132 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE 
different pastures from cattle, enabling wider 
resource use. 
Table 13.MNI and NIF per element for sheep 
and pig 
Sheep/ goat 
ea 
3 5 
1 
metatarsal 
metapodial 
loose teeth 
Pigs 
Only 16 fragments (202 g) are identified as pig with 
no evidence for wild boar. There were no 
measurable bones or recordable mandibles, but 
from the limited evidence available there was a high 
proportion of young animals, evidenced by three 
unfused distal epiphyses (two metapodials and a 
tibia) out of only seven limb bone fragments and 
one unerupted lower third molar (of one). One 
canine was from a male. The commonest element 
was the robust mandible. No butchery or pathology 
was seen. 
This conforms with the usual pattern where 
pigs are managed primarily for meat and carcass 
products and are generally slaughtered young. 
They were probably ‘extensively’ managed, 
exploiting woodland environments for example, 
where they could be fattened on mast in the 
autumn, so broadening the resource base. 
Other domestic animals 
One tibia fragment and one first phalanx of horse 
were found, demonstrating the presence of this 
species at the site. 
Dog was represented by one mandible fragment 
with heavily worn teeth from context 368 (an upper 
fill of middle Bronze Age ditch terminal 366), 
another mandible fragment from context 417 and a 
scapula fragment from context 481, both fills of 
middle Bronze Age waterhole 421. Again, this does 
little more than demonstrate the presence of dog 
during the middle Bronze Age, suggesting a canine 
origin for most or all gnawing noted on bones (see 
Taphonomy below). 
Red deer 
Red deer was represented by five antler fragments, 
three of which had been sawn and four metatarsal 
fragments (one complete). The antler fragments, 
mainly tine tips, were probably waste from antler 
working. One also had traces of chewing, possibly 
by deer, suggesting that it was collected as shed 
antler. The presence of limb bone (metatarsal) 
suggests that deer were present locally. It is possible 
that some of the unidentified long bone is also from 
red deer, since it can be difficult to distinguish 
fragmentary red deer from cattle bone (Bourdillon 
and Coy 1980). 
Red deer prefer woodland environments. While 
they probably contributed little to the overall meat 
diet, antler was an important raw material and 
hunting may have been a prestige activity (possibly 
also involving dogs and horses). 
Taphonomy 
Poor surface preservation (Table 5) has already been 
discussed. Other traces of alteration (butchery, 
burning, gnawing) will be obscured as a result. For 
instance, 90% of fragments with butchery marks 
(26/29) and 82% (14/17) of gnawed fragments were 
from the waterhole, though only 75% of fragments 
overall were from this feature. This is as likely to 
reflect better surface preservation as differential 
distribution of gnawed or butchered bone. 
There was a variable amount of dark staining 
on the bone fragments and the more of this there 
was, the better the surface condition per context 
(correlation coefficient r=0.711, n=25). Staining 
could reflect preservation of bone in waterlogged 
conditions, such as in the waterhole (421). Indeed, 
most fragments recorded as stained ‘dark brown’ 
were from the waterhole and both surface condition 
score and proportion of ‘dark brown’ fragments 
were higher in lower contexts (r=0.894, n=6). 
Burning was seen on one cattle fragment and 
four unidentified fragments. Surface discoloration 
might well have obscured traces of burning on bone 
from the waterhole. 
Gnawing (by dogs) was seen on 16/478 cattle 
fragments and 1/1043 unidentified fragments. The 
