Home

Prehistoric Ritual Landscape

Visibility

Destroy or Preserve?

Scheduling History

Archaeological Procedures

On Closer Inspection...

Palaeoenvironment

The Archaeological Dividend

Publication

•••••

Specialist Reports

Investigation Map

News & Updates

Detailed Search

Site Map

Contributors

Printed from the APC web site: navigation and non-essential images removed.
Please view on-line for full content (URL at end of document).

Neolithic Pottery from Nosterfield

Blaise Vyner. 1998.

introduction | treatment | pottery fabrics | discussion | acknowledgements | catalogue & illustrations

Introduction

The assemblage appears to span the Neolithic period and comprises Grimston, Peterborough and Grooved wares. The majority of the sherds are small and preclude the reconstruction of complete vessels. A number of fabrics is present, but since these are very similar in content individual differences are most likely to reflect the individualities of particular vessels rather than significant differences in chronology or source. Fabric difference between particular vessels, however, may well be functionally and/or symbolically significant.

Treatment

In the fabric descriptions supplied hyphenated colours indicate the variation in colour expected from poorly controlled firing conditions, the first colour being that most in evidence. Grit sizes are expressed as small (>3mm) and medium (4-6mm), large (6-9mm), and very large (<10mm). Distinctive particles smaller than 0.02mm are described as dust. No thin section analysis has been done and identification has been using a 10x lens.

While the desirability of more detailed presentation of prehistoric ceramics in terms of form and function (Cleal 1992, 302-3) is recognised, the fragmentary nature of many assemblages, not least this one, often precludes the application of these approaches in that rim diameter, vessel height and volume are not usually knowable. In the catalogue entries square brackets denote a pit or other feature number, while standard brackets denote their fill number.

Sherds have been assigned to individual fabric types, and where possible, individual vessels have been identified. Diagnostic sherds have been illustrated and this material is separately packed in boxes marked 'D' in green. All the material has been re-packed following examination and identification by fabric and vessel. The pottery has been assessed for conservation needs and all significant sherds in friable or otherwise weak fabrics have been consolidated. The laboratory record cards are included with the pottery and conserved pottery is stored in boxes marked 'C' in red. The drawn material is also that which is most appropriate for display.

Pottery Fabrics

Although the pottery from Nosterfield spans a considerable period of the Neolithic, with a number of chronologically and stylistically distinct elements, there are considerable similarities in fabric. Virtually all the material contains the same suite of filler grits, although proportions vary from vessel to vessel. A distinctive feature of the fabrics is a considerable number of cavities from which an angular grit has leached. The cavities vary in size from very small through to large, in the latter instance the surviving fabric is considerably weakened through the loss of the grits combined with low original firing temperatures. Geological examination reveals traces with the characteristics of gypsum, which is suggested to have been the original grit.

Angular fragments of grey-white 'cherty limestone' - effectively chert - are another major constituent of the pottery fabrics, with mica and quartz forming a smaller element. Smaller rounded quartz sands may have been present in the clay matrix, rather than being deliberately added. Fragments of carbon-rich mudstone are occasionally present, while there also appear to be occasional fragments of re-used 'grog', or previously fired clay.

Variations of the fabric have been noted and allow the sub-divisions described below, but these show relatively little variation in basic constituents between Grimston style of the earlier Neolithic, and the later Peterborough Fengate and Grooved Ware. Significantly, sherds of the only Peterborough Mortlake style vessel from the site are in a variant fabric (Pe4), distinguished by the presence of igneous grits and fragments of feldspar.

It may be significant, in terms of activity at the site and in the neighbourhood, that the constituents of the main suite of fabrics are all available within a radius of between 16 and 19 km of Nosterfield, although, of course, they could have come from further afield. Grits for the granite tempered Mortlake style vessel, if not the vessel itself, derive from the Pennine uplands to the west of the site.

Taking into account the post-depositional degeneration of the pottery a high level of potting skill is evident throughout. In general the finished vessels are better made than pottery of the middle Bronze Age and Iron Age from the region. Of particular note are some sherds of Grooved Ware in Woodlands style, where a fine clay body has been burnished before firing.

Table 1. Distribution of pottery by feature.

Grimston style

The pattern of distribution of Neolithic activity and associated pottery in Yorkshire has, perhaps more than any other period of the past, remained unchanged over many years. Newbigin's map (1937, pl. 18) has continued fairly accurately to represent the known distribution of earlier Neolithic pottery. The pottery assemblage from Nosterfield, on the north bank of the Ure, taken in conjunction with that recently excavated from Marton-le-Moor, between the rivers Nidd and Swale, some 18km to the south (Manby 1996, Tavener 1996), is therefore important, the more so since it derives from the Vale of Mowbray, an area where significant sites have until now not been joined by ceramic assemblages.

Form and fabric

Sherds from four Grimston style vessels were found in two pits, 1069 and 1076. The fabric is of the same general type as the majority of the vessel fabrics found at Nosterfield, characterised by numerous small to medium-sized cavities from leached grits, with variable amounts of small chert fragments and some quartz sands. Vessel 2 is unusual in having been fired oxidised orange-brown on both internal and external surfaces. With the exception of one bag-shaped vessel (vessel 4), the vessel profile was not recoverable, although the raised cordon on one vessel (vessel 1) might well have followed a carination.

The quantity of Grimston style pottery from Nosterfield is not sufficient to allow much discussion. Vessel forms appear to be plain bowls, although no substantial profile is recoverable. Rims are plain and everted, and the assemblage lacks the sharp everted and rolled forms seen at Marton-le-Moor. Vessel walls are thin, between 5 and 8mm, and comparable with those from the finer series of vessels from Marton-le-Moor (Manby 1996). There appear to be similarities, too, between the fabric of the Nosterfield pottery and that of the finer vessels from Marton-le-Moor, although the latter assemblage is marked by sandstone and Pennine grit fillers (ibid).

Contexts and associations

The Grimston style pottery from Nosterfield derives from the fill of two pits only, 1069 and 1076. Only a small amount of the lithic material from the site is chronologically diagnostic (Rowe 1998); of the contexts which contained Grimston style pottery, the fill of pit 1069, context 1068, produced a leaf-shaped arrowhead and a few flint flakes. The small amount of material does not encourage extended discussion, although it should be noted that the presence of carinated pottery here and at Marton-le-Moor (Manby 1996) extends the distribution of carinated Grimston bowls to sites, suggested to have been restricted to mortuary sites (Herne 1988, 19) to sites which do not have an overt mortuary function.

Chronology

In the absence of any radiocarbon dates to provide an absolute chronology for the Nosterfield pottery comparison has to be made with other sites within the region. Again, the Marton-le-Moor site is useful in that a date has been obtained for the thin-walled (Series 1) Neolithic vessels which compare with those from Nosterfield. This is calibrated to 3900 - 3800 BC (OXA-5581), somewhat earlier than the series from Street House cairn, which varies from 3120±50 (Bm²061N) to 2770±50 cal BC (BM1969N) and relates to activity which is probably contemporary with the deposition of the pottery (Manby 1996; Vyner 1988, 199).

In east Yorkshire and its region it would seem that the Grimston style bowl, either carinated or bag-shaped, is current during the first half of the fourth millennium BC. On the evidence from Marton-le-Moor and the more distant Scottish site of Balfarg (Cowie 1993, 65-75), heavier vessels with coarser fabrics and applied lugs are in use, alongside the finer vessels, by the mid-fourth millennium. It is not currently clear how long either type remained current, although Manby suggests that relatively soon after this time the Series 1 vessels go out of use, while ultimately the Series 2 vessels develop into Towthorpe Ware (Manby 1996). The absence of thick-walled vessels from Nosterfield may therefore be chronologically significant, perhaps indicating a reduction of activity in the area around the mid-fourth millennium cal BC.

Peterborough Wares

Fragments of an estimated six Peterborough Ware vessels are present in the assemblage, the majority of the material deriving from parts of two vessels in the fill of a pit, 1307. The vessels are characterised by thick walls and large grits, probably a necessary manufacturing and firing corollary.

Form and fabric

Pe1 Thick walled, chert grits, fine clay matrix with quartz dust. Vessels 5, 6, 10.

Pe2 Thick walled, numerous cavities of all sizes, coarse clay matrix with quartz dust. Vessels 7, 8.

Pe3 As above, with few or no cavities. Vessel 9.

Pe4 Thick walled, coarse fabric with small to medium quartz, feldspar and mica fragments and medium to large and very large (13 by 9 by 9mm) angular granite grits. Wall thickness typically 17mm. Vessel 11.

Most of the Peterborough Ware is in the Fengate style: two vessels, with a single flake from a probable third, vessel 10, have straight sides with T-shaped rims and well-executed incised decoration. Two vessels have more obvious collars, one roughly formed with external incised decoration, another represented by a single sherd which has external incised decoration and a series of U-shaped incised grooves on the interior.

A single vessel, 11, with dumb-bell impressions, probably from the use of bird or other bone, appears to belong to the Mortlake style. The vessel contains igneous grits which could have been obtained locally from a glacial deposition.

As with the Grimston style pottery, the assemblage has some parallels with somewhat larger assemblage of pottery from Marton-le-Moor, but these tend to be in terms of decorative traits rather than vessel form. The T-shaped rim of the well-crafted Nosterfield vessels 5 and 6 is noted as absent from the Marton-le-Moor assemblage (Manby 1996), but does find some similarities in the assemblage from Carnaby Top Site 19 on the Yorkshire Wolds (Manby 1975, fig. 13, 5), and in the less well finished material from Sawdon Moor, on the south slope of the North Yorkshire Moors (Manby 1995, 42-3). The absence of sherds with overt Rudston characteristics contrasts with pottery in the somewhat larger Peterborough Ware assemblage recently recovered from the site at Catterick Racecourse, on the River Swale, 19km to the north (Vyner 1996), where it was apparently associated with mortuary activities. However, the relatively few assemblages available for study, even within the wider region, make it difficult to know whether variation in construction and decoration should be ascribed to chronology, function, or cultural association.

Impressed cord decoration is hardly seen at Nosterfield, although there are some poorly defined indentations which may have been formed by this method. Fingernail impressions are commonly found, but the overwhelming use of incised decoration using stick, bone, or flint is notable.

Table 2. Decorative motifs on Nosterfield Peterborough ware.

Contexts and associations

Peterborough Ware occurs in the fill of three pits, 1307, 1313, and 1321. Peterborough ware in Fengate style was not associated with any other styles of pottery, but the fill of pit 1321, containing the Mortlake style sherd, also contained a sherd of Grooved Ware which is probably part of vessel 15. Again, the lithic associations are unhelpful so far as chronology is concerned. Of the principal context producing Peterborough pottery, pit 1307 produced only flakes, while a saw in volcanic Borrowdale stone was present in the fill of pit 1313 (Rowe 1998).

Chronology

Again, the Marton-le-Moor site has produced a range of radiocarbon dates relevant to the Nosterfield assemblage. Since they are derived from carbonised hazelnuts they may be somewhat older than the associated potsherds, but the range through the second part of the fourth millennium cal BC is a potential indication of the currency of this material (Manby 1996), as well as a further confirmation of the likely contemporaneity of Mortlake and Fengate styles (Gibson 1995, 30).

Grooved Wares

The assemblage of Grooved Ware from Nosterfield contains vessels in Woodlands and Durrington Walls style. The total weight of Grooved Ware from Nosterfield is 1580gm. While it is a smaller assemblage than those recently recovered from Marton-le-Moor (3044gm) or Roecliffe (2899gm), with which regional comparison is best made (Manby 1996), it is particularly important because the continuing archaeological investigation of Nosterfield and the nearby henges offers the potential for viewing the assemblage within the broader context.

The Grooved Ware vessels from Nosterfield, as from other Yorkshire sites, were recovered from pits and are for the most part represented by only small numbers of sherds, and on occasion by only one or two (Table 3). The minimum number of vessels represented is nine in Woodlands style and 12 in Durrington Walls style, with total weights respectively of 300g and 1280g. The higher weight of the Durrington Walls style pottery reflecting the slightly coarser fabric as well as the greater number of vessels. The predominance of Durrington Walls style Grooved Ware at this site is typical of the relative distributions of Grooved Ware styles in northern England (Manby forthcoming).

Table 3. Relative quantities of Grooved Wares at Nosterfield.

Form and fabric

GW1 Thin walled, numerous cavities from small leached grits (and medium for vessel 4), very similar to Grimston. Contains occasional traces of 'grog'. Vessels 4, 12, 24.

GW2 Medium walled, small to medium chert grits, small to medium cavities with remnant white material which is probably gypsum, mica dust in fabric, which can be very fine. Vessels 13, 16, 18, 25, 28.

GW3 Thick walled, numerous small to medium chert grits, some small cavities, quartz dust in the clay matrix. Vessels 15, 23, 31.

GW4 As GW2, but with no obvious cavities. Vessel 16.

GW5 Thick-walled, numerous small, medium and large cavities create a friable fabric, a few obvious irregularly shaped small white grits probably gypsum, some small clear quartz grains. Vessel 17.

GW6 Thin-walled version of GW5. Vessels 20, 30.

GW7 Fine smooth fabric with quartz and pink rose quartz sands, and perhaps some grog. Vessel 27.

GW8 As GW2, but with small white grits, perhaps gypsum. Vessels 14, 19.

GW9 As GW3, but with medium wall thickness. Vessel 22.

Table 4. Nosterfield Grooved Ware: correlation of fabric and style.

The Grooved Ware is typical of the Woodlands and Durrington Walls styles (Table 3). The Woodlands style (Wainwright and Longworth 1971, 238-40) is generally found in small assemblages widely if thinly distributed between Orkney and Wessex. The Nosterfield vessels are all fragmentary and in general do not allow the original form of the vessels to be reconstructed. As usual with the Woodlands style, internal decoration is confined to the rims. External moulded cordons are relatively common and there appears to be a direct correlation between quality of the vessel fabrics and the extent and intricacy of decoration. Vessels 20 and 27 have particularly fine fabrics, the former has notching on alternate cordons as seen at Marton-le-Moor (Manby 1996) and on Yorkshire Wold sites at Carnaby Top Site 12 and Flamborough Hartondale (Manby 1974). The undulating cordon with linking motif on vessel 20 is reminiscent of Marton-le-Moor Gw22 (Manby 1996), while vessel 28 has an applied decorative pellet on the rim interior in the style also seen on that site.

Vessels in the Durrington Walls style (Wainwright and Longworth 1971, 240-42) are again largely fragmentary. Vessels generally have thicker walls and a somewhat coarser fabric than those in Woodlands style. They include some without evident decoration. Raised cordons and patterns of incised lines are the most common decorational traits seen at Nosterfield; the assemblage is generally similar to that from Roecliffe (Manby 1996).

Context and associations

Grooved Ware occurred in conjunction with other pottery styles in only one instance, pit 1321, which also contained a Peterborough Mortlake sherd. Grooved Ware in both Durrington walls style and Woodlands style occurred in only two contexts, pits 1004 and 1054. Other contexts appear to contain either Durrington Walls style or Woodlands style pottery. Taken with the fact that some vessels, especially Woodlands style pottery, were represented by single or only a few sherds, this suggests that selective deposition was taking place. Beyond noting the characteristic presence of scrapers in association with Grooved Ware, the lithic assemblage is not enlightening.

Chronology

Nosterfield provides no internal dating evidence for the Grooved Ware assemblage: on the evidence from Marton-le-Moor and Roecliffe, North Yorkshire, and other sites, Woodlands style material is suggested to belong to the latter part of the fourth millennium cal BC, while Durrington walls style may have a somewhat later currency, in the first half of the third millennium (Manby 1996).

General discussion

The Nosterfield pottery assemblage derives from a series of shallow pits located some 1km north-east of the northernmost of the Thornborough henges. In general terms the features are similar to those at other sites in the region that produce Neolithic pottery assemblages, and there is little to suggest that the presence of the nearby henge has a significant influence on the nature of the assemblage. Unlike the major henges of Wessex, which have produced distinctive concentrations of Grooved Ware, excavations at Yorkshire henges have been notably poor in finds of any kind, especially pottery. Thus limited excavations at the Thornborough henges in 1952 retrieved only a single Neolithic-type sherd from above the cursus (Thomas 1955, 437) and excavations in the ditch terminal of the southern henge in 1996 revealed no pottery at all. At Ferrybridge, a henge adjacent to the River Aire some 60km to the south, the assemblage comprised only a few sherds of Grimston style pottery, probable Towthorpe Ware, and Peterborough Ware (Vyner 1997). It cannot therefore be said that Yorkshire henges produce distinctive pottery assemblages, Grooved Ware or otherwise, indeed, on current evidence it would seem that they do not.

On the other hand it cannot safely be assumed that the known Yorkshire Grooved Ware assemblages derive from occupation sites, since the majority of assemblages derive from pit groups and only at Hartendale, Flamborough, is there an association with a putative structure (Manby 1974, 70). However, at Willington, Derbyshire, a group of structures interpreted as houses was associated with an assemblage of Grooved Ware (Wheeler 1979). A number of sites on the Wolds comprise pits, generally of the same scale as those found at Nosterfield, which Manby has suggested are evidence for occupation in an area where attrition of the surface chalk has removed shallower features and hearths (Manby 1975, 47-8). An assemblage with Clacton style Grooved Ware characteristics appears to have been associated with activity preceding the construction of an early Bronze Age burial mound at Green Howe, North Deighton, and could conceivably have been related to earlier ritual activity (Manby 1971). At Low Caythorpe, East Riding, Peterborough Ware was retrieved from two of 14 pits in a boundary alignment, and thus may have been associated with ritual rather than domestic activity. Grooved Ware was also recovered from a group of six pits (1020), at least three of which appear to have been contemporary (Abramson 1996, 6-9).Unfortunately at Caythorpe as elsewhere, the extent and associations of the pit group are unclear.

Table 5 Relative proportions of pottery by weight, minimum number of vessels and sherd count. Sherd count includes all sherds over around 150mm²; recently divided pieces are counted as one.

All the pottery from Nosterfield derives from pits of varying size and depth, but seldom greater than 1m across or 0.80m deep. The two pits containing Grimston style pottery are slightly smaller than the average, but there seems little to distinguish them from pits containing Peterborough Ware and Grooved Ware.

There is little mixing of pottery types between pits, suggesting that they were not open for any length of time, a suggestion supported by the generally unabraded state of the sherds. Pit 1069 contained Grooved Ware and Peterborough Fengate pottery, but Peterborough Ware was only associated with Grooved Ware in one instance, pit 1321, where a Mortlake sherd was present with Grooved ware of probable Durrington Walls style.

An extensive area has been excavated at Nosterfield and the spatial distribution of pits containing pottery is of some interest. Not all the excavated pits contained pottery; of 76 pits on the excavation plan, 28 contained pottery. Spatially there seems little to distinguish pits that contain pottery from those that do not. It is noticeable, however, that the two pits containing Grimston style pottery, pit 1069 and pit 1076, are situated close to the southern end of the excavated area. Pits containing Peterborough Ware are also relatively restricted in their distribution; pit 1069 (again) and 1321 being at the southern end of the site and pit 1307 at its centre.

The pits containing Grimston and Peterborough pottery are all relatively marginal to the pits which contain Grooved Ware. Pit 1307 is especially notable in being located at the centre of the excavated area in a largely 'empty' area. Activity associated with the deposition of Grimston pottery seems to have been concentrated at the southern end of the site, while that associated with Peterborough pottery was extended into the central part of the excavated area.

Activity connected with the deposition of Grooved Ware appears to have intensified but polarised to north and south within the excavated area. The central space, some 70m wide, was occupied by only a few features, the most significant ceramically being pit 1307, which appears not to have had any other distinguishing features.

While it is quite possible that chronologically distinct areas of Nosterfield site remain to be investigated, on the present evidence there is nothing to indicate continuous activity from the period of deposition of Grimston style pottery through to more concentrated activity involving the use of Fengate, Mortlake and Grooved Ware. Whether the absence of Beaker pottery from Nosterfield is chronologically or functionally significant has yet to be established.

With very few exceptions the Nosterfield pottery is manufactured using clays and grits which could have been obtained within a 16 to 19km radius of the site and therefore might have been made very locally. That very local manufacture is at least a possibility is suggested by the fact that Grooved Ware from Low Caythorpe, Humberside, contained fillers obtainable within 2km of the site (Manby 1996a, 44).

Acknowledgements

Thanks are due to Northern Archaeology Associates for making available the report on pottery from Appleton Roebuck and Marton-le-Moor, and to Terry Manby for his comments on a first draft of this report. Geological identifications were undertaken by Ken Sedman of Middlesbrough Museum Service, while illustrations were prepared by Peter Hart-Allison at Tees Archaeology, Hartlepool.

Catalogue of pottery

Vessel 1

Jar with plain everted rim, mid-grey surfaces and fabric, numerous small and medium chert grits, and cavities from which small and medium grits have leached, wall thickness 9mm. A single plain rim sherd and a small body sherd with a pinched raised cordon, similar in profile to a vessel from North Carnaby Temple Site 11 (Manby 1975, fig. 3, 17). Grimston style. Wt 10g. [1069] (1068)

Vessel 2

Jar, external and internal surfaces and fabric buff-brown, small to medium angular cavities from leached out grits, a few small to medium chert grits. Wall thickness 7mm. No evident decoration. Grimston style. Wt 15g. [1076] (1075)

Vessel 3

Jar, external and internal surfaces dark terracotta-brown to dark grey, cavities where small grits have leached out, the fabric otherwise smooth and somewhat laminated. Wall thickness 6mm. Simple plain everted rim, no evident decoration; striations on the lower interior are probably from manufacture. Grimston style. Wt 50g. [1076] (1075)

Vessel 4

Jar, surfaces and fabric dark grey varying to orange-grey. Numerous cavities from small and medium leached grits, occasional small chert grits and some quartz sands present. Wall thickness usually 5mm, but extending to 10mm at the rim. A large plain rim and shoulder sherd shows this to be a plain vessel with a bag-shaped profile. Grimston style. Wt 100g. [1069] (1068)

Vessel 5

Jar, surfaces orange-brown, fabric similarly orange-brown. Fine well-made smooth fabric with mica dust and some very small chert grits. The chief characteristic is the presence of numerous cavities left by the solution of medium, large and very large grits - some up to 10 by 5 by 6mm - with a few smaller cavities. Typical wall thickness 12mm, base thickness 20mm. Pe1. Fragments of the rim survive (20%) with a similar proportion of body sherds and the base.

Decoration comprises filled triangles of incised lines on the rim surface, the rim upper surface has a chevron of impressed short strokes, below which is a concentric band of oblique strokes above double concentric lines. The rim external surface edge has a single row of near vertical fingernail impressions. The vessel body has been wholly covered with at least seven rows of fingernail impressions. Peterborough Fengate style. Wt 480g. [1307] (1306)

Vessel 6

Jar, external surfaces brown-orange, internal surface varying from brown-orange to dark grey, fabric orange-brown to dark grey. Clay matrix similar to that of vessel 5, but less fine. Cavities remain from the solution of small to medium angular grits. Numerous medium to large angular chert grits. Typical wall thickness 16mm. Pe1.

The rim upper surface is decorated with filled triangles, the design made up with short impressions. The rim interior has three concentric rows of short impressions above two impressed concentric lines. The rim external edge has a single row of diagonal varying to vertical fingernail impressions. The jar body has a seemingly haphazard covering of short vertical impressions - perhaps made with one or more unevenly edged wood or bone implements. The vessel decoration and style is very similar to that of the more finely made vessel 5. Peterborough Fengate style. Wt 695g. [1307] (1306)

Vessel 7

Jar, external surface varying from dark reddish-brown to grey-brown, internal surface dark grey, fabric varying from between the surface colours. The clay matrix seems similar to that of vessels 5 and 6, with mica dust and cavities from the solution of small, medium and large grits. Wall thickness 14mm. Pe2. The vessel has been poorly fired, resulting in much spalling and disintegration. There are a few medium to large angular chert grits and a few medium siltstone flakes.

The rim comprises a large collar which has two rows of impressed scores, or perhaps incisions, a single sherd with finger nail impressions suggests that the motifs alternated. Traces of indentation on the rim bead may represent a row of very short impressions. The body has been covered with what appears to be fingernail scoops set about 10mm apart. Peterborough Fengate style. Wt 440g. [1307] (1306)

Vessel 8 not drawn

Jar, fragment with external surface mid-brown, interior surface dark grey and dark grey fabric, the clay matrix similar to vessels 5 and 6, though less well made. Grits comprise medium and large angular chert fragments, with a few very small to large cavities from former grits. Typical wall thickness 14mm. Pe2. The single rim fragment seems to be a wodge of reddish clay from which the neighbouring material has spalled. The rim fragment has a chevron of fingernail impressions on its only surviving, upper, surface. The vessel body is covered with closely spaced rows of fingernail impressions. Peterborough Fengate style. Wt 125g. [1307] (1306)

There are additionally, unattributable sherds from vessels 7 and 8, total wt 220g. [1307] (1306)

Vessel 9

Jar, external and internal surfaces and fabric dark grey. The clay matrix has quartz dust and contains mixed small limestone grits. Wall thickness 13mm. Pe3. A rim fragment has internal decoration comprising concentric curved grooves, the exterior has oblique short deep incisions along the rim top, below that a chevron of longer incisions. The body has further rows of incisions. Peterborough Fengate style. Wt 25g. [1313] (1312)

Vessel 10 not drawn

Flake of rim interior, surfaces brown-grey, dark grey fabric, mixed small quartz and limestone grits. Pe1. Traces of incised chevron decoration. Peterborough Fengate ware. Wt n/a. [1313] (1312)

Vessel 11

Jar, external surface dark brown-dark grey, internal surface and fabric dark grey. Coarse fabric with small to medium quartz, feldspar and mica fragments and medium to large and very large (13 by 9 by 9mm) angular igneous grits - suggested to be either a microgranite or quartz dolerite, the latter perhaps more likely. Wall thickness typically 17mm. Pe4. Body decoration comprises apparently haphazard dumb-bell-shaped impressions, perhaps made with a bone, the interior has striations probably caused during forming the unyielding fabric. Peterborough Mortlake ware. Wt 115g. [1321] (1320)

This context also contained a few sherds of Grooved Ware, perhaps part of vessel 15. Wt 25g.

Vessel 12

Group of sherds with surfaces and core orange, numerous angular chert grits, some decaying, and cavities from lost small to large grits, wall thickness 9mm. GW6. Decoration comprises grooved lines, including part of a filled lozenge. Although the fabric is similar to vessel 24, both decoration and firing is different. Grooved Ware, Durrington Walls style. Wt 50g. [1004]

Additional 50g in [1002]

Vessel 13

Jar, represented by three sherds, external surface grey-brown, internal surface dark grey, fabric dark grey. Numerous small and medium igneous grits and cavities from leached out small to medium grits. Wall thickness 9mm. GW2. Decorated with grooved horizontal and converging lines. Grooved Ware, Durrington Walls style. Wt 40g. [1004]

Vessel 14

Jar, external and internal surfaces grey-brown, fabric dark grey with small to medium igneous grits, quartz dust in the clay matrix, which has only sparse very small cavities. Wall thickness 6mm. GW8. Plain rim with no sign of decoration on the surviving sherds. Grooved Ware, Durrington Walls style. Wt 50g. [1004] (1002)

Vessel 15

Jar, external surface varying from dark grey to brown-orange and orange, internal surface dark grey, fabric varying from dark grey to orange. Numerous small and medium quartz sands, some igneous sands and small cavities from the leaching of grits. Wall thickness 11mm. GW3. The plain rim has horizontal and vertical raised cordons creating an open panel effect. The one visible junction has an impression. Carbonised accretions on the interior wall. Grooved Ware, Durrington Walls style. Wt 370g. [1011] (1027)

A single body sherd in the same fabric, and probably from the same vessel, has traces of a raised cordon. The context also contained Peterborough material. A single sherd of vessel 15 also occurs in [1321] (1320) Wt 10g.

Vessel 16

Jar rim represented by a single rim sherd, external surface brown-grey, internal surface dark grey, fabric dark grey-brown. Smooth fabric with no obvious grits. Wall thickness 8mm GW4. Decoration on the rim interior comprises shallow horizontal or converging cord impressed lines, on the outside there are broad but indistinct impressions which may have been formed with cord. Grooved Ware, Durrington Walls style. Wt <5g. [1011] (1027)

Vessel 17 not drawn

Jar, external surfaces dark grey, internal surface and fabric dark grey. Numerous small, medium and large angular cavities, a few small irregular ?gypsum fragments remain. Wall thickness 14mm. GW5. A single sherd has traces of a raised vertical cordon, while another has traces of a grooved line, presumed to be evidence of a filled panel. Grooved Ware, Durrington Walls style. Wt 230g. [1017] (1202).

Base sherds and other fragments, external surface brown-orange, internal surface dark grey, fabric colour varying between the two, cavities from numerous missing grits, a few remaining possible gypsum fragments. May be part of vessel 17. Wt 25g. [1074] (1072)

Vessel 18

Single small sherd, external surface and fabric brown-orange, internal surface spalled, fine fabric. GW4. Decorated with a raised cordon which has a neat impressed cord decoration on its centre surface. Grooved Ware, Durrington Walls style. Wt <5g. [1017] (1202)

Vessel 19

Jar, external surface varying from dark brown to orange-brown, internal surface dark grey, fabric variably grey-orange. Numerous small and medium cavities from leached grits, a few small possible gypsum fragments remain. Wall thickness 11mm. GW8. Simple plain rim with no decoration on the surviving body sherds. Carbonised accretions on the interior of the rim and base. Grooved Ware, Durrington Walls style. Wt 105g. [1216] (1217)

Vessel 20

Rim fragments, surfaces and fabric dark grey, small cavities from leached out grits, a few small probable gypsum grits remaining. Wall thickness 6mm. GW6. The thin rim has a neat internal bevel, and its exterior has a series of concentric grooves. Body sherds have raised cordons, including a junction between horizontal and vertical cordons which has two impressed grooves. Grooved Ware, Durrington Walls style. Wt 60g. [1054]

Vessel 21 not drawn

Body sherds with dark grey surfaces and fabric, numerous small, medium and large cavities from leached out grits, wall thickness 10mm. GW5. Three sherds have incised grooves, one with deep, perhaps fingernail, impressions. Grooved Ware, Durrington Walls style. Wt 35g. [1004] (1003)

Vessel 22 not drawn

Two sherds, external surface brown-terracotta, internal surface dark grey-terracotta, fabric dark grey. Clay matrix has quartz dust and small to medium chert fragments, wall thickness 7mm. GW2. One sherd has a fragment of decoration comprising short (4mm) diagonal impressions. Grooved Ware, Durrington Walls style. Wt 10g. [1004[ (1001)

Vessel 23

Group of sherds, exterior surface orange-brown, interior varying from brown to orange, mixed small, medium and large angular chert grits, small to medium cavities, and quartz sands, fabric probably GW3. One sherd has traces of a filled triangle of short impressions, seemingly not made with cord, but perhaps using wood or bone. Grooved Ware, Durrington Walls style. Wt 50g. [1105]

Vessel 24

Jar, a few sherds with external and internal surfaces brown-grey, fabric dark grey. A honeycomb of cavities remains from the leaching of numerous small to large grits. Wall thickness 8mm. GW1. Plain upright rim; traces of external converging raised plain cordons. Grooved Ware, Woodlands style. Wt 25g. [1004]

Vessel 25

Jar, external surface brown-dark grey, internal surface dark grey, fabric varying between the two colours. A few small to medium igneous grits and some very small quartz sands, wall thickness typically 9mm. GW2. The vessel has been poorly fired and most of the body sherds have lost their internal surface. Plain rim with no decoration. A single body sherd has traces of two converging raised cordons, while a lower wall sherd has traces of impressed possible fingernail decoration. Grooved Ware, Woodlands style. Wt 130g. [1009] (1022)

Vessel 26

Rim fragment, external surface brown-grey, internal surface dark grey, fabric varying between the two colours. Fabric matrix has some quartz dust, small to medium mudstone and shale grits. GW2. Plain interior, but variable fabric thickness suggests an external horizontal cordon below the narrow rim. Grooved Ware, Woodlands style. Wt <5g. [1074] (1072)

Vessel 27

Rim, surfaces buff-brown, fabric dark grey, cavities where small and medium angular grits have leached out, a few small to medium shale grits remain. Wall thickness 8mm. GW7. The rim interior has a groove just below the top, the exterior has four raised cordons, with alternating impressed decoration. Grooved Ware, Woodlands style. Wt <5g. [1074] (1073)

Vessel 28

Rim sherds. External surface reddish brown, fabric brown-terracotta, internal surface mostly spalled. GW2. Internal surface has an applied piece with four short vertical ridges, the exterior has a horizontal groove below which are three converging raised cordons, the middle one plain, the flanking ones with short vertical impressions. Below the cordons are traces of diagonal grooves. Grooved Ware, Woodlands style. Wt <5g. [1074] (1073)

Vessel 29 not drawn

Jar, external surface mid-brown, internal surface dark grey, fabric varying between the two colours. Wall thickness 6mm. GW9. Grooved Ware, Woodlands style. Wt 20g. [1113]

Vessel 30

Jar, external surface brown-grey, internal surface and fabric dark grey. The clay matrix has quartz dust and small to medium cavities from leached grits. Wall thickness 8mm. GW6. The rim fragment has two concentric internal grooves, the rim exterior has two grooves, below which is a plain rib and a further pair of grooves. Tiny fragments have traces of a raised cordon and converging raised cordon, while one body sherd has impressions made by a spatula or similar implement. Grooved Ware, Woodlands style. Wt 25g. [1114]

Vessel 31 not drawn

Jar, surfaces and fabric dark brown-dark grey, small to medium igneous grits, a few small to medium cavities from vanished grits. Wall thickness 12mm. GW3. One sherd has traces of converging raised cordons, another has a few irregular indentations, but most of the pieces are fragmentary. Grooved Ware, Woodlands style. Wt 30g. [1009] (1023)

Non-Vessels

Part of a base may be from the same vessel. Wt 25g. [1076] (1075)

Group of sherds, 6+frags, one fragment may have part of a raised cordon. GW3, perhaps part of vessel 15. Wt 90g. [1010] (1024)

Few sherds, 2+frags, GW4. Wt 10g. [1010] (1025)

Group of sherds, 4+frags, GW3. Wt 35g. [1010] (1024)

Single small rim sherd, damaged, GW3. Wt 5g. [1011] (1026)

Sherds, 2+frags, GW3 F6. Wt 15g. [1012] (1020)

Sherds, 2, GW3, one with shallow grooves. Wt 35g. [1013[ (1201)

Sherds, 2, GW3, one with raised plain cordon on exterior and carbonised accretion on interior. Appears to be part of vessel 15. Wt 60g. [1015]

Sherd, GW2. Wt 10g. [1016] (1203)

Rounded lump of ?Peterborough Ware, Pe2, or perhaps simply a piece of baked clay. Wt 20g. Similar fired clay pellets were present in pit containing Grooved ware at Marton-le-Moor, North Yorkshire (Manby 1996). [1063] (1064)

Group of sherds, 5+frags, GW3. Wt 45g. [1090]

Fragments of GW6. Wt 10g. [1096]

Group of 7 sherds +frags, GW2, from a plain-rimmed jar, perhaps vessel 13. Wt 35g. [1097]

Sherd +frags, GW2. Wt 5g. [1099]

Single abraded sherd, GW2. Wt 10g. [1101]

Sherd +frags, GW3. Wt 10g. [1216] (1218)

Sherds, 3+frags, GW3. Wt 15g. [1309] (1308)

Sherds, 2, GW3. Wt 15g. [1310] (1311)

References

Abramson, P 1996 Excavations along the Caythorpe gas pipeline, North Humberside, Yorks. Archaeol. Journ., 68, 1-88

Cleal, R 1992 Significant form: ceramic styles in the earlier Neolithic of southern England, in N Sharples and A Sheridan (eds) Vessels for the Ancestors, 286-304 (Edinburgh)

Cowie, T G 1993 The Neolithic pottery, in G J Barclay and C J Russel-White (eds) Excavation in the ceremonial complex of the fourth and second millennium BC at Balfarg/Balbirnie, Glenrothes, Fife, Proc. Soc. Antiq. Scot., 123, 65-75

Gibson, A 1995 First impressions: a review of Peterborough Ware in Wales, in I Kinnes and G Varndell (eds) 'Unbaked Urns of Rudely Shape': Essays on British and Irish Pottery for Ian Longworth, Oxbow Monograph, 55, 23-39 (Oxford)

Herne, A 1989 A time and a place for the Grimston bowl, in J C Barrett and I A Kinnes (eds) The Archaeology of Context in the Neolithic and Bronze Age: Recent Trends, 9-29 (Sheffield)

Manby, T G 1971 The pottery, flints and other material, in E S Wood, The excavation of a Bronze Age barrow: Green Howe, North Deighton, Yorkshire, Yorks Archaeol. Journ., 43, 2-32

Manby, T G 1974 Grooved Wares Sites in the North of England, BAR 29 (Oxford)

Manby, T G 1975 Neolithic occupation sites on the Yorkshire Wolds, Yorks Archaeol. Journ., 47, 27-59

Manby, T G 1988 The Neolithic period in eastern Yorkshire, in T G Manby (ed) Archaeology in Eastern Yorkshire, 35-88 (Sheffield)

Manby, T G 1995 Neolithic and Bronze Age pottery: implications, in T C M Brewster and A M Finney (eds) The Excavation of Seven Bronze Age Barrows on the Moorlands of North-East Yorkshire, Yorkshire Archaeol. Rep., 1, 41-51 (Leeds)

Manby, T G 1996 Prehistoric Pottery: Marton-le-Moor and Roecliffe. Report for Northern Archaeological Associates (Barnard Castle)

Manby, T G 1996a Prehistoric pottery, in P Abramson, Excavations along the Caythorpe gas pipeline, North Humberside, Yorks. Archaeol. Journ., 68, 35-49

Manby, T G forthcoming Grooved Ware sites in Yorkshire and Northern England: 1974-1994

Newbigin, N 1937 The Neolithic pottery of Yorkshire, Proc. Prehist. Soc., 3, 189-216

Rowe, P 1998 Nosterfield 1991, 1994-1996: Flint Report. Report for Mike Griffiths Associates

Tavener, N 1996 Evidence of Neolithic activity at Marton-le-Moor, North Yorkshire, in P Frodsham (ed) Neolithic Studies in No-Man's Land: Papers on the Neolithic of Northern England from the Trent to the Tweed, 183-7 (Newcastle upon Tyne)

Thomas, N 1955 The Thornborough Circles, North Riding, Yorks Archaeol. Journ., 38, 425-45

Vyner, B E 1988 The Street House Wossit: The excavation of a late Neolithic and early Bronze Age palisaded ritual monument at Street House, Loftus, Cleveland, Proc. Prehist. Soc., 54, 173-202

Vyner, B E 1996 Excavations at Catterick: the Pottery, draft report for West Yorkshire Archaeology Service

Vyner, B E 1997 Report on Pottery from Ferrybridge Henge, draft report for West Yorkshire Archaeology Service

Wainwright, G J, and Longworth, I H 1971 The Rinyo-Clacton Culture reconsidered, in G J Wainwright and I H Longworth, Durrington Walls: Excavations 1966-1968, Soc. Antiq. Res. Rep., 29, 235-306

Wheeler, H 1979 Excavations at Willington, Derbyshire, 1970-1972, Derbyshire Archaeol. Journ., 99, 58-220

Pottery from excavations in 1996

A group of small sherds and fragments from a vessel of which little indication of form or decoration survives. External surface dark brown/dark grey, the interior spalled away, fabric dark grey. Traces of narrow impressed, probably twisted cord, decoration. Fabric probably Pe1, an identification supported to some extent by the decoration. Wt >10g NON96.2 5014.

© Archaeological Planning Consultancy Ltd 2003 - 2006
URL: http://www.archaeologicalplanningconsultancy.co.uk/mga/projects/noster/speciali/vyner98.html
HTML Markup: Guy Hopkinson • email: . Updated November 30, 2005

Hidden gems