Surrey Archaeological Collections

Surrey Archaeological Society, 2003 (updated 2016)

Data copyright © Surrey Archaeological Society unless otherwise stated

This work is licensed under the ADS Terms of Use and Access.
Creative Commons License

Surrey Archaeological Society logo

Primary contact

Audrey Graham
Honorary Editor
Surrey Archaeological Society
Castle Arch

Send e-mail enquiry

Resource identifiers

Digital Object Identifiers

Digital Object Identifiers (DOIs) are persistent identifiers which can be used to consistently and accurately reference digital objects and/or content. The DOIs provide a way for the ADS resources to be cited in a similar fashion to traditional scholarly materials. More information on DOIs at the ADS can be found on our help page.

Citing this DOI

The updated Crossref DOI Display guidelines recommend that DOIs should be displayed in the following format:
Sample Citation for this DOI

Surrey Archaeological Society (2016) Surrey Archaeological Collections [data-set]. York: Archaeology Data Service [distributor]

Three later Neolithic discoidal knives from north-east Surrey: with a note on similar examples from the county


The publication of three later Neolithic discoidal knives found during the 1960s provides an opportunity to consider the type as a whole from the historic county and the areas immediately adjacent to it. Thirty-three examples have been identified and are divided into four geologically-based groups. Group I comprises six implements from the Chalk of the North Downs, Group II nine implements from the Lower Greensand, Group III fifteen implements from the river Thames and its foreshore and Group IV three implements from the Tertiary deposits. Examination of the flint-types utilised across the four groups points to the existence of two discrete zones, one based on the Thames valley (Groups III and IV) and the other on the Chalk and Greensand country to the south (Groups I and II). A preliminary analysis of the distribution of the various other classes of later Neolithic material from the county indicates that some at least may respect this suggested division. Final confirmation, however, awaits further study of the discoidal knives from Hampshire, Kent and Sussex – a task considered to be beyond the modest scope of the present paper.

<< back