SECTION 4.2 THE FAUNAL REMAINS FROM WARRENS FIELD by Naomi Sykes

INTRODUCTION

METHODS

TAPHONOMY

TAXA REPRESENTATION

AGEING

SKELETAL REPRESENTATION

ARTICULATING REMAINS

METRICAL ANALYSIS

DISCUSSION

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Top of Page

Introduction

The site of Warren’s Field was excavated by Oxford Archaeology during the 1980s. Investigations revealed a substantial Middle Iron Age settlement, which was located on three gravel islands and consisted of several round house gullies and enclosures, with numerous associated features. A total of 3,787 hand-collected animal bone specimens were recovered, in varying quantities, from all areas of the site. Most of the material derived from structural features (54%), enclosure ditches (17%) and linear boundaries (14%), with the remainder coming from a variety of smaller ditches (7%), pits (3%) layers (3%) and gullies (2%).

Warren’s Field represents the earliest settlement at Claydon Pike and, as such, its zooarchaeological assemblage forms the backdrop against which the animal bones from the later settlements (those at Londgole’s Field) can be compared. In addition to its temporal significance, the Warren’s Field material provides the opportunity for regional comparisons. Considerable zooarchaeological evidence from other Iron Age sites in Upper Thames Valley is now available and it will be interesting to see if the Warren’s Field assemblage fits the patterns for other contemporary sites in the area. At a site level, because the animal bone was recovered from various feature types, the assemblage also offers the opportunity to consider spatial patterning.

Top of Page

Methods

Wilson began recording the Warren’s Field assemblage in the1980s. In 2002, Oxford Archaeology transferred Wilson’s hand-written records to a computer database. The data were then re-analysed and re-tabulated by CAAA (Centre for Applied Anchaeological Analyses, University of Southampton) during 2003. These circumstances, where the specialist responsible for writing the report did not record the assemblage, are far from ideal. For example, Wilson’s recording stratagem are not always clear. Many of Wilson’s methodologies can, however, be ascertained. It would appear that all identifiable specimens, from all elements including skull, rib, vertebrae, tarsal and carpal fragments, were recorded to species, with no material being placed in sheep- or cattle-size categories. These data have been used to calculate the basic NISP (Number of Identified Specimens) totals, with complete and partial skeletons being counted as single specimens.

Since Wilson did not employ a ‘zones’ system of recording (for instance Serjeantson, 1996), indices of fragmentation are difficult to ascertain, making calculations of the MNE (Minimum Number of Elements) and MNI (Minimum Number Individuals) problematic. During the re-analysis, MNE figures were based on epiphyses counts and bones that had been recorded as ‘complete’. The MNI was calculated from the most common element according to the MNE, taking sides into consideration. Fortunately, mandibles - the only elements that Wilson sided consistently – were in almost all cases the best represented element.

For the main domesticates, dental wear was originally recorded using Payne’s (1973) method for sheep/goat and Grant’s (1982) technique for pig. The data for cattle mandibles appear to have been recorded using a hybrid of these two strategies. During re-analysis, all the records for dental eruption and wear were converted to Grants system; the results are provided in Appendix I. Mandibles, loose deciduous and adult forth premolars, and third molars were placed into age groups following the criteria provided by Payne (1973) for sheep/goat, Legge (1992) for cattle and Maltby (1993) and Hambledon (1999) for pig. Wilson did not take crown-height measurements for equid teeth and does not mention the methods by which he estimated their age. Epiphyseal fusion for all the main domesticates was interpreted using Sisson and Grossman’s (Getty, 1975) timings for epiphyseal closure.

Measurements seem to have been taken following the standards set by von den Dreisch (1976) and the raw data are provided in Appendix II. Where possible, wither heights have been calculated using the factors presented in Driesch and Boessneck (1974). Data accumulated by the Animal Bone Metrical Archive Project (Centre for Human Ecology and Environment n.d) were used for comparison.

Wilson did not record burning, gnawing or butchery marks in a quantifiable manner and therefore the taphonomic history of the assemblage can be little understood.

Top of Page

Taphonomy

Bone preservation is characteristically poor on the river gravels of the Thames flood plain and survival rates at Warren’s Field were no exception. Wilson & Allison (n.d) noted that much of the material was in bad condition, having suffered considerable leaching and fragmentation. Certainly the percentage of identifiable specimens is low (on average 22%) and it seems likely that many of the more fragile bones, such as unfused specimens, have been completely destroyed. Poor preservation is testified by an almost complete absence of vertebrae and ribs, and the presence of numerous single teeth: loose teeth make up 36% of the identifiable fragments.

Rates of preservation and fragmentation do appear to have been consistent across the site. Table 1 shows that the percentage of identifiable fragments varies between the different gravel islands, the assemblage from Island 1 having the lowest percentage (14%) with Islands 2 and 3 having slightly better rates (22% and 23% respectively). Between feature variation is also apparent: Table 2 indicates that assemblages from structural contexts and linear boundaries contain few (19%) identifiable fragments but high frequencies of loose teeth (46% and 44% of the identifiable component respectively), whereas the enclosure ditch assemblages have higher rates of identification and contain fewer loose teeth, suggesting better preservation.

Top of Page

Taxa Representation

Composition of the assemblage is shown, by gravel island, in Table 1. As is the case for most Iron Age sites in southern Britain, the Warren’s Field assemblage consists, almost exclusively, of domestic animal remains: cattle, sheep/goat, horse, pig and dog are all represented. Just one wild specimen – a buzzard/kite metatarsus – was identified.

It has been demonstrated repeatedly that – as a result of inter-taxa variation in bone preservation, butchery and disposal practices – species representation can be influenced heavily by context type (Maltby 1985 and Wilson 1996). For instance, it is often noted that the remains of larger mammals, such as cattle and horse, are better represented in peripheral boundary ditches, whereas caprine and pig bones are more numerous in the features close to central zones of activity. To some extent these findings are borne out by the Warren’s Field assemblage. Table 2 presents taxa representation data for the three main feature types encountered on the site: sample sizes were insufficient (less than 100 identifiable specimens) for the other deposit types to be examined. It can be seen that the round house features, which must be considered as the site’s central focus, are indeed dominated by caprine bones, whereas the enclosure ditches and linear boundaries contain higher frequencies of cattle and horse. Dog remains are also better represented in these more peripheral features, especially the linear boundaries.

Potentially, such inter-feature variations can complicate inter-area comparisons, especially if the areas are characterised by different deposit types. In this case, however, the gravel islands demonstrate the same range of features, hence the results from each can be compared with confidence. The NISP data (Table 1 and Figure 4.2.1: Composition of animal bone assemblage by gravel island ) suggest that slight variation exists between the assemblages from the different areas. Whilst cattle and sheep/goat are in all cases the dominant taxa, the ratio of caprines to cattle is high on Gravel Island 3, being lowest on Gravel Island 1. Reasons for this variation are difficult to discern but it could be related to temporal shifts in the animal economy: nationally, the percentage of sheep/goat declines through the Iron Age in favour of cattle (Grant 1989; King, 1991). Although the dating of the gravel islands is not certain, it may be that the settlement migrated through time, with that on Gravel Island 3 being the earliest, followed by Gravel Island 2 and 1. In the absence of a firm chronology, however, it is prudent to view assemblages in aggregation.

Figure 4.2.2: Relative frequencies of the main domesticates in terms of NISP and MNI presents the relative frequencies of the main domesticates (cattle, sheep/goat, horse and pig) in terms of NISP and MNI. Comparison between the two graphs demonstrate that ranking of the different taxa is dependent largely on quantification technique: fragment counts show cattle to be the best represented animal but sheep/goat become dominant when minimum numbers are considered. This disparity between the two sets of results highlights the issues of fragmentation and preservation set out in Section 3. The bones of larger animals tend to fragment more than those of smaller taxa, hence the cattle frequencies are artificially inflated when considered in terms of NISP. By contrast, sheep/goat and pig NISPs are often reduced due to the susceptibility of their bones to destruction: both taxa have lower bone density than cattle, this is especially the case for pigs since most individuals tend to be culled at a young age before their bones are fully ossified. In this case the MNI counts are perhaps a better reflection of the true species representation, indicating that both caprines and pig were more numerous than the NISP counts suggests. Regardless of quantification technique, horse frequencies are relatively stable, suggesting that their remains were the least fragmented of all the taxa; an idea confirmed by the fact that many of the horse bones were recovered complete.

Top of Page

Ageing

No epiphseal fusion data were available for the Warren’s Field pigs but information for cattle, sheep/goat and horse are presented in Tables 3a-c. Without exception, all the bones providing evidence are fused and there is a complete absence of foetal, neonatal and juvenile remains. Considering the taphonomic evidence for the assemblage (Section 3) it seems probable that the dearth of sub-adult animals is due to poor preservation conditions, with unfused specimens not surviving the processes of disposal and burial. Since teeth are less susceptible to destruction, cull-patterns based on dental evidence should provide a more accurate reflection of flock/herd age structure. Sufficient numbers of mandibles and loose teeth were recovered to allow kill-off patterns to be constructed for cattle (Figure 4.2.3: Mortality rates for cattle) and sheep/goat (Figure 4.2.4: Mortality rates for sheep/goat) but sample sizes were again too small for pigs, the information for which is provided in Appendix I

Figure 4.2.3 shows that while some cattle under the age of 6 months (Stage 3) are represented within the assemblage, the vast mast majority (64.5%) of animals died between 6-30 months, with particularly heavy mortality at Stage 6 (26-30 months). Few individuals survived beyond this point; just 18% being maintained past 3-6 years (Stage 7) with none surviving into old age. A similar lack of very mature individuals is demonstrated by the cull-pattern for sheep/goat (Figure 4.2.4: Mortality rates for sheep/goat), which indicates that all animals were slaughtered before reaching Stage H (6-8 years of age). Instead, there is a significant drop-off at Stage C (6-12 months) with more animals being slaughtered at Stages E (2-3 years) and F (3-4 years). Only four pig mandibles provided ageing evidence and all were from animals aged under 2 ½ years of age. According to Wilson & Allison’s notes on the Warren’s Field equid teeth, most of the mandibles derived from mature individuals, although he identified one set of deciduous incisors as coming from an animal aged under one year.

Top of Page

Skeletal Representation

Little variation in body part representation was noted between the different context types. This, combined with the generally low sample sizes, dictated the decision to combine the results from all features and areas of the site: Table 4 provides the data for the main domesticates in terms of NISP and MNE. Anatomical representation for each taxon is similar, in each case mandibles are abundant with elements of high bone density – such as the distal tibia, proximal radius, distal metapodia and distal humerus – also being comparatively well represented. Density-dependent patterning of this kind suggests that differential preservation, rather than human impact, is the main factor influencing anatomical representation; although scarcity of the smaller elements, in particular the astragalus, calcaneum and first phalanx, may be accounted for by the lack of on-site sieving. There is no evidence to suggest that pre-butchered joints of meat were either imported to, or exported from, the site, and the data provide no insight into specialist activities or disposal strategies.

Top of Page

Articulating Remains

Two contexts produced collections of articulating remains: pit number 58 yielded a group of cattle bones, and horse remains were recovered from ditch 999. Table 5 shows the anatomical distribution for these two assemblages and it can be seen that both consist predominantly of foot bones, with some evidence – in the form of either mandibles or skull fragments – for the presence of head elements. The presence of such specific body parts and the absence of other limb bones suggests that disarticulation of the skeleton must have occurred. No butchery marks were recorded for any of the specimens, though it is possible that poor bone condition may have masked any such traces.

All the cattle and horse bones appear to have been fused. The latest fusing bones of each suggest that both individuals were adult: on the basis of the fused distal metacarpal the horse was probably older than 18 months, whilst the cattle remains derived from an animal of at least 3-4 years of age, since the calcaneum was fused. Additional dental ageing information was available for the cattle remains. The two mandibles contained adult dentition but their third molars were not in full wear, the distal cusps being unworn (Grant Stage D). According to Legge’s (1992) definitions, this suggests an age at death of approximately 26-36 months, suitably consistent with the epiphyseal fusion evidence.

The remains from these deposits were amongst the best preserved on site and, as such, several of the elements provided measurements. Calculations based on the cattle metatarsals suggest an animal with a shoulder height of about 1.03m. A wither height of 1.17m was indicated by the horse metacarpal.

Top of Page

Metrical Analysis

Measureable cattle and caprine bones were scarce within the Warren’s Field assemblage and none were available for pig. Little can, therefore, be said about the size and conformation of the main domesticates. Perhaps the only statement that can be made with confidence is that the cattle and sheep/goat were of a size consistent with those from other contemporary sites in southern Britain (Centre for Human Environment and Ecology, n.d).

Since many of the equid bones were relatively complete, the data set for horse measurements is more substantial that that for the other domesticates. Five metacarpals and three metatarsals provided greatest length measurements, allowing wither heights to be calculated. Table 6 shows that shoulder height estimates range from 1.17m-1.23m with an average of 1.23m. Whilst these figures fit the range for other Iron Age horses (Centre for Human Environment and Ecology, n.d), they are significantly smaller than the animals represented in the later phases at Claydon Pike (Sykes n.d).

Top of Page

Discussion

In most respects, the assemblage is in keeping with the regional evidence. As is the case with other Upper Thames Valley sites, fragment counts suggest cattle and sheep/goat to be represented in roughly equal proportions with pig being much less numerous (Hambleton 1999, 46). Unlike Iron Age sites in Wessex, caprines do not dominate the assemblage, perhaps suggesting that the environmental conditions along the Thames floodplain were more suited to cattle husbandry (Grant, 1984a).

Ageing data indicate that most of the cattle were killed in their prime (between Stage 5 and 7) with a few animals surviving to older ages. Kill-off patterns for caprines show a similar preponderance of young and prime aged animals, again with smaller numbers being kept beyond 3-4 years (Stage F). These cull-patterns are typical of assemblages from the Upper Thames Valley, and Hambleton (1999) has argued that they suggest a mixed animal economy, whereby cattle and caprines were managed primarily for their meat but also for their secondary products. Presumably cattle would have been used for traction, whilst caprines would have provided wool; both animals may have contributed to dairying. Such a management strategy would fit well within a regime of arable production, since cattle and caprines would have been important suppliers of manure for fertilising the fields. Concentration on arable production could explain the low frequency of pigs, since wherever grains are raised pigs will compete with humans (Harris 1997). Furthermore, being solely a meat animal, pigs may have been deemed less useful than either sheep/goat or cattle.

It is difficult to ascertain whether or not livestock were raised on site. There is a dearth of foetal and neonatal remains and, whilst this may be an artifice of preservation, it could equally reflect the true situation. According to Hambleton (1999) absence of infant mortalities is common on nearly all Iron Age sites and it seems possible that it reflects a transhumance strategy, whereby lambing and calving took place when animals were grazing away from the settlement. That animals returned to the site over winter is perhaps indicated by the high sheep/goat mortality at Stage C (Figure 4.2.4: Mortality rates for sheep/goat). Hambleton interprets this 6-12 month peak as representing individuals that failed to survive their first winter, either as a result of natural fatality or through deliberate culling.

Horse husbandry may have followed slightly different trends to that of the other domesticates. Whilst most of the equid remains derived from fully adult animals, at least one subadult specimen was recovered, perhaps indicating that horses were reared on site. Few Iron Age sites have yielded juvenile horse remains, prompting the suggestion that, in this period, horses were not bred in captivity but that feral animals were rounded up and the best individuals retained whilst the others were released (Harcourt, 1979). Wilson & Allison (n.d) argued that while this may have been the case for sites in Wessex, the Thames Valley may have been a suitable environment for horse husbandry, however, it is noteworthy that no juvenile remains were recovered from the more extensive Iron Age settlement in neighbouring Londole’s Field (Sykes n.d). Horses were apparently managed predominantly as riding animals. Wilson recorded no evidence to suggest that they were used for meat but, whilst the completeness of their remains may support this, the possibility that horse flesh was consumed should not be ruled out. It is possible that horses were also incorporated into expression of religious belief, their remains being ‘ritually’ deposited .

Placed deposits of articulating bone groups have been recorded for numerous Iron Age sites (Grant, 1991; Wilson 1992, 1999; Hill 1996) and evidence to suggest that similar structured deposition took place at Warren’s Field is provided by the finds of the ‘head and hoof’ horse and cattle burials, from ditch 999 and pit 58 respectively. Similar sets of articulating remains have been recovered from Winnal Down (Maltby, 1985), Danebury (Grant 1984b) and Owslebury (Maltby n.d). Wilson (1992) argued that such deposits need not indicate ritual and may simply reflect differential disposal of food and butchery waste. Certainly the anatomical representation of deposits from contexts 999 and 58 is indicative of primary butchery waste, however, the superior condition of the bones suggests that they were treated differently to waste from day-to-day practices. Wilson & Allison (n.d) have suggested that the two sets of bones represent ‘hide burials’. That the cattle remains were recovered from a pit associated with structure 2 may indicate that they were placed as a foundation deposit, such as that recovered from Ashville, Abingdon, where a horse leg was found set into a post-hole (Wilson & Hamilton 1978, 125). In the absence of any associated finds (such as human bone, pottery or metalwork) or evidence to suggest that the remains were deposited according to a sequence (Hill, 1995 and 1996) the true significance of the articulating cattle and horse deposits cannot be stated conclusively.

Whilst evidence for ritual deposition is not clear, animal bones at Warren’s Field do seem to have been discarded in a structured way. It was seen in Section 4 that whilst the roundhouse features were dominated by caprine bones, the enclosure ditches and linear boundaries contain higher frequencies of cattle, horse and dog. Similar intra-site patterning has been noted at various Iron Age sites, such as Winnall Down (Maltby 1985) and Mingies Ditch (Wilson 1993 and 1996) where it was suggested that preservation conditions were largely responsible for the observed variation. Maltby (1985, 99) argued that preservation was poorest in the ditches, where material was left exposed and, thus, rapidly fragmented: these deposits were characterised by low rates of identifiable remains and high frequencies of loose teeth. It was concluded that this type of environment would favour the survival of dense cattle and horse bones over the more fragile remains of caprines and pigs, hence their over-representation in these features. Maltby (1985:104) also suggested that the intra-site variation could be due to factors of carcass processing and disposal. At Warrens Field it seems likely that this is the case. For instance, the enclosure ditches actually contained the best preserved material – with the highest percentage of identifiable fragments and lowest percentage of loose teeth – suggesting that the larger food animals were butchered towards the edge of enclosure and their remains thrown directly into the ditch. By contrast, the structural deposits appear to be the least well preserved, with the lowest percentage of identifiables and highest percentage of loose teeth. It seems probable that this finer debris resulted from the meat processing and cooking that would have taken place within the roundhouse. Trampling may also have increased the fragmentation of the material within these occupation deposits. Remains from the linear boundaries are also characterised by poor rates of identification and high frequencies of loose teeth, perhaps indicating that the material had been subject to considerable re-working and re-deposition. That dogs are best represented within the linear boundary features could be evidence that the carcasses of non-food animals were discarded away from central areas of activity.

The animal bone assemblage from Warren’s Field, whilst small, is not without interest. Taxa frequency and ageing data add to existing evidence for animal husbandry in the upper Thames Valley. This, combined with the spatial patterning evidence, also provides an insight into how animals were utilised on site.

Top of Page

Bibliography

Centre for Human Environmant and Ecology, Department of Archaeology, University of Southampton. n.d. Animal Bone Metrical Archive Project (ABMAP): draft report on the project phase for English Heritage.

Driesch von den, A.1976. A guide to the measurement of animal bones from archaeological sites. Peabody Museum Bulletin 1. Cambridge, Harvard University.

Dreisch von den, A. and Boessneck, J. 1974. Kritische Anmerkungen zur Widerristhohen-Berechnung aus langmassen vor- und fruhgeschichtlicher Tierknochen. In Saugetierkundliche Mitteilungen, 22 (4). 325-48.

Getty, R. 1975. Sisson and Grossman’s the Anatomy of the Domestic Animals. Philadelphia, WB Saunders and Co.

Grant, A. 1982. The use of tooth wear as a guide to the age of domestic ungulates. In B. Wilson, C. Grigson and S. Payne (eds.) Ageing and Sexing Animals from Archaeological sites. 91-108. Oxford: British Archaeological Reports, British Series 109, 91-108.

Grant, A. 1984a. Animal husbandry in Wessex and the Thames Valley. In B. W. Cunliffe and D. Miles (eds) Aspects of the Iron Age in Central Southern Britain. Oxford: University of Oxford Committee for Archaeology Monograph 2: 102-119.

Grant, 1984b. Animal husbandry. In B. Cunliffe, Danebury: an Iron Age Hillfort in Hampshire: Volume 2 the Excavations 1969-1978: The Finds. London: CBA Research Report 52, 496-548.

Grant, A. 1989. Animals in Roman Britain. In M. Todd (ed.) Research on Roman Britain 1960-1989. Britannia Monograph Series 11, pp 135-146

Grant, A. 1991. Economic or symbolic? Animals and ritual behaviour. In P. Garwood, D. Jennings, R. Skeates and J. Toms (eds) Sacred and Profane. Oxford: Oxford University Committee for Archaeology Monograph 32, pp109-114.

Hambleton, E. 1999. Animal Husbandry regimes in Iron Age Britain. Oxford: British Archaeological Report, British Series 282.

Harcourt, R. A. 1979.The animal bones. In G. J. Wainwright (ed.) Gussage All Saints, an Iron Age Settlement in Dorset. London: Department of Environment Report 10, pp 150-60.

Harris, M. 1997. The abominable pig. In C. Counihan and P. van Esterik (eds) Food and Culture: A Reader, pp 67-79. New York: Routledge.

Hill, J. D. 1995. Ritual to Rubbish in the Iron Age of Wessex: A study on the formation of a specific archaeological record. Oxford, Tempus Reparatum.

Hill, J. D. 1996. The identification of ritual deposits of animal bones. A general perspective from a specific study of 'special animal deposits' from the southern English Iron Age. Ritual Treatment of Human and Animal Remains. S. Anderson and K. Boyle: 17-32.

King, A. 1991. Food Production and Consumption - Meat. In R. Jones (ed.) Britain in the Roman Period: Recent Trends. Department of Archaeology and Prehistory, University of Sheffield.

Legge, A. J. 1992. Excavations at grimes Graves, Norfolk1972-1976. Fasicule 4. Animals, Environment and the Bronze Age Economy. London, British Museum Press.

Maltby, J. M. 1985 The animal bones. In P, Fasham (ed) The Prehistoric settlement at Winnall Down, Winchester: Excavations of MARC3 Site R17 in 1976 and 1977.. Trust for Wessex Archaeology/Hampshire Field Club Monograph 2, pp 97-112.

Maltby, J. M. n.d. The animal bones from the excavations at Owslebury, Hampshire: an Iron Age and Romano-British settlement. Ancient Monuments Laboratory Report 6/87.

Maltby, J. M. 1993. Animal bones. In P. J. Woodward, S. M. Davies and A. H. Graham (eds) Excavations at Greyhound Yard, Dorchester 1981-4. Dorset Natural History and Archaeological Society Monograph Series 12, 315-40. Dorchester

Payne, S. 1973. Kill-off patterns in sheep and goats: the mandibles from Asvan Kale. Anatolian Studies 23,139-47.

Payne, S. and Bull, G. 1988. Components of variation in measurements of pig bones and teeth, and the use of measurements to distinguish wild boar form domestic pig remains. Archaeozoologia 2, 27-66.

Powell, A. n.d. Animal bones from Middle Duntisbourne and Duntisbourne Grove. Unpublished report to Oxford Archaeological Unit.

Serjeantson, D. 1996. The animal bones. In S. R. Needham and A. Spence (eds) Refuse and Disposal at Area 16 East Runnymede. Runnymede Bridge Research Excavations, Volume 2. pp 194-223. London, British Museum Press.

Sykes, N. J. n.d. The animal remains from Longdole’s Field Claydon Pike, Fairford, Gloucestershire. Unpublished report to Oxford Archaeology.

Teichert, M. 1984. Size variation in cattle from Germani Romana and Germania libera. In C. Grigson and J. Clutton-Brock (eds.) Animals in Archaeology 4: Husbandry in Europe. Oxford: British Archaeological Reports, International Series, 227 pp 93-103.

Wilson, B. 1992. Considerations for the Identification of Ritual Deposits of Animal Bones in Iron Age Pits. International Journal of Osteoarchaeology 2, 341-349.

Wilson, R. 1993. Reports in the Bones and Oyster Shell. In T. G. Allen and M. Robinson The Prehistoric landscape and Iron Age enclosed settlement at Mingies Ditch, Hardwick-with-Yelford, Oxon. Thames Valley Landscapes: the Windrush Valley 1: 123-45.

Wilson, R. 1996. Spatial Patterning among Animal Bones in Settlement Archaeology: An English regional exploration. British Archaeological Reports, British Series 251: Oxford.

Wilson, R. 1999. Displayed or Concealed? Cross Cultural Evidence for Symbolic and Ritual Activity Depositing Iron Age Animal Bones. Oxford Journal of Archaeology 18 (3) 297-305.

Wilson, B. and Allison, E. n.d. Level III report on the bones from the mid to late Iron Age settlements and other later occupation on gravel islands I-III at Claydon Pike, Fairford, Glos. Unpublished report to Oxford Archaeology.

Wilson, R. and Hamilton, J. 1978. The animal bones. In M. Parrington The excavation of an Iron Age settlement, Bronze Age ring-ditches and Roman features at Ashville Trading estate, Abingdon (Oxfordshire) 1974-76. CBA Research report 28, pp 110-138.

 

Top of page