By Mrs. M. E. Cunnington. 57 



and that the ditcli liad already been silted up quite full before the 

 plateau enclosure was made is proved by the intersection of the 

 older ditch by that of the plateau enclosure (p. 49). 



The different character of the pottery and other relics found in 

 the two ditches also affords independent evidence that the two 

 works belong to different periods. 



The pottery and other relics found on the floor of the older 

 ditch cannot be of a later date than the Bronze Age, audit is quite 

 likely that they are Neolithic. Until some distinguishing char- 

 acteristic is recognised between undecorated pottery of the Bronze 

 and Neolithic periods in Britain, if indeed there be any such 

 characteristic, it is impossible to form an opinion as to which 

 period the pottery belongs.^ Nothing definitely characteristic 

 of the Bronze Age was found, and nothing, as far as is at present 

 known, incompatible with the earlier period. 



The Plateau Enclosure, and after. 



The date of tlie plateau enclosure is certainly not earlier than 

 tlie Early Iron Age. A considerable quantity of wheel-turned 

 pottery with bead rims, precisely similar to that found in the 

 Late-Celtic rubbish heap at Oare, barely four miles away, was 

 found beneath the rampart." 



Fragments of the same kind of pottery were found in several 

 places at the bottom of the ditch, but no pottery or other relic 

 that is at all Koman in character was found under the rampart or 

 deeper than eighteen inches in the ditch. A quantity of pottery, 



^The valuable paper by Mr. Reginald Smith on " The Development of 

 Neolithic Pottery," in Arckceologia^vo]. lxii.,1910, does not help in this case, 

 as the i)ottery is not ornamented avid only fragmentary. The straight rim 

 pieces, and the ({uality of the ware found at Knap, are practically indis- 

 tinguishable from the fragments found in the chamber of the long barrow 

 at Lanliill, and from some bronze age pottery. It is true that the ware 

 from Lanliill was mixed with pounded fossil shells, and not with flint as at 

 Knap, but that was no doubt merely a matter of local convenience. For 

 account of the Lanhill barrow see Wilts Arch. Mag., vol. xxvi., p. 300. 



"" Notes on a Late-Celtic Rubbish Heap near Oare," Wilts Arch. Mag., 

 vol. xxxvi., p. 125. 



