Printed from the APC web site: navigation and non-essential images removed.
Please view on-line for full content (URL at end of document).
Flint Report ~ Nosterfield 1991, 1994-1996.
Introduction
The assemblages collected from 4 fieldwork interventions in 1991, 1994, 1995 and 1996, consists of a total of 650 lithic items. A breakdown of the lithic by intervention is presented in Table 1.
| Year | Quantity | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| 1991 | 6 | |
| 1994 | 2 | Natural pebbles from sieving |
| 1995 | 590 | All but 9 example from excavated contexts |
| 1996 | 7 | 1 piece unstratified |
Table 1: Quantities of flint by intervention.
The majority of the lithics come from the 1995 season of excavation and are from contexts associated with an early to late Neolithic complex of cut features principally pits. Given that the majority of the material is from the 1995 intervention this report will consider the collection as a whole and unless otherwise noted all comments relate to the 1995 collection.
Raw material
Colour
The raw material is relatively homogenous in colour and with the exception of 6 red/brown items consists in the main of brown-grey-black pieces often with a range of different shades within one piece. The flint becomes opaque on finer flakes and chippings and is of a good quality with few flaws or fossils. This homogeneity is particularly apparent from context 1096, the cut of a Neolithic pit. Here 340 pieces found in a concentration towards the north end of the pit fit this range of flint colour and may be derived from the same parent source or even nodule.
At least one piece from the assemblage demonstrates re-use of a previously knapped source material. In this case a scraper demonstrates a highly ground and polished surface (Context 1072, the upper fill of a late Neolithic cut, Fig. 1). This surface could not have been applied to the artifact itself due to the pressure involved which would truncate a thin flake. The polish is not unlike that seen on flint axes of the Neolithic period and this doubled with the use of the écaille or split pebble technique to manufacture the flake suggest that a spent flint axe was knapped to produce flakes. The écaille technique is typical of industries using small pebbles as source material (Norman 1977, 4-6) or in this case re-use of a flint axe.
Cortex
There is an extremely low incidence of any cortex on the items from the site with 516 pieces have no remaining cortex whether exterior or interior. The incidence of cortex on an item rarely covers more than 25% of its surface area (12 examples in the range 25-70% surface area cover). These examples consist of larger pieces of debitage and primary/secondary flakes. There are 6 examples of chips of pure cortex all of which come from context 1096.
Where cortex is present it is generally cream/brown in colour and thin in section. There are no examples of soft chalky cortex with the examples present having a solid matrix. The cortex present, even on the few larger items, has evidence of previous removal scars so that glacial transportation of the material cannot be ascertained as no original surfaces remain.
Natural pebbles
There are 6 very small natural pebbles from the collection (less than 20mm square). Two of these pieces are the examples from the 1994 sieving. The natural pebbles present are not suitable for knapping due to their size and quality and are present on the site as gravel erratics.
Chert
There are 4 pieces of chert in the assemblage all of which are deliberately knapped though not further worked. The cherts all vary in character and have marked differences in colour and inclusions.
Patina
Only 8 items from the collection have any patina development, 3 examples come from the 1991 intervention and 1 from the 1996 intervention. Of the examples from the 1995 excavation one is unstratified with two of the remaining three pieces from context 1096. No trends in patina development can therefore be discerned amongst the assemblages.
Post deposition
The material is extremely well preserved with little post depositional damage such as edge chipping, snapping or abrasion. A small number of pieces have minute amounts of surface gloss consistent with movement in a sandy/dry matrix (Harbord 1996. p. 20). Post depositional thermal damage is only evident on once piece, this being a pot lid (S.F. 3, Context 5014) consistent with thermal expansion from cold to warmer conditions. The pot lid refits within a corresponding crater on the surface of a flake (S.F. 2, Context 5014) which shows signs of pre-depositional burning.
Technology
The flint has been classified in the first instance into its basic natural or knapped form irrespective of further working, i.e. scrapers based on flake blanks are included in the statistics for flakes. Table 2 sets out the incidence of the varying forms at the site:-
| Type | Quantity per Year | Total Quantity | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 91 | 94 | 95 | 96 | Total | (%) | |
| Blades (inc. pieces of) | 0 | 0 | 1 | 20 | 21 | 3.5 |
| Debitage (irregular shattered pieces) | 0 | 0 | 1 | 311 | 312 | 51.5 |
| Flakes (inc. pieces of) | 6 | 0 | 4 | 255 | 265 | 43.8 |
| Natural pieces (inc. pot lids) | 0 | 2 | 1 | 4 | 7 | 1.2 |
| Total | 6 | 2 | 7 | 590 | 605 | 100 |
Table 2: Quantities of flint by natural or knapped type.
No cores are present at the site. This may suggest that cores were removed to be further worked or that the method of working left little structural evidence of the parent nodule, i.e. it became completely smashed. The large amount of irregular debitage at the site may suggest this as set out below in Table 3:-
| Debitage size | Quantity | Percentage (%) |
|---|---|---|
| >0mm<5mm | 35 | 11.2 |
| >5mm<10mm | 78 | 25 |
| >10mm<15mm | 88 | 28.2 |
| >15mm<20mm | 60 | 19.2 |
| >20mm<25mm | 31 | 10 |
| >25mm<30mm | 12 | 3.8 |
| >30mm<35mm | 5 | 1.6 |
| >35mm<50mm | 3 | 1 |
| Total | 312 | 100 |
Table 3: Quantity of debitage by graded size.
The debitage was graded by taking its maximum dimension on a grid incremented in 5mm steps. The majority of the debitage falls under 25mm in maximum dimension. The general small size of the waste suggests that preliminary knapping took place elsewhere.
Flakes and blades
Flake production outnumbers blade production at the site in the ratio of 13:1. Blades are classified in this instance as parallel sided pieces with a length:breadth ratio of greater than or equal to 2:1. Other struck pieces falling below this ratio which are flat in section are characterised as flakes. The majority of the struck pieces at the site have prominent bulbs of percussion and retain a large portion of core platform indicating the use of hard hammers. Approximately 10% of the assemblage is soft hammer struck and suggests that in the main the industry was driven by the production of thick flakes prepared by direct percussion with a hard hammer.
Two core face trimming flakes were noted in the collection with the flakes removed across the face of the core at 90 degrees to the striking platform.
In one instance the écaille technique has been used to prepare a flake (Context 1072, Fig. 1) with a downward direct percussion blow with a hard hammer removing the flake. The force of the blow was then carried back through the flake resting on an anvil to produce inverse ripples at its distal end.
The blades at the site range in length from 15mm to 84 mm and represent many different stages in core reduction. The blades are not particularly gracile and include thick examples of 3-5 mm. Flakes at the site have a major range in size from two conjoining pieces from the 1991 collection at 92 x 90 x 19 mm to minuscule examples of small chipped flakes which may represent platform preparation.
Burning
Twenty eight pieces from the collection show various degrees of thermal damage by burning. There does appear to be a correlation between burnt pieces and context with the 20 burnt examples originating from just 8 contexts (1004, 3 pieces; 1022; 1026; 1027, 8 pieces; 1072; 1075, 6 pieces; 1217, 6 pieces and 5014, 2 pieces which refit). However in all cases there are at least 50% more flints unburnt along with those burnt, i.e. there are no discrete areas which would appear to contain only burnt items. It is not uncommon however for flint to remain unaltered in small hearths and fires. All but two of the contexts (1004 & 5014) producing burnt flints had other evidence of burning such as reddened stones or charcoal. Other than one example of a lightly burnt broken scraper (Context 1027) the burnt examples are all waste flakes and debitage.
Worked pieces
Fifty-two pieces in the assemblage have been modified into or demonstrate use as tools. The figures include pieces which have light edge damage as the integrity of the collection suggests little post deposition and excavation damage. Table 4 sets out the tool types at the site:-
| Tool Type | 1991 | 1995 | 1996 | Total Quantity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Arrowhead | 0 | 2 | 1 | 3 |
| Miscellaneous retouch | 1 | 3 | 0 | 4 |
| Scraper | 0 | 19 | 1 | 20 |
| Serrated pieces | 1 | 2 | 1 | 4 |
| Utilised blade | 0 | 5 | 0 | 5 |
| Utilised flake | 2 | 16 | 0 | 18 |
| Total | 4 | 47 | 3 | 52 |
Table 4: Quantities of worked flints.
Scrapers are the dominant tool type amongst the assemblage with 20 examples. The scrapers at the site take a variety of forms from basic trimmed edge flakes (Fig. 1) to well worked teardrop shaped end and edge scrapers (Fig. 2). Scrapers are generally based upon flake blanks and usually form fairly gracile example (e.g. Fig 3) although thicker more robust examples are present (e.g. Fig. 4). Of the 20 scrapers all but two are made on flakes with the other two based upon suitable large blanks of debitage (e.g. Fig. 5). A characteristic thumbnail scraper was collected from the 1995 excavation from an unstratified context (Fig. 6).
The scraping technology at the site appears to have been well utilised with four truncated examples or pieces of broken scrapers present. One truncated example representing the distal end of the original scraper has been blunted along the broken edge to allow its reuse (Fig. 7).
Flint Scrapers
Retouch is used in a more ad hoc manner to create tools but this is limited amongst the assemblage and when used simply trims flakes to useful edges (e.g. Fig. 8).
Retouch is used more regularly to serrate edges with examples from 1991, 1995 and 1996. One of the examples from 1995 is based upon a blade of a Borrowdale volcanic series rock and would have made an extremely robust sawing edge tool (Fig. 9).
Retouched flints: left, retouched flake; right, retouched sawing edge tool.
Many flakes and blades have been utilised without further working, having chipped or otherwise utilised edges. This is particularly the case on pieces with thin edges (e.g. Fig. 10) and those which in general could be used for cutting and slicing functions (e.g. Fig. 11).
Utilised flake and blade.
There are three arrowheads from the assemblages, two from the 1995 excavation and one from the 1996. A small arrowhead was recovered from context 1068 (Fig. 12). The arrowhead is leaf butted and forms a very precise triangular point which shares close affinities with barbed and tanged examples. A leaf shaped bifacially worked point was found in the fill of pit 1018 (Fig. 13). This finely worked piece is made from a grey/white flint which is out of character with the principal brown/grey component of the assemblage. The third example of a possible projectile point (Fig. 14) comes from the 1996 excavation (S.F. 1). The piece is based on a triangle of honey coloured flint with bifacial working along the edges of two sides of the triangle. The third side has been trimmed but not further thinned by bifacial working and may have been hafted as a chisel ended arrowhead. Alternately the invasiveness of the retouch on the other edges of the piece may argue that its is an unfinished leaf shaped example.
Arrowheads
Chronology
The flint recovered from the site came from excavated contexts dated to the Early and Late Neolithic, principally by ceramic assemblages of Grimston, Grooved and Peterborough Wares. There are no diagnostic elements amongst the lithic assemblage which would suggest a date earlier than the Neolithic period. The flaking style with hard hammer direct percussion would fit a date from the early Neolithic onwards.
The small leaf butted arrowhead from context 1068 would correlate with an early Neolithic date as is suggested by the Grimston pottery from this feature although leaf shaped projectiles can also occur in Bronze Age contexts (Green, 1984, p. 33).
The leaf point from pit 1018 appears to be the only item of material culture from the feature. Again it is suggested that this finely worked flint would suit a date in the Neolithic period although closer affiliation with the ceramic industries cannot be tested in this case.
Chisel arrowheads have been documented in association with Grimston Ware and also later Neolithic contexts but do not appear to date any later than the first half of the second millennium B.C. (Green, 1980, p. 113-114).
The flake from a polished stone axe (Fig. 1) would again suggest a date from the early Neolithic. However as this represents the reuse of an item the piece must act as a post quem association. The Woodlands style pottery for the context suggests a later Neolithic date.
The use of a volcanic stone of the Borrowdale series, (often used for the manufacture of axes), for the formation of a saw (Fig. 9) in association with Fengate and Grooved ware would suggest a late Neolithic date for context 1312, the fill of a pit.
The accurate dating of scraping tools is problematic given their continuity throughout prehistory and their varied uses which means variation can be as much a function of purpose as chronology (Young, 1987, p. 57-58). The invasiveness of the retouch on the majority of items would suggest a date later than the Mesolithic although this remains to be tested. The mixture of end and end scrapers are a common component of Neolithic-Bronze Age assemblages . The thumb nail scraper from an unstratified context is a common element of Early Bronze Age assemblages (Edmonds, 1995, p. 141) although not exclusively so.
Conclusions
The assemblage with its predominance of scraping tools suggests that domestic processing was carried out or is otherwise represented at the site. The majority of the lithics are waste flakes and chippings characteristic of secondary knapping and trimming. There are no cores suggesting that they were either removed from the site or that the knapping debris was removed from elsewhere for burial.
Arrowheads are present at the site which would traditionally suggest hunting activities. However given the nature of the deposition of the items, unused in pits, alternate interpretations such as purposeful deposition in a ritual context are plausible.
The majority of the flint appears to be fairly homogenous in raw material characteristics. Given the small size of many of the pieces and lack of cortex it is not possible to suggest whether the flint comes from a glacial origin (boulder clays/river gravels/beaches) or from a mined source.
Without exception the tools at the site are concurrent with its use in the early and late Neolithic periods.
Bibliography
Edmonds, M. 1995. Stone Tools and Society. Batsford.
Green, H. S. 1980. Flint Arrowheads of the British Isles. BAR 75.
Green, H.S. 1984. Flint Arrowheads: Typology and Interpretation. Lithics 5, pp. 19-39.
Harbord, N. H. 1996. A North Yorks Moors Mesolithic Marginal Site on Highcliff Nab, Guisborough. Durham Archaeological Journal 12, pp. 17-26.
Norman, C. 1977. A flint assemblage from Constantine Island, North Cornwall. Cornish Archaeology 16, 3-9.
