Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-skm99 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T15:57:04.665Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Beaker Settlement and Environment on the Chalk Downs of Southern England

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 February 2014

Michael J. Allen
Michael J. Allen
Affiliation:
Wessex Archaeology, Portway House, Old Sarum Park, Salisbury SP4 6EB. m.allen@wessexarch.co.uk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper is dedicated to John Evans, environmental archaeologist extraordinaire, who died 14 June 2005, while this paper was in press. He continually reminded us that environmental data should address questions of people and landscape and be relevant to the understanding of Prehistory by our archaeological colleagues.

The Beaker period in north-west Europe is abound with objects, burials, and monuments, but evidence of settlement and domestic life is often absent or less easily found, and England is no exception. Despite the thousands of barrows with rich artefacts assemblages (eg, Amesbury Archer) and the numerous pits with non-domestic assemblages of placed items, evidence for houses and settlement are sparse despite the indication of increased agriculture and sedentism. This paper explores this problem on the chalklands of southern England that are rich in Beaker finds, and which are generally recognised as one of the best studied and well understood landscapes in Europe. From this study it is suggested that Beaker domestic sites are present, but are often in low lying positions on the chalk downs and have subsequently been buried by variable depths of hillwash, making them invisible to normal archaeological survey and reconnaissance.

Résumé

Les objets, inhumations et monuments relatifs à la période des campaniformes abondent dans l'Europe du nord-ouest, mais les témoignages d'occupation et de vie domestique font sont souvent absents ou sont moins faciles à découvrir. L'Angleterre ne fait pas exception. Malgré les milliers de tertres contenant de riches assemblages d'objets façonnés (comme par exemple, l'Archer d'Amesbury) et les nombreuses fosses contenant des assemblages d'objets déposés non domestiques, les témoignages de l'existence de maisons et d'occupations sont peu rares malgré l'indication d'une agriculture et d'une sédentarité en progression. Cette étude explore ce problème dans les terres calcaires de l'Angleterre du sud qui sont riches en trouvailles des campaniformes, et qu'on reconnait généralement comme étant l'un des paysages les plus étudiés et les mieux compris d'Europe. A partir de cette étude nous suggérons que les sites domestiques des campaniformes sont bien présents mais se trouvent souvent sur des emplacements situés en bas des plateaux calcaires et ont par conséquent été enterrés sous des épaisseurs variables de d'apports d'érosion, ce qui les rend invisibles à toute prospection ou reconnaissance archéologique normale.

Zusammenfassung

In der Glockenbecherzeit in Nordwest Europas sind Gegenstände, Gräber und Monumente im Überfluss vorhanden, jedoch fehlen meistens Siedlungs- und Hausbefunde oder lassen sich zumindest schwieriger nachweisen; England bildet hier keine Ausnahme. Trotz tausender Gräber mit reichen Artefaktinventaren (z.B. der ‘Amesbury Archer’) und zahlreicher Gruben mit nicht zum Haus gehörenden Inventaren niedergelegter Objekte, gibt es trotz Indikatoren eines gesteigerten Ackerbaus und Sesshaftigkeit nur wenige Haus- und Siedlungsbefunde. Dieser Artikel erforscht dieses Problem in den Kreidegebieten Südenglands, die zum einen reich an Glockenbecherfunden sind und zum anderen generell als eine der am besten untersuchten und verstandenen Landschaften Europas gelten. Auf der Grundlage dieser Untersuchung wird darauf hingewiesen, dass es durchaus Siedlungsfundstellen gibt, die jedoch oft in den flachen Bereichen des Kreidetieflands liegen, und damit mit Erosionsschichten unterschiedlicher Mächtigkeit überdeckt und dadurch normale archäologisches Surveys und Prospektionen nicht sichtbar sind.

Résumen

El periodo Campaniforme en el noroeste de Europa es rico en objetos, enterramientos, y monumentos, mientras que a menudo falta, ó es más difícil de encontrar, la evidencia de asentamientos y de vida doméstica. Inglaterra no es una excepción. A pesar de los miles de túmulos con ricas asociaciones de artefactos (por ejemplo ‘Amesbury Archer’) y de los numerosos fosos con asociaciones de tipo no doméstico de objetos depositados, la evidencia de casas y asentamientos es poco frecuente, incluso a pesar de los indicios de una mayor actividad agrícola y sedentaria. Este trabajo explora este problema en el terreno de las colinas de creta del sur de Inglaterra, ricas en hallazgos de estilo campaniforme, y que es generalmente reconocido como uno de los paisajes más estudiados y mejor entendidos en Europa. De este estudio se desprende que los asentamientos domésticos campaniformes existen, aunque a menudo en posiciones de fondo de valle en los Chalk Downs, y que por lo tanto han sido enterrados por capas de aluvión de distintos grosores, lo que los hace invisibles a las prospecciones y reconocimientos arqueológicos habituales.

Type
Research Article
Information
Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society , Volume 71 , 2005 , pp. 219 - 245
Copyright
Copyright © The Prehistoric Society 2005

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

Alexander, J., Ozanne, P.C. & Ozanne, A. 1960. Report on the investigation of a round barrow on Arreton Down, Isle of Wight. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 26, 263–302CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allen, M.J. 1983. Sediment Analysis and Archaeological Data as Evidence of the Palaeo-environntents of Early Eastbourne: the Bourne Valley Excavation. Unpublished B.Sc. dissertation, London University Institute of ArchaeologyGoogle Scholar
Allen, M.J. 1984a. Ashcombe Bottom Excavation; first interim report. Lewes: Lewes Archaeological GroupGoogle Scholar
Allen, M.J. 1984b. Ashcombe Bottom excavations. Sussex Archaeological Society Newsletter 44, 406Google Scholar
Allen, M. 1988. Archaeological and environmental aspects of colluviation in South-East England. In Groenmann-van Waateringe, W. & Robinson, M. (eds), Man-Made Soils, 69–92. Oxford: British Archaeological Report S410Google Scholar
Allen, M.J. 1991a. Analysing the landscape: a geographical approach to archaeological problems. In Schofield, A.J. (ed.), Interpreting Artefact Scatters; contributions to ploughzone archaeology, 39–57. Oxford: Oxbow Monograph 4Google Scholar
Allen, M.J. 1991b. Landscape history of the Pyecombe barrow. In Butler, C., The excavation of a Beaker Bowl Barrow at Pyecombe, West Sussex. Sussex Archaeological Collections 129, 21–3Google Scholar
Allen, M.J. 1992. Products of erosion and the prehistoric land-use of the Wessex chalk. In Bell, M.G. & Boardman, J. (eds), Past and Present Soil Erosion: archaeological and geographical perspectives, 37–52. Oxford: OxbowGoogle Scholar
Allen, M.J. 1994. The Land-use History of the Southern English Chalklands with an Evaluation of the Beaker Period using Environmental Data: colluvial deposits as environmental and cultural indicators. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Dept of Archaeology, University of SouthamptonGoogle Scholar
Allen, M.J. 1995. The prehistoric land-use and human ecology of the Malling-Caburn Downs; two late Neolithic/Early Bronze Age sites beneath colluvium. Sussex Archaeological Collections 133, 19–43Google Scholar
Allen, M.J. 1997. The Land-use History of the Belle Tout Enclosures and Shaft; the Molluscan Evidence. Salisbury: Wessex Archaeology unpublished report 39567/2, for Miles Russell, University of BournemouthGoogle Scholar
Allen, M.J. 2000a. Piggledene Bottom: dry valley. In Fowler, 2000, 209–11Google Scholar
Allen, M.J. 2000b. The wider landscape: molluscan and seed analysis from Compton Down and the Itchen valley. In Walker, K.E. & Farwell, D.E., Twyford Down, Hampshire, Archaeological investigations on the M3 motorway from Bar End to Compton 1990–93, 153–8. Winchester: Hampshire Field ClubGoogle Scholar
Allen, M.J. 2002. The chalkland landscape of Cranborne Chase: a prehistoric human ecology. Landscapes 3, 55–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allen, M.J. 2005. Considering prehistoric environmental changes on the Marlborough Downs. In Brown, G., Field, D. & McOmish, D. (eds), The Avebury Landscape; aspects of field archaeology of the Marlborough Downs, 77–86. Oxford: OxbowGoogle Scholar
Allen, M.J. in press a. Beaker occupation and development of the downland landscape at Ashcombe Bottom, nr Lewes, East Sussex. Sussex Archaeological Collections 143 (2005)Google Scholar
Allen, M.J. in press b. Beaker and Early Bronze Age activity, and a possible Beaker valley entrenchment in Cuckoo Bottom, near Lewes, East Sussex. Sussex Archaeological Collections 143 (2005)Google Scholar
Allen, M.J. & Fennemore, A.V. 1984. Field boundary ditch, Cuckoo Bottom, Lewes. Sussex Archaeological Collections 122, 207–8Google Scholar
Allen, M.J. & Gardiner, J. 2004. Neolithic of the Wylye Valley 1: Millennium re-investigation of the Corton Long Barrow, ST 9030 4034. Wiltshire Archaeological & Natural History Magazine 97, 63–77Google Scholar
Allen, M.J., Morris, M. & Clark, R.H. 1995. Food for the living: re-assessment of a Bronze Barrow at Buckskin, Basingstoke, Hampshire. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 61, 157–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar
ApSimon, A.M., Donovan, D.T. & Taylor, H. 1961. The stratigraphy and archaeology of the Late-Glacial and Post-glacial deposits at Brean Down, Somerset. Proceedings of the University of Bristol Spelaeological Society 9, 67–136Google Scholar
Ashbee, P., Smith, I.F. & Evans, J.G. 1979. Excavation of three Long Barrows near Avebury, Wiltshire. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 45, 207–300CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barrett, J.C., Bradley, R., & Green, M. 1991. Landscape, Monuments and Society: the prehistory of Cranborne Chase. Cambridge: University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Basford, H.V. 1980. The Vectis Report; a survey of Isle of Wight archaeology. Isle of Wight County CouncilGoogle Scholar
Bell, M.G. 1981. Valley Sediments as Evidence of Prehistoric Land-use: a study based on dry valleys in south east England. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, London University, Institute of ArchaeologyGoogle Scholar
Bell, M.G. 1983. Valley sediments as evidence of prehistoric land-use on the South Downs. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 49, 119–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bell, M.G. 1990. Brean Down excavations 1983–1987. London: English Heritage Archaeological Report 15Google Scholar
Bell, M. & Walker, M.J.C. 1992. Late Quaternary Environmental Change; physical and human perspectives. Harlow: LongmanGoogle Scholar
Bell, M., Allen, M.J., Smith, R.W. & Johnson, S. forthcoming. Mollusc and sedimentary evidence for the environment of Hambledon Hill and its surroundings. In Mercer, R. and Healy, F.Hambledon Hill. Swindon: English HeritageGoogle Scholar
Bennett, P. 1988. Archaeology and the channel tunnel. Archaeologia Cantiana 106, 1–24Google Scholar
Bennett, P., Ouditt, S. & Rady, J. 1998. The prehistory of Holywell Coombe. In Preece, & Bridgland, 1998, 263–314Google Scholar
Bradley, R.J. 1970. The excavation of a Beaker settlement at Belle Tout, East Sussex, England. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 36, 312–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bradley, R.J., 1978. Colonization and land use in the Late Neolithic and Early Bronze Age. In Limbrey, S. & Evans, J.G. (eds), The Effect of Man on the Landscape: the lowland zone, 95–102. London: Council for British Archaeology Research Report 21Google Scholar
Bradley, R.J., 1982. Belle Tout – revision and re-assessment. In Drewett, P.L.The Archaeology of Bullock Down, Eastbourne. East Sussex: the development of a landscape, 12–20. Lewes: Sussex Archaeological Society Monograph 1Google Scholar
Burgess, C. & Miket, R. (eds), Settlement and Economy in the Third Millennium B.C. Oxford: British Archaeological Report 33Google Scholar
Burrin, P.J. 1985. Holocene alluviation in south east England and some implications for palaeohydrological studies. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms 10, 257–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burrin, P.J. & Scaife, R.G. 1984. Aspects of Holocene sedimentation and floodplain development in southern England, Proceedings of the Geologists' Association 85, 81–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burrin, P.J. & Scaife, R.G. 1988. Environmental thresholds, catastrophe theory and landscape sensitivity: their relevance to the impact of man on valley alluviations. In Bintliffe, J.L., Donaldson, D.A. & Grant, E.G. (eds), Conceptual Issues in Environmental Archaeology, 211–32. Edinburgh: University PressGoogle Scholar
Butler, C. 1991. The excavation of a Beaker Bowl barrow at Pyecombe, West Sussex. Sussex Archaeological Collections 129, 1–28Google Scholar
Case, H. 1977. The Beaker Culture in Britain and Ireland. In Mercer, R. (ed.), Beakers in Britain and Europe, 71–101. Oxford: British Archaeological Report S26Google Scholar
Case, H. 1993. Beakers; deconstruction and after. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 59, 241–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Champion, T.C. 1982. The Bronze Age in Kent. In Leach, P.E., (ed.), Archaeology in Kent to AD 1500, 31–9. London: Council for British Archaeology Research Report 48Google Scholar
Clarke, D.L. 1970. Beaker Pottery of Great Britain and Ireland. Cambridge: University PressGoogle Scholar
Cleal, R.M.J. 1996. The pottery from pit 2. In Rawlings, M. & Fitzpatrick, A., Prehistoric sites and Romano-British settlement at Butterfield Down, Amesbury. Wiltshire Archaeological & Natural History Magazine 89, 24–7Google Scholar
Cleal, R.M.J. 1997. Earlier prehistoric pottery. In Smith, et al. 1997, 86–102Google Scholar
Cunliffe, B. 1984. Danebury: an Iron Age hillfort in Hampshire. London: Council for British Archaeology Research Report 52Google Scholar
Drewett, P.L. 1978. Neolithic Sussex. In Drewett, P.L. (ed.), Archaeology in Sussex to AD 1500, 23–9. London: Council for British Archaeology Research Report 29Google Scholar
Drewett, P. 2004. Taming the wild: the first farming communities in Sussex. In Rudling, D. (ed.), The Archaeology of Sussex to AD 2000, 39–46. Kings Lynn: Heritage Marketing and Publications Ltd on behalf of The Centre for Continuing Education, University of SussexGoogle Scholar
Ellis, C. 1985. Flandrian molluscan biostratigraphy and its application to dry valley deposits in East Sussex. In Fieller, N.R.J., Gilbertson, D.D. & Ralph, N.G.A. (eds), Palaeoenvironmental Investigations: research design, methods and data analysis, 157–65. Oxford: British Archaeological Report S258Google Scholar
Ellis, C. 1986. The postglacial molluscan succession of the South Downs dry valleys. In Sieveking, G. de G. & Hart, M.B. (eds), The Scientific Study of Flint and Chert, 175–94. Cambridge: University Press.Google Scholar
Ellison, A. 1978. The Bronze Age in Sussex. In Drewett, P.L. (ed.), Archaeology in Sussex to AD 1500, 30–7. London: Council for British Archaeology Research Report 20Google Scholar
Evans, J.G. 1990. Notes on some Late Neolithic and Bronze Age events in long barrow ditches in southern and eastern England. Proceedings of the Prehstoric Society 56, 111–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Evans, J.G. & Smith, I.F. 1983. Excavations at Cherhill, North Wiltshire 1967. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 49, 101–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Field, N.H., Matthews, C.L. & Smith, I.F. 1964. New Neolithic sites in Dorset and Bedfordshire, with a note on the distribution of Neolithic storage-pits in Britain, Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 30, 352–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foley, R. 1981. A model of regional archaeological structure. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 47, 1–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fowler, P.J. 1963. The archaeology of Fyfield and Overton Down, Wilts. (second interim report), Wiltshire Archaeological & Natural History Magazine 58, 342–50Google Scholar
Fowler, P.J. 2000. Landscape Plotted and Pieced; landscape history and local archaeology in Fyfield and Overton, Wiltshire. London: Society of AntiquariesCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fowler, P.J. 2005. Foreword. In Brown, G., Field, D. & McOmish, D. (eds), The Avebury Landscape; aspects of field archaeology of the Marlborough Downs, xiii–xvi. Oxford: OxbowGoogle Scholar
French, C., Lewis, H., Allen, M.J., Scaife, R.G. & Green, M. 2003. Archaeological and palaeo-environmental investigations of the upper Allen valley, Cranborne Chase, Dorset (1998–2000): a new model of earlier Holocene landscape development. Proceedings Prehistoric Society 69, 201–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gardiner, J.P. 1988. The Composition and Distribution of Neolithic Surface Flint Assemblages in Central Southern England. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of ReadingGoogle Scholar
Gardiner, J.P. 1990. Tales of the unexpected: approaches to the assessment and interpretation of museum flint collections. In Brown, A.G., & Edmunds, M.R. (eds), Lithic Analysis and Later Prehistoric: some problems and approaches, 49–65. Oxford: British Archaeological Report 162Google Scholar
Gardiner, M. 2002. The valley bottom entrenchment [Eastwick Barn]. In Rudling, R. (ed.), Downland Settlement and Land-use; the archaeology of the Brighton Bypass, 135–140. London, University College London Field Archaeology Unit Monograph 1Google Scholar
Gibson, A.M. 1982. Beaker Domestic Sites; a study of domestic pottery of the third and early second millennia BC in the British Isles. Oxford: British Archaeological Report 102Google Scholar
Gibson, A., 1998. The Neolithic–Early Bronze Age pottery. In Preece, & Bridgland, 1998, 295–302Google Scholar
Gibson, A., 2003. What do we mean by Neolithic settlement? Some approaches, 10 years on. In Armit, I., Murphy, E., Nelis, E. & Simpson, D. (eds), Neolithic Settlement in Ireland and Western Britain, 136–45. Oxford: OxbowGoogle Scholar
Gibson, A. 2004. Burials and Beakers: seeing beneath the veneer in late Neolithic Britain. In Czebreszuk, J. (ed.), Similar but Different; Bell Beakers in Europe. Poznán: Adam Mickiewicz UniversityGoogle Scholar
Gingell, C.J. 1992. The Marlborough Downs: a Later Bronze Age Landscape and its Origins. Devizes: Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Society Monograph 1Google Scholar
Graham, A. & Newman, C. 1993. Excavations of Iron Age and Romano – British enclosures in the Avon Valley. Wiltshire Archaeological & Natural History Magazine 86, 8–57Google Scholar
Green, H.S. 1980. Flint Arrowheads of the British Isles. Oxford: British Archaeological Report 75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Green, M. 2000. A Landscape Revealed – 10,000 years on a chalkland farm. Stroud: TempusGoogle Scholar
Holgate, R., 1988. A review of Neolithic domestic activity in southern Britain. In Barrett, J.C. & Kinnes, I.A. (eds), The Archaeology of Context in the Neolithic and Bronze Age; recent trends, 104–12. Sheffield: Department of Archaeology & Prehistory, University of SheffieldGoogle Scholar
Kerney, M.P. 1963. Late-glacial deposits on the Chalk of south-east England. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society London B246, 203–54Google Scholar
Kerney, M.P., Brown, E.H. & Chandler, T.J. 1964. The Late-Glacial and Post-Glacial history of the chalk escarpment near Brook, Kent. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society London B248, 135–204Google Scholar
Lovell, J. 1994. The Landscape History of Beachy Head; molluscan analysis of colluvial deposits at Cow Gap. Unpublished undergraduate dissertation, University of BournemouthGoogle Scholar
Macphail, R.I. 1992. Soil micromorphological evidence of ancient soil erosion. In Bell, M.G. & Boardman, J. (eds), Past and Present Soil Erosion: archaeological and geographical perspectives, 197–215. Oxford: OxbowGoogle Scholar
Megaw, J.V.S. & Simpson, D.D.A. (eds), 1979. Introduction to British Prehistory. Leicester: University PressGoogle Scholar
Moffett, L., Robinson, M.A. & Straker, V. 1989. Cereals, fruits and nuts: charred plant remains from Neolithic sites in England and Wales and the Neolithic economy. In Milles, A., Williams, D. & Gardner, N. (eds), The Beginnings of Agriculture, 243–61. Oxford: British Archaeological Report S496Google Scholar
Musson, R. 1955. A thirteenth-century dwelling at Bramble Bottom, Eastbourne. Sussex Archaeological Collections 92, 157–70Google Scholar
Needham, S. 1987. The Bronze Age. In Bird, J. & Bird, D.G. (eds), The Archaeology of Surrey to 1540, 97–137. Guildford: Surrey Archaeological SocietyGoogle Scholar
Perrin, R.M.S. 1956. Nature of ‘chalk heath’ soils. Nature 178, 31–2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Preece, R.C. & Bridgland, D.R. 1998. Late Quaternary Environmental Change in North-west Europe; excavations at Holywell Coombe, south-east England. London: Chapman & HallCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rahtz, P.A. 1962. Neolithic and Beaker Sites at Downton, near Salisbury, Wiltshire. Wiltshire Archaeological & Natural History Magazine 58, 116–41Google Scholar
Rawlings, M. & Fitzpatrick, A. 1996. Prehistoric sites and Romano-British settlement at Butterfield Down, Amesbury. Wiltshire Archaeological & Natural History Magazine 89, 1–43Google Scholar
Rawlings, M., Allen, M.J. & Healy, F. 2004. Investigations of the Whitesheet Down Environs 1989–90: Neolithic causewayed enclosure and Iron Age settlement. Wiltshire Archaeological & Natural History Magazine 97, 144–96Google Scholar
Reynolds, P.J. 1978. Archaeology by experiment: a research tool for tomorrow. In Darvill, T.C., Parker Pearson, M., Smith, R.W. & Thomas, R.M. (eds), New Approaches to Our Past; an archaeological forum. Southampton, 139–55Google Scholar
Richards, J.C. 1990. The Stonehenge Environs Project. London: English Heritage Archaeological Report 16Google Scholar
Russel, A.D. 1990. Two Beaker burials from Chilbolton, Hampshire. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 56, 153–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Russell, M. 1982. Chaldon: Beaker pottery (TQ 342 549). Surrey Archaeological Society Bulletin 179Google Scholar
Russell, M. 2002. Prehistory. In Fookes, G. (ed.), Chalden – Village Histories No. 7. Croydon: The Bourne SocietyGoogle Scholar
Scaife, R.G. 1980. Late Devensian and Flandrian Palaeoecological Studies in the Isle of Wight. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Kings College, University of LondonGoogle Scholar
Scaife, R.G. & Burrin, P.J. 1985. The environmental impact of prehistoric man as recorded in the upper Cuckmere valley at Stream Farm, Chiddingly. Sussex Archaeological Collections 123, 27–34Google Scholar
Simpson, D.D.A. 1971. Beaker houses and settlements in Britain. In Simpson, D.D.A. (ed.), Economy and Settlements in Neolithic and Early Bronze Age Britain and Europe, 131–52. Leicester: University Press.Google Scholar
Simpson, D.D.A. 1979. The early bronze age (c. 2,000–1,300 bc). In Megaw, & Simpson, 1979, 178–241Google Scholar
Smith, I.F. 1965. Excavation of a bell barrow. Wiltshire Archaeological & Natural History Society Magazine 60, 24–46Google Scholar
Smith, R.J.C., Healy, F., Allen, M.J., Morris, E.L., Barnes, I. & Woodward, P.J., 1997. Excavations Along the Route of the Dorchester By-pass, Dorset, 1986–8. Salisbury: Wessex Archaeology Report 11Google Scholar
Smith, R.W. 1985. Prehistoric Human Ecology in the Wessex Chalklands with Special Reference to Evidence from Valleys. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of SouthamptonGoogle Scholar
Smith, N. 2005. Medieval and later sheep farming on the Marlborough Downs. In Brown, G., Field, D. & McOmish, D. (eds), The Avebury Landscape; aspects of field archaeology of the Marlborough Downs, 191–202. Oxford: OxbowGoogle Scholar
Stone, J.F.S. 1932. East Down, Winterslow, South Wiltshire, flint mine excavation 1930. Wiltshire Natural History & Archaeological Magazine 45, 350–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stone, J.F.S. 1933. Excavations at Easton Down Winterslow, 1931–2. Wiltshire Natural History & Archaeological Magazine 46, 225–42Google Scholar
Thomas, N. 2005. Snail Down, Wiltshire … Excavations 1953, 1955 and 1957. Wiltshire Archaeological & Natural History Society Monograph 3Google Scholar
Thomas, N. & Thomas, C. 1955. Excavation at Snail Down, Everleigh, 1953, 1955; an interim report. Wiltshire Natural Hisory & Archaeological Magazine 56, 127–48Google Scholar
Tomalin, D. 1993. Combe-cluster barrow cemeteries in the Isle of Wight; a locational prediction model. Proceedings of the Isle of Wight Natural History & Archaeological Society 11, 85–96Google Scholar
Toms, H.S. 1912a. Excavations at the Beltout valley entrenchments. Sussex Archaeological Collections 55, 41–55Google Scholar
Toms, H. 1912b. Notes on some surveys of valley entrenchments in the Piddletrenthide District, Central Dorset. Proceedings of the Dorset Natural History & Archaeological Society 33, 34–44Google Scholar
Toms, H.S. 1924. Valley entrenchments west of the Ditchling Road. Brighton & Hove Archaeologist 2, 56–72Google Scholar
Toms, H.S. 1926. Valley entrenchments east of the Ditchling Road. Brighton & Hove Archaeologist 3, 42–61Google Scholar
Toms, H.S. 1927. Miscellaneous earthworks near Brighton. Sussex Archaeological Collections 68, 178–97Google Scholar
Wilkinson, K., Barber, L. & Bennell, M. 2002. The excavation of six dry valleys in the Brighton area; the changing environment. In Rudling, D.R. (ed.), Downland Settlement and Land-use; the archaeology of the Brighton bypass, 203–38. London: University College London Field Archaeology Unit Monograph 1Google Scholar
Wilkinson, K. 2002. Appendix 1: Sweetpatch Valley Bottom. In Rudling, D.R. (ed.), Downland Settlement and Land-use; the archaeology of the Brighton bypass, 259–66. London: University College London Field Archaeology Unit Monograph 1Google Scholar