SCRAPER (TOOL)

Part of an assemblage of 98 pieces of debitage and 37 pieces of worked flint found during fieldwalking in a single field. Much smaller quantities of flint were found in a neighbouring field and in one a short distance away, but these have been analysed seperately because of this. The size of this assemblage allowed the debitage to be seperated into flakes (primary, secondary and tertiary), chips (<1cm), blades and bladelets, and fragments (interestingly, no cores were found in the group). Each sub-group has then been recorded here seperately. Individual weights and measurements have not been given for the debitage due to the large numbers involved. Instead it was thought that combining the groups and producing charts showing the length/breath index and the percentage of cortex present would be prove to be a more efficient way of presenting data that would usually be included in a standard PAS record. The results of this showed firstly that over half the debitage was tertiary material (56%), with no cortex remaining and that there was much less secondary material (33%) and very little primary (11%). This ratio is perhaps to be expected in areas such as this one where flint is not naturally occuring and so may have been carefully curated. This may also explain the lack of cores, as they may have been well looked after if flint was a rare resource. Secondly, the length/breath analysis demonstrated that the highest proportion of flakes fitted into the broad (40%) and medium (56%) range, with very few fitting into the narrow range (4%). Such analysis can prove to be a useful dating tool when combined with other methods, as flakes tend to become broader as flintkapping techniques change in the later Neolithic and early Bronze Age. However, in this case it is important to point out that there was a number of probable snapped blades in the assemblage, perhaps as a result of tool manufacture, use or maybe later post-depositional damage. This may well have skewed the data to a certain extent, as many more narrow blades may have been produced than actually survive (see record SOM-3963F1).

The worked flint and tools found amongst the assemblage include Mesolithic to early Neolithic burins, burin spalls and microliths representing the earliest phase of production present. As noted above blades and bladelets, debitage characteristic of Mesolithic and early Neolithic flintworking are also present in small numbers. Interestingly the majority of these show evidence of extensive repatination or complete recotication. This is also present on many of the fragments, which often appear to be parts of blades, and also on many of the smaller waste flakes. Indeed there is a very clear distinction between the heavily patinated waste flakes, which are almost always blades or small flakes, and the un-patinated or slightly patinated flakes, which are generally much larger and cruder. It is also interesting to note that some of the patinated smaller flakes and blades show signs of platform preparation characteristic of Mesolithic and early Neolithic flintworking, which is generally lacking on the larger flakes. However, is was also noted that this distinction is less evident between the earlier and later worked pieces.

A second group of easily dateable worked pieces include three arrowheads (two oblique and one chisel) of later Neolithic date and four thumbnail and end scrapers of probable later Neolithic or early Bronze Age date. It was noted that at least one piece of debitage and one worked flake display evidence of fire damage (crazing and cracking in places), something fairly characteristic of Bronze Age flintworking technology. Furthermore, as already noted, the second group of larger, less patinated waste flakes seldom show signs of platform preparation, a technique not used in these later periods.

There is a final group of crude and non-formal tools, including several awls, piercers, scrapers and notched flakes that could potentially belong to any of the periods above and so do not help greatly with dating. However, based on the evidence outlined there does appear to be two distinct phases of flintworking represented in the assemblage; one covering the Mesolithic to early Neolithic and one the later Neolithic to early Bronze Age.

The assemblage includes the records: SOM-38E2E3, SOM-393F44, SOM-394DF7, SOM-395454, SOM-3963F1, SOM-396A27, SOM-4F40F1, SOM-4F4B63, SOM-4F57B8, SOM-4F6284, SOM-4F7153, SOM-4F7A24, SOM-4F91F3, SOM-4F9A10, SOM-4FA264, SOM-62DD74, SOM-63C914, SOM-659DD4, SOM-65D888, SOM-665045, SOM-674962, SOM-681B30, SOM-684E25, SOM-688C92, SOM-6937E4, SOM-7C8557, SOM-7C9247

A smaller assemblage came from the adjacent field and includes the records: SOM-CD09E3, SOM-CD27A1, SOM-CD3855, SOM-CD4D10, SOM-CD7F84, SOM-CD8967, SOM-CDA860, SOM-CDB3E1, SOM-CDBC82, SOM-CDC496

Another, much smaller, assemblage in a nearby field includes the records: SOM-FB19A4, SOM-FB7D64, SOM-FBAF03, SOM-FBC426, SOM-FC0437, SOM-FC1283, SOM-FC28B3, SOM-FC5A95, SOM-0D4FC5