Blue Bridge Lane
&
Fishergate House
Printed from the APC web site: navigation and non-essential images removed.
Please view on-line for full content (URL at end of document).
This report summarises an assemblage of 86 lithic artefacts comprising 76 items from the 2000-2002 excavations at Blue Bridge and a further 10 items from the 2000-2001 excavations at Fishergate House, York.
The entire assemblage has been catalogued using Microsoft Excel. The following variables have been catalogued: - raw material type, raw material colour, percentage of cortex, cortex type, percentage patina, type of artefact (e.g. flake, blade, core), interpretation (e.g. scraper, arrowhead), period, length, breadth, width, method of knapping, whether burnt and whether damaged. The full catalogue is available with the site archive.
The raw material from the two excavations shares similar characteristics and both sites are discussed together to avoid repetition. The material is almost entirely composed of knapped flint. There is a single piece of unworked blue agate (S.F. 4256) along with a natural pebble fragment of chert (S.F. 4247) both from Blue Bridge.
The flint is fairly homogenous in character and other than a few red-brown pieces consists of grey or light brown items often with a range of different shades within one piece. The flint becomes opaque on finer flakes and is of a good quality with few flaws or fossils.
Cortex is present on much of the primary knapping debris and natural pebbles. Where this is present it is worn from glacial or water action and is extremely thin in section.
The majority of the collection is consistent with the exploitation of small pebbles from glacial or coastal deposits for raw material. However there are a number of pieces from Blue Bridge that are evidently knapped from larger imported nodules (e.g. S.F's. 4251-3, & 4257).
The material has little post-depositional damage. There is no evidence of thermal shattering from freezing or edge damage caused by movement in the soil.
A number of the pieces amongst the collection have extreme patina development. In these instances the original colour of the flint is completely masked by a white, cream or yellow patina. In one case an item from Blue Bridge has become uniformly patinated and has then been re-worked at a later point in prehistory (S.F. 302) with retouch scars breaking the surface patina. This phenomenon is also seen on one piece from Fishergate House (S.F. 997).
A summary of the material from Blue Bridge, York is presented in Table 1.
| Type | Quantity | Percentage |
|---|---|---|
| Blades (or blade fragments) | 3 | 4 |
| Cores | 1 | 1 |
| Debitage | 25 | 33 |
| Irregular burnt pieces | 2 | 3 |
| Flakes | 39 | 51 |
| Natural pebbles | 6 | 8 |
| Total | 76 | 100 |
The majority of the assemblage consists of small flakes or pieces of angular debitage. These vary in size from minute chips to struck pieces from large nodules (see section 2, above).
There is a single core (S.F. 4276) based on a well-worked pebble of grey-brown flint. It has three striking platforms, two opposed and one at 90 degrees. The core has served to produce small blade and flake removals.
The basic tool types from the site are set out below in Table 2.
| Tool Type | Quantity | Small find no. |
|---|---|---|
| Retouched pieces | 4 | 302, 4261, 4262, 4289 |
| Scrapers | 2 | 4275, 4291. |
| Utilised pieces | 3 | 4248, 4264, 4292 |
| Total | 9 |
In its most basic form, retouch has been used to modify the edge of a blade or flake (S.F's. 302, 4261 & 4262). There are a further three pieces with edge damage consistent with that occasioned by use (S.F's, 4248, 4264 & 4292).
A triangular point with bifacial working (S.F. 4289) was recovered from context 2209. This is based on a flake of high quality dark brown flint. This item is difficult to classify with any certainty but has morphological similarities to both later Neolithic arrowhead forms and more ubiquitous piercing tools. Regardless of function the invasive pressure flaked retouch suggests a date from the later Neolithic or early Bronze Age.
Two scrapers were recovered from the excavation. Small Find 4291 is an unstratified edge scraper, with notch, based on a large flake. This well-worn and deeply patinated item, with marked lack of symmetry, is potentially from the Mesolithic or early Neolithic period. The second scraper (S.F. 4275) is a robust thumbnail scraper consistent with a date from the early Bronze Age.
This small assemblage of 10 items from Fishergate House is unusual given the high proportion of worked or utilised pieces. Discounting two natural pebble fragments the collection comprises 3 pieces of unworked debitage, 4 retouched pieces and one utilised flake (S.F. 1001).
Context 1317 produced two worked items of flint. One is a squat flake with battered edges (S.F. 992). The second is the proximal end of a narrow blade (S.F. 993). There is retouch along both edges of the blade and on one side this has created a shallow notch. This method of notched blade working has strong parallels with microlith manufacture in the Mesolithic period and it is likely that the piece dates to this period.
A second retouched blade (S.F. 997) was recovered from context 1411. This is a robust example with a slight yellow patina to the surface. The retouch scars cut the patina suggesting re-working of previously knapped material by later generations.
The final retouched item is a small flake (S.F. 998) from context 1413. Here oblique retouch has been used to sharpen an edge.
This small collection demonstrates prehistoric activity on the margins of the Ouse from potentially as early as the Mesolithic period through to the early Bronze Age.
Raw materials were probably collected locally from glacial or waterborne deposits with some evidence for the importing of larger nodules (although it is possible that the nodular material from features 39 & 58 is from the historic periods, being so out of character with the rest of the assemblage). An expedient alternative to knapping from pebbles was to fashion new tools on previously discarded blanks left by earlier generations.
From this small sample it is difficult to draw any conclusions about the nature of prehistoric activity although it is certain that during prehistory lithic tools were manufactured, curated and disposed of in this locality.
Appendix 1: Blue Bridge Lane catalogue
Appendix 2: York Fishergate House catalogue
apc > monographs > blue bridge lane & fishergate house > archive > specialist assessment reports > flint