Oum ps of clay are known from roman kiln sites and are in fact a common feature, for example Hartley ( 1960) describes such dumps in the Nene valley. These kiln sites were using semimass production methods, which would have demanded more clay than for prehistoric production. Therefore the lack of such dumps on prehistoric sites might simply be a function of the scale of production. However it does mean that in general the evidence for this stage of production only comes from the sherds themselves.

It will be shown that size and shape in many cases, particularly quartz, ts a function of the mode of transport. It ts argued that unless this variable ts defined, then size and shaped are often inapplicable in distinguishing temper. The mode of transport can be determined directly; Wardle and Warren ( 1986) describe how the mode of deposition can be used to distinguish temper by looking at surface features on the quartz grains with a scanning electron microscope.

The various processes involved are described in the following sections .

5.2.1

Size

Levigation

A common assumption is that if a particle in pottery ts large , then it can be regarded as temper. This ts simplistic and incorrect. Glacial clays, for example, can contain aplastics, called erratics, which are many metres in diameter . Similarly it has often been stated that a bimodal particle size distribution represents the particle size distribution of a clay and added temper . This again is clearly simplistic - virtually all sediments are polymodal, with each successive phase of deposition represented by a separate particle size distribution . All that can be said is that a bimodal particle size distribution may be due to the addition of a temper to a clay .

Levtgation is the process by which non-clay minerals are removed from a clay in suspension. Primitive potters do use levigation as a technique ; Hampe and Winter ( 1962) describe modern Cretan potters who levigate clay, and Swan (1984) suggests that it was the norm for Roman potters . Levtgatton pits have been recognised on Roman kiln sites such as St. Albans (Anthony, 1968) and Bramham, Bedfordshire (Tilson, 1973) . While some structures on prehistoric sites may be connected with this sort of activity, such as Thorpe Thewles (Swain and Heslop, 1984) or Staple Howe (Brewster, 1963), this evidence is unproven.

The underlying assumption is that clays mined for potting were fine and did not contain coarse a plastics (particles in the sand or granule size grade). This ts clearly not generally the case but there are exceptions; the gabbroic clays described by Peacock (1988) are examples of this. It therefore follows that size cannot be used directly to distinguish tern per unless the original particle size distribu tton of the source clay ts already known and can be com pared. This again means provenanctng the clay as a separate entity and then looking at the particle size distrtbu tion. The reverse is the normal procedure a particle size distributi on will be used to provenance a "fabric" to a particular locality (see Williams, 1984 for an exa mple of this).

Detecting leviga tion in thin section is virtually impossible, the evidence will always be ambiguous. Even if a truncated grain size distribution could be detected, it can never be proved whether that clay was leviga ted by aqueous transport or by man . Levigating a clay then adding a tern per ts impossible to detect. This ts discussed in more detail later. The only possible procedure would be to provenance the clay by mineral ogy alone, and then com pare the particle size distribution with the source.

5.2.2

Other methods

Temper

of refining clay

While it can be assumed that in prehistory levtgation proper was never used, other methods may well have been employed. At the simplest level it can be inferred that the coarsest particles would have been simply picked out from the clay. It will be shown later that the maximum size of aplastics present in a sherd is a function of wall thickness. This infers that this type of process must have taken place in prehistory . Sheppard ( 1954) reports that San Ildefosso potters winnow ground clay in a light breeze.

Composition Artificial materials obviously must have been deliberately added as a temper. Examples include grog - crushed pottery or slag. In addition some minerals , particularly in a crystalline state, do not occur in the sedimentary environments which produce clay. Crystalline calcite is an example of this, commonly occurring in veins in sedimentary rocks due to hydrothermal activity, and disintegrating almost

57

Technology immediately during transport. In contrast evaportte deposits such as gypsum or haltte often form in sedimentary deposits and could therefore naturally occur in a clay.

grains have been reworked. The shape (and for that matter the size) is the net result of the entire depositional history of the quartz grain. For example if the source rocks for a sediment ts the aeolian Old Red Sandstone, then the grains will be rounded whatever the degree or mode of transport. Therefore in order to assess if differences in quartz grain shape indicate the addition of temper, then the shape spectra of the original clay has to be known or the mode of deposition has to be determined.

Some rocks and minerals may have been artificially altered before they are added as temper. For example flint may be burnt before it is added (Hodges, 1963), for the simple reason that it will explode during firing if 1t has not been burnt.

Shape The shape of mineral and rock fragments has sometimes been used to infer that something has been added as a temper (Hodges, 1963) , particularly quartz grains. There are a number of difficulties in doing this, discussed in the following sections for several of the common minerals. They all relate to the fact that the shape of a mineral or rock fragment in a sediment is a complex function of a number of variables relating to both the composition of the grain, for example hardness and cleavage or mode of transport . In pottery the shape may also be a function of the manufacturing process, for example deliberate .crushing. The shape of a quartz grain is a function of its mode of transport, source and len~h of time it was transported for (Pettijohn, 1975). The source becomes less important with longer or high energy transport. Quartz grains will usually only be angular if the sediment is sourced from an igneous rock. Fluid transport, in water or air, results in very rounded grains, with a spherical shape is characteristic of aeolian transport (Krtnsley and Doornkamp, 1973). The durability of quartz and its common occurrence in sedimentary rocks means that many quartz

With other rocks and minerals shape can sometimes be used to distinguish tern per . For example calcite becomes very rounded very quickly during transport . However , in the case of calcite, what is important ts not the shape but whether or not the grain edges follow the distinctive cleavage that calcite has, therefore indicating deliberate crushing . In general if rock and mineral fragm ents ar e angular they are regarded as being tern per . This ts simplistic and wfiat can actualfy be stated is that the angularity suggests addition rather than proves it. Conversely rounded fragments could be added as part of a sand . Several natural situations can produce angular fragments of rock which could be incorporated into pottery, as follows: 1.

Glacial transport angular fragments.

usually

gives rise to

2.

Distance to source. Very near to the source of hard rocks particles will tend to be angular. For exam pie stream deposits near the Malverns always contain very angular fragments of rock. The use of such deposits has positive advantages for the potter because the rock does not have to be crushed.

5.3 Forming the vessel Woods (1986 a&b) notes that the commonest method of forming vessels in prehistory was by coil/ring butldtng. This technique consists of rolling tbe clay into cons or rings and placing them on top of one another. The coil Joins are subsequently smoothed over .

5.3.1 Detecting wheel thrown pottery in thin section Hodges (1962) suggests that it is impossible to be sure how a vessel was formed from thin section evidence alone. He carried out experiments using the same clay /temper mixture for coil/ ring building and wheel throwing. He recorded a marked orientation of the larger inclusions, with their long axes parallel to the sides of the sherd in wheel thrown pottery. Further experiments were carried out mixing a white clay which formed a fine film between coil Junctions. He concluded that in the first experiments no differences were detected because of the homogeneity of the clay. It should be noted that vertically cut thin sections should be used to detect coils and horizon tally cut sections to demonstrate wheel thrown production. Woods ( 1986 a&b) uses tangential thin sections and the property of preferred alignments to demonstrate that wheel thrown

The main distinction generally made is between "hand made vessels" and "wheel thrown" pottery. This is totally false - all pottery studied in archaeology is hand made, and machines were not used. The term hand made is commonly used as a synonym for not being wheel thrown, and virtually only for coil/ring butlding. This is clearly simplistic, with virtually all pottery being turned on some kind of platform. The essential point is that "wheel thrown" pottery utilises centripetal and centrifugal force to form the vessel.

58

Earlier Prehistoric

Pottery Production

pottery can always be detected. This was not discussed by Hodges (1962), and may account at least in part for his results. However he did record that there was

determining whether a vessel is hand made or not is actually irrelevant, as the potters wheel had yet to be introduced to Britain. What ts important is whether the vessel was coil/ring built, modelled or constructed by slab and anvil. It turns out that the vast majority of vessels are coil/ring built and all the others are rare. Figure 5.1 shows how coil/ring built pottery can be distinguished in thin section.

"alteration of clay minerals near the junction and the development of flow structures." He concluded that

5.3.2.1

"While it is quite clear that the mere absence of any ring building cannot be taken as evidence that the technique was not used, especially where one is considering a body of homogeneous nature, there shoula be no such difficulty in determining whether a pot has been hand built or wheel thrown unless all the inclusions are of equiaxial dimensions since particles w111 show horizontal orientation in wheel thrown pottery while in poorly wedged bodies a horizontal flow structure will develop."

5.3.2

Coil/ring

building

Coils can be made by either rolling lumps of clay on a horizontal slab or by rubbing backwards be tween the palms of the hands held vertically (Hodges, 1963). The length and diameter of coil that can be used is a function of the size of the vessel required , wall thickness and plasticity of the clay and the potter's skill. The more plastic the clay the thinner the con that can be made (Sheppard, 1954). Virtually any clay can be used to coil build, with virtually any concentration of a plastics. The simplest method of coil building ts to form rings of clay and then lay them on top of each other, but this does mean wasting parts of the coil and Joining the ring, which acts as a weak point. Ring building does have the advantage that it leaves a level edge.

"Handmade pottery"

If British prehistoric pottery, dated to before 300 be, ts being exclusively considered then

coil

Q

coil junction

CJ

slab junction

0 5 mm

2·5 mm

2'5 mm

Figure 5.1: Examples of thin sections showing pottery manufacturing

59

features

Technology Bonding the coils together is of primary importance because tbey act as planes of weakness along which the pot will break (Rye, 1976). Diagonal coil joins, or tongue and groove, tncreases the surface of the join and hence its strenj!th. It also has the advantage that it assists the snaping of the vessel (Woods, 1986 a&b). Woods also notes that in cooking vessels at least, the type of coil varies with date. Bonding may be prevented by a lack of plasticity in the clay and also by the presence of air pockets or material picked up during potting. This may be visible on the surface or in thin section, where such voids are normally easily distinguished (Hodges, 1963) provided a vertical thin section is used. Coil1ng can also produce a slight preferred alignment of nonequidimensional grains. When the rolls of clay are joined and smoothed together particles are pushed into a vertical position.

A. Horizontal-simple

This represents of coils, but it quantity. The Junction on a Speymouth .

coil Junction

the most simple possible joining has yet to be recorded in any only example is a single coil neolithic bowl from Boghead ,

B. Forward oblique In this type the actual Junction is flat and slopes from the outside of the vessel to the inside. It is absent on neolithic pottery but occurs on Biconical Urns, Bucket Urns and Food Vessels, as well as on a pygmy cup from Killellan Farm . While all these vessels are of similar date (the middle of the Bronze Age), 1t only occurs on exceptionally large vessels. This points to it being a technique reserved for this purpose.

Woods ( 1986 a&b) has pointed out the difficulties involved with forming a vessel tn this manner and some possible solutions that potters may have used. The principle problem is Joining the coils. Van der Leeuw ( 1976) suggests for beakers that the method of coiling, and in particular joining the coils, at least partially controls the finaf form of the vessel. Detailed study of the cons may produce information about the precise technology involved in construction. Van der Leeuw's ( 1976) experiments showed that it is easier to dry a vessel a coil at a time, and subsequently wet the top of the coil before Joining the next one. Although a long winded process, it will give rise to a thin film of clay between coils. This is precisely the effect observed by Hodges ( 1963) in his experiments.

5.3.2.2

following discussion is an outline classification of coil types and a consideration of how far this is related to date .

Forward oblique

Reverse oblique

Coil junction types see fig 5.2

The interrelationship of form and technology suggested by Van der Leeuw came from practical considerations of how to manufac ture bell Beakers which are thin walled, tall and have constricted necks. The use of rats tails type of coils 3-5mm in diameter, coiled in spirals, is one solution . Unfortunately this is only feasible if the coils are very wet and hence there are problems in drying the vessel. Laying the coils in rings is simpler and means that thicker coils can be used , but a cylinder results. This problem can be overcome by using a roof tile effect for the coil Junctions; they are Joined obliquely. The key point from this work is that coil junction type will vary and has significance.

Altern ate oblique

Tongue and groove

Woods ( 1986 a&b) 1llustrates some of the common types of coil Junction . Her work raises the possibil1ty, although she does not state it, that coil form might relate to chronology . Woods argues that any such effect is the result of changes in the underlying technology and therefore any changes are a measure of that, not pure chronology. '1'his is of course true, but never the less indicates that it may be a way of dating sherds. The importance of this is that it could be universally applied to coil built pottery regardless of sherd size or decoration. The

Figure 5.2: 60

Coil junction types

Earlier

Prehistoric

Pottery Production minor importance in this study because they are at present unrecorded in British prehistory. These include paddle and anvil techniques and moulding.

C. Reverse oblique

In this type the juncti on slopes up from the outside to the in side of the vessel. The method is used on two neolithic bo wls fr om Boghead, Speymouth. On a Biconical Urn it is used on either side of an applied strip of clay. It was used to form the bases of two vessels from Ardnave, with the upper portions being formed using forward oblique junctions.

5.3.5 Thinning and finishing tec hniques These are normally detectable in hand specimen, not thin section, with the exception of slipping, when a layer of finer clay is added to the surface of the vessel. The different methods of finishing a vessel are outlined by Sheppard (1954).

D. Alternate oblique Junctions

A number of vessels have coils which consist of alternate forward and reverse oblique junctions. This method is totally absent on neolithic vessels but is used on Bucket and Biconical Urns.

5.3.6

As clay is worked in a moist or semi-moist state it cannot be fired straight away, as the large contraction in volume that would take place as the water was expelled would rupture the vessel. The shaped vessel has to be dried before firing in order to avoid the resulting thermal shock. This was perhaps the biggest problem for the prehistoric potter and is of course why aplastics are added to the clay, as discussed previously.

E. Tongue and groove

Woods ( 1986 a& b) and Hodges ( 1963) have both pointed out the added strength that results from joining coils with a tongue and groove type of joint. This in fact represents an extreme case of the same generic effect. Here tongue and groove is defined as where the centre of the bottom coil is markedly surrounded on both sides by the next upper coil. It has been found almost exclusively on neolithic pottery, with the exception of a Bronze Age vessel from Shrewton.

5.3.3

During drying water is lost firstly by evaporation, which brings the clay particles into contact with each other, hence causing the shrinkage. The remaining water is held in capillary spaces and only escapes slowly (Sheppard, 1954). The addition of a tern per which does not shrink therefore reduces the overall amount of contraction that will take place, and reduces the possibil1ty of cracking. Swan ( 1984) suggests that for the Roman period the vagaries of the British climate meant that this must have taken place indoors using artificial heat. It is debatable whether drying was carried out in ovens or not in the prehistoric period - this is discussed later. In the Roman period at least there were dual purpose ovens also being used for corn drying (Swan, 1984). Having observed experimental use of ovens at Cosmeston Medieval vmage, I suspect that these structures were multipurpose, being used for many tasks including cooking and corn drying.

Modelling techniques

Although this is perhaps the simplest way of producing a vessel, it does infer a lack of skill on behalf of the potter. The method consists of taking a lump of clay and pulling the clay outwards till a vessel is formed. In general it is the quickest way of forming a vessel but primitive potters use it to roughly form a vessel before finishing with a different technique. Lothrop (1927) gives examples and describes how potters in Guataajiagua in Salvador firstly form a crude vessel shape by modell1ng, and subsequently improve it by a mixture of paddle and anvil technique and co111ng.The potter takes a cylinder of clay and punches a depression, then works the vessel roughly into shape with diagonal strokes. This relatively crude form with thick walls and a flat base is then finished by the potter first thinning, then smoothing and shaping the upper parts of the vessel. The rim is formed, the vessel ts inverted and a hole is made in the base; the bottom ts then formed by paddle and anvil techniq ue. Paddle and anvil ts a special case of model production; the anvil ts an item like a pebble which ts held on the inside of the vessel while the outside is beaten into shape.

5. 3. 7 Firing Firing is the process that converts the clays and aplastics into what we loos ely call ceramics or potte ry . The process is a series of complex chemical processes, but in essence the plastic clays plates change to being rigid. Some clays and pottery recipes are effectively self firing. For example some clays contain quantities of petroleum which ignites during firing, an effect that can be imitated artificially by using dried dung as a temper. This is one way that vesicular fabrics can arise.

Van der Leeuw's ( 1976) description of beaker manufacture suggests that bell1es and bases of beakers were modelled and then the upper parts of the vessel were made by co111ng.

5.3.4 Other techniques vessel

Drying the vessel

The colour of the pottery is a function both of its original composition and the atmosphere during firing. In the type of bonfire kilns used in prehistory, atmosphere could only be crudely controlled. It should be noted however that if a vessel is fired upside down, the inside of the pot

for forming a

Ethnographic studies report other techniques for producing pottery vessels. However they are of

61

Technology will effectively become a reducing atmosphere when the oxygen is exhausted. The early work of Cornwall and Hodges ( 1963) details how different firing conditions control the colour of a particular vessel, which is readily detectable in thin section.

The followtn~ chapter sets out the evidence for the type oT kilns or bonfire used in the prehistoric period.

5.4 Conclusions This chapter, with the evidence of production sites, demonstrates that pottery studies of any type must take technological factors into account . Potting was until recently always carried out 1n an empirical manner based upon knowledge and skill. It was not an exact science, and therefore technology may have a

considerable bearing on scientific analytical studies of pottery. Chapter seven gives a comprehensive review of thin section studies from the point of view of trade; it is to be regretted that the same cannot be done for technological evidence from thin sections .

62

Earlier Prehistoric Pottery Production

Chapter 6 ARCHAEOLOGICAL EVIDENCE OF POTTERY PRODUCTION 6.1

INTRODUCTION

Despite the assertion that pottery production in prehistory was largely a domestic activity there is a paucity of evidence for its occurrence. Cunliffe (1974b) for example, states that:

indicating pottery production and to consider alternative interpretations. Secondly, similar evidence from Yorkshire sites is considered. This evidence, if accepted, is crucial to any consideration of petrological evidence from both Yorkshire and the rest of Britain, as the aim of such analysis is to pin point such production sites.

"Nothing is yet known of the production sites themselves, but it is unlikely that elaborate kilns existed since simple bonfire firing would have been sufficient to produce die wares: little archaeological evidence can be expected to have survived."

This chapter clearly overlaps with the chapter on ceramic technology (chapter five) - the distinction that has been made is artificial. In general the chapter on technology discusses the evidence from the pottery itsel(- particularly in thin section, and the processes involved. In contrast the current chapter discusses the structural and artefactual evidence that results from the production process.

Similarly Burgess (1980) states that: "there is no evidence for industrialised potting" in the Neolithic and Bronze Age.

Throughout this chapter the excavator's original labels for structures and features are used in the hope that the following discussions can be related back to the original work.

Whilst it is true that it is difficult, but not impossible, to distinguish between a domestic hearth and a bonfire kiln, other stages in pottery production may leave distinguishable traces. Several lines of evidence can be suggested, the presence of the following may indicate production:

The clearest example comes from Atlantic Trading Estate, Barry, due to the fact that its significance was recognised during excavation. Tfie fact that this site was excavated with reference to the present study, and the meticulous detail of the recording, means that it provides a key to the interpretation of the other sites. It is discussed last, with reference to all the other sites. It is unfortunate that the timescales involved mean that no scientific dating or analysis of the pottery can be presented here.

1. wasters 2. artefacts which have been used in production 3. raw materials 4. structural evidence for curing or mining clay 5. distinctive manufacturing assemblages . The purpose of this chapter is firstly to review the evidence that has been interpreted as

6.2 6.2.1

NON-YORKSHIRE PRODUCTION SITES Ellean an Tighre

burnt paved area used as a hearth 1 x 0.75m in size. Kiln 2 consisted of a small hearth and oven while Kiln 3 consisted of a small flue, a small oven and another paved hearth surrounded by a wall on one side. About 2000 sherds of pottery were found as well as deposits of clay: some of

Lindsay-Scott ( 1950) describes a working hollow on this site which he interpreted as being a potter's workshop. Within this working holfow three "kilns" were found. Kiln 1 was simply a

63

Production Sites the lumps present.

of clay had

finger

impressions

6.2.3 Stacey Bushes, Buckinghamshire

Simpson (1976) suggests that these deposits are domestic, not industrial, deposits due to the lack of wasters. However comparison with other neolithic settlements on the Scottish Islands shows that invariably houses had a central hearth surrounded by stones. For example Scord of Brouster (Whittle, 1986) or similarly Ronaldsay on the Isle of Man, although it should be noted that some of these examples are later than Eilean an Tighre. Several factors argue against these kilns/ovens being domestic:

Green (1976) suggested that several gullies were cut into the clay sub-soil in order to extract the clay. He suggested three possible reasons: 1. manufacture of daub 2. marling 3. pottery manufacture. The low lime content of the Blisworth Clay suggests that marling was not the purpose of the clay quarrying. The lack of any convincing structure or any recovery of daub precludes the second. In contrast Sofranoff s petrological analysis (1976) shows that the clay sub-soil from this feature bears a marked similarity to the typical fabric used to make Grims ton Ware, found on the site, and hence potting was the probable reason for its extraction.

1. No obvious building surrounds them. The buildings found are clearly later than the pottery workshop. 2. The extensive burnt deposits over the floors of the kiln structures would only result from industrial activity or destruction of the building.

The features on this site consist of possible post/ stakeholes; there was no structure to these features suggesting the deliberate removal of the timbers. These features could be interpreted as being wind breaks. The gullies themselves were undercut precluding a structural interpretation. This ignores the arguments of Reynolds ( 1979) for the alteration of such features by animal action. Green suggests that the unusual shape of the pits, banana shaped, may have been due to their close proximity to huts or the fact they had been used for clay burrowing. One of the clay burrows was filled with charcoal flecks, bone fragments and pottery - both Grooved Ware and Grtmston ware.

3. It is difficult to interpret "the flue" as an internal feature to a building. 4. There is a lack of other domestic debris from

the site, particularly flint tools, bone and shell. Bone is preserved in the deposits associated with the later buildings.

5. Lindsay-Scott ( 1950) suggests that all the vessels are wasters having been deformed during firing. Woods (pers. comm.) has reexamined these vessels and disagrees with Lindsay-Scott's view. The acceptance of this site as a production site largely depends upon which evidence is accepted as to whether the vessels found are wasters or not. However as will be seen later in this chapter one of the commonest lines of argument for pottery production is the presence of clay, which is also present as Eilean an Tighre.

6.2.4

Smith ( 1965) describes several lumps of potters clay found within the ditches at Windmill Hill. These consisted of amphorous lumps of clay "accidently fired." These are dated to the later Neolithic - earlier Bronze Age, not to the earlier Neolithic; the main period of occupation. Two contained sand and the other contained grog. Smith identified these lumps as potters clay because there are depressions where pieces had been pulled off while the clay was still plastic. She also noted a neat brick shaped block with an incomplete end retaining scars where pieces had been pulled away.

Lindsay-Scott's ( 1950) suggestion that the arrangement of kilns and ovens were set out like a Romano-British horizontal kiln perhaps needs modifying. The extent of the ovens themselves was indicated by an area of stone-free burnt soil, bounded by walls in the case of oven two. Hearth 3 is bounded by a wall which overlies oven 3. They cannot therefore be contemporary. Hearth 2 is some 2 feet away from the oven possibly too far to provide a heat source for oven 3.

6.2.2

Windmill Ifill, Wiltshire

6.2.5

Luce Sands

Larkhlll, Wiltshire

Longworth (1971 a) notes the presence of a piece of potters clay at this site. This clay was found in a pit together with nine sherds of Grooved Ware and five flint flakes. The pit itself was filled with burnt flint and brown loam. Another of the pits contained an ashy soil as well as Grooved Ware and flint, an antler pick, two awls and a polished rib fragment. The polished rib had a flat surface. Finch's (1971) analysis of Grooved Ware from this site suggested production on or near to Durrtngton Walls. This is discussed in some detail in the chapter on petrological analysis.

Unfortunately the details of Aitkinson's excavations remain unpublished. However Mcinnes ( 1964) notes that several shallow pits were found cut through sand which were filled with "clean good quality clay." She suggested that the sherds were wasters and therefore the site was a pottery working station.

64

Earlier Prehistoric Pottery Production They suggested that the clay could be obtained 1km away and all the other objects had been imported to the site .

The proximity of this site to Durrtngton Walls must be emphasised - being only hundreds of metres away. The enormity of the assemblage size at Durrtngton is well lmown. as well as the large number of complete or near complete vessels . These factors taken together sugges t that Larkhill may have been the production site for Durrtngton Walls and thus su~esting tha t production may have taken place ofrsite. This is discussed in more deta il later.

6.2.6

6.2.10

Drewett (1982) applied a Schiffer type of analysis to the material culture from the later Bronze Age settlement at Black Patch . and suggested tha t concentrations of burnt flint and other filler s possisbly indicated the presence of pottery production in two of the huts. He notes tha t in hut 3 "the second cluster of burnt flints in the north of the hut cannnot be interpreted in this way (i.e. as a hearth ) as a fire in this position would be too close to the junction of the roof an d floor. This could be a store of flint awaiting use as a filler in locally produced pottery ."

Northton, Isle of Sky e

Simpson (1976) notes the similarity of patches of bu~ and unburn t clay with those descibed by Lindsay -Scott (1950 ) (see above) at Eilean an Tighre but argues agains t these being the result of pottery manufacture because of the lack of wasters . He also records the presence of four bone combs . found in later deposits . whic h wer e "clearly used for potte ry production." None of the Beaker pottery from this site was decorated with these combs howev er.

6.2.11

Clarke ( 1970 ) noted t he presence of a nine toothed bone comb made from a sheep's rib . Megaw (1976) however states tha t this does no t come from later neolithic - earlier Bronze As!,e deposits (it could be residual or redeposited). However Megaw records the finding of a slate comb which he sugges ts was used to form comb decoration on two or three vessels . Peacock's ( 1969b) thin section analysis shows the use of gabbroic clay with an additiona l temper at this site . In addition a pottery ring was found which was suggested to have been a support for a vase during firing .

Belle Toute, Sussex

"The assemblages from the various sites are domestic and unspecialised in character. but contain evidence of flin t working and. perhaps. pot production." The site consisted of a series of occupation floors but no structural evidence of buildings were found. although Bamford suggests that the soil conditions were ideal for tneir preservation . Several stake holes were found (these are discussed in more detail later). but not a single post hole. Reynolds (1979) discusses how buildings could be built without leaving much evidence. but not none. This site therefore has to be interpreted as a specialised area within a larger settlement. The area where the houses were located was not excavated.

6.2.12

At Belle Toute Bradley (1970) suggests that there was a deliberate collection and subsequent storage of burnt flint in one pit. Large numbers of pounders. but no flint waste. were found adjacent to this pit. In addition four pieces of roughly fired clay came from the same area. This he interpreted as evidence for the area where "domestic pottery was made." This pit was surrounded by a row of flint nodules. Also associated with this pit was a series of banks and slots perhaps indicating wind breaks.

6.2.9

Hockwold-cum-Wllton

While the evidence is clearly and succinctl y outlined by Bamford (1982). she was somewha t unsure about its interpretation. She states tha t:

6.2. 7 Gwithlan, Cornwall

6.2.8

Black Patch, Sussex

Hockwold-cum-Wllton

Site 93

The occupation floor is approximately circular: eighteen stake holes were found near to this but they do not define the limits of it. Therefore they simply cannot have been constructed as a wall to a building. Bamford suggests that they were wind breaks. Three hearlns were recognised although these were simply concentrations of charcoal. The gully ts stratigraphtcally earlier than these deposits and therefore not connected with pottery production.

Ross Links

6.2.13

Brewis and Buckley ( 1928) describe what they call an urn factory which consisted of a layer of hardened and fire blackened sand which contained the following:

Hockwold-cum-Wllton

Site 63

This site consisted of a roughly circular hollow surrounded by copious amounts of charcoal. ash. burnt flint. pieces of burnt clay. haematite and pottery. The quantity of ash and charcoal is much greater than the amounts demonstrated by Reynolds ( 1979) as being typical of a domestic hearth. The hearth itself was oval in shape (1.2m wide. 1.84m long and .18m deep) and lined with burnt quartzite. It can only be interpreted as an

1. over fifty pieces of urns 2. three quartzite hammer stones 3. fire-cracked lumps of basalt 4. disc like pebbles 5. quantities of cannel coal 6. lumps of cla_y 7. some large flat stones.

65

Production Sites industrial hearth, not a cooking hearth, for the following reasons.

..Poorly baked that it cannot have been specially prepared before the burial, but rather fired in the embers of the funeral pyre."

1. No bones

were found in the hearth, suggesting that meat was not roasted on it.

This vessel was surrounded by a layer of charcoal, derived from branches and twigs, and sat on top of burnt ..glacial erratics." Two minute globules of fused tin were found on the inside of the vessel. Williams considered this to be evidence for the bronze dagger that accompanied the cremated burial having been placed in the um while cremated bones were still hot. As the melting point of tin is around 232 C a better explanation is that the dagger was placed inside the vessel before it had cooled down after firing causing partial melting of the bronze.

2. The pottery assemblage contained fragments of fine wares including handled beakers. These vessels can only have been used for the consumption of beverages and hence would not have been placed in a cooking fire. No coarse wares i.e. cooking vessels were found in it. 3. The baked clay could be the remains of an oven structure but it is unlike the fragments of ovens found on Iron Age sites such as Danebury. The '"daub" fragments are concentrated around the hearth pit . This calls into question their interpretation as daub. While they do contain an impression of wattle poles their concentration around the pit argues very strongly against it being derived from the walls of a building.

6.2.16

Underneath a round cairn excavated by Gardner (1913) several large spreads of charcoal were found. In one place a small deposit of ..the natural sub -soil clay was found mixed with a small stony grit." The Food Vessel accompan~ cremation 2 was sooted on the interior '"frorii contact with hot ashes" and was made from ..the clay from the tumulus and of the surrounding tumulus mixed with broken grit." The vessel ts described as being ..very soft and crumbling."

4. The haematite cannot realistically be part of a cooking assemblage. The only evidence for these sites being domestic, as opposed to industrial, are the assemblages of flint and pottery. The animal bone was poorly recorded and not all of it was kept, making discussion of it difficult, although it can be suggested that potters had to eat as well!

This again is suggestive of production of a vessel as part of a funerary rite.

6.2.17

The flint assemblage from site 93 is a use assemblage rather than a manufacturing one. It is difficult to explain how arrowheads were discarded as part of potting. The flint assemblage from site 63 contains clearly residual material and therefore the assemblage associated with the potting cannot be isolated.

6.2.18

Whitton, Norfolk

Lawson (1983) describes a number of 'pot-boiler' sites in the vicinity of later Bronze ¾!,e cremation cemeteries. One of these was a small area, 5m x 4.5m, excavated by ~hbee (1983). Structurally the site is reported as being rectangular. consisting of a raised portion at the centre surrounded by a ditch 2m wide flanked by a flat ledge. ~hbee suggests that on this site flint was burnt before being incorporated into pottery as a temper.

Llangynidlr

Ward ( 1919) excavated a Bronze Age cairn during the course of which he found a cist containing a Collared Um but no human bone. Human bone was _preserved elsewhere on the site. This um was filled with and surrounded by "burnt earth." The rim above this burnt soil was badly decayed but the rest of the vessel was "fresh and smooth."

The site is better described as follows: The site consists of a rectangular hollow. approximately 4m wide and 1.5m deep. with slopins! sides and a flat bottom cut into natural 'gravelly clay'. This is surrounded by a flat ledge, 1.5m wide, that was cut to a depth 0.5m from the original ground surface. The site is extensively plough damaged except where preserved under a hedge. This damage is such that the centre appears to be a raised platform.

This could be an example of a waster in situ, the burnt soil representing the remains of the original bonfire.

6.2.15

Runnymede Bridge. Surrey

Needham (1985) suggests that the presence of burnt flint on this site can only be interpreted as evidence of pottery production. The large size of the pottery assemblage is regarded as conclusive evidence of pottery production on the site.

In summary the evidence from Hockwold -cum Wilton is a series of deposits and artefacts which are clearly not related to normal domestic activity. Potting is the most appropriate explanation.

6.2.14

Eglwys Bach. Denbignshlre

Gorsedd, Holywell, Flintshire

During the excavation of a cairn Williams (1921) founcf a Collared Urn or Food Vessel (it is unillustrated) that he considered to be so

The base of the pit was lined with stained grey clay and 'sugar cube' sized lumps of burnt flint.

66

Earlier Prehistoric

Pottery Production

Above this lining there was a dump of burnt flint and charcoal up to lm thick. The charcoal varied in size from 'approximately egg sized to those small enough to have tempered pottery' (Ashbee. 1983). In one place there is a patch of 'natural white gleyed clay' 100mm thick and one metre in diameter.

6.2.21

At Mucking South Rings. Jones and Bond (1980)

note the presence of wasters but give no further details.

6.2.22

While this site could be a burnt mound. the difficulties of using flint as pot boilers is well attested; it shatters when heated. The flint is covered with adhering charcoal and is therefore unlikely to have been dropped in water as part of the cooking process.

Cunnington ( 1923) suggested that the clay for the pottery was obtained from the base of the Kimme ridge clay some 30km away. however several lumps of worked but unbaked clay were found. Several "roofed pits" were discovered. These were roofed with burnt clay, one of which had a layer of potsherds embedded in it. The roofs must have been burnt in situ. All of these pits had passages leading to them, and the form of these pits can be compared with the buried clamp kilns described by Swan ( 1984) for the Roman period. However virtually no evidence of burning was found within the pits themselves, which argues against them being either ovens or kilns. Another possible function could be as food storage pits, but the baked clay roofs and passages argue against this.

The use of this structure as part of the potting process cannot be ruled out. but in essence the evidence consists of large quantities of burnt flint with some clay that could have been used for potting. The pit itself could be a curing pit.

Yapton, Sussex

6.2.23

The excavators of this site (Rudling. 1987) did not suggest pottery production as a possible interpretation. The only structural evidence consisted of three pits and a gully. From one pit evidence of metalworking production was recovered while in the others large quantities of pottery and burnt flint were found; 948 pieces came from one pit. In addition there are very few flint tools from the site. Several pieces of burnt clay/daub were found in one of the pits. This evidence can be compared with that from Runneymede Bridge and Black Patch.

6.2.20

All Cauutugs Cross, Wiltshire

The evidence from this site is tantalisingly ambiguous but it has many implications. It is the type site for pottery dated to the vecy end of the Bronze Age and the earliest Iron Age.

The pit itself is clay lined suggesting that it was designed to hold water. The dump of burnt flint and charcoal is clearly a secondary deposit. However the pit would have contained something like 5-10 tons of burnt flint, which seems too large for the production of temper. The deposit of white clay cannot be natural. it is clearly redeposited. It is tempting to see this as a dump of refined clay.

6.2.19

Mucking, Essez

Wlnklebury, Hampshire

At Winklebury (Smith, 1977) several lines of evidence for pottery- production can be suggested as follows: 1. Clay pits These consist of 11 pits with inwardly sloping sides ending in either a flat bottom or no base at all. The fills were variously coloured clay and two examples contained burnt material, ash. charcoal. chalk and burnt flint. The clay itself comes from the Reading beds (about 2. 5km away) but differs markedly in composition from the clay from the Reading Beds which was used in pottery manufacture (Williams, 1977).

Chapel Tump II, Gwent

At this site large quantities of unfired pottery were recovered in the vicinity of a hearth (Wardle, 1988b). Bone points were also found which may have been used to produce incised line decoration. Large quantities of burnt stone were imported to the site and were found in direct association with "the pottery-." The pottery was tempered with sand produced from the crushing of the burnt stone. In addition metal working debris was found. The structure associated with this site could be interpreted as a wind break. This site is located in the intertidal zone in what would have been fen land. This again points to the fact that potting may have been carried out away from settlement, in this case near a clay source. Additionally salt water may also have been utilised. The addition of salt allows calcite or calcareous clays to be fired to a higher temperature.

2. Working hollows One ot the working hollows was filled with deposits of charcoal.ash and clay. 3. Unfired pot One sherd of unfired pottery was recorded. made in the commonest fabric on the site. The diversity of the pottery- fabrics should also be noted. with 37 being present.

6.2.24

Eastbourne, Sussez

Hodson ( 1962) notes the presence of haematite coated wasters from the Green St. Grove site in Eastbourne. These were distinguished as wasters by the the fact that they had distorted forms. These fine wares were found in association with other seemingly non-wasters

67

Production Sites with abraded surfaces and includes two vessels with repair holes.

6.2.25

have been used to make pottery found at Danebury. Cunliffe interprets these pits as beipg for the puddling, refining and 1!J-bdng of clays for structural purposes. It snould be noted that the evidence for pottery production is restricted to particular ceramic phases, not the entire period of occupation of the site.

Danebury, Hampshire

Two different lines of evidence for pottery production have been suggested (Cunlilie, 1984). Firstly, overtired and dfstorted vessels from ceramic phases 4 and 5 are suggested to be wasters. Secondly, several instances of the storage of clay and flint were found, in five conical shaped pits averag~ 1.6m in diameter and lm in depth. Flint nodufes had been placed at the bottom of these pits. Williams' ( 1984) analysis of these clays shows that they could

6.3

6.2.26 Hod Hill, Dorset and Yarnbury, Wiltshire At both these sites a pit was found which contained imported clay. In both cases this was interpreted as evidence for pottery production.

YORKSHIRE PRODUCTION SITES

The following section discusses similar evidence for sites in Yorkshire. Only on one site however, has potting actually been suggested by the excavator. What is being discussed is evidence, similar to that outlined above, which could indicate potting. Again the evidence is discussed site by site in more or less chronological order.

6.3.1

6.3.6

Mortimer (1905) reports having to ..rebake" a vessel before it could be restored, suggesting that it was only semi-fired. These descriptions from Mortimer's work should be regarded with some caution although they can be compared with evidence from Welsh cairns.

Towthorpe 73

Mortimer (1905) describes a small scoop filled with ..red burnt earth and fragments of an urn." The nearest burial was nearly 2m away. This suggests in situ production of a burial urn.

6.3.2

6.3. 7 Thorpe Thewles At Thorpe Thewles two pits were found which contained a clay which was demonstrated to be boulder clay that had been levigated (Swain and Heslop, 1984). This pit was shallow (O. lm deep) with a channel running off it into a gully. Presumably this arrangement allowed a free flow of water into the curing pit. The second pit is interpreted by Swain and Heslop as being an extraction pit for clay, however they note themselves that the clay being extracted also occurs in the enclosure ditch and the drainage channel leading into the pit.

Towthorpe 7 A

Mortimer (1905) describes a ..small circular hole containing charcoal and fragments of a large urn."

6.3.3

Wharram Percy 67

Mortimer ( 1905) describes barrow thus:

a beaker from this

6.3.8

..It is of a dark texture and has the very appearance of having been hurriedly made from the Kimmeridge clay which occurs at the foot of the escarpment close by and baked upon the spot where it was required."

6.3.4

West Heslerton

A simple

sub-circular pit was found which contained 95% by mass of the assemblage. This consisted of a number of vessels, generally cooking pots. which showed no evidence of use, no secondary firing and no food residues. These vessels were all fragmentary and had a mean sherd size approximately 100 times greater than the rest of the assemblage. Other finds from the pit were a lithic assemblage of approximately 5kg of water worn pebbles, some with fresh fracture surfaces, of a variety of rock types including dolerite, millstone grit and sandstone.

The Aldro Group

Mortimer (1905) reports William Proctor's 1853 decription of a Food Vessel made from sun dried clay.

6.3.5

Hanging Grimston Barrow 58

Acklam Wold Group

6.3.9

Mortimer ( 1905) reports that Proctor in 1884 found a small urn (Food Vessel) of unbaked clay.

Devil's Hill

A simple sub-circular pit was found within a structure which contained 12kg of crystalline calcite and a quartzite hammer stone. A

68

Earlier Prehistoric Pottery Production concentration of pottery was recorded vicinity of this pit.

6.3.10

conform with the normal pattern of construction in the later Bronze As!.eand earlier Iron Age. Hut two consisted of a gully on its southern side but no clear indication of an outer wall on the northern side. Huts I and III had a single hearth in contrast to hut II which had three hearths .

in the

Thwing

A large amount of calcite and other stone has been recorded from the site. Much of this assemblage is burnt, consistent with its use as pot boilers. Outside the large central building a rectangular pit was found , timber lined with a post at each corner. The fill consisted of charcoa l, pottery and burn t stone. This can either be interpreted as a cooking pit or a bonfire kiln. The evidence is ambiguous as the stone could be either pot boilers or temper. Calcite, the main temper in the Towing assemblage, was not found in this pit . The assemblage contained fine wares which would no t be expected in a cooking assemblage . The lack of food residues could be explained by the use of potboilers, but it is unlikely tha t this inefficien t method of water heating was used if the pottery could withstand direct contac t with a fire . The widespread occurrence of sooting and external refiring suggests tha t this was the case . The structure itself could be an oven , or a superstructure to suppor t suspended vessels. However the continuous nature of this structure argues agains t this ; it is more consistent with having been designed to control air supply . Such a structure would be useful during the firing of pottery and can be compared with the structure around the metal working installation at Towing.

6.3.11

Within this structure several unusual features were noted. Firstly a hearth was found which contained granitic pebbles (Brewster, 1963). Unfortunately these are not available for analysis. A structure interpreted ~s an oven was found vecy similar in form to the features found at Thwing and described above. This can be contrasted with the oven found in Hut I, which was not surrounded by posts. No pot boilers are described as having come from this feature . A series of gullies were found within the buildinS!, interpreted as water collectors, and as such tfiey are a unique feature in the Britis h Iron Age. One consists of a shallow gully with a pit at each end. The pits are at slightly differen t hei~ts and there is a sligh t gradient along the gully. The second feature consists of three pit s connected by two gullie s. Neither of thes e features begins outside the projected circuit of the building. There was no evidence of a lining the ccyoterbated chalk itself would not have retained water. There was also no evidence of a covering. An alternative explanation would be that it was used during levigation of clay. Again a lining would have been needed. Unfortunately , detailed descriptions of the fills were not reported which would allow the testing of this hypothesis .

Staple Howe

Three buildings were found at Staple Howe: one is distinguished by the fact that it did not

6.4

DISCUSSION

Having outlined the evidence in the preceding sections, the following sections try to put it into a technological framework comparing the different lines of evidence. It is immediately apparent from this smvey that the quality of the evidence varies enormously and sometimes the flimsiest of evidence has been used to suggest pottery production.

6.4.1

A waster is a vessel that is rendered unfit for use during firing as opposed to a second which · is a vessel that is flawed but can still be used. The presence of a waster therefore clearly represents production on or near the find spot. However once a vessel has disintegrated it becomes a series of sherds which will be disposed of as rubbish. Unless wasters are disposed of as a group, as on Roman kiln sites where they are disposed of in pits with nothing else, it may be difficult to distinguish them from other sherds. This is the case however at several sites namely Luce Down Sands, Eilean an Tighre and Ross Links.

Wasters

Despite the previous section suggesting that many sites do have evidence of pottery production, very few examples of wasters are recorded from these sites. Indeed the opposite is true, with Simpson ( 1976) using the lack of wasters to argue against certain deposits being associated with pottery production and even refuting Lindsay-Scott's ( 1950) identification of vessels as such. At both Eilean an Tighre and Northton there is other evidence for pottery production which raises the question as to what constitutes a waster. It should be noted that the vessels claimed to be wasters by Lindsay-Scott ( 1950) and Mcinnes (1964) are not illustrated.

A large proportion of some types of pottecy have been found in funerary contexts, not domestic contexts - Bucket Urns or Collared Urns for example. Many of these are irregularly shaped vessels. For example the Bucket Urns from Malton (Manby, 1980) are badly warped. Similarly many incomplete vessels from otherwise undisturbed burials are known, for example the Bucket Um from Towing (Manby, 1980). Mortimer (1905) describes half a Collared

69

Production

Sites

s

s

0 cl

=--==i - ==--=•--==i --1t:=:=========~~m

Thwing pottery

production

70

pit

Earlier Prehistoric Pottery Production Um inverted over a burial at Hanging Grtmston 60. The fact that this vessel is inverted means that it must have been ..broken" before burial. In Riggs Group, barrow 35, Mortimer found an um witn the rim missing and major flaws in the body of the vessel.

preserved unless it is accidentally fired. Accidental firing of daub can be ruled out unless there is other archaeological evidence to suggest burning of buildings. Similarly even if burnt, the impressions of the wattle work should be preserved, as at Danebury (Poole, 1984 p 115)

These factors taken together suggest that if the purpose of production is purely as a container for a cremation or to accompany a burial, as has been suggested for Collared Urns (Burgess. 1986), tlien it may be that only complete disintegration would render that vessel unfit for use. In the case of Collared Urns the converse may be true where the very few examples from domestic contexts could represent wasters rather than domestic use. for example Ross Links. Alternatively vessels rendered unfit for use in a domestic setting could be suitable for accompanying the dead. The instances of unfired vessels ref orted by Mortimer (1905) could also be part o this rite. The point being that what was important was a container for the dead.

Clay used for daub, in contrast to potting, does not have to be refined in any way and virtually any clay can be used. Such clay could have mined for use as oven linings but unless as at Danebury ovens have been found then there is no reason to suggest this. At Danebury the ovens were lined out usually with a chalky clay (see Cunliffe, 1984, p 41 for an example) Thus the evidence from several sites can be considered, in the light of of the Danebury evidence, to represent potting clay. The example from Windmill Hill appears to be clear cut. It is usually suggested that such clay was fired ..accidentally", but this seems unlikely. There are several possible explanations which include:

It should

be noted that this hypothesis only applies to later neolithic - earlier Bronze Age and Deverel -Rimbury sites when pottery was commonly used as grave goods. This concurs with the few instances of wasters having been recognised at Eilean an Tighre and Luce Down Sands, on neolithic sites, in later Bronze Age contexts at Mucking, at Eastbourne where Iron N!,e haematite bowls were found, and Danebury where large quantities of wasters have been found.

1. Modem potters often include ..an experiment" of a glaze recipe with each firing. Thus the lumps of clay could represent experiments in clay/temper recipes. 2. Some of these fired lumps of clay could represent ..kiln furniture" as described by Swan (1984) for Roman sites. The excavators of several sites have indicated the presence of "clean clay". Ross Links for example. This fact not only argues against this being used for daub but for careful preparation of clay before potting. Frequently this clay was actually available on site as in the case of Thorpe Thewles or Stacey Bushes. or imported from very near by.

The Danebury evidence is particularly important because firstly the presence of wasters is undisputed and secondly there are other lines of evidence for potting present, in the form of raw materials and petrological analysis. However the presence of wasters is confined to ceramic phases 4 and 5 and not the bulk of the assemblage. This suggests that it is only in these phases of activity that pottery was being produced at Danebury. This coincides with other changes in the ceramics, for example an increased use of quartz temper as opposed to flint temper in the preceding and following phases. Haematite coated bowls are not found after ceramic phase 3. Liddle's (1935) view that haematite coated bowls were manufactured at a single site is reiterated by Cunliffe (1984) and is borne out by Williams ( 1984) analysis.

The presence of large quantities of burnt flint is somewhat problematical to interpret. It does only occur in large quantities on sites whose pottery is predominantly tempered with flint and its occurrence is somewhat anomalous when compared to the flint assemblages from other contemporary sites. While it is difficult to suggest alternatives to its use as a temper, it should be remembered that in many areas ..burnt mounds" are common and that these large quantities of flint may have a similar purpose to the stone in burnt mounds.

At Eilean an Tighre and Luce Down Sands deposits of ..wasters" were found but this seems to be an abnormal mode of deposition.

6.4.2

Calcite and exotic raw materials are less ambiguous, it is difficult to envisage any other use. The presence of basalt at Luce Sands indicates the use of specialised imported tempers for example.

Raw materials

The bulk of the evidence for pottery production is the presence of caches of raw materials, both clay and temper, which might have been used for pottery production. The evidence will always remain a matter of speculation and the various possibilities are discussed . Clay could be used for the production of daub, sometimes mixed with dung or straw. which is applied to wattle work to produce a draught free wall. It is rarely

6.4.3

Structural evidence

Structural evidence for curing and refining clay has been suggested for Thorpe Thewles but it is again difficult to either prove or disprove. afthough occurrence of clay in these contexts lends support to this hypothesis. These features may also have served a variety of functions. The same can be said of the Stacey Bushes features.

71

Production Sites potting. In particular at Belle Toute the area surrounding the cache of burnt flint contained most of the hammer stones from the site but very little flint working debris. The best example however is undoubtedly that from Devil's Hill where a quartzite hammer stone was found associated with calcite.

The interpretation of small sections of gullies on prehistoric sites is always a problem . The interpretation of the Eilean an Tighre as actual kilns is somewhat problematical due to the fact that firstly the only possible parallel at Northton is somewhat simpler: no similar structure has been identified on any of the other sites listed above. Secondly it is a technological innovation 3000 years before its common introduction into Britain. A simpler interpretation in terms of walls acting as windbreaks is perhaps more plausible . Wind -breaks themselves are indicated on a number of sites such as Belle Toute, Hockwold -cum -Wilton and Stacey Bushes.

6.4.4.5

Other stone tools associated with potttns! include rubbers probably used for burnishing. The stone axe fragment at Hockwold-cum-Wilton could have been used for a similar purpose (Bamford, 1982). Hartley (1960) reports a Great Langdale stone axe being found at a Roman kiln site; he suggested it was used for burnishing. It should be noted that broken stone axes could have been used as a source for high quality temper.

The occurrence of pottery making goods in pits is a common occurrence but it is perhaps a result of preservation rather than function. For example the potter's clay in the ditch at Windmill Hill is a case where the find is clearly in a secondary rubbish deposit. Some hearths and pits could be interpreted as submerged bonfire kilns such as Towing or Hockwold -cum Wilton; the Atlantic Trading Estate example is clearly unambiguous.

6.4.4 -6.4.4.1

6.4.4.6

Artefacts Perforated clay plates

It can

be seen that invariably potting assemblages are large and can be contrasted with sites with much smaller assemblages. This is difficult to prove because some sites have huge assemblages of pottery but no real evidence for potting, for example All Cannings Cross or some phases of Danebury.

Bone combs

Combs found on beaker sites such as Gwithian or Northton are invariably interpreted as being associated with the distinctive comb decoration of beakers. The same cannot be said of Iron Age contexts where bone combs are regarded as being evidence of textile production. 6.4.4.3

Many of the production assemblages discussed above are characterised by large amounts of fine wares, for example Belle Toute and Hockwoldcum-Wilton. Others, such as Durrtngton Walls and Carn Brea. are characterised by the lack of fine wares or disproportionate amounts of coarse wares. This can be explained in a number of ways:

Flint assemblages

The flint assemblage from Eilean an Tighre is the only assemblage tfiat can be suggestea as being purely associated with potting, and is characterised by a hi!h proportion of scrapers which account for 15 ¼>of the total assemblage and over half of the actual tool types. Another likely assemblage is that from Hockwold -cum Wilton site 93 although it does contain arrowheads. Again there is a high proportion of scrapers. 6.4.4.4

Durrtngton Walls mechanism. The production is mainly of heavy duty and coarse wares with fine wares being imported. Carn Brea mechanism. The site produces all its own ceramics. in this case using gabbroic clay, and only exports the fine wares to other nonpottery producing settlements.

Hammer stones

Hammer stones are found in association many of the other objects associated

The ceramic assemblages

In some instances the size of assemblage has been used to indicate manufacturing, with manufacturing sites being characterised fiy large assemblages (this is discussed in some detail for the Yorksbire sites later on in this thesis). At Runnymede Bridge for example Needham (1985) sees the assemblage size as being a crucial piece of evidence for pottery manufacture. In contrast Morris (pers. comm.) sees the even bigger assemblage at Potterne as having being produced in the course of normal cfomestic activity. The normal domestic activity also involved losing several gold tores; the settlement must have been very afiluent to be so casual. The assemblage from Durrington Walls with evidence of pottery production can be contrasted with the assemblage from Mount Pleasant which is much smaller. In fact this can be compared with the few henges that do have a pottery production.

These are the only artefacts commonly used as a diagnostic indicator of pottery production. It is unfortunate that Poole's ( 1984) work on perforated clay plates from Danebury demonstrates quite clearly that these were made as part of oven structures, although none were found in close association with an oven. This view is shared by Swan's ( 1984) consideration of Roman kiln sites. Clay plates are common on many later Bronze Age sites in the Thames Valley. 6.4.4.2

Other atone tool•

with with

72

Earlier Prehistoric Pottery Production

6.5 Conclusions In many respects this evidence is somewhat circumstantial but alternative interpretations are even more implausible. The purpose of this part of the thesis is simply to demonstrate that prehistoric pottery production sites can be recognised .

1. The assemblage contains wasters. 2. The pottery is cheaper on a production because no transport costs are involved.

site

Therefore the assemblage size of a pottery producing settlement will be larger than on a non pottery producing settlement even if the production occurs off site (and therefore outside the area detected).

It is quite apparent that despite the above smvey there is a paucity of evidence for pottery production. It could be argued that the hazardous nature of industriaf activity meant that it was not normally carried out on settlements themselves but nearby, and hence will not be found in the normal course of excavation. Many earlier Bronze Age production sites do show this, for example Stacey Bushes, Luce Sands, Hockwold -cum-Wilton, Eilean an Tighre and Durrington Walls. In the first four examples there is no real evidence of a nearby settlement. At Durrington Walls it has been suggested that production took place some distance away, about 400m, at Latch Farm. The evidence could equally be used to argue for specialist workshops associated with some settlements.

This chapter does not quote the large number of sites which have no evidence of pottery production which would allow this evidence to be seen in perspective. The overwhelming impression is that until the later Bronze As!.ethe vast majority of settlements were not procfucing their own pottery. It seems appropriate to end this sutvey by quot~ out of context Cornwall and Hodges' (1963) first suggestion of the long distance trade of pottery: "No longer can it be assumed that prehistoric pottery production was an entirely local affair ."

It can be argued that the pottery assemblages from production sites are larger than non pottery producing settlements for two reasons:

73

Earlier Prehistoric

Pottery Production

Chapter 7 THE ANALYSIS OF PREHISTORIC CERAMICS 7.1 In t ro du c tion In the last sixty years the results of many programmes of petrological analysis of pottery have been published. Although these vary in size and scope, few overviews have been published. It is usual for textbooks to quote the three exam pies of long distance trade suggested by Peacock (1968; 1969a; 1969b), or assume that pottery production was localised (e.g. Cunliffe, 1974 a&b; Megaw and Simpson, 1981). This chapter intends to review the published analyses of prehistoric pottery, and try to outlin e some general trends . It is hoped that this will give a background to the results presented in this thesis, and illustrate some of the problems associated with petrological analysts.

early seven ties no less than seven doctorate theses containing a large element of ceramic analysis have been presented at Southampton University, accounting for the bulk of analysis carried out on prehistoric ceramics. Virtually all other analysis has been carried out by English Heritage 's research fellow, David Williams, or by research students at Southampton under his supervision (there are now some recent exceptions). The increasing use of thin section analysis also coincided with the rise of rescue archaeology and increased funding . Therefore the biases in such funding are also reflected in what analysts has been carried out.

Thin section analysis had been used on several occasions before Peacock's work (Ph emi s ter, 1941; Thomas, 1932; Cornwall and Hodges, 1963), but had in the main suggested that production was localised. Cornwruf and Hodges (1963) did tentatively suggest that some pottery from Windmill Hill was not locally produc ed. It was only after Peacock's work was publish ed, and through his efforts , that the analysis of pottery was e xtensiv ely carried out, which concluded that there long distanc e trade in pottery. This is to be com pared with th e activities of the impl ement petrology committees over the last fifty years, who have systematically analysed stone axes county by county. Since the

While this is a simplistic view of how past research has been carried out, it does serve to demonstrate the point that generally the further north and east one excavates, the less likely you are to have thin sections a nalysed . This also coincid es with th e areas of more complex geology and the presence of glaci a l drift . Before t he present study began only 12 analyses were published for Yorkshire ceramics. The applicability of mod els generated from Wessex to the rest of the country is a debatable matter and this should be borne in mind when considering this chapter.

7.2 The earlier Neolithic 7.2.1

Gabbroic pottery

in Scotland. He conclud ed that all the raw materials were locally available. Stanford (1956) examined the shell found in the causewayed camp at Abingdon and suggested that 1t was of local origin.

In 1932 and 1935 when Thomas published his results on the thin section analysis of the pottery from Hembury, he noted that thr ee of the five fabrics present were tempered with "foreign material". These com prised about 40% of tfie assemblage. He concluded that "either the material or the pots were imported to the area". These fabrics contained fragments of albite, tourmaline and hornblende and a provenance of the borders of the Dartmoor Massif was suggested . In 1946 Phemister analysed sherds from what he thought was a manufacturing site

The first piece of thin section analysis to demonstrate long distance trade in British prehistory occurred when Cornwall and Hodges ( 1963) analysed the pottery from Windmill Hill. They produced what they considered to be some very surprising results. They showed that four fabrics were present, two of which were made from raw materials not available in the immediate locality. The other two fabrics were

75

The Analysis

of Prehistoric

described as having been made with clay-withflints. which occurred in the vicinity of the site . One fabric contained fragments of oolitic limestone. pointing to a source to the north in the Cotswolds. Another contained quartz. feldspar. and hornblende in an unweathered state; the freshness of these minerals and their concentrations suggested the deliberate crushing and addition of an igneous rock. The nearest possible sources for these fragments were either the Welsh Borderlands or the igneous massifs of Devon and Cornwall, a minimum distance of over 200km. They also noted the presence of this fabric at Robin Hood's Ball and Maiden Castle. They tentatively suggested that "no longer can it be assumed that pottery was produced locally".

The first and fourth explanations can be rejected because the Grimston-Lyles Hill series of pottery was generally finer than the Hembury-Abingdon series. The fact that it does constitute the fine ware component of the Hembury-Abingdon tradition does not exclude this however. It should be noted that the gabbroic cla~s naturally very well suited for its use in coo vessels. The vessels are generally undecorate . suggestive of low labour input, which could be regarded as evidence for them not being a luxury commodity. The suggestion that they were used as containers is rejected because of the impracticality of transporting these fragile pots. It has been noted

that stone axes are traded after they have been roughed out, the stage at which damage is most li.K.elyto occur, and are only polished at their destination. Thus if it is assumed that if the most likely place of breakage is before sale, then trade in raw materials becomes a possibility.

At the time. and it remains so. that was regarded as being unacceptable; it is stated that "these fragile pots" would not survive such long distance transport. It had always been assumed that pottery was manufactured by women at the settlement where it was used.

The Neolithic Gabbroic fabric is generally homogeneous. except at Carn Brea where quartz pebbles were also found mixed with gabbroic clay (Peacock. 1969b). They must have been deliberately added to the clay. suggesting distribution of raw materials. Similarly, Whittle (1977) notes that flint temper was also mixed with gabbroic clay. although this is disputed by Smith (1981). Sophranofrs (1981) petrological analysis notes the presence of quartz sand in most of the analysed sherds from Carn Brea. The heavy mineral analysis is inconsistent with a gabbroic source. indicated by the abundance of mica. A granitic source was suggested to explain this. However a much more likely explanation is the mixing of the gabbroic clay with a micaceous clay containing quartz sand. This is consistent with Hilary Howard's ( 1981 b) analysis of the local clays. which do not match either the petrological or heavy mineral analyses alone.

Peacock had long felt that this material could be much more closely provenanced and so carried out a much larger study of this material (1969b). He demonstrated that the pottery occurred not only in Devon and Cornwall but throughout Wessex, and there was a very small number of 'possible sources for it. He noted that the mineral assemblage was most akin to a gabbro and hence could be provenanced to the Lizard peninsular. It was also suggested that these vessels were made from an tn situ clay. This gabbroic fabric was only used for fine vessels. and the forms were copied by local potters using local materials. Thus the inference was made that they were produced by specialists . Peacock ( 1969b) states that neolithic pottery was normally regarded as a personal product. and the occurrence of exotic wares on a site were equated with the occasional visits of people, i.e. a "gift-exchange" mechanism was being used rather than trade proper. He suggested that the fact that these vessels were ffrier and better meant that they were actually "traded". and compared the distribution of gabbroic pottery with group XVI and XVII axes. Several explanations pottery was traded:

Peacock ( 1988) states quite categorically that Sophranoff's mineral identifications are incorrect, in particular that mica was muddled with magnetite and amphibole. Without personally analysing the residues it is impossible to say who is correct. but several things suggest that the samples Peacock analysed were not the same ones that Sophranoff used. These are as follows:

can be made as to why this

1. Smith ( 1981) states

that Sophranoffs work was supervised by Peacock. She was Peacock's research student.

1. People in Wessex did not have the skill to make fine wares. 2. It was traded as a container prestigious commodity.

for a more 2. Mica. magnetite and amphibole are both very distinctive and should not be muddled even by the most inexperienced worker.

3. It was a prestige commodity in its own right. 4. Raw materials

manufacture

in Wessex of fine wares.

Ceramics

prevented

the

3. Peacock and Whittle have both suggested on other occasions that the gabbroic fabric is not homogeneous.

5. The vessels were traded as part of a wider trade networ~ with for example stone axes.

Wardle (1987a) used the above evidence to suggest that gabbroic clay was traded. and pointed out that the gabbroic clay has potting properties that make it almost perfect for the

6. The clay itself was traded and manufactured locally.

76

Earlier

Prehistoric

Pottery Production of the pots made of other clays survived in Peacocks experiments, would breakage in transport be risked if breakage in fl.ring was less likely?

prehistoric potter; this ts discussed in more detail later. This ts a crucial point, since trade in raw materials renders most petrological work invalid. It ts the base assumption upon which this thesis and all other similar work relies. It appears to be accepted that in the Bronze Age gabbroic clay was traded and diluted. Christie (1986) states that:

If gabbroic clay was being traded, then it would be expected to be made into vessels whose form

and decoration would reflect the rest of the ceramic assemblages in which they were found. Peacock (1969b) notes that this is so, but interprets it as evidence of local copying of the imports. The restricted typology of this group of pottery does not however preclude the distribution of the raw materials; both interpretations are equally feasible.

"Some of the pots from Treg1lla and David stow Moor, in North Cornwall, are of mixed gabbroic and non-gabbroic clay suggesting the former needed to be eked out if supplies were running low." Williams (1979) uses the dilution of gabbrotc clay with fragments of granite as an example of one limitation of petrology. Similarly Williams ( 1983a) quotes a conversation with Parker Pearson thus:

Hodder and Orton ( 1976) used regression analysts to compare the distribution networks of stone axes and pottery from Cornwall . They noted that the gradient for fall off of group I axes was very gentle, suggesting maritime trade. This was compared with pottery, which was noted to be less widely distributed than axes because of its fragile bulky nature. They noted a plateau in its occurrence and suggested that the distrtbu tton had a supply zone trading directly with the potters, and an outer zone where vessels were traded down the line. The distribution for the down the line trade is comparable to random walk distributions with a small number of long steps . This they suggest was due to the high value of the pottery . The supply zone is effectively Cornwall and coincides with most of the sites where there is evidence of mixing of the gabbroic pottery . Within this area the pottery was almost exclusively made from gabbroic clays. This suggests that within the supply zone the clay itself was being moved, while complete vessels were being traded outside this area.

"There may be some evidence for movement of gabbroic clay in the Bronze Age, where in a number of cases additional inclusions appear to have been added to this type of clay ." It would be surprising

if there was no trade in gabbroic clay in the Neolithic, and therefore that Whittle's and Sophranoff s hypothesis is correct. The fact that gabbroic clay has thermal properties which make it the perfect potting clay for the prehistoric potter seems to be missed by Quinnell ( 1988), who suggests a major programme of work to establisb why gabbroic clay was highly prized . The same is also true of Peacock (1988) and Williams (1983a), who also seem to fail to realise this point, although Peacock does seem to have discovered it empirically:

Both Hodder and Peacock used the percentages of gabbrotc pottery in the assemblage in their distribution maps. These are reproduced in Figure 7.1. Using percentages does overcome many difficulties when comparing quantitative pottery but they mask several important lines of evidence. Figure 7. 1 shows the absolute quantities of gabbrotc pottery identified . The graph of percentages does not quite follow the smooth negative exponential that would be expected, but it does approximate to it. The graph of absolute vessel numbers shows that apart from at Carn Brea the number of vessels ts small, and that the distribution ts a series of peaks and troughs. Assuming that other factors such as size of excavation or quantification method are irrelevant, then it can be suggested that the pottery was distributed via high status causewayed camps such as Robin Hood's Ball or Maiden Castle. This argues against Hodder's hypothesis of down the line trade outside the supply zone. It suggests direct trade between these elite sites in et ther the vessels or raw materials. At Maiden Castle, 125km from the Lizard, there are a hundred and fifteen vessels compared to 550 at Carn Brea, and 27 vessels in the next largest assemblage, suggesting trade in raw materials. The small numbers of vessels near the source points towards central production, even if it ts at Carn Brea where the

"Experiments carried out in Southampton in 1970 suggest that pots made of Lizard clay were more resistant to the rigours of bonfire firing. It would not be surprising if the inhabitants of Neolithic Carn Brea travelled a little further than usual to obtain this particularly desirable raw material." Thus Peacock seems to accept Wardle's ( 1987a) hypothesis that there was long distance trade or procurement of raw materials (it should be noted that t hese three reviews were written independently and went to press at the same time). The key question ts how far can t he distribution of gabbroic pottery be accounted for in these terms? Briggs ( 1976) suggests the difficulties in transporting gabbroic pottery can be paralleled with carrying a thermos flask in a rucksack. Peacock ( 1988) suggests that a thermos and therefore gabbroic pottery can be taken anywhere if skiffully packed. My own experiments in the same vein agree with Peacock. This evidence does suggest two important pain ts: firstly that a thermos is used as a container and secondly there is no point in risking breaking the thermos if tea can be obtained at the destination. Given the ease with which gabbroic clay can be fired, and that none

77

The Analysis potters were indulging in long procurement of raw materials.

of Prehistoric

Ceramics

1. raw materials were not always obtained within 6km 2. raw materials were traded 3. fabric and form are deliberately related 4 . not all analysts ts correct.

distance

The gabbroic clay can be used to suggest that some assumptions are not always vafia. These are as follows:

100

~00

u

,I'(

~

10

"~

0

~ ~ ~

~

D ,o D

'

~

" ~o

0

C

~

~~

'

100

~

D t 100

~

I.,

JOO

I.,

,I'(

~ ~ ~ ~

~00

10

'

z

,JJ\

0 0

JO

tO

lO

!10

!10

0 0

!!O

JO

to

lO

!10

!10

l!.

Distance (kt1)

Distance(kt1)

0 ~

Figure 7. 1 Gabbroic Potte:ry - fall off with distance refative frequency

Figure 7.2 Gabbroic Pottery - fall off with distance absolute frequency

7.2.2

firing. While post deposition changes cannot be ruled out, these are usually obvious in thin section. This fabric was recorded by Roberts and Roberts at Dyffryn Ardudwy, but they also noted the presence of quartz sand. This fabric can be compared with Darvill's ( 1984b) fabrics 2 and 3 at Gwernvale and Llanelwedd, which also have a sandy matrix . Vesicular or calcite tempered pottery is a rare component in contemporary southern English assemblages , although shell tempered pottery is well attested. At Peak Camp, Gloucestershire, a distinct vesicular fabric was detected, as well as calcite and limestone tempered fabrics (Darvill, 1984a). The fact that the vesicular pottery was found together with limestone and shell tempered pottery suggests that the vesicul es were not form ed during burial. Its occurrence at Peak Camp in small quantities , about 10%, suggests that it is an import . Thus the Welsh vesicular pottery can be considered to be a distinct entity, and its distribution co uld be the result of specialist production.

Scotland

The above situation can be contrasted with the Orkneys, where igneous rock are the norm. At the Knap of Howar W1lltams (1983b) notes the absence of pottery tempered with igneous rocks and concluded that all the vessels were therefore locally made and W1lliams ( 1982) notes that local production is usual. At Isbister Williams ( 1983c) concluded that all five fabrics were local except for the Grooved Ware, which was imported; over seventy per cent were made in one fabric however. The fresh shell and sandstone fabric can be compared to the commonest fabric at Knap of Howar .

7.2.3

Wales

Roberts and Roberts (1973) noted that at the chambered tomb of Dyffryn Ardudwy the majority of vessels were manufactured from locally available clays. However a component of the assemblage was made with materials that did not occur locally. This ts largely backed up by Darvill's work on other Welsh neolithic sites, for exam pie Gwernvale, and Stackpole Warren . At each of these a number of different fabrics were found, but it was concluded that production was locally based.

Further con tacts between Peak Camp and Gwernvale can be suggested. Fabric 1 at Gwernvale, the commonest fabric, ts characterised by the presence of grog. The use of grog as a temper ts usually regarded as a technological innovation that occurred in the later Neofithic . It has only been recorded on two other sites; Windm111 Htll and Peak Camp. At Peak Camp it accounts for about 10% of the assemblage, a similar figure to that of Gwernvale. Peacock ( 1968) notes that the value of petrological analysis is increased by the

Savory (1980b) notes the common occurrence of vesicular fabrics in earlier neolithic vessels in Wales, which infer the use of an organic tern per or the disintegration of calcareous matter during

78

EQTlier Prehistoric

Pottery Production

conservative nature of potters in their choice of raw materials and production methods, therefore a synchronous technological innovation in a particular region, several 1mndred years before the rest of the country, clearly suggests a common prcxiuctton source or potter: The fact that it accounts for a small but equal proportion at both sites suggests that it may have originated at Windmill Hill and traded to both Peak Camp and Gwernvale. Fabric three at Dyffryn contained fragments of mtcaceous dolerite and welded tuffs characteristic of the rocks which form Cader Idris, at least 20km away from the site. Similarly two further fabrics were demonstrated to be imports to the site, one characterised by dolerite from Snowdonta or the Lleyn Peninsular at least 20km away. The other was characterised by felsite from the Castle Rock at Criccieth, 17km away. Darv1ll's (1986) analysis of the material from Four Crosses, Llandysilio, showed that the middle neolithic bowls were made from Gwernvale fabric 7, and were imports to the site. Instances of Abingdon Ware, discussed later, have also been noted in Wales (Savory, 1980b), which again can be suggested to be 1mports.

7.2.4

Eastern England

At Broome Heath and Eaton Heath in Norfolk, Limbrey ( 1973) records that local river runt and river gravels were used exclusively in the pottery. Denham and W1lliams ( 1985) concluded that virtually all the pottery from Briar Hill was locally produced; there is some evidence for pottery production on the site, see chapter six. Four fabrics were defined, quartz and either ironstone or sandstone being the predominant aplastics. They recorded the presence of gypsum in one sam pie , and this is unr ecorded elsewhere in Britain. More importantly th ere is a grog tempered fabric . It should be noted that even if these fabrics were mad e at specialist centres they would not be recognised as such.

Hodges compares some of this pottery to the shelf tempered pottery from the causewayed camp at Abingdon. However, Leeds' (1956) analysis showoo that the shell derived from fresh water bivalves such as Anodons and Unios which are common in the Thames tcxiay. Hodges records only a single oolith in one section and suggests that the shell may be of fossil origin. Howard (1981a) could not match the Windmill Hill pottery with any of the local clays, but she did suggest that the Kimmeridge Clay might be a suitabfe source, although not from the outcrops near Windmill H111.This infers a fossil ori~ for shell, although this is not stated expllcitly. Hodges suggested that this fabric was imported to the site, a view supported by Howard. At Abingdon this pottery predominates, accounting for 88% of the assemblage, and it is therefore tempting to suggest that this fabric was made at Abingdon. However, greater absolute numbers of vessels were found at Windmill Hill, although this figure is based upon both the oolitic and shell tempered pottery together and therefore re pre sen ts an over estimate. It is impossible to apportion the pottery at Windm111 H111into these two fabrics, although Howard (198 la) does note that no complete vessels were found in the oolitic fabric which suggests that the shell fabric predominates. The evidence from Windmill Hill does not mitigate against the shell fabric being manufactured at Abingdon. The analysis of other Windm111H111Ware showed that they were made with either quartz sand or flint and quartz sand in the clay . Howard (1981a) showed that these could be subdivided into clays derived from clay -with - flints, brickearths and alluvial clays. The uniformity of the fabrics for Windmill Hill Ware, in contrast to other ceramics on the same site , shows that the clays used where deliberately selected, which points to entirely specialist production. Flint tempered pottery accounted for 40% of the assemblage, with 692 vessels being made from these fabrics. The flint fabrics coufd have been made from clay obtainable within 1km of the site. The sand fabrics are matched by Hodges (1965) to either the London Clay or brickearths from the Marlborough Downs; the former does not occur within 6km of the site, while the latter might.

At Offham, Cartwright (1977) showed all the pottery to have been locally produced; the entire assemblage was tern pered with calcined "LPage 7 flint. It is interesting to note that a nonartefactual fragment of acidic granite was found, provenanced to Devon or Cornwall. Darv1ll's ( 1979) work on the Nympsfield chambered tomb demonstrated the use of Hassie clays, available near to the site in the Severn valley. Cartwright and Woods (1975) showed that at Alfriston the Hembury and Grimston styles of pottery were locally manufactured .

7.2.5

probable source however. Sophranoff ( 1976) .records its presence at Overton Hill, Larkh111and West Kennet, while Darvill (1983b) adds Cherhill to the 11st.

Howard ( 198 la) relates fabric to function (form and decoration) in a qualitative manner, resulting in two basic suites of vessels . Her arguments are rather circular, as she uses a fabric that she regards as unsuitable for cooking vessels to indicate function in one suite . Of the fabrics which are unsuitable for cooking, all but one are imports or possibly imports. Efsewhere, Windmill Hill Ware has been shown to be locally produced; at Bury H111both the clay and temper used were locally available (Cartwright, 1981).

Southern England

The occurrence of "gabbroic pottery" in neolithic Wessex has already been discussed, but other pottery was imported into the region. Hodges ( 1965) notes the presence of ooliths in pottery at Windmill Hill, in Windm111 Hill Ware, which Smith (1974) provenances to the Bath-Frame region. The Gloucester Cotswolds ts an equally

79

The Analysis

of Prehistoric

Whtttle's (1977) typology of earlier neolithic pottery divides it up into three zones; Western, Eastern and Northern. While in some ways this is not satisfactory, with non-gabbrotc Hembury Wares being found in Sussex, it does agree with the evidence suggested from petrological analysts. In Wessex, Wales and the West, production was entirely specialist with long distance trade of fine wares, and regional trade in the coarser components of the assemblage. In t he eastern province prod uctton was predomtnan tly on site, with very little trade, while in the north production consisted only of on site production and use.

7.3 later Neolithic

Consideration of the evidence from the early Neolithic produces some stark contrasts between the west and east and north of Britain . The fact that these zones coincide with areas of different types of geology is perhaps no coincidence. In the Orkneys the geology is too complicated to produce unambiguous evidence of trade, whilst in the east of England it ts too simple. This emphasises the point that unless the pottery is made with distinctive materials trade can never be suggested .

and earlier Bronze Age 7.3.2

This period is marked by great social change, with the transition of causewayed camps into henges, and individual burial in round barrows rather than communal burial in long barrows. Technological innovation occurred with the introduction of metallurgy . These changes are reflected in the ceramics, not only in their style and form but their fabrics and technology as well.

Grooved Ware

Finch (1971) noted that a t Durrington Walls a major proportion of the Durrington Walls style of Grooved Ware pottery was tempered with grog. Sophranoff (1976) found that at Stacey Bushes grog had been used as a tern per in Durrington styfe Grooved Ware at t he beginning of t he second millennium . Ellison (1984) notes that at Shrewton the only sherd of Grooved Ware was made in the Durrington Walls style with grog temper , while at Trelystan Darvill (1983a) noted that grog had been used as tern per in 60% of the Durrington Style Grooved Ware , as well as the Beaker pottery. Grog is the commonest temper in the Durrington Style Grooved Ware at Mount Pleasant (Longworth, 1979).

The most important technological innovation was the common use of grog in pottery , althou® grog is recorded in earlier neolithic pottery, for example Peak Camp (Darvill, 1983b), Gwemvale (Darvill, 1984b). Briar Hill (Denham and Williams, 1985), Bury Hill (Cartwright, 1981) and Windmill Hill (Cornwall and Hodges, 1963). Much of this work was carried out before Whitbread (1986) showed how grog could be distinguished from clay pellets or m udstone . Similarly grog is only rarely recorded in Peterborougb Ware, for exam pie Darv1ll ( 1982) identified grog ·in Mortlake Ware from Cherhill, and Denham and Williams (1985) in Fengate Ware at Briar Hill.

This can be contrasted with most of the nonDurrtngton Walls Style Grooved Ware at Durrtngton Walls (Longworth , 1971b), which are not grog tempered. For example , sherds 453-9, in the stylistically rare Rinyo style, are not tempered with grog but are described as being "porous with added shell and some grit". Similarly, sherds 51-53 , with the ladder pattern characteristic of the Woodlands Style, are shell and grit tempered, although P50 is grog tempered. The obvious inference from this evidence is that the common use of grog was introduced by the makers of Durrington Walls style Grooved Ware.

This phenomenon was first suggested by Hodges (1966). who noted that Colfared Urns and Beakers in Southern England were usually tern pered with grog, and interpreted this as a major technological innovation. This was largely based upon examination of such vessels witb a hand lens; subsequent analysis has shown this assertion to be correct.

7.3.1

Ceramics

The evidence for Grooved Ware being manufactured near to Durrington Walls at Larks Hill is discussed elsewhere in this thesis. The Durrington Walls style of Grooved Ware can be seen to be:

Peterborough Ware

The use of grog in Peterborough Ware has already been noted (see above). At Briar Hill the fabrics defined correspond to the typology of the vessels, Mortlake Ware having either quartz and flint fabrics or organic temper, while the Fengate Ware was tempered with limestone, grog and flint. The Mildenhall Ware was clearly imported to the site from a distance of at least 20km and was characterised by the presence of glauconite, quartz and ironstone.

1. a distinctive style of pottery found throughout Britain 2. the commonest type, by several orders of magnitude, at the type site 3. manufactured, at least in part, near the type site 4. the first common instance of the use of grog as a temper 5. representing a major technological innovation.

80

Earlier

Prehistoric

Pottery Production

The obvious interpretation of this evidence ts that the Durrtngton Walls style of Grooved Ware was manufactured at Durrtngton Walls by specialists (as defined in chapter two). Its occurrence with grog temper away from Durrington Walls argues for its subsequent trade . This argument can be taken further, by detailed com part son with the Woodlands and Clacton styles characterised by the presence of shell. For example at Woodhenge, just outside Durrington Walls, the assemblage ts characterised by the presence of the Woodlands style of Grooved Ware. The shell was identified as Paphla sp., and Spisula sollda (Zeuner, 1929). These are non-fossil marine shells and although they could have been brought to the site as food, this again suggests that the pottery was imported to the site. At Hills Road, Cambridge, Zeuner ( 1943) identified Ostrea edulis, Cardium edule, Gyralus sp. and Planorbis in the Clacton style Grooved Ware. The first three are marine shells while Planorbls is characteristic of a freshwater habitat. He concluded that this pottery was made from Fen clay and therefore produced near to the site. No marine molluscs were found, and the non-marine molluscan assemblage did not contain Planorbis.

1. Specialist production at Durrtngton Walls and subsequent trade. Under this model we would expect the following: the largest assemblage at the manufacturing site or sites uniformity of style throughout Britain uniformity of fabric evidence of manufacturing at Durrington Walls. 2. Localised production in isolation. model we would expect:

Under this

assemblage sizes to be similar at similar sites diversity of fabrics diversity of style evidence of manufacturing at most sites. The preceding arguments assume that these are the criteria to use, and th us localised prod uctton cannot be inferred. Production is suggested for Stacey Bushes, and in Yorkshire tfiere is a distinctive regional flavour to the Durrtngton Walls style of Grooved Ware. This suggests that specialist production at Durrington Walls is not the entire explanation. However, explanations of the evidence favouring localised production are more tortuous:

At Durrington Walls (Finch, 1971) only the use of fossil shell is noted. While is it difficult to extrapolate using the accurate analysts of the shell from only two sites, it seems to be more than fortuitous where analysis has been related to style that each style has a distinctive fabric.

1. Evidence

of manufacturing cannot be detected . Chapter six shows this not to be correct.

2. The size of the Durrington Walls assemblage ts due to the exceptional rt tual activity at Durrtngton Walls as discussed by Richards and Thomas ( 1984).

The most important points to emerge from this discussion are those concerned with how this evidence is interpreted. Finch (1971) correctly suggested that all the raw materials were locally produced and therefore the model of ceramic production suggested was in effect "locally based". The fact that Durrington Walls is an exceptional site, clearly of the highest status, means it would be surprising if pottery production was not inferred. Similarly the authors who all concluded that production was locally based because all the raw materials could be obtained locally were correct if the underlying model is one of entirely localised production, and they were looking at the sites in isolation. If these underlying assumptions are removed and overall patterns are considered, then a different interpretation will result.

3. "decorative motifs than the portable objects (Bradley, 1984).

were exchanged

rather

which

them"

carried

4. There were special recipes for ritual selective use of particular materials. · These explanations are all possible and emphasise the point that tt ts the assumption that controls the tn terpreta tton. This ts 1llustrated by Bradley's ( 1984) attitude to precious stone axes which were traded over long distances; this in fact ts the base assumption. It ignores the possibility that the stone was obtained from glacial drift and there was exchange in the method of, and pattern that was used to, manufacture the axe (Briggs, 1976). In contrast Thorpe and Richards ( 1982) stm ultaneously argue for a specialised ritualistic use of Grooved Ware by an elite, with a model of locally produced Grooved Ware. Their hypothesis is that Grooved Ware was part of a ritual authority economy rather than a prestige goods economy. The use of Grooved Ware was restricted to certain chiefs in Wessex. Restriction tn use also infers restriction in manufacturing, and therefore implies specialist production at a number of centres, not production at every site.

The fact that raw materials could have been obtained locally does not prove that the pottery was made locally, it merely suggests that it could have been, and this ts a fundamental ambtgutty in petrological analysts. Similarly the fact that the pottery at an individual site was made locally does not exclude the possibility that it was the result "of specialist production". Only if at every site production can be demonstrated, and there are no imports, can the model of "entirely localised production" be inferred. In the case of the Durrington Walls style of Grooved Ware two models can be suggested.

81

The Analysis of Prehistoric

entirely tempered with undtagnosttc quartz and hence thought them to be locally produced. There are other obvious examples of locally produced Beakers, for example at Briar Htll Denham and Wtlltams (1985) analysed a late Beaker and found that a local ortgtn could be suggested upon the basts of the presence of quartz, limestone and ironstone.

The correct interpretation, under such a system, ts therefore the one which uses the most commonly accepted assumption. This can be contrasted with the interpretations made about Beakers. The base assumption is that their occurrence represents either invasion, migration or trade with continental Europe.

7.3.3

Ceramics

Beakers

It ts apparent

The evidence is again clear that grog is commonly used to temper beakers. This can be explained tn terms of the continental origin of Beakers. Clarke's figures show that ts was most commonly used in the Rhineland styles and barbed wire Beakers, but is virtually absent in the northern and early southern series. It does however have a resurgence in the very late southern Beakers. Hodges ( 1966) suggests that Beakers are invariably tempered with grog and Peacock ( 1970) sees 1t as an example of technological innovation from abroad. Elsewhere it has shown that at Durrtngton Walls and other sites Beaker pottery ts the fine ware element in the assemblag e , even 1f it ts an 1mport. At Trelystan (Darvilf, 1983a) argues that this ts the case . At Durrtngton Walls aoou t 30% (at least) of the Beaker pottery contains grog. In southern England and Wales, excluding Devon and Cornwall, the use of grog ts recorded ts 50% of the analyses of Beaker pottery. The figures gtven by Clarke ( 1970) based only on hand specimen examination can be regarded as underestimates. At Belle Toute virtually all of the assemblage ts tern pered with grog. (Bradley, 1970). Usually however, another filler ts used as well as grog, for example at Trelystan . At Roughground Farm grog ts used in half the Beaker fabrics but not in the Grooved Ware.

from the above discussion that Beakers exhibit a great diversity of fabrics, form and decoration. Thus the pottery that ts expected to be made by specialist or tm ported exhibits all that ts expected of household type of production. Both Hodges ( 1966) and Peacock ( 1970) are clearly incorrect. The use of grog implies a continuity of technological tradition from Durrtngton Style Grooved Ware, not an example of innovation from abroad. The mixing of grog with other tempering materials argues against centralised production , but for localised household prod uctton, movement tn ideas or the potter himself. Sophranoff ( 1976) argues for a mobile potter tn the Milton Keynes area at this tim e. The decline of the use of grog coincides with the development of regional styles of Beakers and ts consistent with a dtverstflcatlon of manufacturing locations .

7.3.4 Collared Urns, Food Vessels and Biconical Urns Collared Urns are characterised by the presence of grog (Hodges , 1966). Tomaltn ( 1982) rejects Peacock's ( 1970) assertion that widespread use of grog in Collared Urns in Wessex ts due to Beaker influences. He agrees with Longworth (1961; 1984) that despite the fact that Collared Urns can be comb decorated (the classic Beaker method of decoration), they have their origins in Peterborough Ware rather than Beaker or Grooved Ware. Tomaltn considered the consistency of the recipes and the proportions of grog used in Food Vessels, Food Vessel urns and Collared Urns. He noted a constancy in the proportions of grog used and suggested that Collared Urns have their origins in h1s group 4a Food Vessel urns.

Where analysts has taken place in the sou thwest, Beakers are usually made without the use of grog. At Pldowrian Williams ( 1975) found the mineral assemblage normally associated with, and used to characterise, gabbroic pottery, but he favoured a source in Iberia rather than Cornwall. Savory has often (e.g. 1980b) argued for an Iberian source for some of the earliest Beakers in Britain, particularly "Bell Beakers" and barbed wire Beakers. However the Beakers from Pldowrian belong to Clarke's ( 1970) Western-Northern Rhine group, not the group suggested by Savoury to derive from Iberia . The suggestion that these do not come from Cornwall therefore seems unlikely. A more realistic interpretation is that they represent copying of a popular new style of pottery by the specialist gabbroic potters.

Outside of Wessex the use of grog in Food Vessels and Collared Urns ts not so common. For example Williams and Jenkins' (1976) work on vessels from Anglesey suggest that they were made at a single source using dolerite as a temper. At Trelystan (Darvtll, 1983a) there is a change tn clay resources with the introduction of Food Vessel urns, but grog ts not used. A cordoned urn from Ystrad-hynod contained no grog (Peacock, 1973) .

There is no stylistic difference between Beakers from Cornwall and the rest of the country . At Topsham, Beakers are found with Trevtsker style ceramics (this points to a very early date for the Trevisker Ware) made from undistinctive clays (Smith, 1975). In Wales Darvill (1983a) found that one of the Trelystan Beakers was tern pered with sandstone not available within 20km of the site. Grog was absent from the Beakers. At Callis Wold Gt6son ( 1978) found the Beakers to be

Tomalin ( 1982) found that in contrast Wessex Btcontcal Urns were always "stltceously tempered". This was suggested to be due to the arrival of people from tfie continent (northern France or the middle Rhine) in Wessex II. This however ts contemporary with the latest Beakers S3 and S4, or step seven, which were undergoing a resurgence in the use of grog. One of Tomalin's Btcontcal Urn groups is

82

Earlier Prehistoric Pottery Production predominantly grog tempered, which he interprets as being due to copying of the new vessels. In Cornwall vessels were still predominantly made by the gabbroic potters who had by now evolved the "Trevisker Style" of ceramics . The later Neolithic-earlier Bronze Age is very much characterised by the introduction of grog temper. However, like the preceding Neolithic the country can be divided into three zones, with some change in boundaries. Particularly striking is the continuity but contraction of the gabbroic potters, who quickly adopted the manufacture of a new style of fine ware, and now perhaps is a separate regton. The long distance trade in their products ceases. In the south, now including

7 .4 Deverel-Rimbury

south Wales and the south-east, it seems to be replaced by much more regionalised trade in Grooved and Peterborough Wares, but production sites appear to be much more widespread. In Scotland purely domestic production continues. The technological innovations of Beakers and Collared Urns continues this divide with northern Beakers being non-grog tempered. The overall trend is for regional use of a preferred temper mixed with other materials. This may be evidence of itinerant potters or trade in raw materials, although the latter can be excluded because grog is available on every site. Throughout this period the evidence of production sites also increases.

and post Deverel-Rimbury

The analysis of later neolithic-earlier Bronze Age ceramics produced supposed evidence of technological innovation, but the analysis of later Bronze Age ceramics shows technological innovation in modern day archaeological science, with the use of neutron activation analysis (NAA). This reflects the rise of ceramic analysis away from its essentially core area in coastal Hampshire . Barrett et al. ( 1978) carried out a programme of NAA on Deverel -Rimbury ceramics from South Lodge, Angle Ditch, Barrow Pleck, Down Farm, Tinkley Down and Handley Barrow. In all, 61 samples were analysed, selected from "fabrics" distinguished using a Xl0 hand lens. Eleven fabrics were identified for all of this material, based upon the type and amount of aplastics present. It appeared that the fabrics were type specific. Essentially the bucket urns could be distinguished by the presence of "heavy gritting", while barrel urns and globular urns were made from fabrics which were vesicular and contained fragments of fine flint.

pottery

"D". These represent the finest vessels and the single clay source argues for specialist production (cf. Peacock, 1968). Bucket urns from this group occur at only two sites; Angle Ditch and Handley Farm. However group A vessels are absent at Down Farm and Down Farm. Clearly none of the analytical groups are site specific, and the data can be interpreted as evidence for intra -site trade and not localised production at each site. Fabric A is confined to the westerly and northern sites, while fabric C is limited to easterly sites. The presence of a bucket urn in group D (globular urn) group suggests a production centre in the vicinity of Angle Ditch and Handley barrow, producing a full range of ceramics but only trading the fine wares. A similar project was carried out by Mann ( 1979) on later Bronze Age pottery from the lower Thames valley. He analysed 110 sherds from Runnymede, Weybridge, and Petersfield. All these sites are dated to the first millennium be, and the ceramics are in the post-DeverelRtmbury tradition (Barrett, 1980). This has the expressed aim of testing the following hypotheses:

Barrett et al. (1978) interpreted the NAA results as evidence for the globular and barrel urns being made at one source. They also suggested that there was good agreement between the analytical resufts ancf the hand specimen descriptions . They noted that there was no difference between burial and settlement evidence, based upon the data from one site. The bucket urns failed to give a distinctive group for each site, except at Martin Down. Thus they concluded there was trade in pottery, rejecting the hypothesis that bucket urns were locally made.

1. coarse wares were locally produced 2. decorated pottery may have been exchanged within style zones 3. the extremely fine pottery with distinctive decoration was exchanged between style zones. He concluded that the bulk of the pottery was locally produced, the fabrics being site specific. The cups, which were suggested by Longley ( 1980) as continental imports, were virtually always site specific. He noted that some vessels were traded between sites. While his conclusions are generally true, the data does contain much more information (see dendrogram - figure 7.3).

Their analytical results are not as clear cut as they suggest. For example, only two hand specimen fabrics are distinguished by NAA. There are vessels from fabric one, a bucket urn fabric, which occur in analytical group "D", a globular and barrel group. This fabric also occurs in four other analytical groups. All the sites have globular urns from analytical group

83

The Analysis

of Prehistoric

Ceramics

6. 'i57

------

_[ 1 -------.

7, 6 72 6. 786

.,

i,-i,--

(X)

D [8]

~

Lacustrine Clay

' ~

«>

Speeton Clay

[1JKimmeridge Clay 5km Figure 12.1: Staple Howe and Heslerton clay and temp~r resources

ct «>

rn ....

....

=

Earlier

Prehistoric

Pottery Production

~~I

u

•flt

~

~~I

~~·

.Q ~~I ~

~

-l~'

~

0 l~' i~I C 0 i~I

•flt

ilJ

1~'

~

0 ~

10'

0

~

0. ....1

V

Fabric Number

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

10 11

l

~

~

'

1

!

~

rn

FabricnuMber (see table) Fabric

Proportion %

Calcite Calcite Calcite Calcite Calcite Calcite Flint Opaques Quartz Voids Limestone

Quartz Opaques Opaques Quartz Only with other aplastics & Igneous Rock Fragments

Figure 12.2: Staple Howe: Fabric Series

119

50.81 18.39 11

4.35 4.68 5 1.29 1.94 1.77 1

Results: Other Later Bronze Age Sites ts a great variety in the other aplastics present, most containing quartz . and opaque minerals. The opaques are characteristically black, small and rounded and can be equated with altered glaucontte from the Speeton Clay. This combination can be regarded as the Staple Howe Fabric. Quartz ts rare fn the Speeton Clay. so its presence can be interpreted in a number of ways; it could have been added as a tern per or it may indicate that secondary deposits of Speeton Clay were being used. The second commonest fabric contains calcite and opaques alone, which again can be equated with the use of Speeton Clay. A calcite tern pered fabric without the opaques forms a significant portion, about 10%, of the assemblage. This has sparse grains of quartz but nothing else. The fabric is similar in many ways to the Thwtng fabric described previously, perhaps indicative of the use of a band of marl from within the chalk. No such bands of marl are reported to have been found at Staple Howe during the excavation so perhaps this fabric represents imports into the site. Some sherds do contain fossils, in particular shell, but only one instance of a belemnite was recorded. These account for about only 2% of the

12.3

Non-calcite tempered pottery accounts for only 5% of the assemblage. No instances of gravel, in strict size terms, was observed, although sand was recorded in about 2% of the sherds. Brewster characterised his "alien ware" by the presence of gravel, and this perhaps reflects an imprecise use of the term rather than a disagreement. Included in this percentage are the sherds which contain opaques and altered ~auconite, usually together with igneous rock rragments of various lithologtes. It is clear that these fabrics are what Brewster defined as "alien ware" . Their comparative rarity in the assemblage does point to them being imports, but the presence of opaques are suggestive of the use of the Speeton Clay. Several examples of an organic tern pered fabric were found comparable with the Scarborough Castle Hill fabric, described below, some containing igneous rock fragments . Brewster notes that many sherds contain voids from the weathering of calcite, and the reasons for the formation of voids and how to distinguish them has been discussed previously. Incfuded here are only sherds which do not contain any calcite at all and non rhombohedral shaped voids.

Devil's Hill

The composition of the fabric assemblage at Devil's Hill almost directly match those defined for the Staple Howe. This is not surprising gtven the close geographic proximity of these two sites. The percentages for each fabric are com parable, being within a few per cent of each other: for example the total amount of calcite tempered

12.4

assemblage, surprising given the fossiliferous nature of the Speeton Clay.

pottery is 69% at Staple Howe and 68% at Devil's Hill. Fabrics containing igneous rock fragments make up a smaller part of the assemblage, but flint tempered pottery is slightly more common . The fabric series is presented

in figure 12.3.

West Heslerton

West Heslerton, or simply Heslerton, is situated about half a kilometre to the west of the Wolds Scarp. Devil's Hill and Staple Howe are near to Heslerton, within 2km of each other. The resources available at Heslerton are therefore the same as at the other sites, with the addition on site of wind blown sand as well as stream deposits. The clays available are the Speeton and Kimmeridge Clays. Rigby (1986) divides the pottery fabrics up into three: vesicular, flint tempered, and rock or erratic tempered. She states that

occurring clay pellets. Because it is difficult to see and distinguish them they have not been used as a criteria in the fabric types." This is a crucial point that will be discussed detail later.

12.4.1

in

Vesicular wares

Rigby states that 95% of all "hand made" sherds are made from this fabric. She states that some sherds contain fragments of calcite and chalk and therefore were the tern pering agents. Also noted is the fact that some of the sherds at Staple Howe are tempered with shell. She is implying that the vesicular fabrics are the result of weathering rather than production.

"Matt black inclusions can be seen in some of the light coloured clay matrices. They are chopped organic and vegetable matter or crushed fired clay or naturally

120

Earlier Prehistoric

Pottery Production

~~·

u ,,t

~~·

L ~~·

.a ~

~

l~' l~'

~

0 i~· C

0 i~·

., 1~·

•flt

L

0 ml ~ 0 L

~I

n.

1

l

~

~

~

1

i

FabricnuMber (see table) Fabric Number 1 2

3 4 5 6

7 8 9

10 11

Fabric

'

rn 11

Proportion %

Calcite Calcite Calcite Calcite Calcite Calcite Flint Opaques Quartz Voids Limestone

Quartz Opaques Opaques Quartz Only with other aplastics Rock Fragments & Igneous

45.77 22.39 13.43 5.47 2.99 1.49 4.48 2.9 0.5 1

o.s

Figure 12.3: Devil's Hill: Fabric Series 121

Results: Other Later Bronze Age Sf tes

12.4.2

Flint tempered

wares

published by Rigby, although in fact there is general agreement about the main "tempering agent", i.e. voids. The differences can be accounted for by a number of factors, principally methodology. Firstly Rigby was looking at the fabrics using a hand lens, secondly she was using only a single lithological discriminator whicfi she equated uncritically with temper, and thirdly, only the larger sherds were looked at. The key issue is the origin of the voids; that is whether they represent a post-depositional weathering effect or a temper. Calcite or shell was recorded in a number of sherds, but these represent less than 1% of the total. The voids occur throughout the sherd, which argues in favour of an organic temper. The shape of the voids is generally irregular but none are rounded, making this interpretation is ambiguous.

This fabric accounts for 3.5% of the assemblage under Rtgby's classification. She describes the flint as being over 2mm long, calcined and cube like in shape. Deliberately crushed flint breaks into slivers, the shape being controlled by flint conchoidal fracture, but if burnt it can break into cubes, suggesting here that the flint was burnt before being added as a temper. It ts suggested that this fabric represents the earliest chronological group of pottery, i.e. later Bronze Age, pre 800 be, rather than Iron Age. It should be noted that Rigby ts using a Cunliffe type chronology rather than the chronology used tn this thesis.

12.4.3

Erratic tempered

wares

Several facts should be borne assessing rugby's assertions.

This is the rarest fabric present, accounting for 1.5% of the assemblage. Rigby compares it with that found at the Rudston Roman villa and the Iron Age cemetery at Burton Fleming, and uses its occurrence on these sites to suggest a date in the Iron Age for this fabric. Rigby also notes that it does occur at Scarborougfi Castle Hill, and therefore its use could extend back into the later Bronze Age.

1. The subsoil at West Heslerton

is chalk gravel overlain by wind blown sand. The sand is acidic, but there are pits cut into the chalk gravel which may have alkaline fills.

2. Most of the sherds are from secondary contexts, such as pits, or are tiny sherds recovered from sieving.

The petrology of these erratics ts discussed with reference to the Burton Fleming site, and ts shown to be a mixture of rock types which originated in either Scotland or Scandinavia. No provenances for any of the fabrics were suggested, even for the erratic tempered ware. The entire discussion seems to be based upon looking for chronological differences in temper and relating them to the other Iron Age sites into which the British Museum was researching. For example, Rigby states with reference to the erratic tempered ware that

3. Bone preservation bone survives.

12.4.4

The fabrics

There are notable differences between the fabric series presented here (see figure 12.4), and that

12.5

Scarborough

is poor, but some human

There is no doubt that the acidity of the soil at Heslerton is different to the other sites on the Wolds described above. On balance, given the acidic nature of the soil, it is perhaps more likely that most, but not all, the vesicular fabrics originate from weathering of the sherds. Eighty-five per cent of the sherds are vesicular (contain voids throughout the sherd) compared to rugby's 95%. This difference is due to the fact that sherds which only have surface voids were excluded. Most of these are reassigned to the flint and quartz fabrics.

"the situation is not simple ... because a Jar shows that the ware was being made before the fourth century, the earliest date for the Burton Fleming cemetery." In itself this ts interesting; an intrusive, that ls Arras, population was utilising a particular native fabric almost straight away.

in mind when

No evidence was found of a separate erratic tempered fabric, although many sherds do contain fragments of igneous rock, which occur in all the other fabrics. It is therefore difficult to assess what Rigby means by this fabric. All sherds with rock (erratics) account for about 4% of the total, comparable to Rigby's figure. However 3% of these are otherwise indistinguishable from the main fabric .

Castle Hill

The site at Castle Hill is on a promontory which is an outlier of lower calcareous grit surrounded by deposits of Oxford Clay. The promontory itself is covered by boulder clay at its southern end, and overlooks a sandy beach and a plain of boulder clay (see figure 12.5).

12.5.1

The fabrics

The fabric series present at Scarborough (see figure 12. 6) show in general a greater homogeneity than on any other site. The principle fabric is vesicular, although in this

122

Earlier Prehistoric

l ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ ~ FabricnuMber (see table)

1 Fabric Number 1

2 3 4 5

6

7 8

9 10 11

Pottery Production

Fabric

rn 11

Propor

ti on %

Calcite Calcite Calcite Calcite Calcite Calcite Flint Opaques Quartz Voids Limestone

Quartz Opaques Opaques Quartz Only with other aplastics Rock Fragments & Igneous

33.88 29.93 0 0

16.12 0

3.29 0 0

14.47 2.3

Figure 12.4: Heslerton:

123

Fabric Series

Results: Other Later Bronze Age St tes

~ Boulder Clay

~ Oxford Clay N

i

Scarborough Castle Hill

5 km

Figure 12.5: Scarborough

Castle Hill: clay resources

124

Earlier Prehistoric

Pottery Production

case it is not due to the weathering of calcite, shell or limestone. The voids consistently occur throughout the sherds and are a variety of shapes, but all are rounded. No calcareous material was observed in any sherd, and occasional grains of medium sized quartz are present in all sherds.

It can be compared to Rigby's erratic fabric defined at Heslerton and represents a fine ware component in the assemblage. The maximum wall thickness is 10mm, but 5mm is more common. Thirty nine per cent of the sherds with this fabric can be considered to be fine wares, although the majority are in the everyday class. It is tempting to see this fabric as the fine ware equivalent to the vesicular fabric, but the vesicular fabric is actually far more common. It could be suggested that they represent a group of fine wares and special cooking vessels.

This fabric has a low density and is normally fired to a light buff colour. Vessels have wall thicknesses ranging from 4mm to 15mm. Virtually all sherds are coil constructed, although a significant proportion have been manufactured by modelling. Two thirds of these vessels are in the everyday ware class with wall thicknesses of 6-7mm.

The erratics are provenanced to the older glacial drift that would have been present on the beach below the site. The quartz tempered fabric is present at Castle Hill in larger quantities than on other sites considered. A beach origin could be suggested, but there is no evidence of provenance whatsoever.

It should be noted that the nearest deposit of clay to Castle Hill is the Oxford Clay, which is organic rich and is to a certain extent self firing; i.e. the burning of organics within the sherd contribute to its firing. 'This may account for the vesicular nature of the sherds and the fact that they are generally very highly fired .

The third fabric at Castle Hill is quartz tempered, again unprovenanced. The vast bulk of sherds in this fabric are from everyday wares, although there is a significant fine ware component.

A very high proportion of the rims in this fabric have "T" shaped profile, a clear example of a correlation between fabric and typology. About 5% of the sherds in this fabric contain fragments of igneous rocks, erratics from coastal deposits of glacial clay. Virtually all of these are in the heavy duty class, i.e. storage vessels/containers.

The remaining fabrics are all clearly imports, gtven the general nature of the assemblage. They consist in general of calcite or flint tempered pottery com parable wt th fabrics found on the Wolds.

The second commonest fabric is distinguished by the presence of fragments of crushed erratics.

12.6

Grimthorpe

Stead ( 1968) describes the pottery fabrics at Grimthorpe as being crude with coarse grit. He notes some exceptions which are fine wares and he records the use of chalk as a tern per in these vessels. Being situated on the western edge of the Wolds, the Kimmeridge and Speeton Clays would have been available to the prehistoric potter on this site.

12.6.1

The fabrics (see figure 12.7)

Nearly three quarters of the assemblage is made essentially of the same fabric; limestone with a variety of other aplastics, but predominantly limestone on its own. No instances of chalk were observed. The distinctions made by Stead can be seen simply as due to the fact that less temper was being added to the fine wares.

Virtually none of the sherds in this fabric contain any opaques, precluding the use of the Spee ton Clay. The origin of the limes tone is problematical; no sherds were available for thin sectioning, but there are a number of possibilities. It could be partially disintegrated shell fragments consistent with the use of the Kimmeridge Clay, and a significant proportion of this fabric, about 10%, does in fact contain shell. It is unlikely that this limestone is decayed chalk, as suggested by Stead. Calcite tempered pottery makes up only 4% of the assemblage, and none of the fabrics are directly comparable with the many calcite fabrics analysed in this study.

12. 7 Discussion The overwhelming pattern that emerges from the above descriptions is that eacfi site was producing the bulk of its own pottery. In three cases, Devil's Hill, Heslerton and Staple Howe,

two clay and temper recipes were being used on each site. The on site fabrics account for about 70-80% of the assemblage except at Thwtng (see table 12.1).

125

Results:

Other Later Bronze Age Sites

1~•t-------------

1

~

J

l

~

FabricnuMber (see table)

Fabric Number 1 2 3

4 5 6

percentage

Fabric Voids-Quartz Quartz Calcite Flint Other rock fragments Igneous rock fragments

Figure 12.G: Scarborough

126

62.09 18.68 15.93 2.20 0.55 0.55

Castle Hill: Fabric Series

Earlier Prehistoric

Pottery Production

i l ~ ~ FabricnuMber (see table)

1

Fabric Number

1 2 3 4 5 6

Fabric

percentage

Limestone Quartz Calcite Flint Other rock fragments Igneous rock fragments

Figure 12. 7: Grimthorpe:

127

Fabric Series

78.47 13.27 3.24 2.36 1.47 1.00

Results: Other Later Bronze Age Sites Table 12. 1 Percentages of the two commonest on site fabrics at sites in Yorkshire Site Staple Howe Devil's Hill Heslerton Grimthorpe Scarborough Thwing

Table

12.2

1st 51 46 34

2nd 18 22 29

78

19 19

68 63 97 81

15

75

62 60

Principle

SITE Thwing Staple Howe Heslerton Devils Hill Grimthorpe Scarborough

Total

69

fabrics

and

This accords with the archaeological evidence from these sites, and is comparable with the rest of the country in the later Bronze Age. In each case the maximum distance at which raw materials were being procured is about llan, and in some cases it is much lower, with on site resources being used. At each site, excepting Devil's Hill, Staple Howe and Heslerton, which can be regarded as one site, the principle fabrics are different. These are shown in table 12.2.

the

TEMPER

MATRIX

CALCITE CALCITE CALCITE CALCITE LIMESTONE ORGANIC

QUARTZ QUARTZ OPAQUES QUARTZ OPAQUES QUARTZ OPAQUES QUARTZ

The main fabrics are considered below, accompanied by tables showing percentage frequency of assemblages and distance from source of raw materials.

Thwing calcite tempered

RANK

Thwing Staple Howe Heslerton Devils Hill Grimthorpe Scarborough

60

1

11

3

13

3 3

3