178 
THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE © 
Table 9. Whitesheet Hill: Charred plant remains, summary data 
Several samples from different contexts were analysed from each pit, but are summarised by feature (details in archive). 
Feature (pits) pit pit saucer pit post hole nat.feature feature feature  ?RB feature 
1295 1303 1293 1326 1297 1299 1301 1291 
no of samples/sampled contexts 3 3 1 4 1 1 3 
Total volume (litres) 30 30 19 vi 40 8 10 25 
Corylus avellana L. nut shell 
fragments, (g) 20 26.5 104.5 2 155 17 By) 6 
Prunus spinosa L. (stone) - 1 - - - - - 
Conopodium majus Loret (tuber) - - cell - - - 4 - 
cf C. majus (tuber fragments) oe - + - + ar orate 
Vicia/Lathyrus sp. (seed) . - . - 1 - - - 
Solanum cf nigrum L. (seed) - 1 - - - - - - 
Galium sp. (seed) - - - - - - 1 - 
Triticum cf dicoccum Schubl. 
(grain) 1 - - - - - - 
(glume base) - - - - 1 - - 
Triticum monococcum/dicoccum - - - - - - 1 
Triticum sp. 1 - - - . - - 
Cerealia indet. (grain fragments) + + ? - + ? - + 
+ = less than 10 fragments 
Wild plant foods 
Hazel nut shell fragments were found in every 
sample taken from features within the causewayed 
enclosure. There were no whole nuts and very few 
fragments were more than a quarter of a whole 
shell. A number of fragments indicate impaction or 
crushing suggesting that they were deliberately 
broken by hand. There is no indication of more 
refined techniques such as those suggested by 
Scaife (1992), nor of natural separation at 
germination. No traces of kernels were found nor 
signs of gnawing by animals. 
Crude estimates of the number of nuts involved 
experimentally charring six modern nuts gathered 
from close to the site (in late autumn). These gave 
an average weight of 0.53g, thus 0.5g was taken as 
an estimate of the charred weight of a single nut. 
From this we can calculate that the fragments 
(125.5g) from context 1341 (pit 1297) would 
represent about 251 nuts and the 82g from context 
1350 (pit 1293) about 164 nuts. Using Scaife’s 
(1992) methods for larger samples of Mesolithic 
nuts the estimates would be at least doubled. 
Tubers and fragments of Conopodium majus 
(pignut, earth-nut) were identified by Jon Hather 
whose microscopic examination (archive) showed 
that there was no evidence of peeling or scraping of 
the tubers, although the upper part of the tuber had 
been removed before charring occurred. Further, 
the particular nature of the enlarged vessicles 
indicated that the tissues were relatively fresh when 
charred rather than having been previously dried in 
++ = 10-20 fragments 
the ash of the fire. The sample from pit 1293 
included, in addition to three whole tubers, about 
30 fragments. By dividing their weight by the 
weight of individual tubers, Hather estimated that 
these fragments represent probably about another 
eight tubers, giving a total of approximately eleven 
from the sample. 
A stone of Prunus spinosa (sloe) from pit 1303, is 
incomplete, but its size (c. 5.5 x 4.7mm) is typical of 
the small seeded sloe (var. microcarpa). 
Cereals 
The few grains recovered are mostly in very poor 
condition. Only one, from feature 1295, is at all 
well-preserved and is probably Tiiticum dicoccum 
(emmer) from a one-seeded spikelet. The other 
grains are very fragmentary, their surfaces almost 
totally abraded. They have been identified as 
wheat only by the characteristic outlines of 
surviving parts of the grains. A single glume base 
from 1297 is equally damaged but again likely to be 
emmer. 
Weed seeds 
Few weed seeds were recovered and identification 1s 
not certain beyond generic level. A damaged seed of 
Vicia/Lathyrus sp. (vetch) is compatible with Vsativa 
ssp nigra (common vetch) but the damage and 
distortion makes it impossible to identify this 
further. A very abraded seed of Solanum cf. nigrum 
(black nightshade) is likely to be black nightshade 
rather than Solanum dulcamara (bitter-sweet). 
