The development of geophysical survey remains a spearhead-priority for new research and cultural resource management alike – since geophysics can find and map sites without destroying them. However, there are current weaknesses of sensitivity and resolution – the instruments cannot easily “see” small features like graves and post-holes of which so many ancient sites are principally composed. Great hopes have been invested in caesium vapour magnetometers, which the Centre for Archaeology has been promoting in England – perhaps nowhere with such dramatic success as at Stanton Drew, Somerset. Here, geophysical techniques have brought to light the lines of broad circles belonging to a previously unrecognised henge monument, and the caesium magnetometer showed these circles to be composed of individual pits about 1.4 m in diameter. The fine focus achieved for these buried features augers well for the discovery and preservation of similar sites and monuments in the future.

Salvage excavations on the verges of the A344 at Stonehenge resulted in the recovery of large, well stratified groups of prehistoric artefacts. In 1968, a complete section across the Avenue earthwork was recorded, and material obtained for a radiocarbon determination. In 1979 and 1980, the two ditches of the Avenue were again sectioned. Detailed recording of find provenances from both these and the Heelstone ditches permitted a fuller understanding of the erosion and filling processes. In 1979, part of a pit that had held a previously unknown standing stone was excavated. A geophysical survey of the Avenue suggests that further pits may be present along its course. A unique deposit of prehistoric stoneworking debitage was sectioned in 1980. It is suggested that this debitage, representing the opportunistic use of megalith shaping debris, accumulated within a structure inhabited at the time the major stone monument was being erected. The discovery of these rock fragments has prompted an important new study of the petrology at Stonehenge, and a discussion of stoneworking around the site is included. The paper concludes with an appraisal of the chronology of Stonehenge and an introduction to the comprehensive excavation archive.

Excavations of sites spanning the Beaker to early Roman periods at Stackpole Warren, Dyfed, are described. The sites are in an area of blown sand which enhanced their preservation and led to the separation of several horizons. The earliest is a buried soil beneath the blown sand which contained Mesolithic to Bronze Age artefacts. At site A, there was a roundhouse associated with Early Bronze Age pottery and dated to 1620±70 and 1400±70 BC uncal., and two other roundhouses, one possibly of Beaker age. After a period of soil formation, a ritual complex of Later Bronze Age date was established, this contemporary with the earliest besanding of the area; it included a stone setting of more than 2000 small stones, an alignment of small water-worn stones and a standing stone. A cremation gave a latest date of 940±70 BC uncal. Other Later Bronze Age activity is recorded at site G/J in the form of a rectangular enclosure, possibly unfinished.Late Iron Age to early Romano-British settlement was present at sites A and B, consisting of scatters of occupation debris, burnt mounds, cooking pits, hearths and houses, some of stone, some of timber, all taking place in an area being intermittently besanded.Peripheral to the religious and domestic sites, a field system was excavated. The earliest phase was a linear earthwork from which a C14 date of 400±70 BC uncal. was obtained from charcoal in the ditch. After the decay of this, rectangular fields with stone walls were laid out, one along the line of the erstwhile earthwork, this taking place around the end of the Iron Age as dated by C14 of charcoal directly beneath a wall to 90±70 BC uncal. Some of the fields had been cultivated by a succession of cross- and one-way-ploughing, others used for cattle.An assemblage of 763 flints included a few Mesolithic artefacts but was mostly of Late Neolithic and Bronze Age date. A succession of ceramic assemblages included a small Middle Neolithic group (4 vessels), two distinct Beaker groups, one early (Lanting and van der Waals steps 1–3 (8 vessels), one late (steps 3–6) (45 vessels), an Early Bronze Age group of collared urns (43 vessels) and a Later Bronze Age group (26 vessels).Environmental data was not prolific but there was a small quantity of animal bone, mostly cattle and sheep, and cereal grain, mostly barley with some wheat. Marine molluscs were present but sparsely utilized and there was no other indication of the exploitation of the coastal resources such as seals, birds, fish andiseaweed. Land Mollusca indicated open country from the Iron Age onwards when the record begins.The importance of the site is in the ritual complex from site A, the succession of Iron Age/Romano-British occupation horizons, the succession of ceramic assemblages, the field system and the fact that blown sand horizons have allowed the preservation and separation of the sequence much of which would have been at best conflated in to a single horizon or at worst destroyed. Otherwise, there is no evidence that the site was in any way special with regard to the relationship of human activity and sand deposition until the Middle Ages when the area was used as a rabbit warren. Nor was the coastal location important, at least as could be determined by the results. This was a representative of a succession of later prehistoric farming communities and their various domestic, ritual and sepulchral activities in lowland Dyfed.

No abstract

Excavations at the Glandy Cross monumental complex during 1991 and 1992 formed part of an integrated programme of evaluation, rescue, and research by Dyfed Archaeological Trust (DAT). Enclosures, pit circles, standing stones, and cairns were excavated and their environs systematically surveyed. Radiocarbon dates show the monumental complex to have been constructed between c. 2190–1530 cal BC. However, the earliest activity at the site may date to c. 4470–4230 cal BC. A defended enclosure was constructed on the peripheries of the complex c. 830–510 cal BC.The 1991–92 excavation results are presented along with a summary of survey, salvage, and research spanning the period 1981 to 1992. This new data set is tentatively interpreted in terms of historical process and the social practice of monumental construction. A brief commentary on heritage management at Glandy Cross is also presented.A note on authorship: one of the authors (George Williams) directed the Glandy Cross excavations during 1991–92 and prepared an initial draft of the project report. Following his retirement from DAT a project editor (Trevor Kirk) was commissioned by Cadw: Welsh Historic Monuments to guide the project towards publication. This paper was largely penned by the project editor, though the excavation and survey data were produced by George Williams and his fieldwork team. The excavation and survey archives are held at the offices of DAT.

The hot and dry summer of 1995 once again proved the value and cost-effectiveness of aerial survey. Numerous parchmarks were a product of the dry conditions throughout England, but especially in chalk grassland, and they revealed important new archaeological information. A parchmark within the great Neolithic henge at Avebury identifies a new subterranean feature, confirmed by geophysical survey, which fills in further details of the Avebury enclosure.

No abstract

Fieldwork by the Dyfed Archaeological Trust during 1989-92 has identified clear evidence for the manufacture of stone axeheads at two locations on the eastern flanks of the Preseli Mountains, Dyfed: at Llanfyrnach (SN 186 307) and near Glandy Cross (SN 143 266). At both sites, small quantities of lithic debris were collected from field surfaces after cultivation; unfortunately, no contemporaneous features were found by subsequent, very limited, trial trenching. In this report we describe the fieldwork at these two sites, and the resulting lithic collection, concluding that the latter represents evidence for small-scale and opportunistic exploitation of locally abundant erratics during the Neolithic. The Glandy Cross area was later a focus for the construction of ritual monuments during the Bronze Age, and there is also some evidence for continuing activity at Glyn-y-Fran at this time.Petrological thin section analysis of some of the artefacts is reported and demonstrates a probable identity with petrological Group VIII; geochemical analysis of some of the same artefacts places the likely geological origin of these at local igneous exposures also in the Preselis. These conclusions are reviewed in the light of current discussion on the usage and origins of raw materials in later prehistory.