Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-vvkck Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T18:12:00.541Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The Neolithic Causewayed Enclosure at Staines, Surrey: Excavations 1961–63

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 February 2014

Reay Robertson-Mackay
Affiliation:
Ancient Monuments Inspectorate, Historic Buildings and Monuments Commission, Fortress House, 23 Savile Row, London W1X 2HE

Abstract

The partial excavation under rescue conditions in 1961–63 of the ditches and interior of an enclosure of the earlier neolithic period is described. The enclosure, covering a total area of approximately 2.4 ha, was defined by double concentric interrupted ditches, which were for the most part naturally filled. There were many traces of activity within the interior, presumed to be contemporary with the ditches, including pits, gullies, post- and stake-holes, and varying concentrations of struck and burnt flint and pottery. Human burials were found. There is a little Ebbsfleet pottery in secondary contexts and there are later prehistoric, Roman and medieval finds. It is probably not possible to ascribe a single or specific role to the site, which may have been important as a place where several activities were concentrated, including occupation, subsistence, exchange, enclosure or defence, burial and ritual.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © The Prehistoric Society 1987

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Bamford, H., 1985. Briar Hill. Northampton: Northampton Development Corporation.Google Scholar
Bell, M., 1977. ‘Excavations at Bishopstone, Sussex’, Sussex Archaeol. Coll. 115, 1299.Google Scholar
Bruce-Mitford, R. L. S., 1938. ‘A hoard of neolithic axes from Peaslake, Surrey’, Antiq. J. 18, 279–84.Google Scholar
Case, H., 1961. ‘Irish Neolithic pottery’, Proc. Prehist. Soc. 27, 174–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Case, H. J. and Whittle, A. W. R. (eds), 1982. Settlement patterns in the Oxford region: excavations at the Abingdon causewayed enclosure and other sites. London: CBA Res. Rep. 44.Google Scholar
Clark, J. G. D., 1954. Excavations at Star Carr. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Clark, J. G. D., Higgs, E. S. and Longworth, I. H., 1960. ‘Excavations at a neolithic site at Hurst Fen, Mildenhall, Suffolk (1954, 1957 and 1958)’, Proc. Prehist. Soc. 26, 202–45.Google Scholar
Curwen, E. C., 1934. ‘Excavations in Whitehawk Neolithic Camp, Brighton, 1932–3’, Antiq. J. 14, 99133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Curwen, E. C., 1936. ‘Agriculture and the flint sickle in Palestine’, Antiquity 9, 6265.Google Scholar
Drewett, P., 1977. ‘The excavation of a neolithic causewayed enclosure on Offham Hill, East Sussex, 1976’, Proc. Prehist. Soc. 43, 201–42.Google Scholar
Green, H. S., 1980. The flint arrowheads of the British Isles. Oxford: British Archaeological Reports British Series 75.Google Scholar
Healey, E. and Robertson-Mackay, R., 1983. ‘The lithic industries from Staines causewayed enclosure and their relationship to other Earlier Neolithic industries in southern Britain’, Lithics 4, 127.Google Scholar
Hedges, J. and Buckley, D., 1978. ‘Excavations at a Neolithic causewayed enclosure, Orsett, Essex, 1975’, Proc. Prehist. Soc. 44, 219308.Google Scholar
Helbaek, H., 1952. ‘Early crops in southern England’, Proc. Prehist. Soc. 18, 194233.Google Scholar
Keeley, L., 1980. Experimental determination of tool uses: a microwear analysis. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Legge, A., 1981. ‘Aspects of cattle husbandry’, Mercer, R. (ed.), Farming practice in British prehistory, 169–81. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Madsen, T. and Petersen, J. E., 1984. ‘Tidligneolitiske anlaeg ved Mosegården. Regionale og kronologiske forskelle i Tidligneolithikum’, Kuml 1982–83, 61115.Google Scholar
Mercer, R., 1980. Hambledon Hill. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Needham, S. P., 1985. ‘Neolithic and Bronze Age settlement on the buried flood plains of Runnymede’, Oxford J. Archaeol. 4, 125–37.Google Scholar
Piggott, S., 1954. The neolithic cultures of the British Isles. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Pryor, F., French, C. and Taylor, M., 1985. ‘An interim report on excavations at Etton, Maxey, Cambridgeshire, 1982–1984’, Antiq. J. 65, 275311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robertson-Mackay, M. E., 1980. ‘A “head and hoofs” burial beneath a round barrow, with other Neolithic and Bronze Age sites, on Hemp Knoll, near Avebury, Wiltshire’, Proc. Prehist. Soc. 46, 123–76.Google Scholar
Robertson-Mackay, R., 1962a. ‘The excavation of the cause-wayed camp at Staines, Middlesex’, Archaeol. Newsletter 7, 131–34.Google Scholar
Robertson-Mackay, R., 1962b. [Staines] Excavations: Annual Report, 1961, 6. London: HMSO.Google Scholar
Robertson-Mackay, R., 1965. ‘The Primary Neolithic settlement in Southern England; some new aspects’, in Estratto dagli Atti del VI Congresso Internazionale delle science Preistoriche and Protostoriche, Vol. II, 319–22. Rome: UISPP.Google Scholar
Robertson-Mackay, R., Blackmore, L., Hurst, J. G., Jones, P., Moorhouse, S. and Webster, L., 1981. ‘A group of Saxon and Medieval finds from the site of the Neolithic cause-wayed enclosure at Staines, Surrey, with a note on the topography of the area’, Trans. London and Middlesex Archaeol. Soc. 32, 107–31.Google Scholar
Rosenfeld, A., 1971. ‘The examination of use marks on some Magdalenian end-scrapers’, British Museum Quarterly 35, 176–82.Google Scholar
Saville, A., 1977. ‘Two mesolithic implement types’, Northants Archaeol. 12, 38.Google Scholar
Saville, A., 1981. Grimes Graves, Norfolk, excavations 1971–72, Vol. 2: The flint assemblages. London: HMSO.Google Scholar
Shepherd, W., 1972. Flint: its origin, properties and uses. London: Faber.Google Scholar
Sieveking, G. de G., Bush, P., Ferguson, J., Craddock, P. T., Hughes, M.J. and Cowell, M. R., 1972. ‘Prehistoric flint mines and their identification as a source of raw material’, Archaeometry 14, 151–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, I. F., 1965. Windmill Hill and Avebury. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Smith, I. F., 1971. ‘Causewayed enclosures’, in Simpson, D. D.A. (ed.), Economy and settlement in Neolithic and Early Bronze Age Britain and Europe, 89112. Leicester: Leicester University Press.Google Scholar
Smith, I. F., 1974. ‘The Neolithic’, in Renfrew, C. (ed.), British Prehistory: a new outline, 100–35. London: Duckworth.Google Scholar
Smith, R. A., 1921. ‘Hoards of neolithic celts’, Archaeologia 71, 113–24.Google Scholar
Trotter, M. and Gleser, G. C., 1952. ‘Estimation of stature from long-bones of American Whites and Negroes’, Amer. J. Phys. Anthrop. 10, 463514.Google Scholar
Trotter, M. and Gleser, G. C., 1958. ‘A re-evaluation of estimation of stature based on measurements of stature taken during life and long-bones after death’, Amer. J. Phys. Anthrop. 16, 79123.Google Scholar
Wainwright, G. J., 1972. ‘The excavation of a neolithic settlement on Broome Heath, Ditchingham, Norfolk’, Proc. Prehist. Soc. 38, 197.Google Scholar
Wainwright, G. J. and Longworth, I. H., 1971. Durrington Walls: excavations 1966–1968. London: Soc. Antiq. Res. Rep. 29.Google Scholar
Wheeler, R. E. M., 1943. Maiden Castle, Dorset. London: Soc. Antiq. Res. Rep. 12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whittle, A. W. R., 1977. The Earlier Neolithic of southern England and its continental background. Oxford: British Archaeological Reports International Series 35.Google Scholar
Whittle, A., forthcoming. ‘Contexts, activities, events — aspects of Neolithic and Copper Age enclosures in central and western Europe’, in Burgess, C. C., and Mordant, D. and Topping, P. (eds), Enclosures and defences in the Neolithic of western Europe. Oxford: British Archaeological Reports International Series.Google Scholar
Willock, E. H., 1936. ‘A neolithic site at Haldon’, Proc. Devon Archaeol. Explor. Soc. 2, 244–63.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: PDF

Robertson-Mackay supplementary material

Robertson-Mackay supplementary material

Download Robertson-Mackay supplementary material(PDF)
PDF 50.1 MB