Notes: Two Neolithic Polished Flint Axes from the Vale of Aylesbury

Notes: Two Neolithic Polished Flint Axes from the Vale of Aylesbury

NOTES TWO NEOLITHIC POLISHED FLINT AXES FROM THE VALE OF AYLESBURY During a programme of systematic fieldwalk­ expected to be the flint mines of East Anglia or ing by Aylesbury Past Project between 1986 and Sussex, but flint mines have been found in the 1988 Roman, Saxon and medieval artefact Chilterns at Peppard Common (Peake 1913) so scatters were recovered (Dalwood and Platell a local source may be possible. Reworked axes, 1988). Prehistoric pottery and lithics were only such as No.2, are common finds: the reworking recovered in small quantities, but two items of the butt-end, perhaps to facilitate the re­ deserve publication in this note. Archive docu­ shafting of a broken axe, is found amongst mentation and the objects themselves are Cotswold flint axes, and it may reflect the retained at Buckinghamshire County Museum. distance from flint sources (Tyler 1976, 13). 1. Axe, broken, from Hartwell (SP 80901190). Both axes were recovered from localities The middle portion of a neolithic ground and which have not produced any other lithic polished flint axe, with slightly flattened sides. material. The neolithic occupation in the Vale It is broken at both ends: at the blade end, the of Aylesbury has been inferred from the re­ flake scars are unpatinated; at the butt-end, covery of artefactual material at Walton Vicar­ they have a white patina. The whole is battered age (Farley 1976, 160-1, fig. 2), in Aylesbury and worn, but the butt-end flake scars suggest (Dalwood forthcoming) and at Scotsgrove flakes struck to rework the piece. The polished House, Haddenham (CAS 4194). In addition, a surfaces carry a milky white patina over orange total of five stone axes and three flint axes have flint. (AFS 16, S.F. 1041; BCM CAS 5619, Ace. previously been found: two stone axe fragments No. 301.1987). from Walton Vicarage (Farley 1976, fig. 2: 17- 18), a stone axe from Aylesbury (CAS 4450), 2. Axe, broken, from Stone (SP 78971118). another probably from Aylesbury (CAS 1807), The butt-end of a neolithic ground and polished and two flaked flint axe fragments also from flint axe, with a rounded section. It has a clean Aylesbury (CAS 1807). In addition, a single regular break, and is slightly chipped at the stone axe has been found in Bierton (CAS butt-end. The sides are faceted towards the 2386), and a polished flint axe in Dinton (CAS break. The polished surfaces are patinated a 4982). The material from Walton Vicarage pale milky grey, over an opaque grey~brown comprised stone axe fragments, ceramics flint. (AFS 24, S.F. 1042; BCM CAS 5627, Ace. (Peterborough Ware) and other lithics, all as No. 308.1987) residual material: otherwise axes and datable neolithic scatters are not associated. The two axes are similar in size and type, both being ground and polished flint axes with It is generally supposed that neolithic flint faceted sides, well-known throughout southern axes were broken and discarded or lost in use, England, and the commonest type of flint axe and that their distribution is a function of the (Class 6) in the East Midlands (Moore 1979, process of neolithic clearance (Tyler 1976, 3). 86). Their resemblance to Group VI (Langdale) Although some stone axes could not have func­ stone axes has been noted (ibid; Whittle 1977, tioned as tools at all, and others are too small to 65), although it is uncertain how this similarity have been heavy felling tools (Bradley 1978, should be interpreted. 12-13), the majority may be interpreted as timber-working tools, used for clearance to­ The source of these flint axes might be gether with fire-setting and ring-barking 181 1 2 Fig. 1. Neolithic polished flint axes from (1) Hartwell and (2) Stone. (Scale 2: 3) 182 (Fowler 1983, 165) . Another possibility is that Acknowledgements these objects were 'ritual' deposits as has been The Aylesbury Field Survey was part of a suggested in the Cotswolds and Berkshire programme of fieldwork carried out by Ayles­ (Holgate pers. comm.) Neolithic activity in the bury Past Project, a Community Programme Vale of Aylesbury is certainly indicated by this scheme funded by the Manpower Services material, but the present distribution is largely Commission, to whom thanks are due for the product of chance discovery during archae­ enabling publication to be completed. The two ological fieldwork and more prosaic activities axes were drawn by Alison Hawkins. Thanks which probably account for the concentration in are also due to Mike Farley and Robin Holgate. Aylesbury's urban and suburban area. HalDalwood BIBLIOGRAPHY Bradley, R. 1978. The Prehistoric Settlement of Fowter, P. J . 1983. The Farming of Prehistoric Britain Britain (London). (Cambridge). CAS. County Antiquities Survey (Sites and Moore, C. N. 1979. 'Stone axes from the Midlands', Monuments Record), Buckinghamshire County in Clough, T. H . McK. and Cummins, W. A. (eds), Museum, Aylesbury. Stone Axe Studies, CBA Res. Rep. 23,82-6. Dalwood, C. H. and Platell, A. C. 1988. 'Aylesbury Peake, A. E. 1913. 'An account of a flint factory, with Past Project, 1987--88', South Midlands some new types of flints, excavated at Peppard Archaeology 18, 35-9. Common, Oxon. ', Archaeol. J. 70,33-68. Dalwood, C. H. forthcoming. 'The Flints', in Farley, Tyler, A. 1976. Neolithic Flint Axes from the M. E . [Excavations at Prebendal Grounds, Cotswold Hills, BAR (Brit. Ser.) 25. Aylesbury]. Whittle, A. W. R. 1977. The Earlier Neolithic of Farley, M. E . 1976. 'Saxon and Medieval Walton, Southern England and its Continental Background, Aylesbury, Excavations 1973--4, Recs. Bucks 20, BAR (Inter. Ser.) 35 . 163--290. EXCAVATIONS AT MOAT FARM, HEDGERLEY Introduction In 1978 the impending sale and possible use of Moat Farm, Hedgerley (SU 97738830 and the site of Moat Farm for gravel extraction Fig. 1) is thought to be the site of the original prompted the Hedgerley Historical society to Bulstrode Manor which was associated with the apply for permission from the Department of Knights Templars since before 1200. The order Transport for a preliminary field study at Moat was dissolved in 1308. An account of the history Farm, including trial excavations in selected of the site is given by A. Baker (1980). areas. Following receipt of permission excava­ tions took place in 1979 and an interim account Only a part of the moat now survives (Fig. 1), was published by B. Stainton (1980) and see the course of its southern and western per­ photograph in Rice (1980, 60). imeters are not known. The whole site is generally considered to be medieval in date, though the Ordnance Survey have suggested The Excavation that it may have utilized the remains of the ditch A survey of the site was carried out on the of an Iron Age plateau fort. This hypothesis can ground with a proton-magnetometer and from not now be easily checked as most of it has been the air with an infra-red pyrometer. Both of destroyed by gravel working on the west and by these surveys indicated hirge areas of anomalies construction of the nearby M40 motorway. within the moat. 183 EXCAVATION AREAS N t Fig. 1. Moat Farm, Hedgerley, showing the excavated area and moat section. A section was cut through a dry portion of the considered that at least three building periods moat (Fig. 1). The line of the moat and its were represented. subsequent infilling was revealed, though a detailed profile could not be ascertained as the The outer edges of the phase 1 wall (trenches bottom lay beneath the water table. It is prob­ C4 and B4) were defined by lines of flints which able that the moat ditch had a generally wide, had not been dressed, and which were sitting in flat bottom. The only dating evidence from this a foundation trench. Irregular-shaped flints trench was a sixteenth-century lead-glazed were also present in the core .of the wall, along sherd found in one of the lower layers of fill. with some mortar and pieces of chalk. The phase 1 wall was traced for about 6 m running A grid was laid down within the moat and a westward, and it probably continued on the series of nine trenches were opened up. In all of same alignment underneath the later phase 2 the trenches a dense layer of building debris was wall. A mortar floor was associated with the found only 200 mm beneath the present ground phase 1 wall and overlay an earlier chalk floor. level. Fragments of walls were present in four The limited excavation did not determine trenches and there was evidence of robbed whether the chalk floor was associated with the foundations in a further twe (Fig. 2). Based phase 1 wall, or some earlier activity. Robbed mainly on differences in construction it was wall foundations a short distance to the north 184 - ,._ OCCASIONAL ,....._ POND I _ _j 0 Sm - m PHASE 1 WALL ~ PHASE 2 WALL - ~ OTHER WALLS - - I: ::1ROBBED WALLS liit@l MORTAR Fig. 2. Plan of excavations within the moat. (trenches B2 and B3) were considered to be directly on the phase 1 wall and was traced for associated with the phase 1 wall. about 6 m running westward. The traces of wall showing in the sides of the intermittently filled The construction of the phase 2 wall (trenches pond to the west (Fig. 2) may be a further B4 and A4) was superior to that of phase 1, continuation of the phase 2 wall. though it also was constructed of flints, chalk pieces and tile, the proportion of the latter A short section of wall ran northwards at right being greater than in phase 1.

View Full Text

Details

  • File Type
    pdf
  • Upload Time
    -
  • Content Languages
    English
  • Upload User
    Anonymous/Not logged-in
  • File Pages
    17 Page
  • File Size
    -

Download

Channel Download Status
Express Download Enable

Copyright

We respect the copyrights and intellectual property rights of all users. All uploaded documents are either original works of the uploader or authorized works of the rightful owners.

  • Not to be reproduced or distributed without explicit permission.
  • Not used for commercial purposes outside of approved use cases.
  • Not used to infringe on the rights of the original creators.
  • If you believe any content infringes your copyright, please contact us immediately.

Support

For help with questions, suggestions, or problems, please contact us