160 
termed locally-produced. The presence of P11, 
however, with its unusual decoration paralleled at 
Hambledon Hill, and of P16, with its unusual form 
paralleled much further afield, all point to the 
possibility of contacts over a wider area. 
As so little of the interior of the causewayed 
enclosure was excavated there is little opportunity 
to comment on patterns of ceramic deposition. It is 
perhaps worth noting, however, that the deposition 
of large pieces of gabbroic ware pottery deep in 
causewayed enclosure ditches may be a recurrent 
feature, as large sherds were found at Maiden Castle 
in a similar deposit to that in which P17 occurred. 
The question of whether the pottery was, like much 
of the lithics and other material, burnt before 
deposition must remain unresolved. Due to the fact 
that colour does seem to leach out of buried sherds 
(Rice 1987, 345), the observation that the colour of 
broken edges is sometimes the same as the surfaces 
cannot be taken as an indication of refiring. 
FLINT 
by Frances Healy 
The entire fills of all possible features in the 
interior of the causewayed enclosure were bagged 
and subsequently wet-sieved, the residues being 
washed through a nest of sieves (9.5mm, 5.6mm, 
2.0mm and 1.0mm) and sorted. Artefacts were 
sorted only from the 9.5mm and 5.6mm residues, 
the 2.0mm and Imm residues being retained 
unsorted, except in the case of a few residues of low 
bulk which were washed directly through a 2mm 
sieve. The 5.6mm residues contributed almost all of 
the chips (pieces with an area of less than 100 sq 
mm). Artefacts were recovered manually from the 
causewayed enclosure ditch. 
The difference between the two modes of 
recovery is reflected in a low frequency of chips 
(Table 3) and a generally larger flake size among 
material from the ditch. Material from the features 
in the interior is thus not directly comparable with 
most published industries since the latter were 
recovered manually. 
Distribution and condition 
Struck flint was overwhelmingly concentrated in 
the internal features (Table 3), where a high 
proportion of it was burnt, reaching a maximum of 
82% in feature 1293. This also contained the largest 
quantity of unworked burnt flint which was 
concentrated in features towards the north-west 
side of the enclosure (Figure 12). 
THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE 
Burnt flint, worked and unworked, is fire- 
cracked with frequent small pot-lid fractures, the 
spalls from which are present in large numbers. 
There is some brown to red discolouration, it has 
the appearance of having been exposed to intense 
dry heat and differs markedly in appearance from 
crazed, bluish-white ‘pot-boilers’ which were not 
recovered from the site. Unburnt flint from the 
same features is in sharp, fresh condition and only 
lightly corticated. Almost 90% of the chips from 
these features were burnt or fragmentary, or both. 
The remainder were complete small flakes. 
The relatively small quantity of struck flint 
thinly scattered through the primary fills of the 
causewayed enclosure ditch is sharp and fresh and 
is heavily corticated. Its condition contrasts with 
that of the equally corticated material from the 
ditch recut, which is dulled and abraded, often 
with discoloured cortex. There was very little 
burnt flint in the ditch, the only concentration 
lying in layer 1351 towards the top of the primary 
fill. 
Raw material 
There is no evidence for the working of the tabular 
flint observed im situ in the Middle Chalk during 
excavation. All the worked flint seems to have 
been produced from small, often irregular, 
nodules with pronounced surface convolutions. 
The cortex can be 15mm or more thick, composed 
of a porous outer layer and a denser, rather chert- 
like, inner one. The flint is dark grey to black in 
fracture and is much flawed, with frequent 
thermal fractures and cherty inclusions as well as 
fossils and internal voids. Such flint does not seem 
to occur in the Middle Chalk within the 
immediate area, although inspection of further 
local exposures would be necessary to confirm 
this. However, it corresponds closely to the flint 
which abounds in the Upper Chalk some 300m to 
the south-east. 
Flakes from ground implements (Table 3) 
indicate that these were treated as raw material, 
perhaps after they had broken. Dorsal scars on the 
largest flake (Figure 10, L13) suggest that the axe 
from which it came was systematically flaked 
down. It and the other flakes retaining areas of 
grinding stand out from the assemblage by their 
generally lighter colour. Axes may have been 
brought to the site as finished implements, 
especially as the only evidence for  biface 
manufacture is a single possible thinning flake 
from feature 1295. 
