PJ Thompson MSc CEng FICE County Director of Environment and Transport St Edmund House, County Hall, Ipswich, IP4 1LZ.
______________________________________
SCCAS Report No. 2003/40
Contents List of Figures List of Tables List of Contributors Acknowledgements Summary SMR Information Background Method Results Trench 0034 Pit 0045 The Finds (Sue Anderson, Sarah Bates, Val Fryer and Sarah Percival) Prehistoric pottery Worked flint Other finds Biological evidence Human and animal bone Plant macrofossils General discussion Recommendations for further work References Appendices 1. Brief and Specification 2. Context list 3. Finds lists 3.1. General finds 3.2. Pottery 3.3. Flint List of Figures
1. Site location plan Red Marley, Thurston 2. Site plan. 3. Sections 4. Sections 5. Sections 6. Harris Matrix
List of Tables 1. Finds quantities 2. Quantity and weight of pottery by fabric 3. Quantity and weight of pottery by rim form 4. Quantity and weight of pottery by feature type 5. Summary of flint 6. Cortication and condition of flint 7. Charred plant macrofossils and other remains
List of Contributors Andrew Tester Senior Project Officer, Suffolk County Council Archaeological Service Sue Anderson Finds Manager, Suffolk County Council Archaeological Service Sarah Percival Project Manager, Norfolk Archaeological Unit Sarah Bates Project Manager, Norfolk Archaeological Unit Val Fryer Freelance Environmental Specialist Acknowledgements This project was funded by three bodies: Plan 4 Kitchens, Suffolk County Council and English Heritage. Andrew Tester, Jo Caruth, David Gill, Jonathan Van Jennians, and Aidan Turner carried out the excavation and monitoring. The drawings for this report were prepared by David Gill and Kelly Powell. Summary During the course of monitoring work on land next to Red Marley, Thurston, large quantities of struck flint and pottery were uncovered dating from the Neolithic. The finds were concentrated in a pit and ditch which were cut into the side of a natural hummock, a remnant of surviving Breckland landscape in a former private garden. Despite limited excavation, a minimum of fifty pots was identified, probably domestic in function and featuring the carinated forms typically associated with ‘household’ use. Although the ditch was well dated, the pit appeared to be a more recent hand dug feature which contained only residual finds. It has been suggested that the pit may have been an antiquarian excavation but this could not be confirmed during the fieldwork. SMR information Planning application no. E/99/1035/P Date of fieldwork: January-May 2000 Grid Reference: TL 914 657 Funding bodies: Plan 4 Kitchens, Suffolk County Council and English Heritage
Background The site is located on land adjoining ‘Red Marley’, 18 Barton Road, Thurston, Suffolk (TL 914 657, Fig. 1). An archaeological monitoring condition was placed on the planning consent for four houses (planning consent E/99/1035/P). ). A ‘brief and specification’ was drawn up by Judith Plouviez for the planning authority (Appendix 1) and archaeological monitoring took place during 2000. The aim of the monitoring was to record any evidence for a Roman road and any associated settlement, which cartographic evidence suggests ran across the southern end of the site. Earlier editions of the Ordnance Survey maps (c.1887) suggest that the area was open Breckland before it was ploughed up and, more recently, encroached upon by housing. The plot of land for development included a crescent-shaped hummock spanning the centre of the site (Fig. 2). The development timetable included the construction of an access road and the reduction of the mound, both actions resulting in the total destruction of the archaeology over a large part of the site, beyond that caused by footing trenches. During the first monitoring visit, Neolithic pottery was identified over the surface of the excavation in association with buried grey sand and discrete cut features. No evidence of the Roman road or anything associated with it was found. The levelling of the site promised to destroy well-preserved deposits of prehistoric material. It was, therefore, decided to carry out limited rescue excavation work ahead of destruction. This was beyond the scope of the programmed monitoring. Excavation work took place on two separate occasions during January and May 2000. The first phase of excavation was concentrated on the central hump. The most significant feature was a ditch which ran parallel to the south-western, concave, side of the hump. It produced a large quantity of struck flint, including tools, and Neolithic pottery. At the south end of the hump other features were sealed beneath blown sands. The second phase of digging was concentrated at the southern tail of the hump where a large rectangular feature cut into it. This feature also produced a sizeable collection of pottery and flint. The developer’s contribution to the archaeology has been paid, building work on the site has been completed, and the planning condition discharged. Method This small excavation developed from a monitoring condition and this is reflected in the extent of the excavation. Three areas of the site were examined with some degree of detail. 1. Recording was carried out following the stripping of topsoil for the construction of an access road and along a
section line (A-B on Fig. 2). 2. A section was excavated at right-angles to the natural topography. The south end of the section was widened by
machine and exposed ditches were excavated by hand. 3. The third area to be examined was composed almost entirely of a single rectangular pit 0045. Site plans and sections were drawn at scales of 1:50 and 1:20. A single context continuous numbering system was used. A full context list appears as Appendix 2. A matrix of critical contexts was also prepared and appears as Figure 6. A photographic record was made of the excavation. Following the excavation, all context records were entered onto an Access database, and inked copies of section drawings and plans were prepared. Bulk finds were washed, marked and quantified, and the resultant data was also entered onto a database. The finds lists appear as Appendix 3. The site archive is currently stored at Shire Hall, Bury St. Edmunds.
Results There is no stratigraphic or dating information with which the site can be phased. The evidence will therefore be presented in the sequence in which the investigations took place. This should help to explain the development of the archaeological strategy during the course of the building work. All features are shown in plan on Fig. 2. The first recording occurred during the construction of the access road at the western entrance to the site. A back-acting machine had been used to expose yellow sand, removing between 0.25m and 0.5m of natural sand and topsoil. The south facing section created by the road was drawn (Fig. 5). Possible Pit, 0004 was excavated against the section, as was spread 0005. Both features were distinguished by a dark brown sand fill with concentrations of charcoal. Feature 0004 was at least 0.45m deep measured against the section and had a steep edge on the east side and a flat base (only the bottom 0.2m was excavated by hand, the remainder having been removed by machine before the monitoring began). Finds collected during the cleaning of this area under contexts 0002 and 0003 are likely to have originated from 0004. Spread 0005 was only 0.1m deep and did not extend as far as the section along the edge of the road (0065). A hand-cleaned section was created in the hole left after the removal of a tree towards the top of the mound, 0008 (Fig. 3). Brown sand topsoil overlay orange sand which in turn overlaid a cream coloured sticky, orange loam with flint. A hand-dug box section, 0010, was also excavated towards the top of the mound with the intention of establishing whether the mound was a man-made feature. The box measured c. 0.8m x 1.6m. The excavation revealed a cut feature which was later identified as ditch 0032 (see below, Trench 0034). Context numbers from the ditch were 0012, which was a red/brown sand and below that 0014, which was similar in colour. Surface cleaning was recorded under context 0013. Trench 0034 (Fig. 3) The topsoil was removed from the top of the mound and this was used as the basis for a section that was extended across the feature. A machine was used to remove the topsoil in extending the trench. Three irregularities were examined along the top of the mound, of which a small pit, 0021, produced pottery and charcoal. The other irregularities on this mound were interpreted as natural features. No features were visible along the north-facing slope but on the south slope a ditch, 0032, was exposed. This was defined by machine on the west side and a limited area was exposed on the east side with the ditch continuing beneath the baulk. Three areas of the ditch were exposed. The western end of the ditch was partially hand-excavated as context 0025and appears in section 0056 (Fig.3). Two further sections were dug, using context numbers 0022 and 0027 for the top fill of red/brown sand and 0023 and 0028 for the lower fill of dark brown sand with charcoal. Contexts 0023/0028 were also distinguished by concentrations of tiny fragments of burnt and decayed bone. This material was too fragmentary to collect by hand but was sampled in bulk as context 0030 (below). The course of ditch 0032 was partly revealed by machine and occurred in section 0068 where it could be seen cutting horizontal layering 0067 (Fig. 5). Pit 0045 (Fig. 4) Following this excavation, monitoring was carried out during the stripping of topsoil around the trench. No new features were exposed. Topsoil was also stripped close to the standing property before a further series of footings was dug.
- - - - - - -
~Suffolk County Council ~Environment & Transport
P. J . Thompson, MSc. CEng. FICE County Director of Environment & Transport
St Edmund House, County Hall, Ipswich, Suffolk
- - - -
This map Is based upon Ordnance Survey material with the permission of Ordnance Survey on behalf of the Controller of Her Majesty's Stationery Office (c) Crown copyright. Unauthorised reproduction infringes crown copyright and may lead to prosecution or civil proceedings. Suffolk County Council Licence No. LA076864 2001
- - - - - - -
Scale 1 :5000
Figure 1 Site Location plan Red Marley, Thurston
- - -
CHECKED BY
DRAWING No.
DATE
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
. , -.. . .
·- ...
P. J . Thompson, MSc. CEng. FICE Director of Environment & Transport
An area of dark soil 0045 was exposed, which was excavated in quadrants and is shown in sections 0057 and 0059. This feature was not entirely exposed because it extended beneath the existing property; the south edge may have extended into the area of the new road. It had dimensions of at least 6m x 3.75m with a maximum depth of 1.1m although the base of the feature was uneven with a general slope to the south-west. The fill consisted of interleaved layers of dense black silty sand with grey sand. Fig. 6 shows a matrix of the layers in the pit. Layers 0042, 0040, 0041, 0044 and 0049 were all dark brown silty sands.
Matrix, sections 0057 and 0059
0052
0045
0041
0051
0050
0043
cut
0042
0040
0049 0050
0044
0051
Figure 6. Harris matrix for pit 0045.
Between some of these layers, but not at the same stratigraphic or absolute level, was a series of concentrated patches of flint, 0060, 0061, 0062, 0063 and 0064. These were described as possible post pads during excavation but appear to be isolated collections of flint within the backfill of the pit. The south-west edge of this feature, which appears in section 0059, was vertical but the cut face of the mound revealed horizontal banding of grey sand. A slot was cut through this soil, 0052, as a continuation of the section and a second vertical face was exposed with yellow sand. This horizontal layering is probably a continuation of that exposed in sections 0065 and 0068 under context 0067 beneath a homogenous layer of grey sand (Fig. 5).
The Finds Compiled by Sue Anderson, contributions by Sarah Bates, Val Fryer and Sarah Percival. Introduction Table 1 shows the quantities of finds collected from the site. A full list by context is included in Appendix 3.1.
Find type No. Wt/g Pottery 617 4154 Worked flint 1011 12586 Burnt flint 79 1826 Human bone 4 8 Animal bone 3 114 Table 1. Finds quantities.
Prehistoric Pottery Sarah Percival Introduction Six hundred and seventeen sherds of pottery weighing 4154g were recovered from thirty-five contexts during excavations at Thurston THS 011. The majority of the sherds were all of earlier Neolithic Plain Bowl forms dating to c. 4000-2900BC. Methodology The assemblage was analysed in accordance with the Guidelines for analysis and publication laid down by the Prehistoric Ceramic Research Group (PCRG 1992). The total assemblage was studied and a full catalogue was prepared. The sherds were examined using a binocular microscope (x10 magnification) and were divided into fabric groups defined on the basis of inclusion types present. Fabric codes were prefixed by a letter code representing the main inclusion present (F representing flint, G grog and Q quartz). Vessel form was recorded; R representing rim sherds and U undecorated body sherds. The sherds were counted and weighed to the nearest whole gram. Decoration and abrasion were also noted. The pottery and archive are curated by Suffolk Archaeological Unit. The Earlier Neolithic Pottery All six hundred and seventeen sherds were identified as being of Earlier Neolithic date. The pottery was fragmentary and no full or partial vessel profiles were recovered. The rim forms are simple and suggest that the assemblage comprised open bowl forms. A number of carinated body sherds indicate vessels with upright shoulders, perhaps similar to those identified at Broom Heath, Ditchingham (Wainwright 1972). No Grimston Ware, defined by Manby (1970, 16-17) and I.F. Smith (1965) was identified. No decorated sherds were present. The sherds were fairly large and well preserved with an average sherd weight of 6.7g. Fabric Two main fabric groups were identified. Flint tempered fabrics F1, F2 and F3 (Table 2) made up the majority of the assemblage (98%, 4097g). All three of these fabrics contained crushed sub-rounded flint and varying quantities of quartz-sand. Small quantities of mica, visible as small glistening plates, were also present in fabric F2. The sherds were hard and well fired and ranged in colour from dark brown/ orange to buff/orange. The distinction between fabric F1 and fabric F2 was based on size of inclusion, F1 contained larger, coarser pieces of flint and was found in thick bodied sherds. Fabric F2 comprised more finely finished sherds with medium sized flint inclusions. 87% of sherds of fabric F2 were burnished (1407g), whilst only 10% of F1 sherds had a burnished surface finish (237g). Fabric Q1 constituted less than 2% of the total assemblage. The sherds were fine and thin bodied and had irregular sub-rounded vacuoles in the surface perhaps the remnants of a grog inclusion.
Fabric Description No. Wt/g F1 Coarse flint tempered. Common, coarse, burnt angular flint; moderate, small
quartz-sand, Orange brown exterior and interior brown to grey core. 258 2162
F2 Moderate, medium to small, burnt angular flint; moderate, small quartz-sand, mica. Orange brown exterior and interior brown to grey core. Often burnished.
299 1610
F3 Moderate, medium to small, burnt angular flint; moderate, small quartz-sand, Orange brown exterior and interior brown to grey core. Burnished. Dense speckled. Occasional vacuoles.
49 323
Q1 Sandy fabric. Moderate, small quartz-sand, sparse red-orange inclusions, occasional vacuoles. Orange brown exterior and interior brown to grey core. Often burnished.
10 57
Undiagnostic 1 2 Total 617 4154
Table 2. Quantity and weight of pottery by fabric. The predominance of flint tempering compares well with Earlier Neolithic assemblages from Southern Britain, (Cleal 1995) and in particular with those from Northern East Anglia such as Broome Heath, Ditchingham (Wainwright 1972, 23) and Spong Hill, North Elmham, Norfolk (Healy 1988, 71). No fabrics with shelly inclusions or organic voids were identified. Form The rim forms were classified following the rim typology used for Hurst Fen, Suffolk (Longworth 1960, 228), Windmill Hill, Wiltshire (Smith 1965), and Spong Hill, Norfolk (Healy 1988, Fig. 57) and other assemblages (Table 3). No heavy, developed or ‘T’ shaped rims were present.
Table 3. Quantity and weight of pottery by rim form. The rim forms are most frequently out-turned, though some have slight external thickening. The remaining rims are simple, upright forms, these can be rounded or pointed. Most of the vessels have thin walls where the thickness of the fabric does not exceed 8mm. Eight sherds exhibited distinct changes of angle suggesting carinated bowls with well-defined shoulder ledges low on the body of the vessel and these, along with the lighter rims suggest a close parallel with the assemblage from Broome Heath, Ditchingham (Wainwright 1972, Fig. 15 P1). Burnishing is present on 319 sherds, 1801g. The vessels appeared to be coil built as many sherds displayed coil fractures. This limited range production techniques of coil made and thumb built pots has been noted within earlier Neolithic assemblages at The Stumble, Essex (Brown forthcoming) and Windmill Hill, Wiltshire (Smith 1965). Deposition The majority of the sherds were found in ditch 0032, which contained 53.92% of the total assemblage weight (2240g). The remaining sherds came from within pit 0045 (12.45% 517g), the fills of pits (10.83% 450g) and two excavated layers/features beneath 0045 (1.13% 47g) and below feature 0034 (0.34% 14g). Sherds from cleaning and other unstratified surface finds made up the remainder of the assemblage (21.33% 886g). Table 4 summarises this.
Table 4. Quantity and weight of pottery by feature type. The overall average sherd weight for the site was 6.7g. This is fairly large, especially compared to sherds from the recently excavated midden site at Colney, Norfolk where the ASW was only 3.7g (Percival forthcoming). This suggests that the pottery found at Thurston had been thrown into open ditches or become incorporated into the rubbish within the structure (ASW 7.9g) and had remained undisturbed and relatively unfragmented. This is also implied by the unabraded nature of the assemblage with less than 1% showing signs or post-depositional wear and tear. Discussion The Thurston assemblage is fairly large containing a minimum of fifty-seven vessels. The majority of the pottery comes from the fills of a ditch or double ditch feature. This is unusual as earlier Neolithic assemblages from the region are mostly found in pits or pit clusters, middens or surviving Neolithic soils and the later, overlying deposits (Healy 1988, 108; Wainwright 1972, 23). The relatively large size and well preserved surfaces of the sherds suggest that the pottery was found in the features in which it had been originally deposited and contrasts markedly with pot from midden deposits, such as that found at Colney (Percival forthcoming) which is small and heavily abraded. The assemblage is probably domestic in function and features the carinated forms typically associated with ‘household’ use (Thomas 1999, 103). Pit 0045 contained the second largest quantity of pottery from the site and the large size and good condition of the sherds again suggests that they were excavated in-situ. The structure appears to be contemporary to the Padholme Road structures from Fengate (Pryor 1974, Fig. 4) which also contained plain bowl pottery. The Thurston assemblage is characterised by fine, undecorated bowls with out-turned or simple rims and a marked carination low on the body of the vessel and as such is very similar in style to recent finds from Colney, Norfolk. No decorated bowl styles were present. Plain carinated bowl represents a component of earlier Neolithic pottery styles which have a wide distribution in southern Britain (Thomas 1999, Fig. 5.3). Dating of carinated bowl styles is complex and has been the subject of much debate (Herne 1988; Thomas 1999, 99). The pottery from Thurston is stylistically homogeneous, suggesting the ditches, structure and other features were fairly contemporary. However it is worth remembering that early Neolithic plain carinated bowl styles had a long currency, beginning around 4000BC and continuing in use to c. 3100BC (Thomas 1999, 99). The East Anglian variant of the pottery, as found at Thurston and at Colney (Percival forthcoming) does not appear to represent the earliest ‘inception’ plain bowl style but dates to slightly later, perhaps around 3500BC (A. Gibson pers. comm.).
Worked flint Sarah Bates Introduction A total of 1011 pieces of struck flint were recovered from the site. A single small piece of burnt flint was also found and has been discarded along with a small number of non-struck/thermally fractured flints. The flint was recovered from excavated contexts, many of which are dated to the Neolithic period, and from unstratified contexts including cleaning layers. Methodology Each piece of flint was examined and recorded by context. The material was classified by category and type (Appendix 3.3) with numbers of pieces and numbers of complete, corticated, and patinated pieces being recorded. Additional descriptive comments were made as necessary. The recorded information was input into an Access database for the purpose of assessment. The Flint The flint was mostly mid to dark grey in colour, some of it with mottled patches. Cortex, where present, includes an orangey cream coloured cortex of thin to medium thickness, sometimes abraded and a dirty greyish white cortex which is slightly coarse in texture. Both of these are probably from broken nodules and gravel fragments. Also present are occasional pieces with a thin grey cortex from rounded pebbles. The flint is notable for the sharp nature of most of it, most of the pieces are complete and only a very small number of pieces were significantly edge damaged. Some of the flint exhibits post-depositional patination. The flint is summarised in Table 5 and cortication and condition of the flint in Table 6.
Type No. Cores/core preparation Flake core 13 Keeled core 1 Core fragment 3 Tested/struck piece 15 Core tablet 1 Crested blade 2 Debitage Flake 491 Blade-like flake 121 Blade 210 Shatter piece 63 Spall 17 Chip 4 Modified pieces Scraper 7 Knife 4 Piercer 2 Spurred piece 1 Denticulate 1 Fragment from polished implement 1 Polished axe fragment 1 Retouched flake 11 Retouched fragment 4 Utilised flake 18 Utilised blade 19 Burnt fragment 1
Table 5. Summary of flint.
Cortex present 65 Complete pieces 68 Patinated 8
Table 5. Cortication and condition of flint (as %, by number, of complete assemblage).
Fourteen cores, three core fragments and fifteen tested or struck pieces, many of the latter cortical fragments from nodules, are present. The cores include thirteen flake cores, most of them quite small and with multiple platforms. A single keeled core is also present. It is relatively large with flakes from both sides of one ridge and an additional platform. A possible core tablet and two crested blades, all evidence for the deliberate preparation of cores, are also present. The assemblage consists largely of unmodified flakes but a number of these have been classified as ‘blade-like’ and a relatively high number of true blades is also present, many of them fine, neatly produced pieces. Blades and blade-like flakes together form 36% (by number) of the complete assemblage. Although evidence for the use of a hard hammer is present (pronounced bulbs, squat flakes) a relatively large number of pieces have clearly been struck by soft hammer. Seven scrapers are present. They include two end scrapers on large blades, 0028 and 0042, a neat subcircular scraper, 0028, two scrapers on thermal fragments, 0037 and 0003, a sub-rectangular scraper which has been burnt, 0025, and a cortical flake with slight retouch and utilisation of its edges, 0042. Four pieces have been classified as knives. A regular large blade has coarse retouch on both faces along its left edge and probable utilisation of its other edge and a bifacially flaked piece, with one end missing, could be a ‘laurel leaf’ knife. Both are from context 0028. A small discoidal knife, 0025, and another backed knife, again quite large with retouched left edge and utilised right edge, 0001, were also present. Two possible piercers are present, 0010 and 0011, both are small, one is quite chunky. A spurred piece, 0021, has also been formed on a chunky flake. A thick flake fragment, 0040, has coarse retouch forming a steep denticular edge. The end fragment of an axe, polished on both faces and burnt is present 0036. Possibly it was discarded and burnt once broken. A small flake, 0001, is also polished on its dorsal surface and was clearly struck from a polished implement and possibly indicates the re-use of such a piece. Numbers of retouched and utilised pieces are also present. They include a retouched thermal fragment, 0037, and pieces which might have been used as a knife, 0028, and as piercers, 0005, 0024 and 0028. Also a utilised blade with possible notch, 0005, and a utilised flake which may also have been used as a core, 0052. Flint by context A total of 479 flints, almost half of the total flint from the site, was recovered from the fills, or probable fills, of ditch 0032. Four cores, a core fragment and eight tested or struck pieces were present. None of the cores appeared to have produced blades, but two possible crested blades (one of them only a small fragment) from the preparation of blade cores are present, as well as a possible core trimming piece. A total of 242 unmodified flakes are present, almost all of them quite sharp and many of them thin. There are also relatively large numbers of unmodified blades
and blade-like flakes (107 and 53 pieces respectively), many of them small and thin and most of them quite sharp. Twenty-seven irregular shatter pieces and seven spalls/chips are also present Retouched tools from ditch 0032 include three scrapers, one of them an end scraper on a large blade, a small subcircular bifacially flaked knife, a backed knife and a bifacially flaked fragment from a probable leaf-shaped knife. There are also seven retouched flakes, three of them possibly used as piercers and two with retouched edges, eleven utilised blades and three utilised flakes. Ninety-six flints came from hand-dug layers 0010-0014 associated with this ditch. It is of interest that a relatively large number of these pieces have been described as irregular or broad in shape, several showing clear evidence for having been hard hammer struck. Two flake cores, two piercers and one utilised flake are present. Otherwise the material is unmodified debitage. A total of 57 pieces came from deposits within pit 0045. They include three flakes, a thick flake fragment retouched as a denticulate and a utilised blade, 0040, 50 pieces, mostly thin and sharp, including soft hammer struck blades, an end scraper on a thin blade, another scraper and two utilised pieces from upper fill 0042 and a blade-like flake and a utilised blade 0044. Six flints were found in layer 0049 and two from layer 0050 (both deposits associated with pit 0045). Two utilised blades, one a regular large piece, were included. Four more pieces, including a core and a utilised fragment were from layers 0052 and 0054. Forty-one flints were recovered from pit 0046. They include two flake cores and some kind of a core preparation or trimming piece as well as flakes, blade-like flakes and blades, a retouched flake and a utilised flake. Much of the material is recorded as sharp. Thirty-eight flints came from the fill of a large pit, 0004. These included a core, some irregular shatter pieces and flakes, blades and blade-like flakes. Much of the material is recorded as sharp. Twenty-two flints were found in the fill of pit 0021. They included irregular flakes. A spurred piece and two utilised pieces were present. A couple of the flints were quite chunky in nature. Twenty struck flints came from an area of topsoil, 0024, which was machined off the area of the standing building. Additionally, included as part of 0024, were eight flints, a core and some thin sharp flakes and blades, from pit 0031. Six flints came from uprooted tree stump 0007, three blades and three flakes. All are sharp. Four flints, including a utilised flake were found in an area of tree disturbed soil 0008. A total of 68 flints were recovered from cleaning in the areas of various ditches (contexts 0036, 0037 and 0039). Most of the material was quite sharp. A small number of utilised or retouched pieces are present. These include an end fragment from an axe, both faces are polished, a cortical thermal fragment retouched as a scraper and another retouched thermal fragment (all from 0037). A total of 160 pieces of flint were recovered from unstratified, 0001 and 0053, or ‘unknown’, 0003, contexts, and, from surface cleaning, 0002; in the area adjacent to the new access road and 0020. The flints included a number of retouched and utilised pieces including a backed knife a and a flake from a polished implement. Discussion The assemblage includes a range of material with both soft and hard hammer struck pieces. However it is distinctive for the high proportion of blades and blade-like pieces and the presence of the possible core tablet and the crested blades represent the preparation of cores for blade
production (although, in this instance, there are no blade cores in the surviving assemblage). Such material is indicative of the Mesolithic or earlier Neolithic period, but in this case, with the presence of a few diagnostic tool types (the polished axe and flake fragment, neatly retouched end scrapers and a high proportion of utilised blades) and with other dating evidence (pottery), it is likely that this material dates to the Neolithic period. The sharp nature and completeness of much of the flint suggests that the material was quite recently struck when deposited in the excavated features and even that flint which was recovered from surface or unstratified deposits appears, generally, to be quite ‘fresh’. Most of the material exhibits little in the way of edge damage and it probably originated from features or deposits which remained undisturbed until relatively recently. It is noted that a number of contexts appear to contain flint of a more irregular nature with flakes being broader in shape and a greater incidence of hard hammer struck pieces. This is unusual compared to much of the material from the site and suggests that an element of the assemblage may represent later activity. It may be that this flint is of a later date or that it represents a different stage in the knapping process. Categories (terms used in database) Category Name axes Axe (stone) blad Blade burn Burnt core Core corf Core rejuvenation flake dent Denticulate flak Flake knff Knife (flint) pecr Piercer retf Retouched flake scpf Scraper (flint) stfr Struck fragment unsk Unstruck utbl Utilised blade utfl Utilised flake Flint types (terms used in database) Type description backed knife generally parallel sided with one edge blunted by abrupt retouch, the other 9cutting) edge worn
or retouched blade parallel-sided flake with length:breadth ration >2:1 blade-like flake which is long and narrow but not a true blade chip fragment;<20mm core tablet flake removed from a core platform, has near vertical edges formed by scars of previous
removals core tablet rejuvenation flake removing platform from core crested blade triangular section, removed from a ridge prepared by alternate or one directional flaking denticulate with retouch forming coarse teeth discoidal knife generally sub-circular with bifacial retouch around periphery and sometimes over faces (also
triangular, quadrangular and lozenge-shaped forms) end scraper retouch usually at distal end of flake (occasionally at proximal end) flake struck debitage >20mm fragment miscellaneous fragment keeled core core with flakes from both sides of a ridge, with or without additional platform knife Knife
multi flake multi-platform flake core piercer piece with point formed by retouch from one direction (or with utilised point) polished polished implement retouched flake miscellaneous retouched flake retouched fragment miscellaneous retouched fragment (non-flake) scraper part of edge steeply retouched shatter miscellaneous fragment >20mm single flake single platform flake core spall struck debitage;< 20mm spurred piece piercer with point formed on scraper-like edge subcircular subcircular scraper tested piece piece from which a couple of removals have been made utilised blade utilised blade - with signs of wear due to use utilised flake utilised flake - with signs of wear due to use Other finds Sue Anderson Other artefacts from this site consisted of burnt flint and stone only. A total of 78 fragments (1298g) of burnt flint and one burnt sandstone fragment (528g) were collected from eleven contexts. Seven fragments were unstratified or from topsoil or cleaning layers. Of the remainder, 64 pieces were collected from several sections/fills of ditch 0032. Five fragments were from a large possible pit, 0004, which may be an extension of the ditch. Two fragments were from pit 0021. The sandstone piece was from pit/feature 0046. All fragments were found in association with Neolithic pottery and worked flints, and are presumably related to activity of this date. Biological evidence Human and animal bone Sue Anderson Animal bone from the site consisted of a small piece of large mammal (?cow) rib, sawn at both ends and showing signs of rodent gnawing at one end, from a tree disturbance (0007), and the proximal half of a bovid metatarsal and a proximal phalange from disturbed soil layer 0055. These are likely to be of recent date and are not connected with the prehistoric activity on the site. Fragments of cremated human bone were found in 0040 (NW quadrant of 0045) and 0050 (SE quadrant). The two pieces from 0040 were probably fragments of an adult radius or ulna, and the two pieces from 0050 were fragments of an adult fibula. These could be the remains of a single individual. Plant macrofossils Val Fryer Introduction A single plant macrofossil sample (0030) was taken from the basal layers within the ditch. A large and very regular rectangular feature at the southern end of the earthwork produced a notable assemblage of pottery and flint and a small number of charred oak (Quercus sp.) fruits (sample 0048). Methods Sample 0030 was processed by manual water flotation/washover, collecting the flot in a 500 micron mesh sieve. The
dried flot was scanned under a binocular microscope at magnifications up to x 16, and the plant macrofossils and other remains noted are listed below. Nomenclature follows Stace (1997). All plant remains were preserved by charring. Modern contaminants, in the form of fibrous roots, were common. The non-floating residue was collected in a 1mm mesh sieve and sorted when dry. Artefacts/ecofacts were not present. Results of assessment Table 7 summarises the results. Plant macrofossils With the exception of charcoal fragments, which were reasonably abundant, plant macrofossils were extremely rare. However, small fragments of hazel (Corylus avellana) nutshell were recorded along with a piece of indeterminate fruit stone and rare fragments of charred root or stem. Other materials Dark mineralised soil concretions formed a large part of the assemblage. Their exact composition is not known, but they may be related to depositional conditions within the ditch. Conclusions In summary, the low density of plant macrofossils within the assemblage is by no means unusual and is paralleled at other contemporary sites within the eastern region. However, as so little material was recovered, it is not possible to accurately interpret the assemblage, and it appears most likely that it is related to a low density scatter of refuse.
Sample No. 0030 0048 Charcoal <2mm xxx - Charcoal >2mm xx - Charred root/stem x - Indet.fruit stone frag. x - Corylus avellana L. x - Quercus sp. (fruit frags.) - x Mineralised soil concretions xxx - Sample volume (litres) 5 <0.1 Volume of flot (litres) 0.2 <0.1 % flot sorted 100% 100%
Table 7. Charred plant macrofossils and other remains.
General Discussion The nature of these excavations precludes a full understanding of the site but a number of general conclusions can be drawn and issues in doubt at least identified. The feature which produced the most finds was ditch 0032. It was on the south side of a natural ridge running parallel to it, and it may be significant that the ditch butt ends (distinctly if not dramatically so) where the ridge terminates at the western end. The ditch had at least two cuts, judging by the profile, although there were no visible cut lines within the fill. The size of the pot sherds found, and condition of both it and the flint, suggests the material had not travelled far. The appearance of the ditch fill with a dark lower layer, containing decayed bone, too degraded to recover, and a brown upper fill, is consistent with the finds evidence in suggesting that it contained rubbish deposits. Pit 0045 has presented many problems with interpretation. Despite producing a substantial number of struck flints and Neolithic pottery sherds, the excavators were not convinced of the antiquity of this feature. Doubts were expressed over the clarity of definition between the fill types within the pit; this was especially true of the cut edge. Of particular importance was the recovery of semi-charred acorns towards the base of the feature. These were not fully carbonised and could not therefore have survived from the Neolithic in the relatively dry conditions within the mound (following examination they were discarded by Val Fryer). If we accept this feature is not that old, we are left to speculate on its origins. The hole was clearly dug carefully with vertical sides and the only visible corner was at a right angle. There was no evidence of any other buildings on site. One possibility may be that this hole is the remains of an antiquarian excavation; this explanation would account for the juxtaposition of the pit, ditch and mound, and the large quantity of finds within the pit backfill. Fragments of cremated human bone recovered from the pit backfill may offer a different explanation for why the mound might have attracted antiquarian attention and it is possible that there might have been burials associated with this feature. The monitoring and rescue excavation work at Thurston was carried out over a short period of time while construction was in progress. Although the developer was co-operative (for example providing machine time) the circumstances of the project account for a disjointed programme of recording. During the final stage of monitoring it was hoped that pit 0045 could be investigated further; unfortunately the last series of footings was not recorded which has left a gap in the record. Recommendations for further work Stratigraphic assessment It is not recommended that this site should move toward formal publication. An archive report and the primary archive are held at Shire Hall Bury St Edmunds and the finds lodged in the county store. Finds assessments If the site is published, illustrations of some of the pottery will be required. No further work is necessary on any other category of finds.
References Brown, N., forthcoming ‘The Pottery’ in Wilkinson, T.J. and Murphy, P.L, Archaeology of the Essex
Coast, Volume II: The Stumble, East Anglian Archaeology.
Cleal R.M.J., 1995, ‘Pottery fabrics in Wessex in the fourth to second millennia BC’ in ‘Unbaked Urns of Rudely Shape’ Essays on British and Irish Pottery for Ian Longworth Oxbow Monograph 55, Oxbow.
Healy, F., 1988, The Anglo-Saxon Cemetery at Spong Hill, North Elmham, part VI: Occupation During the Seventh to Second Millennium BC, East Anglian Archaeology 39.
Herne, A., 1988, ‘A time and a place for the Grimston Bowl’, in Barrett, J. and Kinnes, I. (eds.), The Archaeology of Context in the Neolithic and Bronze Age: Recent Trends, 9-29, Sheffield.
Longworth, I.H., 1960, ‘The Pottery,’ in Clark, J.G.D., ‘Excavations at the Neolithic site of Hurst Fen , Mildenhall, Suffolk’ Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 26, 228-240.
Manby, T.G., 1970, ‘Long barrows of northern England; structural and dating evidence’ Scottish Archaeological Forum 17, 1-25.
Percival, S., forthcoming, ‘The Pottery’ in Whitmore, D., ‘Excavations at John Innes Institute, Colney, Norfolk’.
Prehistoric Ceramic Research Group, 1992, Guidelines for the Analysis and Publication, PCRG, Occasional Paper 2.
Pryor, F., 1974, Excavation at Fengate, Peterborough, England: the first report. Royal Ontario Museum Archaeology Monograph 3, Toronto.
Smith, I.F., 1965, Windmill Hill and Avebury (Oxford, Clarendon Press).
Stace, C., 1997, New Flora of the British Isles. Second edition. Cambridge University Press.
Thomas, J., 1999, Understanding the Neolithic. Routledge.
Wainwright, G.J., 1972, ‘The excavation of a Neolithic settlement on Broome Heath, Ditchingham, Norfolk, England’, Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 38, 1-1-7.
Appendix 1: Brief and Specification
S U F F O L K C O U N T Y C O U N C I L
A R C H A E O L O G I C A L S E R V I C E - C O N S E R V AT I O N T E AM
Brief and Specification for Archaeological Monitoring of Development
Land adjacent Red Marley, 18 Barton Road, Thurston 1. Background 1.1 An application to build three dwellings on this site has been granted conditional upon an acceptable programme of
archaeological work being carried out (application OL/27/99). Assessment of the available archaeological evidence indicates that the area affected by new building can be adequately recorded by archaeological monitoring.
1.2 The development is at TL 914656 on a high, fairly level ridge (over 150 foot contour), close to the Rougham parish
boundary. Adjacent areas to the south and west are described as ‘Thurston Heath’ on the 1904 etc OS maps. The area is of archaeological interest because it lies on the probable line of the Roman road (Margary 33a) which runs south-south-west from the fort and small town at Pakenham, just south of Ixworth. The road was observed in the 1950’s during construction work about 300m south of the present site and pottery sherds recovered (THS 002); a further ‘Belgic’ piece was recorded in the 1980’s from nearby (THS 004). The line of the road should cross the south east corner of the proposed development. Examination of the site, currently garden (grass and mature trees), did not reveal any clear sign of a Roman road, although there are strong irregularities not relating to the present house (possibly old pits/spoil?) suggesting that the area has not been ploughed this century.
2. Brief for Archaeological Monitoring 2.1 To provide a record of archaeological deposits which are damaged or removed by any development, including services
and landscaping, permitted by the current planning consent. 2.2 The main academic objective will centre upon the potential of this development to produce evidence for earlier activity
on the site. 2.3 The significant archaeologically damaging activity in this proposal is the excavation of building footing trenches.
These, and the upcast soil, are to be observed after they have been excavated by the building contractor. Adequate time is to be allowed for archaeological recording of archaeological deposits during excavation, and of soil sections following excavation. The construction of the access road should also be observed. It is understood that there is unlikely to be major levelling of the site - if there is the archaeological programme will need complete re-consideration.
3. Arrangements for Monitoring 3.1 To carry out the monitoring work the developer will appoint an archaeologist (the observing archaeologist) who must
be approved by the Planning Authority’s archaeological adviser (the Suffolk County Council Archaeological Service). 3.2 The developer or his archaeologist will give the Conservation Team of the Suffolk County Archaeological Service
(Suffolk County Council, Shire Hall, Bury St Edmunds IP33 2AR. Telephone/Fax: 01284 352443) five working days notice of the commencement of ground works on the site, in order that the work of the archaeological contractor may be monitored. The method and form of development will also be monitored to ensure that it conforms to previously agreed locations and techniques upon which this brief is based.
3.3 Allowance must be made to cover archaeological costs incurred in monitoring the development works by the contract
archaeologist. The size of the contingency should be estimated by the approved archaeological contractor, based upon the outline works in paragraph 2.3 of the Brief and Specification and the building contractor’s programme of works and time-table.
4. Specification 4.1 The developer shall afford access at all reasonable times to both the County Council Conservation Team archaeologist
and the contracted ‘observing archaeologist’ to allow archaeological observation of building and engineering operations which disturb the ground.
4.2 Opportunity must be given to the ‘observing archaeologist’ to hand excavate any discrete archaeological features which
appear during earth moving operations, retrieve finds and make measured records as necessary.
4.3 In the case of footing trenches unimpeded access at the rate of one and a half hours per 10 metres of trench must be allowed for archaeological recording before concreting or building begin. Where it is necessary to see archaeological detail one of the soil faces is to be trowelled clean.
4.4 Other than those previously defined the ‘observing archaeologist’ will not be entitled to enforce specific delays and
hold ups to the work of the building contractor. If delays prove desirable to the archaeological recording process they should be arranged by mutual agreement with the contractor; the developer’s architect may be approached as an arbitrator.
4.5 All archaeological features exposed must be planned at a minimum scale of 1:50 on a plan showing the proposed layout
of the development. 4.6 All contexts must be numbered and finds recorded by context 4.7 The data recording methods and conventions used must be consistent with, and approved by, the County Sites and
Monuments Record. 5. Report Requirements 5.1 An archive of all archaeological records and finds is to be prepared and must be deposited with the County Sites and
Monuments Record within 3 months of the completion of work. It will then become publicly accessible. 5.2 Finds must be appropriately conserved and stored in accordance with UK Institute of Conservators Guidelines. The
finds, as an indissoluble part of the site archive, should be deposited with the County SMR if the landowner can be persuaded to agree to this. If this is not possible for all or any part of the finds archive, then provision must be made for additional recording (e.g. photography, illustration, analysis) as appropriate.
5.3 A project report must also be prepared summarising the methodology employed, the stratigraphic sequence, a period by
period description of contexts recorded, and an inventory of finds. The objective account of the archaeological evidence must be clearly distinguished from its interpretation.
5.4 A summary report, in the established format, suitable for inclusion in the annual ‘Archaeology in Suffolk’ section of
the Proceedings of the Suffolk Institute of Archaeology, must be prepared and included in the project report. 5.5 County Sites and Monuments Record sheets must be completed, as per the county SMR manual, for all sites where
archaeological finds and/or features are located. Specification by: Judith Plouviez Suffolk County Council Archaeological Service Conservation Team Environment and Transport Department Shire Hall Bury St Edmunds Suffolk IP33 2AR Date: 30th July 1999 Reference: \thurst07.doc This brief and specification remains valid for 12 months from the above date. If work is not carried out in full within that time this document will lapse; the authority should be
notified and a revised brief and specification may be issued.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -Appendix 2: Context Lis opno feature component identifier grsq plan no section sheet n soil sample finds description same as cuts cut by over
0001 0001 0001 fmds Yes
0002 0002 0002 cleaning Yes Surface cleaning in area adjoining baulk on edge of new access road
0003 0005 0005 cleaning Yes Surface collection in area of0005.
0004 0004 0004 pit? Yes Large pit. Appears to be cut feature dug close to the surface (see section). Uneven base. Visible immediately below turf. Could be part of extended ditch?
0006 0006 0032 ditch? Yes grey sand layers up to 1.6m deep in baulk possibly phase of ditch striped appearance from small section seen.
0007 0001 0001 fmds Yes finds located around tree disturbance (unstratified)
0008 0008 0008 section Yes Examination of ground beneath tree disturbance.
0009 No not used
0010 0010 0032 layer Yes Topsoil in short hand dug trial hole c. 1.6m x 0.8m (also 0011 11,12,13 and 14)
0011 0011 0032 layer Yes Brown sand subsoil, possibly something from ditch below. 0013? Possibly cut by ditch, top fill 0013 (part of 0032)
0012 0012 0032 ditch fill Yes ditch fill? Separate segment of ditch 0032 dug by hand from turf 0014
0013 0013 0032 ditch fill? Yes top fill of ditch, grey brown sand 0012
0014 0014 0032 ditch fill Yes base fill of ditch, grey sand
0020 0020 0034 cleaning Yes Following machine stripping of topsoil for Plot 2 surface was hand cleaned and a slot trench was excavated aligned N-S
0021 0021 0034 pit 2 2 No Feature exposed in shovel trench which is recorded in plan and section. Suggest feature connected to ancient tree in some way as the structure of the pit was odd. However, good pottery and charcoal near the base.
0022 0022 0032 ditch fill 2 2 Yes Red/brown sand with flints and fmds. Appears to be slump 0023 from top of ridge into ditch. Suggest natural filling?
0023 0022 0032 ditch fill 2 2 Yes Lower fill of ditch. Darker brown fill from charcoal some fragmentary bone. Suggest filled from top of slope.
0024 0024 0024 layer Yes Topsoil machined off in area of standing building and over the area of ditch by request to builder. And later machining see 0031 below
0025 0025 0032 segment 2 2 No western extension of ditch excavation.
0026 0025 0032 ditch fill 2 2 Yes Dark layer from which ALL finds came?
0027 0028 0032 ditch fill 2 2 Yes Upper red/brown fill, see others. 0028
0028 0028 0032 ditch fill 2 2 Yes Dark layer, tiny frags of bone, cannot retrieve, too fragile.
0029 0028 0032 layer 2 No Similar to above .
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -opno feature component identifier grsq plan no section sheet n soil sample finds description same as cuts cutby over
0030 0028 0032 sample 2 y Yes Charcoal sample found well down in 0029. Some root penetration. Charcoal spread generally along trench.
0031 0031 0024 pit Yes Dark brown feature excavated by shovel. This was the largest of several which could not be investigated.
0032 0032 0032 ditch 2 2 No component for entire ditch. Includes what appear to be two cuts. Connects 0025-0022-0028 with 0005 and 0004.
0033 0032 0032 fmds Yes If this produces finds it must refer to fmds from the machined sections of0032?
0034 0034 0034 Trench 2 2 Yes Slot trench across top of mound.
0035 0028 0028 Section 2 2 No west facing section of 0028
0036 0036 0036 Cleaning Yes Surface fmds from cleaning in area of ditch(s)? At east end of site
0037 0037 0037 Cleaning Yes Finds from cleaning surface 'in area of possible North-South ditch
0038 0038 0038 Cleaning Yes Surface finds from cleaning in area of possible East-West ditch
0039 0039 0039 Cleaning Yes Surface finds from possible North-South ditch and feature
0040 0045 0045 Fill Yes Dark, charcoal sand fill within northwest quadrant of0045. Lies beneath horizon of pale grey arch. sterile sand
0041 0045 0045 Fill No Layer of charcoal, sand and burnt flints. Ran in discrete linear 0044,00 patch along the north edge of0045
0042 0045 0045 Layer Yes Dark charcoal soil horizon toward top of the soil profile within southeast quadrant of0045. Underneath surface 0043
0043 0045 0045 Surface Yes Dark brown silt sand. Uppermost layer over/within feature 0045. Visible in all quadrants of0045. Seen and recorded in sections 0057 and 0059
0044 0045 0045 Fill Yes Dense black silty sand. Few stones. Charcoal flecks. Within 0045. Seen in section 0059
0045 0045 0045 Feature No Rectilinear feature cut into the south side of the mound, its long side orientated parallel to mound. Square, vertical sided and flat bottomed
0046 0046 0046 Pit/Feature Yes No more details recorded
0047 0045 0045 Layer Yes Pale sand within southwest quadrant. Removal of this layer 0044 exposed flint patches 0060 and 0061. This layer probably same as pale layer recorded in northwest quadrant below 0041. Overlies 0044
0048 0045 0045 Finds y Yes Burnt fruit stones/acorns? Found at the bottom of pit within pale grey sand
0049 0045 0045 Layer Yes Black charcoally sand at the base of the feature. This occurs in a series of shallow undulations within the surface of the basal grey sand layer 0050. These run in a diagonal northwest-southeast
0050 0045 0045 Layer Yes Basal layer in southeast quadrant. Undulating upper profile 0049 in hollows within 0050. Stones 0064 on surface of0050
0051 0045 0045 Layer Yes Black sand under 0049
- - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ - - - - - - -opno feature component identifier grsq plan no section sheet n soil sample finds description same as cuts cutby over
0052 0045 0045 Layer Yes Bands of yellow-brown sand and iron pan. Finds from this, but this is the soil into which the central square feature is cut. Initially thought to be natural but obviously not. Edge identified in slit trench
0053 0045 0045 Finds Yes Unstratified finds from this area.
0054 0045 0045 Layer Yes Banded sand in north trench under black layer
0055 0045 0045 Layer Yes Disturbed soil in base of section. Bone from this. Looks like animal disturbance.
0056 0026 0026 Section 2 2 Yes North facing section. Shows dark fill petering out westward
0057 0045 0045 Section No North-South running section through 0045. Formerly numbered as Section 1
0058 0045 0045 Section No Northeast-Southwest running section through 0045. Located within southwest quadrant. Formerly numbered as Section 2
0059 0045 0045 Section No East-West running section through 0045. Formerly numbered as Section 6
0060 0045 0045 Post pad? No Area of concentrated flint. Possible post pad located in southwest quadrant. Exposed by excavation of 004 7. Originally recorded as A
0061 0045 0045 Post pad? No Area of concentrated flint. Possible post pad located in southwest quadrant. Exposed by excavation of0047. Originally recorded as B
0062 0045 0045 Post pad? No Area of concentrated flint. Possible post pad located in southeast quadrant. Odginally recorded as C
0063 0045 0045 Post pad? No Area of concentrated flint over a shallow pit filled with yellow sand. Possible post pad located in southeast quadrant. Originally recorded as D
0064 0045 0045 Post pad? No Area of concentrated flint partially exposed in Section 0059. Possible post pad. Originally recorded as F
0065 0065 0065 section No Edge of road
0066 0066 0065 section No section along edge of road continuation of 0065
0067 0067 0068 layer Yes layers of horizontal sand and silt deposits, possibly windblown
0068 0068 0068 section Yes
0069 0069 0032 ditch fill Yes
0070 0045 0045 section Yes
I I Appendix 3.1: General Finds
OPNo Pot No PotWt Flint No FlintWt BFlintNo Blint Wt Miscellaneous
0 thick flake frag has coarse ret one edge forming steep denticular edge
0
0 mostly thin sh, sharp, 1- abr platform
0 cortical fl with slight ret and ut on distal and right edges
0 qu large thin blade-lie - ret around distal end and coarse ret/ut on left edge
0 sharp, mostly thin
0 1 - bl-like
0
0 mise
0 thin grey pebb cortes ut left edge
0
0 all sharp, 1 irreg, 1 from protruding cortical nodule
0
0 v thin - poss ut of fine distal point
0 regular large bl with slight ut of both edges
0 sm thin
0 abraded thermal frag - discarded
0 has slight ut of dist point and at prox end fls struck from ventral face - ?use as core
0 frag from cortical face of ?core - a few fl struck .from it
0 thick, distal end missing
0
0
0 thin, sh
0
0 sharp, sm and thin
0 qu large ilTeg cortical fl with ?ut cortical edge
0 all quite sharp
0
0 thin, sh
0
0 vsm
0 or sort of crested flake? -has previous flake removals from one side
- -
Context Category Type No Complete Cortex Primary Patina damage Sharp Burnt Comment
0046 retf retouched flak 1 1 0 0 0 0 sub-sq thin flake frag with shallow ret on ventral face at distal end and flakes from broken 'prox' end on dorsal face, also utilised right edge
flak shatter 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 both large chunky corticl fragments from shattered nodules
core multi flake 0 0 0 0 irreg frag - flakes from 2 platforms
core single flake 0 0 0 0 small flakes from all around circumf of sm cortical frag
