184 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE 
a result of competition for the Introduced 
Helicellids, but also possibly increased grazing 
intensity. This episode can be attributed to the 
medieval period or later by the occurrence of 
Introduced Helicellids (Kerney 1977). 
Molluscan evidence indicates that the ditch was 
dug when long, probably ungrazed, grassland 
existed. It is thus evident that Bronze Age tillage 
had ceased and grassland had become established. 
It is likely that within this tall herbaceous 
vegetation other shrubs and bushes were dotted 
around the hilltop, possibly more prominent on the 
steeper slopes. Soon after the ditch was dug there is 
evidence for light grazing of the grassland. The 
ditch may therefore relate to pastoral farming 
management. It is generally thought that until the 
medieval or post-medieval periods grazing was 
fairly light. More intensive grazing producing short 
turfed dry grassland or even limited tillage can be 
seen in this last period. 
DISCUSSION 
by Michael F. Allen and Mick Rawlings 
Discussion of the nature of Neolithic activity at 
Whitesheet Hill is restricted by the limited area 
examined within the pipeline corridor. Information 
about the date and nature of the earthworks, and 
activities in the interior have been elucidated, 
however, along with an environmental sequence 
and assemblages of various artefact types. This data 
can address some of the fundamental questions 
about the causewayed enclosure, the landscape in 
which it sits, and the landscape that it served. 
The presence of a large undated circular 
enclosure on another spur of the hill, defined by an 
uninterrupted ditch, serves to highlight the 
number and range of monuments at Whitesheet 
Hill. 
Date of Construction and Activity 
Radiocarbon dates for the primary fill of the 
causewayed ditch indicate construction about 3730- 
3370 cal BC, which is directly comparable to dates 
for the enclosure ditches at Windmill Hill (Ambers 
and Housley 1999), Maiden Castle (Ambers et al. 
1991), and Hambledon Hill (Bayliss et al. in prep.). 
More significant, however, is the date range of the 
features from the interior. These clearly fall into a 
range of c. 3720-3330 cal BC, proving that both the 
interior pits and the enclosure are contemporary 
events within the earlier Neolithic. These 
contribute to an increasingly coherent group of 
dates for causewayed enclosures in Wessex. 
Nature of the Monument 
The form of the Whitesheet enclosure is described 
above and summarised elsewhere by Oswald et al. 
(2001, fig. 8.4, 157); it is typical of many such 
enclosure monuments. Excavation, however, 
revealed the scale of the ditch to be far from the 
1.35m depth recorded by Piggott (1952, fig. 2). The 
size and shape of the ditch was unprecedented for a 
causewayed enclosure, being 2.8m deep, with a 
narrow 1m wide and 1m deep almost vertical sided 
‘slot’ in the base making it almost defensive in form 
and quite unlike the typical broad, flat-bottomed, U 
shaped profiles of other enclosures (see Oswald et 
al. 2001, fig 3.8). 
site typical typical ~— form 
width depth 
Maiden Castle 3-—4m _ 1.2-1.6m_ broad flat bottomed 
U-shaped 
very broad flat 
bottomed U-shaped 
broad flat bottomed 
U-shaped 
Windmill Hill 2.5-4m_ 0.8-2.3 
Hambledon Hill c 1.8 ileal 
This begs two questions: Did Piggott reach the 
bottom of the ditch in his cutting I (Piggott 1952, 
fig 2); and is the function of this causewayed 
enclosure significantly different from others? 
Outlook and Landscape 
From the enclosure circuit there is a clear series of 
views over the local landscape. From the eastern 
side the monument looks down the local deep-sided 
dry valley, and on the opposite side, the chalk 
escarpment falls away to the south and north-west 
giving panoramic views of the Blackmore Vale. The 
enclosure is conspicuous from all the landscapes it 
views. However, these views are not as clear, nor as 
striking in all directions from the interior of the 
enclosure. None of the artefact assemblages 
suggests any defensive or offensive events as seen at 
Carn Brae (Mercer 1974; 1999) that might have 
provided some light on the nature of the excavated 
ditch profile. The ditch at the location excavated 
was, however, across the most vulnerable location 
facing a spur towards the hillfort rather than steep 
scarp slope. Piggott’s ditch faced on to the opposite 
spur towards the undated enclosure (Figure 2). 
This might suggest that Piggott had only reached 
