Excavations at Ford Airfield, Yapton, West Sussex, 1999

Excavation by the archaeological

department of RPS Planning Transport
and Environment on the site of the
former airfield at Ford, West Sussex,
recovered evidence for prehistoric and
Roman settlement from the beginning
of the first millennium BC to the second
century AD. The incomplete plan of a
sub-rounded enclosure dating to the early
first millennium BC was recovered, as was
a substantial assemblage of later Bronze
Age pottery with associated C14 dates.
Several contemporary field boundaries and
ditched trackways indicated that this part
of the coastal plain had been enclosed by
this date. The enclosure was subsequently
used for limited cremation burial in the
later Iron Age and a new co-axial field
system was set out during this period on
a different alignment to its predecessor.
This latter field system may have been
By Chris Place
partially abandoned in the first century
AD when a sub-rectangular enclosure
was constructed. Use of the enclosure was
short lived, with only limited evidence for
activity continuing into the second century.
The final phase of activity included limited

Chris Place
iron working.

With major contributions by

Sue Hamilton, Malcolm Lyne and Pat Hinton
H eritage
Heritage

Designed, Published and Printed by

Heritage Marketing and Publications Ltd
Hill Farm. Great Dunham, King’s Lynn, Norfolk, PE32 2LP
Tel: 01760 755645 Fax: 01760 755316
e-mail: [email protected]
Excavations at Ford Airfield,
Yapton, West Sussex, 1999
 Excavations at Ford Airfield

Excavations at Ford Airfield,

Yapton, West Sussex, 1999

By Chris Place

With major contributions by

Sue Hamilton
Malcolm Lyne and
Pat Hinton

H eritage
iii
Excavations at Ford Airfield

Designed, Published and Printed by

Heritage Marketing and Publications Ltd
Hill Farm. Great Dunham, King’s Lynn, Norfolk, PE32 2LP
Tel: 01760 755645 Fax: 01760 755316
e-mail: [email protected]

© C Place 2004

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced,

stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted by any means, electronic,
mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the
written permission of the copyright holder

ISBN 0 9544456 0 0

An extensive range of new and selected out-of-print books on Archaeological

and Historical subjects is available on the Heritage Marketing and Publications
website at:

http://www.heritagemp.com

iv
 Excavations at Ford Airfield

Contents

Introduction. ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 1 Key First Millennium BC Pottery Groups... ... 18
Location, Topography and Geology ... ... ... ... 1 Catalogue of Illustrated Early First
Fieldwork ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 1 Millennium BC Pottery.. ... ... ... ... ... 27
Results ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 1 The Range of Diagnostic Types and their
Mesolithic and Neolithic Activity ... ... ... ... ... 1 Chronology .. ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 36
Early First Millennium BC Settlement The Intra-Site Spatial Zonation of the
Environment and Economy . ... ... ... ... ... 1 Assemblage .. ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 37
Stratigraphic Evidence... ... ... ... ... ... ... 1 Sussex Early First Millennium BC Pottery
Economic and Environmental Evidence ... ... 5 Assemblages and their Overall
Discussion ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 9 Sequencing: The Dating of the Assemblage 38
Late Iron Age/Early Roman Settlement Later Iron Age and Roman Pottery . ... ... ... ... 38
Environment and Economy . ... ... ... ... ... 9 Methodology ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 38
Stratigraphic Evidence... ... ... ... ... ... ... 9 Fabrics ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 38
Economic and Environmental Evidence ... ... 13 The Assemblages ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 39
Discussion ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 17 Charred Plant Remains (Pat Hinton) ... ... ... ... 44
Specialist Reports ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 18 Cremated Bone (Jacqueline Mckinley) . ... ... ... 45
Early First Millenium Pottery of the Results ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 45
West Sussex Coastal Plain ... ... ... ... ... 18 Other Specialist Reports ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 45
The Stratigraphic Context and Spatial Zonation References ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 46
of the Pottery ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 18

List of Figures
Figure 1: Site Location.. ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 2 Figure 11: Early First Millennium Pottery.. ... ... ... 29
Figure 2: Site Plan... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 3 Figure 12: Early First Millennium Pottery.. ... ... ... 30
Figure 3: Late Bronze Age.. ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 4 Figure 13: Early First Millennium Pottery.. ... ... ... 31
Figure 4: Late Iron Age (c.100 BC – AD 50) ... ... ... 10 Figure 14: Early First Millennium Pottery.. ... ... ... 32
Figure 5: Roman c. AD 50 – 150 ... ... ... ... ... ... 11 Figure 15: Early First Millennium Pottery.. ... ... ... 33
Figure 6: Pits 3 – 9 .. ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 12 Figure 16: Early First Millennium Pottery.. ... ... ... 34
Figure 7: Late Broze Age Pit Complex. ... ... ... ... 21 Figure 17: Early First Millennium Pottery.. ... ... ... 35
Figure 8: Enclosure 2 ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 22 Figure 18: Early First Millennium Pottery.. ... ... ... 36
Figure 9: Sections ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 23 Figure 19: Late Iron Age/early Roman Pottery. ... ... 42
Figure 10: Sections . ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 4 Figure 20: Late Iron Age/early Roman Pottery. ... ... 43

List of Tables

Table 1: Charred Plant Remains - Late Bronze Age 6 Table 8: Sherd counts for early first millennium BC
Table 2: Scientific and common names of identified pottery according to fabric types and site
plants (in order of appearance in tables etc.) 8 contexts: pottery from pits ... ... ... ... ... 20
Table 3: Charred Plant Remains – Late Iron Age ... 14 Table 9: Sherd counts for early first millennium BC
Table 4: Charred Plant Remains – Early Roman . ... 15 pottery according to fabric types and site
Table 5: Fired Clay and Metallurgical Remains .. ... 16 contexts: pottery from postholes ... ... ... 20
Table 6: Sherd counts for early first millennium Table 10: Average sherd weight according to fabric
BC pottery according to fabric types and site type for the first millennium BC assemblage 26
contexts: unstratified pottery and pottery from Table 11: Estimated Vessel Equivalents (EVEs)
cuts, tree throws, deposits, and cremations 19 based on rim sherds . ... ... ... ... ... ... 40
Table 7: Sherd counts for early first millennium BC Table 12: Cremated Bone: A summary of the results 45
pottery according to fabric types and site
contexts: pottery from ditches ... ... ... ... 19

v
Excavations at Ford Airfield

Acknowledgements
The archaeological investigations were funded by Southern Council) are also gratefully acknowledged. The timely efforts
Water and their commitment to the work is duly acknowledged. and advice of all the specialists involved with the project was
In addition, RPS Planning Transport and Environment would particularly appreciated, above all Sue Hamilton, Malcolm
like to acknowledge Southern Water and especially the Lyne and Pat Hinton. The evaluation and the final stages of
Project Manager for the scheme Anneke Inigo-Jones for excavation on the Late Iron Age - Romano-British enclosure
their day to day assistance and support in the execution of all were directed by Rob Masefield. The project was managed by
phases of the project. The advice, enthusiasm and support of Rob Masefield and David Freke for RPS Planning Transport
John Mills (archaeological officer for West Sussex County and Environment.

Summary
Excavation by the archaeological department of RPS been enclosed by this date. The enclosure was subsequently
Planning Transport and Environment on the site of the used for limited cremation burial in the later Iron Age and a
former airfield at Ford, West Sussex, recovered evidence new co-axial field system was set out during this period on a
for prehistoric and Roman settlement from the beginning different alignment to its predecessor. This latter field system
of the first millennium BC to the second century AD The may have been partially abandoned in the first century AD
incomplete plan of a sub-rounded enclosure dating to the when a sub-rectangular enclosure was constructed. Use of
early first millennium BC was recovered, as was a substantial the enclosure was short lived, with only limited evidence for
assemblage of later Bronze Age pottery with associated C14 activity continuing into the second century. The final phase
dates. Several contemporary field boundaries and ditched of activity included limited iron working.
trackways indicated that this part of the coastal plain had

vi
 Excavations at Ford Airfield

Excavations at Ford Airfield, Yapton, West Sussex, 1999

by Chris Place

INTRODUCTION was restricted to the foundation pads and trenches for the
Sludge Reception Area (‘SRA’ Figure 2) and the Inlet Works,
During 1999, a programme of archaeological works was Administration and Workshop Building (‘AWB’ Figure 2).
undertaken by RPS Planning Transport and Environment
Ltd in advance of and during the initial construction of a
new waste-water treatment works for Southern Water at RESULTS
Ford, West Sussex (the Site). The programme of works,
which was undertaken as a condition of planning consent, Mesolithic and Neolithic Activity
was wholly funded by Southern Water and included field
evaluation, excavation, post-excavation assessment and Initial activity in the area is evinced by later Mesolithic
final analysis. Written reports were prepared following worked flint, of which the great majority was residual in
the completion of field evaluation (Masefield 1999) and the contexts from which it was recovered. The presence of
post-excavation assessment (Place 2000) and submitted to microliths, serrated flakes, burins and debitage suggest the
WSCC for inclusion in the Sites and Monuments Record, presence of a hunting-processing camp in the vicinity. It is
where they can be consulted. These include a full description not certain that the microliths and other tools were being
and assessment of the Site Archive including stratigraphic produced here, but the recovery of bladelet cores and some
relationships, fieldwork methodology and specialist reports broken bladelets suggest they may have been. The recovery of
not reiterated in full in this report. The Site and Research a leaf-shaped arrowhead and polished axe fragment suggests
Archives are held at Littlehampton Museum under Accession that similar activity may have continued into the early
Number AT0374. Neolithic. Elsewhere on the coastal plain, the widespread
occurrence of flint and stone axes, flint arrowheads and other
flint tools probably indicates extensive activity, such as the
Location, Topography and Geology exploitation of natural resources (hunting, fishing, gathering
The Site is located in the north quadrant of the disused airfield plant material). No features date to this phase and there were
at Ford (OS grid reference SU 994 033), between the villages no discrete concentrations of material. A detailed report on
of Yapton and Climping, approximately 2km to the west of the material is contained in the assessment report and it is
Littlehampton, West Sussex (Figures 1 & 2). Situated on the considered no further.
West Sussex coastal plain at an altitude of between 5–7m OD
the site is underlain by aeolian deposits (‘brickearth’) above Early First Millennium BC Settlement,
raised-beach deposits (sands and gravels) that may correlate Environment and Economy
with marine sands recorded at Norton Farm (Bates et al 1997)
and dated to c 190,000 years BP. The whole is underlain by Stratigraphic evidence
Upper Chalk. The site is not crossed by any natural drainage
features, although the area is dominated by the River Arun Those features that most likely date to this period are
and its floodplain less than 1km to the east. Several small illustrated on Figure 3. They include Enclosure E1, Pits P1
‘Rifes’ and associated ‘tributaries’, such as the Ryebank Rife, to P10 and P28, the double-ditched trackways T1-T3, ditches
are to be found within 1.5 km to the north, west and south of D1, D7 and D8, and numerous isolated post holes including,
the Site (see Figure 1). but not limited to, PH1-PH3.

Fieldwork Enclosure 1
Three phases of fieldwork were undertaken between February Partial exposure of this feature within the excavated area
and June 1999. The evaluation (Phase 1) included the suggests a ‘square’ enclosure with rounded corners. It is
excavation of nine 50m x 2m trenches located systematically impossible to determine the size of the enclosure, although
across the site as well as the excavation of Test Pit 1 to a ‘diameter’ of 30-50m would not be without precedent. The
mitigate the effects of a substantial geotechnical test pit. Six profile recorded in Figure 9, Section 7 indicates a re-cut.
trenches were excavated initially, with a further three trenches A date for the infilling of the ditch is provided by a small
added to the evaluation in the light of the early results. The assemblage of Late Bronze Age medium-coarse and fine
trench positions are illustrated on Figure 2. The final scope wares in the primary fills (1226) and the absence of any
of the main excavation (Phase 2) was agreed with WSCC; later material; although the pottery consists of eroded sherds
trenches ET1, ET2 and ET3 (Figure 2) being located to that may have weathered prior to final deposition. Late Iron
examine areas in detail where the evaluation indicated that Age Cremation 1 (1296) was inserted into this feature when
the proposed construction would most likely damage or substantially filled and provides a terminus ante quem.
destroy archaeological remains. Changing design solutions Stratification within the ditch was insufficiently developed
for the water treatment works meant that a limited amount to indicate whether a bank was present and there were no
of excavation and recording (Phase 3) had to be undertaken internal features to suggest that such a feature might have
as mitigation during the initial construction phase. Fieldwork been revetted.

1
 Excavations at Ford Airfield
Figure 1 Site Location

2
 Excavations at Ford Airfield

Figure 2 Site Plan

3
 Excavations at Ford Airfield
Figure 3 Late Bronze Age

4
 Excavations at Ford Airfield

Potentially similar enclosures (excluding larger enclosures/ Trackways and other ditches
hillforts such as Highdown Hill, Thundersbarrow Hill
and Harrow Hill) although unknown from Sussex, have Ditches 1073/1046 (part of Trackway T2), contain slightly
been examined elsewhere in the south-east. At Highstead, weathered Late Bronze Age pottery, while trackway T1
Kent, partial excavation revealed the corner of a rectilinear (1180, 1181) and ditch D1 both contain more heavily eroded
enclosure with an entrance and evidence for a revetted bank material. No later material was recovered from the ditch fills.
(Champion 1980, 237) (Macpherson-Grant pers. com.). Large Together with trackway T3 and ditch D8 (from which no finds
quantities of pottery and a wide range of other finds suggested were recovered) they suggest a co-axial land division and are
a strongly defended Late Bronze Age settlement dateable to considered to be contemporary. The ditches were shallow
the period c 850-800/750 BC. At Lofts Farm, Essex (Brown (Figure 9, Sections 3, 4 & 6) and difficult to detect in the
1988), a double-ditched sub-rectangular enclosure measuring ‘brickearth’ subsoils and it is quite possible that short sections
approximately 42 × 48m contained a probable post built or longer continuations, if even slightly shallower, could have
round-hut, a possible post-built aisled building, four-post been removed during machining. Mindful of the above, it is
structures and other post and linear features. The site was impossible to be sure if the termination of T1 and T2, the
interpreted by the excavator as a pastoral based farmstead. causeway in T2 and the lack of a intersection between D7
and T2 are real or products of unequal survival. Nevertheless,
the axial alignment of the trackways at Ford is remarkably
Pits and post-holes similar to the landscape revealed on a much larger scale at
West Deeping, Lincolnshire (Hunn 1993), which occupies
The following features are securely dated on the basis that a similar topographic location to Ford. Here, it is suggested
the Late Bronze Age pottery sherds contained within feature that the trackways allowed the controlled passage of grazing
fills display a relative lack of weathering and a larger size animals between the lower lying floodplains in summer and
than for enclosure E1. Feature fills, obviously, also lack any higher, drier areas in autumn and winter (Pryor 1996). Similar
later material. management may have been practised at Ford (the trackways
are aligned from the higher area of the site towards the Arun
floodplain), although it is impossible to be sure.
Pits: P1 (510), P2 (1104), P3 (1136), ?P4 (1137), P5
(1140), P6 (1275), P7 (1276), P8 (1284), P28 (1243) and
This direct evidence for prehistoric land division is a rarity
?P9 (1111). (NB. Pit 4 may not be a separate feature and Pit
for the coastal plain, where soil conditions do not allow the
9 may be part of Pit 3).
identification of such features by aerial photography, although
it is insufficient to allow a detailed consideration of whether
Postholes: PH1 (904), PH2 (1042) and PH3 (1207) pastoral or arable regimes are represented. Nevertheless,
the presence of trackways/droveways does suggest that the
Of the above, Pits 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8. 9 and 28 are inter-cut and controlled movement of grazing animals was an important
form the complex of features illustrated on Figure 6 and consideration (Pryor op. cit., 314).
Figure 9, Sections 1 and 2. The probable sequence of cutting
and backfilling is illustrated in Figure 7. Several pits were Economic and environmental evidence
probably open at any one time and the complex appears to
have extended outwards from a central ‘core’. The following Charred plant remains and charcoal (Interpolating
radiocarbon AMS dates (2 sigma calibrated) have been the results of analysis by Pat Hinton and Sophie Seel)
attained from charcoal recovered from the pit fills: context
1085 – Cal BC 1100 to 820 (Beta 144445); context 1113 – Cal The poor recovery of animal bone from the Site (none was
BC 1120 to 820 (Beta 144446); context 1264 – Cal BC 820 recovered from Bronze Age contexts) neither supports nor
to 770 (Beta 144447). This ‘pit complex’ was most probably refutes the indirect evidence for animal husbandry presented
superimposed on Trackway T2 (see below), which must also above. As with other sites on the coastal plain acidic ground
be of a similar or earlier date. Concentrations of pits appear conditions have probably destroyed what material was
to be one characteristic of the few known Late Bronze Age present, resulting in an underestimation of the importance
settlement on the coastal plain and have also been recorded of animals in the local economy.
at Knapp Farm, Bosham (Gardiner and Hamilton, 1997)
and Yapton (Rudling 1987), although such features were not By contrast, the recovery of charred seeds (see below
observed at Rustington (Rudling 1990). for specialist report) gives a useful, if perhaps skewed,
picture of the local economy. Seventeen samples produced
charred seeds (Table 1; see Table 2 for common names) but
Pit 10 (1127) contains slightly weathered pottery sherds
exceptional is that from context 1162 (Pit 5), with the greatest
that may not have been buried immediately post-breakage.
number and representing a wide range of species. Context
Other small pits/post-holes illustrated on Figure 3 (feature
1141, stratigraphically above 1162 in Pit 5, included fewer
numbers have not been generated and context numbers only
seeds but they complement those from the lower context.
are illustrated) contained weathered Late Bronze Age pottery
All samples contain cereals to some extent. Wheat (Triticum
but no later material.
spp.) is present in eighteen of the seventeen, barley (Hordeum
sp.) in eight and oats (Avena sp.) only in two, but all samples
None of the above features are internal to Enclosure 1 or include small cereal fragments not identifiable to species.
form any coherent patterns that might indicate structures
such as granaries, storehouses, drying racks or upright It is probable that most, if not all, of the wheats are the
looms that have been suggested for other sites (Ellison and glumed wheats emmer and spelt (Triticum dicoccum and
Drewett 1971). Triticum spelta). Certain characteristic features of the grains

5
6
Table 1 Charred Plant Remains – Late Bronze Age
Context/ Feature 509 905 915 1041 1046 1085 1102 1141 1162 1176 1110 1113 1187 1261 1067 1096 1127
P1 – – PH2 T2 – P2 P5 P5 P5 P3 P4 – – – – –
Sample volume (litres) 5 5 7 40 30 40 50 30 40 10 20 20 10 20 10 10 10
Cereals
Excavations at Ford Airfield

Triticum cf dicoccum – grains 10 1

- glume bases 3
Triticum cf spelta -grains 3 3 4 8 2 1 5
- glume bases 4

Triticum dicoccum/spelta – grains 1 40

- glume bases 2 37 2
- rachis node frags. 28 1
Triticum cf aestivum s.l. ?1 ?1 1
Triticum sp. 1 2 1 2 2 5 10 1 3 1 13 1 1
Hordeum vulgare - grains ?1 3 1 2 ?1 28 57 1
- rachis internodes 1 1
Avena sp. – grains 2 14
- floret base 1
- awn fragments 8 1
Cerealia indet. – grains & frags.(ml.) <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 .5 <0.5 0.5 c.2.0 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 c.1.0 <0.5 –
Oil or fibre plant
Linum usitatissimum L. 68
Arable, ruderal or grassland plants
Ranunculus acris/repens/bulbosus 1
Papaver sp. 2 1
Urtica dioica L. 2
Chenopodium album L. 2 2 2 2 2 186 c.400 5 14 1
Chenopodium sp. 2 1 1 4 3
Atriplex sp. 1 1
Stellaria media/neglecta 7 24 7 16 1
Persicaria maculosa Gray 1 1 8 83 2 1 2
Fallopia convolvulus (L.) Á.Löve 1 25
Rumex acetosella L. 1 2
 Table 1 continued
Rumex cf crispus 5
Rumex sp. 1 1 20 1
cf Sisymbrium sp. 1
Brassicaceae indet. 3 1 1
Aphanes arvensis L. 1
Vicia tetrasperma (L.) Schreb. 2
Vicia. cf sativa 1 2
Vicia/Lathyrus sp. 2
Medicago lupulina L. 1
Solanum dulcamara L. 1
Plantago lanceolata L. 1
Galium aparine L. 1
Tripleurospermum inodorum (L.)Sch.Bip 44 1
Asteraceae indet. 1
Poa annua L. 2 44
Alopecurus/Phleum sp. 4
Bromus secalinus/hordeaceus 1 1 1 1 1 2 21 1 1
Arrhenatherum elatius var. bulbosum ?1
(L.) P.Beauv. – culm nodes
Poaceae indet. 2 1 2 1 c.250 6 4 1 1
Damp ground plants
Juncus cf effusus type 16
Luzula cf campestris 1
Carex spp. 1 3
Excavations at Ford Airfield

7
Excavations at Ford Airfield

Table 2 Scientific and common names of identified plants convincingly spelt and other narrower bases more typical
(in order of appearance in tables etc.) of emmer. Only three wheat grains are of a shorter, more
compact form suggestive of a free-threshing wheat (Triticum
Triticum dicoccum Emmer cf aestivum s.l.) but these might also be spelt. Most of the
Triticum spelta Spelt samples include grains that although damaged or distorted
Triticum aestivum Bread wheat can be recognised as wheats but not further differentiated.
Hordeum vulgare Hulled barley
Avena sp. Oats Grains of hulled barley (Hordeum vulgare), distinguishable
Linum usitatissimum Flax, Linseed by their more angular form, are present less frequently than
Pisum sativum Pea wheat but in the rich sample from context 1162 they are in
Vicia faba var. minor Small broad or field bean almost equal numbers. For three of these it is likely that their
Ranunculus acris/repens/ Meadow, creeping or bulbous
asymmetry is that of the lateral grains of 6-row barley rather
bulbosus buttercups than an effect of charring. There is no evidence to suggest
Papaver sp. Poppy the presence of naked barley.
Urtica dioica Stinging nettle
Chenopodium album Fat hen Oats (Avena sp.) appear only in the same two fruitful samples
Chenopodium sp. Goosefoot
from Pit 5. As with the wheats specific identification depends
upon more than the grain alone. Fortunately among the
Atriplex sp. Orache
fourteen grains in context 1162 is one floret base which bears
Stellaria media/neglecta Common or greater stitchwort
the disarticulation scar of Avena fatua, a wild oat, and this
Persicaria maculosa Redshank may well be the identification of the other oats.
Fallopia convolvulus Black bindweed
Rumex acetosella Sheep’s sorrel Also present are some very poorly preserved grains and small
Rumex crispus Curled dock fragments that can be recognised only as cereal in origin. In
Rumex sp. Dock the majority of samples there is little information to be gained
Polygonaceae indet. Dock family as to the processing stage of the cereals as found.
Viola sp. Violet or pansy
Sisymbrium officinale Hedge mustard The other cultivated crop plant represented in the Bronze
Raphanus raphanistrum Wild radish Age samples is flax, or linseed (Linum usitatissimum), and
Brassicaceae indet. Cabbage family again it is context 1162, in which the Linum seeds form a
Aphanes arvensis Parsley piert significant proportion, which provides the evidence. Of the
Vicia tetrasperma Smooth tare
68 seeds several are distorted by charring but there are a few
sufficiently well preserved on which it is possible to see the
Vicia sativa Common vetch
cell distribution which distinguishes this cultivated species
Lathyrus sp. Vetchling
from perennial flax (Linum perenne). Linseed is found more
Medicago lupulina Black medick rarely than cereals but this does not necessarily reflect its
Trifolium sp. Clover importance. It requires no heating in the earlier stages of
Euphrasia/Odontites Eye-bright or Bartsia preparation and so, unlike the glumed wheats which need
Veronica cf serpyllifolia Thyme-leaved speedwell drying and parching, is less likely to become accidentally
Veronica hederifolia Ivy-leaved speedwell burned. The plant has been reported from British prehistoric
Solanum dulcamara Bittersweet sites; first as impressions in Neolithic pottery (Helbaek
Solanum nigrum Black nightshade 1952), and increasingly as charred or waterlogged seeds at
Middle and Late Bronze Age sites onwards. It is not possible
Plantago lanceolata Ribwort plantain
to say whether the plant was cultivated for its oil-rich
Galium aparine Cleavers, goosegrass
seeds (linseed) or for fibre (flax). When grown for fibre the
Tripleurospermum inodorum Scentless mayweed uprooted plants require a longer period of processing which
Asteraceae indet. Daisy family includes softening in water. The association with cereals in
Festuca sp. Fescue this deposit does seem to imply that the plant was grown for
Poa annua Annual grass the nutritious seeds.
Alopecus/Phleum sp. Foxtail or cat’s tail grass
Bromus secalinus/hordaceus Rye grass or soft brome grass The wild plant seeds are those of typical arable weeds
Arrhenatherum elatius var. False oat grass or onion couch and other disturbed ground while some, such as the rush
bulbosus (Juncus sp.) from Pit 2 (1104) indicate damp or muddy
Danthonia decumbens Heath grass places. Outstanding however are the large numbers of fat
Poaceae indet. Grass family hen (Chenopodium album) seeds in contexts 1141 and
Juncus effusus Soft rush 1162. The small round seeds of recent fat hen can infiltrate
Luzula campestris Field wood-rush older deposits via root tracks and fissures, and indeed a few
Carex sp. Sedge uncharred fat hen seeds were in fact found here. However,
Corylus avellana Hazel about 40 seeds, selected randomly, showed the brittle
fracture of charred material when tested by pressure and it
allow suggested identifications but sure identification to is therefore assumed that the majority are contemporary with
species is not possible without the diagnostic chaff, present the remainder of the assemblages in these two samples. It
here as glume bases in only two samples. In context 1162 might be that these had been gathered as a food supplement,
many of the grains could be either of the above species but but a single plant of this common arable weed may produce
among the well-preserved glume bases are some more robust about 3000 seeds (Salisbury 1961). Small grass seeds also
forms, rounded and with traces of strong veins, which are were numerous in the sample from Context 1162 but this

8
 Excavations at Ford Airfield

was a particularly rich sample and the numbers are perhaps pits/depressions were excavated. The remaining sites consist
not necessarily disproportionate. Unfortunately, the wild of groups of pits and isolated pits, usually containing pottery
plant seeds, in conjunction with the charcoal, provide little and other rubbish possibly derived from nearby middens: such
information on the local environment. The seeds recovered rubbish disposal perhaps signalling the ‘decommissioning’
are mainly of species that readily grow in any disturbed or abandonment of the site. This is not to suggest that we are
ground and the charcoal was insufficient to form a basis for observing different classes of site, but rather the sampling of
environmental interpretation. Species identified from the differing parts of similar sites where the sampling strategy
latter comprised oak, maple and hawthorn. is dictated and constrained by development. Larger scale
sampling in advance of gravel extraction in the Kennet
The alluvial soils of the coastal plain would have been Valley, Berkshire, has revealed groups of pits in association
eminently suitable for cereal production and those represented with probable hut structures (Bradley et al 1980) and this
here most likely were grown in the vicinity, although barley may be a good indication of the type of site represented by
would be an appropriate crop for the lighter calcareous soils recent findings on the coastal plain.
of the adjacent chalk downs. Flax or linseed can be grown
in varying conditions, from clays to light sandy soils but it The finds from Ford help to re-emphasise the importance of
flourishes on friable loams. the coastal plain in the early first millennium BC, although it
is by no means certain if this represents a shift of settlement
away from the Downs during this period as suggested by
Other material Ellison (1980, 34). Recent work at Varley Halls (Greig,
1997), Downsview (Rudling, 2002), Mile Oak (Russell in
The non- Mesolithic/Neolithic worked flint recovered during Rudling, 2002) and Patcham Fawcett (Greatorex in Rudling,
excavation was most probably sourced from the coastal 2002) on the Downs east of the River Adur indicates some,
plain and local beaches. The apparent random selection of albeit reduced, continuity of use from the Middle Bronze
any flint available, irrespective of quality and size is typical Age until the 9th/8th centuries BC. Possible Late Bronze Age
of flint procurement in the Bronze Age. With the exception huts/platforms were recorded at Varley Halls and Downsview,
of two fabricators, two scrapers, two scraper/piercers, one whereas at Patcham Fawcett and Mile Oak the evidence was
notched/scraper and one notched/piercer, which may be confined to pits and metal working respectively.
later Neolithic/Early Bronze Age, the implements recovered
represent the most common implement types occurring in the
Bronze Age (Ford et. al. 1984): viz. scrapers, a single piercer
and two notched pieces. All of the worked flint appears to Late Iron Age/Early Roman Settlement,
be residual and is considered no further. A more detailed Environment and Economy
description of the collection is included in the Assessment
Report.
Stratigraphic evidence
Discussion Middle-Late Iron Age c 300 BC–0
The evidence presented above and in the specialist pottery Fragments of two saucepan pots were recovered from Late
report below is taken to indicate that in all probability Iron Age features and are presumably residual in their
enclosure E1 indicates the location of a small, enclosed contexts. A single cremation (Figure 4, C2) (see specialist
settlement. Despite the lack of evidence for settlement report, below) and associated pottery vessels dated to c 90–50
structures such as huts within E1 or elsewhere, the range BC was (?)inserted into the uppermost fill of enclosure E1,
of pottery recovered, the nature of its deposition and the from which fragments of a (?)Dressel 1A amphora was also
recovery of a range of arable seeds does suggest the presence recovered. It seems likely that the enclosure was still partially
of an agricultural settlement within the immediate area. visible as an earthwork and was selected deliberately for the
internment. There is no structural evidence, however, for any
Late Bronze Age settlement elsewhere on the coastal plain is settlement or other activity associated with this phase. The
evinced by recent finds from Selsey (Seager-Thomas, 1998 pottery is discussed in more detail in the specialist report
– see Figure 1, 1; Kenny, 1988- Figure 1, 2) Knapp Farm, below.
Bosham (Gardiner and Hamilton 1998- Figure 1, 3), Yapton
(Rudling, 1987- Figure 1, 4), Rustington (Rudling, 1990- Late Iron Age c 0–AD 50
Figure 1, 5), Climping (Stevens, pers. com.- Figure 1, 6) and
Westhampnett, Area 4 (Wessex Archaeology, 1993) (Figure A co-axial field system was laid out or at least started to
1, 10). Pottery from Yapton has been dated by parallels to the silt up during this period. Orientated north-south/east-west
9th-8th centuries BC (Hamilton in Rudling, 1987): subsequent it is aligned at approximately 45° to its Late Bronze Age
radio-carbon age determination has provided a date of 910- predecessor. The field system, which comprises ditches
530 cal. BC. The pottery from Selsey has also been ascribed D9(1232), D10(1093), D11(1082), D12(1079), D13(1278),
a similar date on stylistic grounds, with that from Knapp D14(206), D15(1053), D16(104, 1010, 1281), D17(1101),
Farm dated to the 10th-8th centuries BC. The pottery from D18(1224, 1286, 1288), D19(1478), D20(304) and D21(1434)
Rustington displayed characteristics of both Late Bronze extends over all of ET2 but does not extend as far as ET1/3
Age and Deverel-Rimbury traditions, suggesting a date of c (Figure 4). Ditches D2(1238) and D3(1165) are, however,
1000/900 BC (Hamilton in Rudling, 1990). on the same alignment and at least D3 is of the same date.
They may represent a contemporary trackway. The ditches
Whilst the above is indicative of settlement, only Rustington are similar in plan and profile, with Sections 8 (D12; s96), 9
produced evidence for settlement structures, where one and (D18; s154) and 10 (D16; s53) illustrated as representative
possibly three post-built huts, areas of burnt clay and several (all Figure 9). The different depths and width at the top are

9
 Figure 4 Late Iron Age (c.100 BC – AD 50)

10
Excavations at Ford Airfield
 Excavations at Ford Airfield

Figure 5 Roman c. AD 50 – 150

11
Excavations at Ford Airfield

Figure 6 Pits 3 – 9

most probably a function of the depth of topsoil/sub-soil sections excavated across the co-axial field system contained
stripping. Other contemporary features include ditch D28 pottery in primary contexts dateable to this subsequent phase
(110), pits P11 (1475), P12 (1420), P13 (1159) and PH6 and Figure 10, Section 11 (s153) suggests that Enclosure E2
(1020) and probably cremation C1 (1095) (see specialist was superimposed on ditches that had already silted up.
report below). There is no evidence of settlement within
the Site, although the concentration of pottery in ditch D10 E2, which is defined by ditch D22 (112, 1089, 1209, 1345,
(1093; see specialist report below) may indicate that this is 1452, 1457), is rectangular in plan with rounded corners
to be found to the south or west of ET2. and has a maximum north-south excavated dimension of
approximately 40.5m and a minimum east-west excavated
Pre-Flavian c AD 50–70 dimension of approximately 67m (Figure 8). Ditch D22
is of variable depth and width, although the minimum
The major period of activity occurred during this phase dimensions at its south east corner are probably a product of
and appears to have concentrated in Enclosure E2 to the heavy machining. At its maximum it is 2.2m wide and 0.9m
exclusion of the rest of the Site (Figure 5). None of the deep. Its variable profile is illustrated in Figure 9, Sections

12
 Excavations at Ford Airfield

12 (s170) and 13 (s107). Pottery from the ditch fills (see Fifteen samples were examined from Late Iron Age contexts
specialist report below) provides a date of c AD 50–70, for carbonised plant remains: all contained small numbers
with evidence to suggest that activity was considerably less of cereals and seeds (Table 3). More or less well-preserved
intense after AD 60. wheat grains in four samples suggest spelt and one glume
base in another sample confirms its presence. Two grains
The internal dividing ditches D23(114, 1214) and D24 (in two contexts, 1019 and 1342) are shorter and bear some
(1198, 1418, 1517, 1521) may be contemporary with D21, resemblance to free-threshing bread wheat but, as before,
although the junction between D21 and D24 fell outside could equally well be spelt. Hulled barley is represented only
the area of excavation making it impossible to determine in one sample by three grains, of which one suggests 6-row
their stratigraphic relationship. Ditch D23, which measures barley. There is no evidence of oats.
approximately 0.80m wide and 0.56m deep (Figure 10,
Section 14; s158) is markedly smaller than D24 (Figure A single flax seed, is doubtful evidence of its cultivation in
10, Section 15; s127), which is up to 2.6m wide and 0.8m the Iron Age. It is one of only two seeds in Context 1019, the
deep. other being one of the possible bread wheats. These probably
are merely chance finds of widely distributed charred items
Several pits (e.g. P14 (1314), P15 (1320), P16 (1316), P17 of unknown provenance.
(1362), P18 (1335), P19 (1325), P20 (1339) (Figure 10,
Sections 16 and 17; s161, s164) of Pre-Flavian date are Wild plant seeds comprise arable weeds and plants of other
contained within the interior of E2. disturbed places. Brome grass (Bromus sp.) is a frequent
accompaniment of spelt. The lower culm nodes (‘tubers’)
of false oat grass or onion couch (Arrhenatherum elatius) in
Early Roman c AD 60/70–150 one, possibly three, samples might be classed as ‘weeds’ as
the nodes can be re-distributed during soil cultivation and
The evidence for activity during this period, which overlaps each may produce a new plant. An alternative interpretation,
temporally with the preceding one, lies mainly in the since they frequently occur with cremation pyre material,
stratigraphic relationship of ditches D26 (1311, 1329, 1331, is that they are burned when dry grasses are used in fuel.
1462=1455) and D27 (1401) to the main enclosure ditch D22 Fragments of hazel nut shells (Corylus avellana) in two
(both clearly cut into a fully silted D22). In addition, pits samples may of course represent food debris or possibly
P21(1511), P22 (1464), P23 (1466), P24 (1471), P25 (1524) chance inclusions acquired when hazel wood was cut for
and some pottery within enclosure ditch D22 and ditch D26 other purposes presumably at no great distance.
appear also to be contemporary. The very meagre amounts
of pottery that can be ascribed to this period suggests that There is more charred material from the Early Roman period.
‘full-time’ occupation ceased soon after AD 60. Of 16 samples more than half include seeds in sufficient
numbers to provide useful information about agricultural
Ditch 26 is a shallow, ‘U’-profiled feature, with the evidence practice and the environmental background (Table 4).
from Section 18; s163 (Figure 10) suggesting that it was Contexts 1470 and 1467 are particularly rich in cereals,
re-cut at least twice and migrated slightly to the south in the almost entirely wheat. Glumed wheats predominate and as
process. Four complete upturned pots were emplaced within before grains and damaged glume bases cannot be securely
the fills at its eastern end, two of which should date to before distinguished. However spelt seems to be the major wheat
c AD 60 and could be as early as Late Iron Age in date. species, which is typical of wheat cultivation in the Roman
period, with characteristic grains in eight samples and
Ditch 27 is a narrow, shallow (up to 0.15m deep and 0.5m convincing spelt chaff in seven. Only in four instances are
wide) ‘U’-profiled gulley, semicircular in plan. The majority there grains which strongly suggest free-threshing bread
of slag and other bloomery waste (see below) was recovered wheat. Hulled barley appears in about half of the samples and
from this feature, perhaps indicating that it may represent in one (Context 1091) can be identified as 6-row barley. Oats,
evidence for a small wind-break or shelter to protect as before not identifiable to species, occur in five samples.
metalworking activities from the predominant south-west In two instances chaff was recovered in sufficient quantities
wind. The concentration of features containing charcoal to suggest that whole spikelets of wheat (rather than fully
within the immediate area substantiates the notion that this prepared grain) may be involved. It is likely that the earlier
was an area of industrial activity requiring heat. stages of processing, i.e. threshing and first sievings took
place nearby. Otherwise, there is little information to be
gained as to the processing stage of the cereals as found. Flax
Economic and environmental evidence seeds appear again, only in two samples, but taken with the
one seed from the Iron Age phase it does suggest that flax
Charred plant remains, charcoal and animal bones cultivation may have continued from the Late Bronze Age.
(Interpolating the results of analysis by Pat Hinton, It is not possible to say whether the plant was cultivated for
Lucy Sibun and Sophie Seel) its oil-rich seeds (linseed) or for fibre (flax).

Very little animal bone was recovered from contexts of this First found at this site in the Early Roman period are peas
period and as with earlier contexts it is likely that an acidic (Pisum sativum) and small broad or field beans (Vicia faba
soil has destroyed the potential evidence. Fragmentary cattle var. minor). The peas are identified by their distinctive hilum
teeth and unidentifiable long bone fragments were recovered in two contexts (1091 and 1326) and other fragments of
from the ditch fills of enclosure E2. As with the Late Bronze similarly sized cotyledons (seedling leaves) may well also
Age, however, the presence of a possible ditched trackway be of peas. Peas are rarely reported before the Roman period
in ET1 may be indirect evidence that pastoralism was more but there is an Iron Age record for Hengistbury Head (Nye
important than the direct evidence suggests. & Jones 1987). The beans also are identified by their form

13
 Table 3 Charred Plant Remains – Late Iron Age

14
Feature PH6 – D3 D6 P12 C2 – D16 D12 D12 D16 P26 – D24
Context 1019 1062 1165 1227 1421 1296 1011 1035 1079 1077 1092 105 1342 1047 1519
Sample volume (litres) 20 20 20 20 10 110 1 20 20 20 10 10 20 20 20
Cereals
Triticum cf spelta – grains 2 2 1 2
– glume bases 1
Triticum dicoccum/spelta – grains
– glume bases 1 1
– rachis node frags. 2
Excavations at Ford Airfield

Triticum spelta/aestivum 1 1
Triticum sp. 3 1
Hordeum vulgare – grains
3
– rachis internodes
Avena sp. – grains
– awn fragments
Cerealia indet. grains & frags. (ml.). <0.5 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Oil or fibre plant
Linum usitatissimum L. 1
Arable, ruderal or grassland plants
Chenopodium album L. 2 4 1
Chenopodium sp. 1 2 1
Atriplex prostrata/patula 2
Stellaria media/neglecta 1 1 1
Persicaria maculosa 1 2
Fallopia convolvulus (L.)Á Löve 2
Rumex acetosella L. 1
Rumex cf crispus 1 1
Rumex sp. 1
Sisymbrium cf officinale 1
Raphanus raphanistrum L. pod sections 3
Brassicaceae
Medicago lupulina 1 1
Trifolium sp. 1
Veronica cf serpyllifolia 1
Euphrasia/Odontites sp. 1
Galium aparine L. 2
Poa annua L. 2
Bromus secalinus/hordeaceus 4 4 2 1
Arrhenatherum elatius var.
?1 3 ?1
bulbosum (L.)P.Beauv – culm node
Danthonia decumbens (L.) DC 1
Poaceae indet. – caryopses 2 2
2 1 2
– culm fragments ? 4
Woodland/wood margin
Corylus avellana L. nut shell fragments 1 1
 Table 4 Charred Plant Remains – Early Roman
Feature D27 D26 D22 D26 P15 P23 P19 P14 P23 P17 D22 P27 D24 P25
Context 1402 1463 1020 1091 1105 1310 1319 1470 1326 1333 1467 1357 1458 1491 1513 1525
Cereals
Triticum cf spelta – grains 4 5 22 13 c.150 2 5 c. 90
– glume bases 3 5 c.700 7 c.200 19 3
Triticum dicoccum/spelta – grains 7 3 c. 50 3 4
– glume bases 9 2 32 c.500 1 1 c. 50
– rachis node fragments 4 5 1 1 10
Triticum cf aestiivum s.l. 1 ?1 5 5
Triticum spelta/aestivum 1 1
Triticum sp. 8 13 8 c.100 6 1 3
Hordeum vul.gare – grains 1 3 4 3 10 2 3 6 2 3
– rachis internode 1
Avena sp. – grains 9 7 16 1
– awn fragments 2 2
Cerealia indet. – grains & frags.(ml.) <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 c.0.5 c.0.75 >2.0 c.0.75 <0.5 c.1.0 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Pulses
Pisum sativum L. 1 1 + ?2
Vicia faba L. ?1 ?1 1 1 + ?1 1
Oil or fibre plant
Linum usitatissimum L. 4 1
Arable, ruderal & grasssland plants
Urtica dioica L. 1
Chenopodium album L. 3 1 1 2
Chenopodium sp. 1 2
Atriplex sp. 2 1
Stellaria media/neglecta 7 4 4 6 1 2 3
Rumex acetosella L. 1
Rumex cf crispus 1 1 2 1 1
Rumex sp. 3 7 6 1
Polygonaceae indet. 1 ?1 1
Viola sp. 1
Raphanus raphanistrum L. – pod section 1
Aphanes arvensis L. 1 1 1
Vicia tetrasperma (L.) Schreb. 1 3 2 1 1
Vicia hirsuta/tetrasperma 6 13 1 4 1 1 2
Vicia sativa s.l. 4 3 4 1 3
Vicia/Lathyrus sp. 2 1 4 2
Medicago lupulina L. 8 3
Trifolium cf pratense 1 2
Excavations at Ford Airfield

15
Excavations at Ford Airfield

Table 5 Fired Clay and Metallurgical Remains

Context Frags. Weight (g) Description Context Frags. Weight (g) Description
1001 1 11 fired clay with vitrification 1402 13 520 iron bloomery forging slag inc.
plano-convex forms
1026 1 15 iron bloomery forging slag 1402 >22 140 fired clay with metalliferous
vitrification
1046 1 1 fired clay with metalliferous 1402 26 730 iron bloomery forging slag
vitrification
1058 1 7 iron bloomery forging slag 1402 >50 360 fired clay with metalliferous
vitrification
1080 3 14 fired clay with natural iron 1402 1 7 fired clay with vitrification + iron
inclusions inclusions
1091 >3 46 iron bloomery forging slag 1402 26 50 iron bloomery forging slag inc. prills
1091 1 21 fired clay with iron inclusions 1402 45 35 fired clay with metalliferous
vitrification
1102 1 1 fired clay with vitrification 1402 many 28 hammer scale
1110 1 1 iron bloomery forging slag 1405 8 78 iron bloomery forging slag
1176 1 7 iron bloomery forging slag 1405 1 14 fired clay with metalliferous
vitrification
1197 1 113 iron bloomery forging slag 1421 1 30 fired clay with metalliferous
vitrification
1312 1 7 fired clay with vitrification 1485 >7 57 fired clay with vitrification
1350 2 1 high temperature iron slag 1487 >30 230 fired clay with metalliferous
vitrification
1402 3 300 iron bloomery forging slag inc. 1491 2 4 fired clay with metalliferous
plano-convex forms vitrification
1402 4 2 fired clay 1497 1 18 fired clay with vitrification
1402 1 14 iron bloomery forging slag 1497 1 7 coarse, fired clay with charcoal
inclusions
1402 1 14 iron bloomery forging slag 1497 1 4 fired clay with vitrification
1402 >23 190 coarse, fired clay with 1519 1 1 iron bloomery forging slag
vitrification

and their characteristic hilum, preserved in three samples. depression would be formed on the ground surface. Charcoal
Fragments from two other contexts are likely to be parts of would be heated in this depression, using a forced draught,
bean cotyledons. Both peas and beans are found increasingly and the bloom brought to a temperature sufficient to melt the
during the Roman period. slag and make the iron malleable. In the course of this the
underlying ground would be baked to a temperature of up to
The soil conditions required for cereal production have 1200ºC, which would cause some vitrification of the silica
already been discussed in relation to the Late Bronze Age. in clay or sand, as well as the partial absorption of some of
Peas grow better on light soils and beans, while tolerating the slag into the surface.
most soils, are best on medium loams. (Newsham & Gunston
1947). These crops then could well have been locally A bloom was the basic product of a bloomery, or iron furnace
produced, with perhaps only the barley ‘imported’ from the using the direct smelting process, whereby malleable iron was
chalk downs. produced directly from ore. Bloomeries were the only means
of making iron in Britain from the beginning of the Iron Age
The wild plant seeds and charcoal provide little information until the end of the medieval period, and sources of iron ore
on the local environment. The seeds recovered are mainly of existed in the Weald where smelting on a significant scale
species which readily grow in any disturbed ground and the took place from the second century BC onwards. During the
charcoal was insufficient to form a basis for environmental first two centuries of the Roman occupation the Weald was
interpretation. Species identified from the latter comprised the main iron production region for the province (Cleere
oak, maple, ash, hazel, and hawthorn and may indicate and Crossley, 1995). The association of the metallurgical
secondary woodland or scrub communities in the area. remains from the Site with artefacts of Late-Iron Age to
early-Romano-British date would be consistent with iron
Metallurgical remains (interpolating the results of making of the type described.
analysis by Jeremy Hodgkinson)
The total weight of iron slag submitted, excluding hammer
The iron slag and fired clay recovered during excavation scale, amounted to 1898g. This corresponds to approximately
(see Table 5) all showed characteristics typical of the forging 1kg less than the slag adhering to a single bloom made during
stage in the production of iron, in which the consolidation of bloomery iron smelting experiments carried out by Crew
a raw bloom would entail the separation of slag adhering to (Crew 1991). It is possible, therefore, that the slag excavated
it, followed by smithing to shape the iron. A small quantity at Ford was the product of the working up of a single or
of hammer scale confirms that smithing was taking place. perhaps a few iron blooms. This would not constitute an
The fired clay is also consistent with iron forging. A shallow ‘industrial’ use of the site; instead, it suggests an agricultural

16
 Excavations at Ford Airfield

or domestic use, probably with a specific purpose in mind. on the coastal plain, for example Copse Farm and North
Bersted, it appears that cattle are predominant at the expense
It is likely that the iron bloom to which the excavated material of sheep/goat.
relates was made in the Weald, but the means of distribution
of such products can only be inferred. Unworked blooms The local soils of the coastal plain would have been suitable
may have been ‘sold’ to agricultural communities as part for the growing of all the cereals recovered, although barley
of a distribution network which included other products. would be an appropriate crop for the lighter calcareous soils of
Alternatively, members of such communities may have been the chalk downs and this is perhaps reflected in its numerical
responsible for small-scale smelting activity, perhaps during inferiority in the samples recovered. The increase of spelt
summer grazing in the Weald, returning with blooms to be in the Late Iron Age samples is typical of wheat cultivation
worked up in the winter. as reflected in many other sites and wheat is almost always
the major cereal identified from sites on the coastal plain of
Discussion Sussex, e.g at Littlehampton (Lovell, forthcoming), Boxgrove
(Bedwin & Place 1995), Bognor (Hinton, unpublished client
Enclosure and settlement of the coastal plain during the later report) and Westhampnett (Fitzpatrick et al., forthcoming).
Iron Age is evinced from excavation at Copse Farm, Oving
(Bedwin and Holgate 1985)(Figure 1, 7), Wick Farm Road, Pre-Plavian and later occupation/activity at Ford concentrates
Littlehampton (Gilkes 1993) (Figure 1, 8), Oldplace Farm, around Enclosure 2. This may represent a re-location away
Westhampnett (Bedwin 1983)(Figure 1, 9), Westhampnett, from the possible Late Iron Age activity suggested by the
Area 5 (Wessex Archaeology, 1993) (Figure 1, 10), Boxgrove pottery from ditch D10 and thus reinforces the pattern seen
(Bedwin and Place 1995) (Figure 1, 11) and the slightly at Copse Farm and Oldplace Farm. The similarity of plan
earlier site at North Bersted (Bedwin and Pitts 1978) (Figure between the Ford and Oldplace Farm (Bedwin 1983, Fig. 4)
1, 12). The enclosures and field systems recorded on air enclosures can be noted. There are no domestic structures such
photographs at Great Hidden Farm and Park Farm, Arundel as huts contemporary with Enclosure 2, although the wide
may also date to this period (King 1979) (Figure 1, 13 & 14 range of vessel types present in Assemblage 3 (see specialist
respectively). pottery report) probably indicates domestic activity. The
dearth of fine wares and near absence of Samian suggests that
At Copse Farm pottery evidence suggests occupation during the site was of low social status during this period. Towards
the late first century BC, but probably not continuing into the end of this period Enclosure 2 is further sub-divided by
the first century AD: a characteristic noted by the authors ditch D26 and the small ring gulley, D27, is superimposed
for Oldplace Farm (Bedwin, 1983). At both sites there are on the already infilled terminal of the enclosure. At this stage
also indications that occupation/activity was ‘re-established’ the character of activity changes and the Site is associated
during the early Roman period (mid-first century) at enclosure with a brief phase of iron working.
complexes at a short distance from the Iron Age foci.
‘Non-villa’ early Roman settlement/farmstead sites have
At Wick Farm Road, by contrast, a rectangular enclosure received relatively little attention in Sussex (Rudling 1998,
was dated to the early decades of the first century AD on 47) and for this reason it is difficult to draw detailed parallels
the basis of pottery contained within dumps of domestic between Ford and many other local sites. The presence of a
refuse. The enclosure was then re-cut in the immediate mid-first century farmstead pre-dating the Gosden Road villa
pre-conquest period: pottery from the fills of the re-cut (Figure 1, 15) has been suggested (Gilkes 1993), although
included Gallo-Belgic imports with a possible date range of there is no unequivocal evidence of the nature of occupation.
AD 18–45. There was also very little Samian ware and the Likewise, the proximity of a Late Iron Age – early Roman
coarse pottery displayed no forms that were considered to be settlement, associated with a field system and probably
later than the mid-late first century AD Excavation was not abandoned by the early 2nd century AD, has been inferred at
possible within the enclosed area and thus it is not known Rustington (Rudling 1990) (Figure 1, 5). The main phase of
if it contained settlement features such as huts and pits etc. occupation at Boxgrove (Bedwin and Place 1995) (Figure 1,
At Westhampnett, Area 5, five post-built round houses were 11) is dateable to the mid- to late-first century AD and appears
excavated and dated to the first century BC-first century to be associated with an enclosed landscape. A first to second
AD. century AD rural settlement was excavated at Middleton on
Sea (Barber 1994) (Figure 1, 16) with indications for one
possible post built small building and boundary/field ditches.
Whilst there is no direct evidence for domestic settlement Ditched trackways dating to the late-first/second century were
at Ford the assemblage of Late Iron Age pottery from ditch investigated at Littlehampton (Gilkes and Hammond 1991)
D10 does suggest its proximity in the early first century AD (Figure 1, 17). In general, the limited evidence suggests
This, in association with the field system itself, is additional small arable farmsteads operating in an enclosed landscape.
evidence that the apparent discontinuity is settlement between Where samples have been analysed, for example at Middleton
the end of the first century BC and the mid-first century AD on Sea and Boxgrove, wheat (spelt) is the dominant cereal.
is less real than evidence from other sites suggests (Bedwin Peas were also recovered from Middleton on Sea and as
and Holgate op. cit., 241). such the evidence from Ford accords well with the general
trends established for the coastal plain. Notwithstanding
Ditched trackways/droveways are a characteristic of Copse this, it would be wise not to underestimate the importance
Farm and, together with the ‘trackway’ at Ford and the of pastoralism in the local economy, albeit the evidence is
possible stock control enclosures at Great Hidden Farm, slight and at times indirect. In common with the evidence
may indicate the need to manage animals on a large scale presented above for the Late Iron Age it would appear that
and thus the importance of pastoralism in the local economy. cattle were numerically more important than sheep and pigs
Where animal bone has survived in significant quantities (Bedwin and Place op. cit.; Barber op. cit.)

17
Excavations at Ford Airfield

SPECIALIST REPORTS and Yapton (Hamilton 1987). The features associated with
the Selsey West Beach have been interpreted as well-pits
(Seager Thomas pers. comm.), which importantly adds
Early First Millenium Pottery of the West another category of early first millennium BC feature to
Sussex Coastal Plain be associated with Sussex Late Bronze Age pottery. Ford
Airfield is particularly important in providing an early first
By Sue Hamilton millennium BC assemblage from a range of contexts, namely
pits, ditches, trackways, and ‘levelling’ deposits. This de
Introduction facto suggests that the pottery may be more reflective of a
full domestic assemblage that the smaller samples recovered
The early first millennium BC assemblage from Ford from sites such as Knapp Farm and Yapton.
comprises 3316 sherds and weighs a total of 21.3kg. The
majority of this pottery can be dated to the early Late Bronze
Age, but some later Late Bronze Age/Early Iron Age forms Key first millennium BC pottery groups
are also present. This assemblage substantially adds to a
growing number of early first millennium BC assemblages The stratigraphic integrity of the Ford Airfield
now known from the West Sussex coastal plain (Gardiner pottery assemblage
and Hamilton 1997). Both in sherd numbers and weight this
is the largest early first millennium pottery assemblage yet This section discusses the key information concerning the
recovered from Sussex. Another important Late Bronze Age stratigraphic context of the Ford Airfield pottery. Further
assemblage from the West Sussex coastal plain comprises the details on the stratigraphic locations of all of the Ford pottery
recent finds from Selsey West Beach. The latter has produced are given in Tables 6-9. The stratigraphic presence of the
a similarly large weight of pottery, although fewer sherds (c. pottery clearly is important for the phasing of the site and
1300 sherds, Seager-Thomas pers. comm.). its features, and details of this are here given. It is however
equally important to consider the stratigraphic integrity of the
assemblage for isolating the nature of the activities associated
The stratigraphic context and spatial zonation of with pottery using. Such a consideration demonstrates that the
the pottery earliest first millennium BC assemblage (Late Bronze Age)
can be treated as a coherent coeval assemblage. Additionally,
The stratigraphic integrity of the assemblage there are early first millennium BC forms (associated with
Fabric Type 9, see later) which are later than the bulk of
In common with the other earliest first millennium BC the assemblage. These indicate a limited Early Iron Age
assemblages from Sussex, none of the Ford Airfield pottery is activity on site, not necessarily continuous with the original
in situ in terms of being recovered from the specific locations occupation (possibly a smaller scale reoccupation). Their
of its original use (Hamilton 1987). The Ford Airfield pottery association with Late Bronze Age sherds in some contexts
has been deposited in pits and ditches, either as an on-going also suggests some stratigraphic mixing of material (see
tradition of rubbish disposal and artefact decommissioning, Pit 4 and layer/deposit 1085), perhaps relating to this Early
or as a result of clearing on abandonment of the site. Much Iron Age activity. The general lack of early first millennium
of the pottery is of large pieces and is relatively un-abraded. BC sherds from the ploughsoil (Table 6), and the greater
This suggests that it was deposited into the features relatively presence of Iron Age and Roman, however, suggests that
soon after the pots went out of use. This pottery can therefore the majority of the early first millennium BC assemblage
be used to provide a terminus post quem for the feature’s remained undisturbed post deposition, and is thereby largely
active use. Given the absence of pottery of an immediately reflective of original on-site processes and activities.
preceding date, and minimal presence of pottery of an
immediately succeeding date, it can be presumed that this
un-abraded pottery assemblage relates to the community who Ford Airfield: securely stratified Early first
used and created the features. millennium BC pottery groups
A number of contexts contained un-abraded pottery.
Stratigraphic contexts for the first millennium BC This, together with the generally larger sherd size of such
pottery pottery, and the higher number of sherds in certain contexts
(unassociated with pottery of other periods), were the criteria
Recent finds of earliest first millennium BC pottery on which securely stratified pottery was isolated.
assemblages from the West Sussex coastal plain includes
those from Knapp Farm (Gardiner and Hamilton 1997), The trackway pottery
Yapton (Hamilton 1987), Selsey West Beach (Seager Thomas
1998) and Selsey East Beach (Kenny 1989), Birdham T2 (Context 1046: 16 sherds, Fig. 11). T2’s associated
(recent finds unpubl, Archaeology South East), Climping Ditches 1046/1073 have abraded sherds, but all of Late
(recent finds unpubl., Archaeology South East), Chichester Bronze Age type (Context 1086:2 sherds, Context 1087:
Westgate (recent finds, unpubl. Archaeology South East), 19 sherds). Collectively these are the earliest stratigraphic
and Rustington Site B (Hamilton 1990). Additionally, there contexts for the earliest first millennium BC assemblage.
are older, unstratified finds from Selsey Golf Links Lane The pottery is comparable with the pottery groups from the
(Hamilton 1993; White 1934). These sites have produced a pit complex that superimposes it. This indicates that they are
very restricted range of features associated with the pottery, essentially part of the same pottery assemblage and probably
the most recurrent pottery-bearing context being that of relate to a concentrated phase of site activity. Key pottery
a cluster of inter-cutting pits. This has been detailed on a forms: Externally expanded rim from a round-shouldered
small scale for Knapp Farm (Gardiner and Hamilton 1997) (?) jar (Fig. 11.1).

18
 Excavations at Ford Airfield

Table 6 Sherd counts for early first millennium BC pottery according to fabric types and site contexts: unstratified pottery
and pottery from cuts, tree throws, deposits, and cremations
Fabrics
CW MCW MCW MCW MCW MCW MCW FW FW FW UC
Contexts 1&2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Unstratified 36 10 2 22 0 0 0 0 0 2 0
P/soil 505 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
802 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
S/soil 602A 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0
Cut Fill
612 613 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
908 909 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1427 1426 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Tree Throws
1097 1096 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1492 1493 6 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1505 1506 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
Deposits 1085 471 19 11 5 0 5 0 0 102 0 0
1126 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0
Cremations 1296 3 0 0 0 0 1 0 7 0 0 5
Key CW=coarsewares; MCW=medium-coarse wares; FW= finewares; UC=Late Bronze Age fabrics which cannot be
further classified; P/soil= ploughsoil; S/soil=subsoil.
Table 7 Sherd counts for early first millennium BC pottery according to fabric types and site contexts: pottery from ditches
Fabrics
Contexts CW CW CW MCW MCW MCW MCW FW FW FW UC
Ditch Fill 1&2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
104 105 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
116 117 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
404 405 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
807 808 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
906 907 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1010 1000 0 3 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
1001 0 4 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
1004 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1
1021 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
1035 0 1 2 0 0 3 0 2 0 0 3
1046 u/s 4 0 1 6 1 0 0 1 0 0 3
1086 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1087 2 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 11
1079 1077 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 0
1080 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 0
1084 4 0 8 0 0 1 0 19 9 0 6
1093 1048 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1101 1114 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0
1199 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
1116 1115 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 25 0 0
1122 1109 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1165 1166 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1180 1182 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1183 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
1181 1184 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
1185 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1209 1211 0 1 0 0 0 2 0 1 0 2 0
1216 1217 0 6 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
1224 1223 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0
1227 1226 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 17 0 0
1295 2 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1278 1279 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
1281 1282 0 4 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 2 0
1286 1290 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
1478 1479 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
1496 1497 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1499 1501 0 12 0 5 0 0 1 3 0 0 0
1502 1503 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1504 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 2 0 0
Key CW=coarsewares; MCW=medium-coarsewares; FW= finewares; UC= Late Bronze Age fabrics which cannot be
further classified; u/s=unstratified.

19
Excavations at Ford Airfield

Table 8 Sherd counts for early first millennium BC pottery according to fabric types and site contexts: pottery from pits
Fabrics
Contexts CW MCW MCW MCW MCW MCW MCW FW FW FW UC
Pit Fill 1&2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
510 509 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0
803 804 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
817 818 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1063 1047 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1058 1059 0 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 2
1104 1102 0 6 266 2 0 0 0 48 0 0 315
1111 1112 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
1116 1115 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 25 0 1
1127 1128 11 1 6 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
1136 1110 28 3 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1200 34 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0
1137 1113 242 175 64 0 165 0 0 15 11 5 0
1140 1141 4 4 0 17 0 0 0 2 1 0 34
1162 19 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
1176 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0
1177 19 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1187 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
1169 1170 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1274 1273 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1275 1242 32 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
1276 1202 3 16 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0
1240 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1241 1 6 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0
1261 7 8 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 18
1263 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1264 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1265 0 9 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1277 1234 1 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
1284 1235 18 33 8 5 0 0 0 0 3 1 0
1237 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1349 1350 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
1414 1415 2 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1420 1421 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
1428 1429 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1444 1445 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1507 1508 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Key CW=coarsewares; MCW=medium-coarsewares; FW=finewares; UC=Late Bronze Age fabrics which cannot be
further classified.

Table 9 Sherd counts for early first millennium BC pottery according to fabric types and site contexts: pottery from
postholes
Fabrics
Context CW MCW MCW MCW MCW MCW MCW FW FW FW UC
P/hole Fill 1&2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
603 604 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
605 606 0 0 2 10 2 0 0 0 0 0 0
809 810 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
819 820 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 1 0 0
904 905 0 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
914 0 53 0 0 0 0 0 21 0 0 0
915 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1020 1019 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1028 1027 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1042 1041 37 0 0 12 0 0 0 73 0 0 105
1067 1066 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1178 1179 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1207 1208 41 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1220 1221 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0
1255 1256 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1442 1443 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Key CW=coarsewares; MCW=medium-coarsewares; FW=finewares; UC=Late Bronze Age fabrics which cannot be
further classified.

20
 Excavations at Ford Airfield

The pit complex pottery groups Figure 7 Late Broze Age Pit Complex
The Ford Airfield inter-cutting pits are a distinctive type of
feature complex which is recurrently associated with Late
Bronze Age pottery on the West Sussex coastal plain. The
Ford Airfield complex has a stratigraphic sequencing, with Pit
4 being the most recent and Pits 3 and 6 the oldest. The pottery
from these pits, however, has no obvious internal chronology,
having collectively a range of types commonly associated
with earliest Late Bronze Age pottery (c. 10th-8th centuries
cal BC). These forms include round-shouldered jars and
bowls, often with flat-topped rims (e.g. Figs 11.4 and 12.10)
or internally folded-over rims (e.g. Fig. 12.11). Decoration is
virtually absence from these forms. A chronological oddity
is the foot-ring base (Fig. 12.19) from Pit 4. This is a form
associated with Early Iron Age pottery assemblages and
perhaps is intrusive from later on-site activity.

The pit complex pottery suggests that the sequence of activity

which the pits represent was relatively short in time, and
that several of these pits were probably open at one time.
Spread 1085 and Pit 4 (1113) and Post-hole 2 have sherds,
for example, from the same or very similar pots (Figs. 12.17
and 14.42). This again suggests a concentrated phase of site
clearing with several other features being open/active coeval
with the pit complex. Both Pit 3 and Pit 4 are dominated by
coarsewares and may have received direct deposition from
a specific task area (relating to storage and cooking), rather
from more general midden debris.

The pit complex pottery groups are detailed below in Later/mixed? pottery groups from pits
stratigraphic order of earliest to latest) (see also Fig. 7): These pit groups of pottery suggest a limited reuse of the
site in the Early Iron Age. They include later diagnostic form
Pit 6 (1275): Context 1265 (12 sherds), Context 1242 (33 sherds types, but also include the continued presence of medium and
including Fig. 11.2-4). Key pottery forms: necked
coarseware Fabric Types characteristic of the Late Bronze
round-shouldered jars with rounded or bevelled
rims. Age assemblage as a whole. The dating of the later forms is
discussed further in a later section of this pottery report.
Pit 3 (1136): (Context 1110: 39 sherds, Figs 11.5-7, Context
1200: 36 sherds). Key pottery forms: straight-sided
vessels with cabled rim tops. Pit 1 (510): This pit has a single fill, Context 508 (31 sherds,
Fig. 17.57. Key pottery forms: the one diagnostic
Pit 5 (1140): Context 1141 (6 sherds); Context 1162 (20 sherds),
form type (Fig. 17.57) is a fineware (Fabric Type
Context 1176 (17 sherds, including Fig. 12.9-10),
11), cordon-groove shoulder from a bowl with a
Context 1177: (19 sherds including Fig. 12.8). Key
flaring rim. This is a latest Late Bronze Age/Early
pottery forms: round-shouldered jars with up-turned
Iron Age type. The 25 coarse ware body sherds
rims.
are however in line with those from the early Late
Pit 7 (1276): Context 1202 (21 sherds), Context 1240 (3 sherds), Bronze Age assemblage as a whole.
Context 1241 (9 sherds), Context 1261 (35 sherds),
Pit 2 (1104): This pit has a single fill, Context 1102 (641 sherds,
Context 1262 (1 sherd), Context 1263 (6 sherds),
Fig. 17.58). Key pottery forms: a fineware shoul-
Context 1264 (7 sherds). Key pottery forms: finger-
dered jar with out-turned rim and foot-ring base
grooved sherds; 1 sherd from shouldered bowl.
(Fabric Type 9: Fig. 17.58), and parts of a medium
Pit 4: 1137: (Context 1113: 677 sherds including Fig. 12.11-18) coarseware (Fabric Type 4) shouldered jar with
This pottery group has an associated radiocarbon short flaring neck (not illustrated). These forms are
result of cal BC 1120-820 (BETA- 144446 2800 660 later than the earliest Late Bronze Age forms, and
BP). Key pottery forms: necked, shouldered jars/ the vessel with a foot-ring base suggests an Early
bowls (Figs 12.11, 13, and 14) including one with Iron Age dating for the feature.
a flattened cabled rim top (Fig. 12.16), a shouldered
jar/bowl with out-turned rim (Fig. 12.17), convex
jars (Fig. 12.18) and one foot-ring base (Fig. 12.19). Pottery groups from postholes
The radiocarbon date (early Late Bronze Age) for
this context is in line with its recovered pottery, with Three of the postholes produced early first millennium BC
the exception of a foot-ring base in Fabric 9 (see pottery groups.
above). Some Early Iron Age pottery forms occur
on site (see Figs 17.52, 17.57 and 18.59) and the PH3 (1208: 41 sherds, Fig. 15.49-50). This posthole
foot-ring probably ‘belongs’ with these and suggests pottery group is the only one that has wholly early
a limited stratigraphic disturbance of the context. Late Bronze Age types. Key pottery forms: a round-
The overlying layer 1235/1085 has a coherent as- shouldered jar with a flattened out-turned rim (Fig.
semblage that would fit with a wholly Late Bronze 15.49) and a barrel-shaped jar with a flat-rounded
Age dating. rim (Fig. 15.50).

21
Excavations at Ford Airfield

Figure 8 Enclosure 2

PH1 This posthole contains three fills (905: 14 sherds, rimed bowl (Fig. 17.52) is characteristic of the later
914: 74 sherds, Figs. 15.47-48, and 915:1 sherd). Late Bronze Age/Early Iron Age.
Key pottery forms: Shouldered bowl with flaring
neck, rounded rim and flat-rounded out-curved Pottery groups from the ditches
base (Fig. 15.47) and a round-shouldered jar with
flattened, cabled rim (Fig. 15.48). The first form is Nearly all of the ditches lacked early first millennium BC
characteristic of the later Late Bronze Age/Early pottery groups. Ditch 1116 (T2) (1115: 27 sherds) solely
Iron Age, and suggests that the pottery group is contained Late Bronze Age body sherds and in sufficient
contemporary with that from PH2 (1042). quantities to suggest a similar dating for the ditch.
PH2 (1041: 227 sherds). This posthole has a single fill
which produced a very similar range of sherds to
that from PH1. Key pottery forms: a large round- Pottery groups from layers
shouldered jar with flat-topped rim and a splayed
base (Fig. 16.51); a shouldered bowl with flaring, Layer 1085 /1235 (Figs 13.20-14.46) produced substantial
rounded rim (Fig. 17.52); and a round-shouldered quantities of Late Bronze Age pottery. This pottery group has
vessel with a flattened, pie-crusted rim (Fig. 17.53). a full range of fabric types, and lacks Fabric Type 9 which is
These are all Late Bronze Age forms but the flaring associated with the Early Iron Age foot-ring bases (Table 6).

22
 Excavations at Ford Airfield

Figure 9 Sections

23
 Excavations at Ford Airfield
Figure 10 Sections

24
 Excavations at Ford Airfield

The context is stratigraphicaly secure in lacking post earlier be grouped into coarsewares (2 fabric types, 27% of sherd
first millennium BC finds. Context 1085 has an associated numbers), medium-coarse wares (6 fabrics types, 35% of
date of 1100-820 cal BC (BETA 144445 2820 660 BP). sherd numbers) and finewares (3 fabric types comprising
Key pottery forms: the forms from Layer 1085/1235 are in 13% of sherd numbers) The greatest number of fabric types
line with the later end of the associated radiocarbon dating. is in the medium-coarse ware category. A further 15% of
This is on the basis of the presence of forms with expanded the sherds were classifiable as Late Bronze Age sherds, but
rims (e.g. Fig. 13.20), flared-neck bowls and jars (e.g. Fig. precise attributions to specific fabric types was impossible
14.40), and occasionally decorated rims (e.g. Fig. 14.40) and due to their small size and abraded state.
shoulders (e.g. Fig. 13.33). Some forms relate to the same
vessels (Fig. 12.17 and 14.42) and similar vessels (e.g. Fig. The collection was recorded using the pottery recording
13.20 and 13.27) from Pit 4, which has produced a similar system recommended by the PCRG (1992). All sherds were
radiocarbon date range. assigned a fabric type after macroscopic examination and
the use of x10 magnification. All sherds were counted and
Abraded and residual first millennium BC pottery weighed to the nearest whole gramme.
Many of the Ford Airfield features have abraded earliest Coarsewares
first millennium BC sherds which have worked their way
into features as a by-product of on site activities and /or Some of the coarsest and thickest sherds (Fabric Type 1)
post-abandonment site activities. These sherds belong to the are reminiscent of Middle Bronze Age fabrics. Overall, the
original earliest first millennium BC assemblage and can be indications are that West Sussex has coarser Late Bronze
used to consider the range of vessel types that comprise the Age fabrics than East Sussex. Tables 6-10 collate Fabrics
assemblage. They however must be used with caution as a Types 1 and 2 together, since they are somewhat overlapping
tool for dating features, or for directly suggesting on-site and Fabric Type 1 has only one diagnostic form sherd (Fig.
locations for specific activities: earliest first millennium BC 12.10). The average weight per sherd is high (about 8 gms,
sherds are for instance residual in Late Iron Age features. Table 10) reflecting the size of the flint inclusions and the
thickness of vessel walls in these fabrics.
Residual pottery in pits
Diagnostic forms
Some of the pits/postholes predominantly contain Late Iron
Age pottery and/or later pottery, and here the Late Bronze Age Barrel-shaped jars (Fig. 15.50 and 18.60), together with
pottery is clearly residual. The pits with residual pottery are round-shouldered vessels, variously with rounded (Fig. 13.21
as follows: PH6 (1020), 1063 (1047) and P12 (1420/1421). and 13.27), bevelled (Fig. 11.3) and flat-topped internal
Other pits solely contained Late Bronze Age, but this is too and externally expanded rims (Fig. 13.20 and 13.22-24)
small in quantity and too eroded to use them as a means of characterize the coarsewares. Some of these rims have
dating the pits. These are: 817 (818), 1058 (1059), 1169 cabled tops. There is occasional fingertip decoration on the
(1170), 1274 (1273), 1277 (1234), 1349 (1350), 1414 (1415), shoulder. Evidence of building and finishing technology
1444 (1445), and 1507 (1508). comprises finger-furrowing or finger-smearing (Fig. 13.20,
13.31), finger-pressing (Fig. 13.26) and finger-pinching (Fig.
13.30) including out-turned finger-pinched bases (Fig. 11.2,
Residual pottery in postholes
11.8, and 14.36-37) and occasional heavily gritted bases (Fig.
The following postholes contained pottery that was too 14.34). Decoration is rare, but includes a fingertip-impressed
minimal, or abraded pottery for secure dating of the feature: shoulder (Fig. 13.33).
603 (604), 809 (810), 819 (820), 1028 (1027), 1178 (1179),
1067 (1066), 1040 (1187), 1220 (1221), 1255 (1256), 1442 Fabric types
(1443).
Fabric Type 1: very coarse flint-tempered
Residual pottery in ditches Very coarse, relatively abundant (40% density), poorly sorted,
grey and white calcined pebble- and granule-sized calcined flint
Amongst the Late Bronze Age pottery residual in later tempering measuring up to 8mm across. Surfaces and core are
ditches, diagnostic form sherds include those from D16 oxidized an orange/buff colour. Sherd cross-sections measure up
(1004): Fig. 17.56, D6 (1226); Fig. 18.60-62 and D12 (1084): to 13mm thick.
Fig. 18. 59. Diagnostic Late Bronze Age forms from D6
as a whole comprise rims from straight-sided and round- Fabric Type 2: coarse flint-tempered
shouldered jars. Very common (30% density), poorly sorted coarse grey and white
pebble and granule-sized calcined flint-tempering measuring up
Pottery fabrics and their associated form types to 6mm across. Exterior surfaces are an oxidized buff colour,
and have wiped finishes. Interior surfaces and cores are generally
Fabric range unoxidized a dark-brown colour. Occasional grog specks (2-3 mm)
are sometimes visible on the surface but are difficult to quantify.
The Ford Airfield assemblage has a wide variability in precise Sherd cross-sections measure up to 12mm thick.
fabrics, suggesting small-scale, perhaps frequent production,
rather than occasional larger scale production. For these Medium-coarsewares
reasons it was decided to group the fabrics into general
Diagnostic forms
fabric types, rather than describe individual fabrics that
often related to individual pots. Fabric types were isolated Shouldered bowls and jars, sometimes with short flaring
on the basis of dominant inclusion types, the density and necks (Fig. 11.4, 14.42, 14.44, and 14.46), or longer flaring
size of inclusions, and the firing characteristics and surface necks (Fig. 14.47) are common. Rims are variously flat (Fig.
finishes. Eleven fabric types were thus defined. These can 12.14), out-turned or rounded, or expanded (Figs. 12.11,

25
Excavations at Ford Airfield

12.13 and 12.16). Some of the rims have fingertip, cable- density) of very fine (0.25mm) quartz sand. Interior and exterior
effect decoration (Fig. 11.5, 11.7, 12.16, 14.40, and 17.53). surfaces are oxidized and coloured buff. Cores are unoxidized and
Convex jars are also present (Fig. 12.18, 17.54, and 17.55). coloured dark brown to black. Sherd cross-sections average 8mm
Bases are often finger-pinched and expanded (Fig. 12.15), and thick.
sometimes have heavily gritted bases (Fig. 12.12). Average
sherd weights are variable (Table 10) with Fabrics Types 3 Fabric Type 6: medium quartz sand with some fine flint-
and 4 being comparable to Fabrics Types 1 and 2. The fabrics temper
with quartz sand inclusions are much more friable (Table 10, Medium-coarse (0.5mm) quartz sand, and occasional (5% density)
Fabrics Types 5-7) and of smaller average size (1-4 gms). coarse sand-sized (1mm) flint tempering. The surfaces are oxidized
dark red to orange in colour, and the cores are dark brown to black in
Fabric Types colour and unoxidized. Sherd cross-sections average 7mm thick.
Fabric Type 3: abundant, medium flint-tempered Fabric Type 7: abundant medium to coarse quartz sand
Variant 3a: Well-sorted, abundant (40% density) granule- and very with sparse fine flint temper
coarse sand-sized flint tempering comprising fire-cracked white
Abundant (50% density), medium to coarse (0.25 to 1.0 mm) quartz
and occasionally grey coloured grits measuring up to 4mm across.
sand. Sparse (3% density) very coarse sand-sized and granule-sized
There are rare irregular, red iron-oxide inclusions measuring up to
(2 to 3mm) calcined flint tempering of white, and grey, colours. The
4mm across. Surfaces and cores are oxidized to an orange colour.
exterior, and sometimes the interior surfaces are usually oxidized
Sherd cross-sections measure up to 8mm thick.
a buff to orange colour. The core is dark brown in colour and
Variant 3b:This fabric is the same as variant 3a with the addition unoxidized. External surfaces have traces of smoothing.
of rare to sparse granule-sized (2mm) grog inclusions (2% to
3% density: only apparent on the surface), and the presence of Fabric Type 8: fired out chaff/organic inclusions
an exterior surface coating. This coating is patchy and orange in Moderately abundant flat (5mm long) voids where chaff/organic
colour. It suggests a slip, or iron-rich powder coating which has been temper has been fired out. The fabric is wholly coloured dark brown
burnished onto the leather-hard pottery prior to firing. and unoxidized throughout.
Variant 3c: Well-sorted abundant medium-sized flint tempering
Finewares
comprising fire-cracked white-coloured grits measuring up to
4mm across (as variant 3a). Surfaces and cores are an unoxidized These wares have a relatively high average weight per sherd (Table
dark brown to black in colour. Sherd cross sections measure up to 10, 4-6gms) given that they come from thinner-walled vessels
9mm thick. and that their quartz sand inclusion increases their friability. This
suggests that they were probably cleared/deposited into features
Fabric Type 4: sparse, medium flint-tempered with fired-
more rapidly that other vessels. Fabric Type 9 is associated with
out vegetation Early Iron Age forms.
Medium to sparse (7% to 10% density) of granule-sized (up to 4mm)
Diagnostic forms
grey and white calcined flint tempering, together with occasional
fired out vegetation (up to 5mm long). Rare (2% density) mica flecks The finewares are associated with thin-walled shouldered bowls,
are present, and the surfaces sometimes have a silky appearance. with flaring necks and rounded rims (e.g. Fig. 12.9, 14.43 and
There are occasional wiped surfaces. Surfaces are generally oxidized 17.52), together with bipartite bowls with rounded (Fig. 13.28),
buff coloured, and cores are an unoxidized dark brown/black colour. or up-turned rims (Fig. 17.59, and 18.61) and in some instances
Occasional grog specks (2-3mm) are sometimes visible on the (Fabric 9) foot-ring bases (Fig. 12.19, and 17.58). Fabric Type
surfaces, but are difficult to quantify. Sherd cross-sections measure 11 has one diagnostic form association of a shouldered bowl with
up to 9mm thick. incised-cordon groove on the shoulder (Fig. 17.57). The fineware
Fabric Types occur associated with Late Bronze Age types but
Fabric Type 5: fine quartz sand and medium flint-
Fabric Types 9 and 11 are more specifically associated with Early
tempered Iron Age forms notably the foot-ring bases, and the cordon-groove
Sparse (7% density) small pebble and granule sized calcined flint shoulder (Tables 6-9, and see above).
tempering (up to 5mm), together with moderate quantities (15%
Fabric Types
Table 10 Average sherd weight according to fabric type for
Fabric Type 9: abundant fine flint-tempered (10)
the first millennium BC assemblage
Fabrics Wgt No. ASW Well-sorted, moderately abundant (40% density), very coarse sand-
1/2 10492 1233 8.5 sized (1mm) flint tempering. The core is coloured dark-brown and
3 3590 433 8.3 is unoxidized. The surfaces are patchily oxidized and coloured buff
4 3695 398 9.3 to orange. The outer surfaces have some signs of burnishing, and
5 521 123 4.2 form a sharply defined outer layer, which includes rare to sparse
(2% to 3% density) iron oxides. Sherd cross-sections average
6 195 163 1.2
9mm thick.
7 102 25 4.1
8 26 9 2.9 Fabric Type 10: common medium-fine flint tempering
9 1283 201 6.4 (9)
10 862 198 4.4
Common (20% density), well-sorted very coarse sand-sized
11 139 24 5.8 (1.5mm) white flint temper (NB fire-cracking not clearly evident).
UC 470 509 0.9 The surfaces and cores are unoxidized dark brown to black in colour.
Totals 21375 3316 6.4 The surfaces are smoothed. Occasional grog specks are sometimes
Key Wgt= weight in grams; No.= number of sherds; visible on the surfaces, but are difficult to quantify. Sherd cross-
ASW= average sherd weight sections average 9mm thick.

26
 Excavations at Ford Airfield

Fabric Type 11: very fine quartz sand inclusions (8) 15. Context 1113 (Pit 4). Finger-pinched, slightly expanded
base. Yellow-red exterior surface; dark grey, finger-smeared
The fabric is characterized by moderately abundant (45% density), interior surface; dark grey core. Fabric Type 3.
very fine quartz sand inclusions (0.25mm). The surfaces are lightly
burnished and black to dark grey in colour, with an oxidized pink/red 16. Context 1113 (Pit 4). Finger-pinched, flared neck with flat,
inner margin immediately below the exterior surface. Cores are deeply cabled, internally and externally expanded (‘hammer-
coloured dark brown/black and are unoxidized. Sherd cross-sections head’) rim. Slightly yellow-red exterior and interior surfaces;
average 8mm thick. slightly yellow-red core. Fabric Type 3.
17. Context 1113 (Pit 4). Shouldered-jar. Flared neck with
Catalogue of illustrated early first millennium slightly flattened rim. Smooth yellow-red exterior surface;
BC pottery grey-brown interior surface. Surface colours continue into
core. Fabric Type 4 (with some grog). Does not conjoin but
Figures 11-18 is probably the same vessel as illustration 42, Context 1085.
Possibly the same vessel as illustration 41.
1. Context 1046 (Trackway 2). Finger-pinched, flared neck with
flat, expanded rim. Yellow-red interior and exterior surfaces; 18. Context 1113 (Pit 4). Convex jar. Internally beveled (hooked)
dark grey core. Burnt. Fabric Type 9. rim and flat, out-curving base. Red to slightly yellow-red
exterior surfaces; dark grey to dark brown, finger-smeared,
2. Context 1242 (Pit 6). Finger-pinched, flat, straight-sided base. interior surfaces; dark grey core. Rim burnt. Fabric Type 3.
Possible finger-smeared, red exterior surfaces and abraded,
black interior surfaces; red core. Fabric Type 2. 19. Context 1113 (Pit 4). Foot-ring base. Burnished, grey-brown
exterior and slightly red-brown interior surfaces; grey core.
3. Context 1242 (Pit 6). Angular-shouldered jar. Slightly finger-
Fabric Type 9.
pinched, upright to slightly flared neck with flat, internally
beveled rim. Yellow grey surfaces and core. Red shadow over 20. Context 1085. Shouldered jar. Internally finger-furrowed
parts of breaks and surfaces indicate burning. Fabric Type shoulder with flat, internally expanded rim. Yellow-red
2. exterior surface; grey brown interior surface. Surface colours
continue into core. Fabric Type 2.
4. Context 1242 (Pit 6). Round-shouldered jar. Slightly finger-
pinched, flared neck with flat to rounded rim. Yellow-red 21. Context 1085. Round-shouldered jar. Slightly flared, angular,
interior and exterior surfaces; yellow-red break; grey-brown fingered neck with flat to rounded rim. Yellow-red exterior
core. Burnt. Fabric Type 3. surfaces; buff interior surfaces and core. Fabric Type 2 (with
some grog).
5. Context 1110 (Pit 3). Flat, in-turned, externally expanded,
cabled rim. Finger-smeared, dark-brown exterior and brown 22. Context 1085. Round-shouldered jar. Finger-pinched, deeply
interior surfaces. Surface colours continue into core. Fabric in-curved neck with flat, externally and internally expanded
Type 4. (hammer-head) rim. Finger-smeared, dark brown to yellow-
6. Context 1110 (Pit 3). Flat, expanded base. Yellow-red to red exterior surface; finger-smeared, grey-brown to buff
brown exterior and dark brown interior surfaces; dark grey interior surfaces; dark grey core. Fabric Type 2.
core. Fabric Type 4. 23. Context 1085. Slightly flared neck with flat, internally
7. Context 1110 (Pit 3). Flat, possibly cabled rim. Grey to expanded rim. Slightly yellow-red exterior surface; finger-
red-grey exterior surface colour, and grey-coloured interior smeared, yellow-red interior surface; yellow-red core. Fabric
surface and core. Fabric Type 3. Type 2.

8. Context 1177 (Pit 5). Possible finger-pinched foot-ring 24. Context 1085. Finger-pinched, squared, slightly internally
(identification uncertain owing to abrasion). Yellow-red expanded rim. Red exterior surface; buff interior surface.
exterior and interior surfaces; yellow-red core. Fabric Type Surface colours continue into the core. Fabric Type 2.
2. 25. Context 1085. Flat rim. Yellow-red exterior surface; dark
9. Context 1176 (Pit 5). Possible tri-partite bowl. Flared neck grey interior surface and core. Fabric Type 2.
with rounded rim. Possibly burnished, yellow-brown exterior 26. Context 1085 Angular shouldered bowl or jar. Finger-smeared
and interior surfaces; yellow-brown core. Fabric Type 11. and internally impressed shoulder with sharply in-curved
10. Context 1176 (Pit 5). Round shouldered jar. Slightly flaring neck. Dark grey exterior and interior surfaces; dark grey core.
neck with flat rim. Yellow-red to buff exterior and interior Fabric Type 2.
surfaces; yellow-red to buff coloured core. Fabric Type 1 27. Context 1085. Rounded to slightly flattened rim. Dark grey
(with occasional grog). to dark brown exterior surface and core; finger-smeared dark
11. Context 1113 (Pit 4). Possible shouldered jar. Finger-pinched grey to dark brown interior surface. Fabric Type 2.
upper shoulder and upright neck with flat, possibly folded, 28. Context 1085. Possible bowl. Rounded rim with slight internal
internally expanded rim. Yellow-red coloured exterior and bevel. Buff exterior surface; roughly burnished, dark grey
interior surfaces and core. Fabric Type 3. interior surface. Fabric Type 10.
12. Context 1113 (Pit 4). Flat, expanded, heavily gritted, base. 29. Context 1085. Finger-pinched cordon. Finger-smeared, dark
Slightly yellow-red surfaces and core. Fabric Type 3. brown interior surface; dark grey core. Red to slightly yellow-
13. Context 1113 (Pit 4). Flat, slightly externally expanded rim. red exterior surface and broken edges indicates burning.
Yellow-red interior and exterior surfaces; yellow-red break; Fabric Type 2.
grey-brown core. Burnt. Fabric Type 3. 30. Context 1085. Flat, finger-pinched, very slightly externally
14. Context 1113 (Pit 4). Slightly flared neck with flat rim. Finger- expanded rim. Red exterior surfaces; yellow-red interior
smeared, dark grey exterior and interior surfaces; dark grey surfaces. Surface colours continue into core: possibly burnt.
core. Fabric Type 3. Fabric Type 2.

27
Excavations at Ford Airfield

31. Context 1085. Curved, lightly finger-impressed, body sherd. 48. Context 914 (PH1). Round shouldered jar. Internally fingered,
Red to buff exterior surface; finger-smeared, dark grey slightly flared neck with flat, internally and externally
interior surface; dark grey core. Fabric Type 2. Resembles expanded (‘hammer-head’), cabled rim. Buff to yellow-red
decoration on No. 51. exterior surface; light, slightly yellow-grey, interior surface
and a grey core. Fabric Type 9. Different fabric but resembles
32. Context 1085. Flat rim. Finger-smeared dark grey to dark
vessel No. 49, context 1208.
brown surfaces; dark grey core. Fabric Type 2.
33. Context 1085. Fingertip-impressed shoulder with sharply in- 49. Context 1208 (PH3). Round shouldered jar. Finger-pinched
curved neck. Finger-smeared, dark brown surfaces; dark grey shoulder and slightly flared neck with flat, cabled rim. Yellow
core. Buff patch on outer surface and broken edge indicates red exterior surfaces; yellow red breaks; dark grey core.
burning. Fabric Type 2. Burnt. Fabric Type 2. Different fabric but resembles vessel
No. 48, context 914.
34. Context 1085. Flat, expanded, heavily gritted, base. Slightly
yellow-red exterior surface and core. No surviving interior 50. Context 1208 (PH3). Possible barrel-shaped jar. Neck with
surface. Fabric Type 2. flat to rounded rim. Yellow-red to buff surfaces; dark grey
core. Fabric Type 2.
35. Context 1085. Flat, straight-sided, heavily gritted base. Dark
brown exterior surface; dark grey interior surface and core. 51. Context 1041 (PH2). Shouldered jar. Lightly finger-impressed
Fabric Type 2. shoulder, finger-pinched, upright neck, and expanded base
36. Context 1085. Flat, slightly expanded base. Dark buff to with finger pinched wall. Red surfaces and breaks; grey core
yellow-red exterior surface; yellow-red interior surface and (base); yellow-red to buff surfaces and breaks; grey core (neck
core. Fabric Type 2. and shoulder). Burnt. Fabric Type 2.

37. Context 1085. Flat, slightly expanded base. Yellow red 52. Context 1041 (PH2). Round-shouldered bowl. Internally
surfaces and core. Fabric Type 2. fingered shoulder, flared neck with rounded rim and flat, out-
curved base. Burnished, buff to dark grey exterior surface;
38. Context 1085. Flat, out-curved base with finger impression at
buff to dark grey interior surface. Dark grey core. Probably
base of wall. Yellow-red exterior surface; dark brown interior
burnt. Fabric Type 9.
surface and core. Fabric Type 2 (with some grog).
39. Context 1085. Flat, out-curved base. Buff surfaces; dark grey 53. Context 1041 (PH2). Flat, externally expanded cabled
core. Fabric Type 2. rim. Finger-smeared dark grey-brown exterior and interior
surfaces. Brown core. Fabric Type 5.
40. Context 1085. Round-shouldered jar. Flared neck with flat,
cabled rim. Possibly burnished, yellow-red to yellow-brown 54. Context 117 (T2). Possible convex jar. Rounded, slightly
exterior surface; yellow-brown interior surface; grey-brown out-turned, rim with knob. Dark grey exterior surface and
core. Fabric Type 4 (with some grog). core; dark grey-brown interior surface. Fabric Type 4.
41. Context 1085. Round-shouldered jar. Flared neck with flat, 55. Context 405 (D1). Possible convex or barrel shaped jar. Flat
externally beveled, rim. Smooth buff to yellow-red exterior to rounded rim. Finger-smeared, dark grey-brown surfaces;
surface; finger-smeared buff to dark brown interior surface. dark grey core. Fabric Type 4.
Buff core. Red patch on interior surface and broken edge
indicates burning. Fabric Type 4 (some grog). Possibly same 56. Context 1004 (D16). Slightly flared neck with rounded
vessel as Nos. 17 and 42. rim. Burnished black exterior and dark red-brown interior
surfaces. Surface colours continue into core. Fabric Type 7.
42. Context 1085. Shouldered-jar. Flared neck with slightly
flattened rim. Roughly burnished yellow-red exterior surface; 57. Context 509 (P13). Possible groove-cordoned bowl.
grey-brown– dark brown interior surface. Surface colours Burnished, dark grey-brown surfaces; brown-grey core. Red-
continue into core. Fabric Type 4 (with some grog). Does brown patch on interior surface and break indicates burning.
not conjoin but probably the same vessel as No. 17, context Fabric Type 11.
1113. Possibly the same vessel as no. 41. 58. Context 1102 (Pit 2). Round shouldered bowl. Flared neck
43. Context 1085. Flared neck with rounded rim. Burnished, dark with rounded rim, an internally fingered shoulder, and a
grey interior and exterior surfaces; buff core. Fabric Type 10 foot-ring base. Burnished, dark grey surfaces; dark grey core.
(with some grog). Fabric Type 9.
44. Context 1085. Round-shouldered jar. Slightly flared neck 59. Context 1084 (Late Iron Age/Early Roman pit). Flat to
with flat, burnished, very slightly expanded rim. Possibly rounded, slightly out-turned, rim. Burnished, dark grey
burnished, yellow red to buff exterior surface; dark grey exterior surface; dark red-brown interior surface; yellow-
interior surface and core. Fabric Type 3. brown to red-brown core. Fabric Type 10.
45. Context 1235. Flat, out-curving base. Burnished, slightly 60. Context 1126 (Late Iron Age/Early Roman deposit). Possible
yellow-red exterior and interior surfaces; slightly yellow-red barrel-shaped jar. Neck with flat rim. Finger-smeared dark
breaks; grey core. Burnt. Fabric Type 4 (with some grog). grey-brown exterior and grey-brown interior surfaces;
46. Context 1235. Slightly flared neck with flat rim. Finger mottled brown core. Fabric Type 2.
smeared, yellow-red to buff exterior surface; yellow-red to
61. Context 1126 (Late Iron Age/Early Roman deposit). Flat
buff interior surface and core. Fabric Type 4.
to rounded, slightly externally expanded, rim. Possibly
47. Context 914 (PH1). Narrow, round-shouldered bowl. Flared burnished, dark grey brown exterior and dark grey interior
neck with rounded rim and flat to rounded, out-curved base. surfaces; dark grey core. Fabric Type 10.
Burnished yellow-red to buff un-abraded exterior and interior
surfaces. Dark grey weathered surfaces and core. Fabric Type 62. Context 1126 (Late Iron Age/Early Roman deposit). Flat rim.
3. Dark grey brown surfaces and core. Fabric Type 2.

28
 Excavations at Ford Airfield

Figure 11 Early First Millennium Pottery

29
Excavations at Ford Airfield

Figure 12 Early First Millennium Pottery

30
 Excavations at Ford Airfield

Figure 13 Early First Millennium Pottery

31
Excavations at Ford Airfield

Figure 14 Early First Millennium Pottery

32
 Excavations at Ford Airfield

Figure 15 Early First Millennium Pottery

33
Excavations at Ford Airfield

Figure 16 Early First Millennium Pottery

34
 Excavations at Ford Airfield

Figure 17 Early First Millennium Pottery

35
Excavations at Ford Airfield

Figure 18 Early First Millennium Pottery

The range of diagnostic types and their technological traits which characterize Late Bronze Age
chronology assemblages from Lowland Britain. These traits have
been widely noted for Sussex Early first millennium BC
Functional range assemblages (Gardiner and Hamilton 1997; Hamilton 1987)
The Ford Airfield early first millennium BC assemblage and the Ford Airfield Late Bronze Age pottery assemblage
is associated with an extensive range of Late Bronze Age is fully concurrent with these traditions (e.g. see Fig. 11.2,
pottery types, (as first defined by Barrett 1980 for Lowland 11.5, 11.8, and 12.12, 12.15, and 12.16).
England), including barrel-shaped and convex jars, and
Fabrics
shouldered bowls and jars. Of note are the large size of several
of the jars and bowls (e.g. Fig. 11.3 and 16.51). Other well- The temper and inclusion components of the coarseware, and
documented Late Bronze Age assemblages from Lowland medium-coarseware fabrics are similar to those from Selsey
Britain which include this large-size range include those West Beach, Yapton and Knapp Farm, and comprise locally
from Selsey West Beach (Seager Thomas 1998) on the West available materials. The coastal plain Brickearths would
Sussex coastal plain, and Runnymede, Surrey (Needham and have provided potting clay and flint- gravel for tempering.
Spence 1996). Vessels of this size must be for storage, and Flint would have been available from further afield on the
their presence suggests that a full range of on-site domestic Downs. The presence of occasional grog-temper also occurs
activities took place. Indisputable evidence for drinking at Yapton (Fabric 4, Hamilton 1987) and Knapp Farm (Fabric
vessels (hemispherical bowls and cups), as noted locally 3, Gardiner and Hamilton 1997) but is absent from Selsey
at Yapton and Selsey West Beach, and further east at the West Beach.
pre-hillfort enclosure of Thundersbarrow Hill (Hamilton
1993) is absent from the Ford Airfield assemblage. Possible Decoration
examples do however occur in Context 1350 (too fragmentary
for illustration). Ford Airfield, together with Selsey West The small amount of decoration, and its restricted range,
Beach (Seager Thomas 1998), are exceptional assemblages associated with the Ford Airfield pottery suggests a dating
in terms of their range of forms compared to other Sussex later than the very beginning of the first millennium BC
Late Bronze Age assemblages, particularly those from the (Barrett1980; Hamilton 1993), but earlier than sites such as
coastal plain. These other assemblages each have only a Yapton, and Selsey West Beach, which have a fuller range of
restricted number of elements of the full Late Bronze Age decoration. A more extensive use of decoration is commonly
assemblage range. The latter emphasizes the general lack of ascribed to the 8th century BC onwards (Needham 1996).
larger-scale excavations of Late Bronze Age sites in Sussex The most recurrent decorative trait on the Ford Airfield
and continues to negate against a full understanding of the assemblage is that of finger-impressed decoration of rim
nature of Late Bronze Age settlement activity. tops to produce a cabled effect (Fig. 11.5, 11.7, 14.40,
15.48, and 15.49). The shoulders of vessels nearly all lack
decoration. Cabled rims also occur at Selsey West Beach
Late Bronze Age chronological indicators (Seager Thomas 1998, Fig 4:2), and it is a decorative variant
Technology on the finger-impressed ‘pie crusted’ rims present at Knapp
Farm (Gardiner and Hamilton 1997, Fig. 9:14), Carne Seat
Finger-furrowing, finger pressing, pinch-splayed bases, (Hamilton 1986, 43) and Thundersbarrow Hill pre-hillfort
and profusely flint-gritted undersides of bases, are all enclosure (Hamilton 1993 A4.6:5)

36
 Excavations at Ford Airfield

Form types BC use of the site. These are specifically associated with
the fineware fabrics.
Expanded, flat-topped rims
Further support for a Late Bronze Age dating later than the Fabrics
very beginning of the first millennium BC are the externally-
and internally-expanded flat-topped rims (variously The relatively abundant presence of quartz in the finewares
described as ‘hammer-headed’, or ‘lipped’) associated with suggests deliberate selection of sandy clay or the use of quartz
the medium-coarsewares (e.g. Fig. 11.5, 12.16, 12.20 and sand as a temper. Quartz sand is available on the coastal plain
13.23). Expanded rims are variably present in Late Bronze (e.g. beach sand), but is more likely to be of wealden origin,
Age assemblages from Lowland Britain and are ascribed a relating to the Lower Greensand outcrops. Quartz-sand
post 10th-century BC and later dating. The latter is based fabrics are associated with Latest Bronze Age and Earliest
on their interpretation as skeuomorphic representations of Iron Age assemblages in Sussex, Essex and Surrey (Hamilton
bronze cauldron rims and the associated metalwork and 1993, 163, 221; Needham and Longley 1980, 413) and are
radiocarbon dates (e.g. Ashville Trading Estate, Oxon.: not generally characteristic of the earliest first millennium
De Roche 1978, Pit 60; Ivinghoe Beacon, Bucks.: Cotton BC assemblages.
and Frere 1969, Fig. 16). In Sussex these forms occur most
frequently at Bishopstone (Hamilton 1977, Fig. 41: 11, 13), Diagnostic forms
Heathy Brow (Hamilton 1982, Fig 33: 2, 7 and 8) and Selsey
West Beach (Seager-Thomas 1998, Fig. 5:5, 8 and 10). The The forms include the shouldered bowls with flaring necks
Bishopstone assemblage has a thermoluminescence date of (Fig. 15.47 and 17.52), a similar example of which occurs
1550-350 BC (Bell 1977, 290). locally at Rustington Site A (Hamilton 1996, Fig. 6:1), and
the foot-ring bases (Fig. 13.19 and 17.58). It is difficult to
Convex, barrel-shaped and straight-sided vessels find direct local comparisons for the bases. They share a
conceptual similarity with the low pedestals associated with
Convex jars comprise one of the earliest components of the Green Street, Eastbourne ‘onion-shaped’ shouldered
Late Bronze Age assemblages, being present by the end of bowls (Budgen 1922; Hodson 1962, Fig. 3). The latter have
the second millennium BC but are still current in post 7th a suggested post 6th-century BC dating (based on continental
century BC assemblages (Gardiner and Hamilton1997, 80). parallels, Hodson 1962). Foot-ring bases occur in eastern
The Ford examples include ones with rounded rims (Fig. England associated with Cunliffe’s ‘Darmsden-Linton’ style
13.27), and hooked rims (Fig. 12.18). Barrel-shaped jars group of Early Iron Age pottery. They are also found in Surrey
with flat-topped rims (Figs 15.50 and 18.60), straight-sided Early Iron Age assemblages, and in Sussex at Findon Park
vessels (Figs. 11.5 and 11.7) and necked, round-shouldered (Fox and Wolseley 1928) and Park Brow (Hawley 1927;
jars (Fig. 16.51) are also present. Knapp Farm (e.g. Gardiner Wolseley et al.1927) . They have a suggested 5th century
and Hamilton 1997, Fig. 9:11 which compares with Ford BC date for their first appearance (again, primarily on the
Airfield Fig. 16.51) and Bishopstone (Hamilton 1977) form basis of the basis of their continental affinities, Cunliffe 1991,
the closest parallels to this range of Ford Airfield medium- 76). The incised cordon-grooved shoulder from a bowl (Fig.
coarseware forms. By contrast, Yapton lacks this range 17.57: Context 509) has an equally later chronology. This
of forms, having predominantly convex-sided jars for its form of decoration emerges in Wessex by the 7th century BC
coarse/medium-coarseware component. and recurs down to the 5th century BC. Thus, the presence
of Fabric Types 9 and 11 finewares, (which are associated,
Shouldered bowls
although not exclusively, with these later forms), and the
The Ford shouldered bowls fall into two categories. Firstly, forms themselves, (particularly in Postholes 904 and 1042,
those with short necks and a slight concave profile (Fig. 11.4, and Pits 2, 4, and 510), characterize features associated with
12.10, 13.21 and 14.40-42), and secondly, bowls with longer a further Early Iron Age (re)-use of the site.
flaring rims/necks (Fig. 15.47 and 17.52). This suggests
a typological chronology with the second being later (see
The intra-site spatial zonation of the
below for discussion of these). Limited stratigraphic evidence
indicates that shouldered bowls with shorter profiles have assemblage
primacy within the Lower Thames Valley Late Bronze Age
The Ford Airfield deposits and features with relatively small
bowl sequence (Adkins and Needham 1985). These occur in
numbers of sherds mirror the relative presence of fabric
assemblages, which on the basis of metalwork associations
categories (e.g. Context 1046) observed for features with
and radiocarbon dates, have 10th-8th century BC dates (Field
more plentiful quantities of early first millennium BC pottery.
and Needham 1986, Adkins and Adkins 1983, Longley 1980).
This recurrence of the same general fabric mix (particularly
The Ford Airfield shorter-necked forms are similar to those
for the coarsewares, and medium-coarsewares) suggest the
from Thundersbarrow Hill pre-hillfort enclosure (Hamilton
existence of middens where the pottery (and other rubbish)
1993, Fig. A4.7:13) and Knapp Farm, but are more extended
was primarily collectively deposited, and subsequently was
than those associated with the Yapton assemblage. One of
re-deposited in pits and ditches. The larger scale middening
the short-necked vessels however has a foot-ring base (Fig.
of material, and the subsequent levelling of sites by clearing
17.58), suggesting an Early Iron Age dating for some of the
midden material into pits and ditches has increasingly been
bowls including the flaring-necked bowls (Figs. 15.47 and
recognized as a Late Bronze Age phenomenon in southern
17. 52), (see below for discussion).
England (Hamilton 1987; Needham and Spence 1996).
Latest Bronze Age/early Iron age chronological
indicators Several of the sherds show burning across sherd breaks. This
suggests that they had been cleared from the same household
There are some pottery forms from the Ford Airfield or activity area which had gone on fire, or was subjected
assemblage which suggest a later, early first millennium to intense heat, at sometime subsequent to the breakage of

37
Excavations at Ford Airfield

the sherds, but before their removal to a midden area. In first millennium BC ceramic sequence for the West Sussex
particular the material from Pit 2 and Posthole 2 showed coastal plain.
burning across sherd breaks. Sherds from the same pots occur
in more than one feature, again suggesting that the fills of Endscript
features were derived from communal middens (see above
for discussion of sherds from spread 1085, Posthole 2, Pit All radiocarbon measurements relating to the discussion of
4 (Context 1113) the Ford Airfield pottery and associated assemblages are
quoted at 95% confidence (2 sigma) and have been calibrated
The distribution of finewares (which relate to a very limited using the data sets of Pearson and Stuiver (1986) and Pearson
number of vessels), additionally indicates links (deposits et.al. (1986). They have been calculated using the maximum
from the same source?) between contexts PH1 (914), PH2 intercept method (Stuiver and Reimer 1987).
(1042), layer 1085, P4 (1137), and T2 (1115). This may
suggest proximity to distinct activity areas (associated with Acknowledgements
eating and drinking?), and in some cases relates to the Early Mike Seager Thomas drew the early first millennium BC
Iron Age phase of site use (see above). pottery (Figs. 11.1-18.62) and provided information on
Selsey West Beach.
Sussex early first millennium BC pottery
assemblages and their overall sequencing: the Later Iron Age and Roman Pottery
dating of the assemblage Introduction
The Ford Airfield assemblage provides an important The evaluation trenches yielded 116 sherds (975 gm) and
addition to a growing number of early first millennium BC the main excavation 3270 sherds (35401 gm) of pottery.
assemblages now recognized from Sussex, and particularly This material ranges in date from the Middle Iron Age to c
the West Sussex coastal Plain (Hamilton in press). The AD 70 or slightly later.
assemblage shares characteristics in common with the Late
Bronze Age assemblages from Bishopstone, Heathy Brow,
Knapp Farm, and Thundersbarrow Hill pre-hillfort enclosure. Methodology
It is probably earlier than the Yapton assemblage, which All assemblages were quantified by numbers of sherds and
has some decorated finewares, and it is also earlier than the their weight in grams per fabric. Fabrics were classified
pottery from Selsey West Beach, which also has a more highly with the aid of a ×8 lens with built-in metric scale and,
decorated assemblage. The Yapton assemblage is associated where further magnification was necessary, by a ×30 pocket
with a radiocarbon date of cal BC 910-530 BC (HAR-7038, microscope with built-in illumination.
2600670 BP), while the Selsey West Beach assemblage has
two pending radiocarbon dates (Seager Thomas per. comm.). Fabric codings are numerical with the prefixes S for sand
The Ford Airfield radiocarbon results of cal BC 1100-820 filler, CF for calcined flint, AF for alluvial flint, G for grog
(BETA-144445, 2820660BP), and cal BC 1120-820 (BETA and GS for grog and sand filler. These codings are followed
1444446, 2800660BP), associated with Late Bronze Age by the suffixes H for handmade, T for tournetted and W
pottery in Layer 1085 and Pit 4 respectively, would likewise for wheel-turned. Further suffixes O,B,SS and G indicate
suggest an earlier dating that Yapton. Typologically, the Ford whether the pot is oxidised, surface blackened, soot-soaked or
Airfield Late Bronze Age assemblage best fits perhaps a 9th grey reduced. A further suffix P is used for sherds with patchy
century BC dating (with a later assemblage discussed below). colouration. This coding system is particularly useful in West
The Ford Airfield Late Bronze Age assemblage is therefore Sussex, where sand-tempered fabrics were in use throughout
earlier than the more highly decorated Late Bronze Age the Late Iron Age and Romanisation of them takes the form
assemblages from the hillforts of Harting Beacon (Hamilton of improved pot-making and firing technology rather than
1977, 1993) and Chanctonbury Ring (Hamilton 1980, 1993) major changes in filler.
which have suggested 7th century BC datings. The recent
West Sussex coastal plain finds from Birdham, Climping, and
Only one assemblage, from the south-east corner fills of the
Chichester Westgate also suggest assemblages of a similar
Enclosure 2 ditch, was large enough for quantification by
date to Ford’s main Late Bronze Age assemblage. Climping,
Estimated Vessel Equivalents (EVEs) based on rim sherds
for example, has a very similar vessel to the one of the Ford
(Orton 1975).
convex jars (Fig. 17.54), together with rims with cable-
decorated tops. Collectively the Ford Airfield assemblage,
together with those from these contemporary sites, establishes Fabrics
the West Sussex Coast plain as a major zone of settlement at
the beginning of the first millennium BC. Sand-tempered
S.1A. Rowlands Castle ware (Hodder 1974,86).
The nature of subsequent early first millennium BC activity at
Ford Airfield, and the associated pottery assemblage at Ford S.1B. Rowlands Castle ware with additional sparse to moderate
Airfield is less clear. The flaring rim shouldered bowls, and coarse flint. This is a Late Iron Age to c AD 70 dated fabric
the foot-ring bases find local comparison in the assemblages variant when used for cooking-pots and other small vessels
from Rustington Site A (Hamilton 1990: a flaring rimmed but continued in use for large storage-vessels into the early-
but no base is present), Findon Park and Park Brow. This third-century.
suggests further sustained activity in the region during the S.2. Arun Valley ware with profuse up-to 1.00 mm. poorly-sorted
7th to 5th centuries BC. Collectively these sites suggest that multi-coloured quartz filler and occasional to moderate
there is a growing potential to achieve a continuous early angular black ironstone of similar size. This fabric was

38
 Excavations at Ford Airfield

formerly termed Hardham Ware, but the recent discovery S.17. Hard high-fired fabric with profuse up-to 0.20 mm. colourless
of kilns of the Hardham/Wiggonholt industry at the quartz. The one vessel in this fabric (Fig 20.22) may be a
Littlehampton Crops Research Centre site just across the product of the Claudian Chapel Street kilns in Chichester
River Arun from Ford (Laidlaw and Lyne 2000) indicates (Down 1978).
production of such wares over a considerably wider area both
S.18. Soot-soaked fabric with profuse up-to 0.10 mm. quartz and
north and south of the Downs. Production of handmade and
a little coarser material.
tournette finished soot-soaked and surface-blackened variants
of this fabric commenced during the Late Iron Age. S.19. Off-white fabric with profuse sub-angular up-to 0.30 mm.
colourless and white quartz, moderate up to 0.75 mm black
S.3. Coarse fabric with moderate 1.00 mm to 3.00 mm angular
ferrous inclusions and thin blue-grey surface slip. Vessels
black/red ferrous inclusions and profuse up-to 1.00 mm.
in this fabric were probably produced by the Arun Valley
irregular to subangular multi-coloured quartz filler. A Late
industry and are rare at Ford.
Iron Age fabric represented by a single jar from Ditch 1093
(Fig.19.5). S.20. Pink fabric with profuse minute to 1.50 mm. crushed reddish-
brown ferrous and up-to 1.00 mm crumbly cream inclusions.
S.4. Very-fine grey fabric fired cream externally with profuse
Fired soft cream.
ill-sorted up to 0.50 mm. colourless quartz filler.
S.5. Fabric with profuse subangular up-to 0.50 mm quartz filler Grog and sand tempered
and the occasional alluvial flint grit of similar size.
GS.1 Coarse fabric with profuse poorly-sorted up-to 1.00 mm.
S.6A. Coarse red fabric with profuse up-to 0.50 mm. multi-coloured multi-coloured quartz filler (mainly iron-stained) and
quartz filler, fired black. A Late Iron Age and Early Roman moderate crushed brown up-to 4.00 mm. grog (?pot).
Arun Valley industry fabric variant.
Grog-tempered
S.6B. Fine red fabric with profuse silt-sized quartz, fired smooth
black with mica-dusting. Hardham London ware. G.1. East Sussex Ware (Green 1980). A few sherds in this fabric
from production centres east of the River Adur may have
S.6C. Similar to S.6A but with additional sparse up-to 1.00 mm
arrived on the site through coastal trade.
white calcareous inclusions.
G.2. Similar but with additional sparse shell filler.
S.7. Sandfree grey Upchurch ware from North Kent (Monaghan
1987) with sparse to moderate brown to grey ferrous Alluvial-flint tempered
inclusions. Seven sherds from a closed form were recovered
from Context 112 in Assessment Trench 1 and may be AF.1. Coarse fabric with profuse up-to 15.00 mm irregular, white-
indicative of coastal trading links with the Thames estuary. patinated flint grit and up-to 0.20 mm quartz filler.
S.8. Rough fabric with profuse up-to 0.75 mm multi-coloured
Calcined-flint tempered
quartz, occasional up-to 0.20 mm. rounded glauconite and a
little mica. CF.1. Handmade with profuse up-to 2.00 mm calcined flint.
S.9. Orange-brown fabric with profuse silt-sized to 0.10 mm. CF.2 Handmade with sparse up-to 2.00 mm calcined flint.
multi-coloured quartz and occasional up to 2.00 mm. soft
red ferrous inclusions. CF.3. Handmade with sparse up-to 2.00 mm calcined flint and
organic inclusions.
S.10. Alice Holt/Farnham greyware with profuse up to 0.20 mm
colourless quartz filler (Lyne and Jefferies 1979, Fabric A). The assemblages
A few jar bodysherds in this fabric came from the fills of
the Enclosure 2 ditch and indicate trading contacts with this Middle Iron Age c 300–50 BC
industry on the Hampshire/Surrey border. This trade, however,
may have been indirect and the wares acquired through the Fragments from two saucepan pots are present: both are
market at Noviomagus Regnensium, as such wares also apparently residual in their contexts. One from fill 1099 of
occur in mid-to-late first century pottery assemblages from enclosure E2 is in patchy black/brown fabric CF.2 (Fig.19.1),
Chichester and were probably traded in small quantities down the other piece comes from fill 1516 of the same enclosure
the Silchester road. and is in polished handmade black fabric with profuse up-to
1.00 mm. irregular colourless-quartz filler (Fig.19.2).
S.11. Gallo-Belgic whitewares from the Amiens region of North-
East Gaul. Fragments from a butt-beaker and a lagena are
present in Pre-Flavian contexts. Late Iron Age c 100 BC–0
S.12. Terra Nigra. Fragments of a platter of uncertain form but Assemblage 1: from the fills of enclosure E1 (1227)
from the same area as the Gallo-Belgic whiteware vessels (Contexts 1225,1305 and 1306)
came from the Enclosure 2 ditch.
The upper fills of this feature, of which one rounded corner
S.13. South Gaulish Samian.
intruded into the western end of the excavated area, produced
S.14. Micaceous orange-brown fineware. 52 sherds (1228 gm) of pottery, including fragments from
a ?Dressel 1A amphora and a handmade pot in lumpy CF.1
S.15. Wheel-turned fabric with profuse up-to 0.50 mm. angular
fabric. Two fragmentary cremation pots were also found
crushed calcite and rounded multi-coloured quartz.
together within fill 1305 in the same ditch:
S.16. Oxidised sandfree ?Hoo fabric with soft red ferrous inclusions.
Fragments from a flagon are present in the c AD 43-70 dated Fig.19.3. Bead-rim bowl with pedestal foot in tournetted
assemblage from Context 1310. black fabric with red-to-brown surface patches and profuse

39
Excavations at Ford Airfield

up-to 0.50 mm subangular colourless and white quartz filler. diameter 200 mm.
Ext. rim diameter 160 mm.
Fig. 19.6. Necked handmade jar in rough grey-black fabric
Fig. 19.4. Lower part of polished jar with girth-cordon AF1HB with brown margins. Ext. rim diameter 200 mm.
above overall fine horizontal surface rilling, in handmade
black fabric fired brown-buff internally with profuse ill- The rest of the material (31 sherds,479 gm.) is made up
sorted up-to 1.00 mm. crushed calcite and up-to 0.30 mm. of bodysherds in fabrics CF1HSS (1),CF2HSS (8),S2TG
subangular colourless quartz filler. The complete vessel was (9),S2HSS (4),S6AHB (6), two in miscellaneous sandy fabric
probably similar in form to the high-shouldered necked-jar and one intrusive Late Medieval sherd.
from the c 90-50 BC dated Grave 20253 at Westhampnett
(Mepham 1997, Fig. 83.27141, Fitzpatrick 1997), also with
The other field-system ditches produced a total of 26, rather
body-rilling.
nondescript, sherds (261 gm) of Late Iron Age pottery.
Late Iron Age c 0–AD 50
Pre-Flavian c AD 50–70
The field system ditches were for the most part lacking in
pottery but the following, somewhat larger, assemblage The main Enclosure 2 ditch belonging to this phase produced
belongs to this phase: most of the pottery from the site (2254 sherds,13763 gm);
including the following assemblage:
Assemblage 2: from the fill of Ditch 1093 (Context
1048) Assemblage 3: from the fills of the south-west corner
of the Enclosure 2 ditch (Contexts 1090, 1091, 1098,
The 406 sherds (5887 gm.) of pottery from this feature 1099, 1103, 1105)
include the greater parts of the following two pots with
very-coarse filler: These fills produced 809 sherds (9727 gm.) of pottery; a
large enough assemblage for quantification by Estimated
Fig. 19.5. Jar with rolled-over and undercut rim in Vessel Equivalents (EVEs) based on rim sherds (see Table
tournetted grey fabric S3TG with rough surfaces. Ext. rim 11 below):

Table 11 Estimated Vessel Equivalents (EVEs) based on rim sherds

Fabric
Jars EVE Bowls EVE Dishes EVE Beakers EVE Store-jars EVE Others EVE Total EVE %
CF1HO P P.
CF2HO P. P.
S1AWB P. P.
S1ATG P. P.
S1AWG 1.15 0.07 1.22 11.9
S1AWO 0.05 0.05 0.5
S1BWG 0.07 0.07 0.7
S2HSS P. P.
S2HO P. P.
S2TG 0.73 0.73 7.1
S2WSS 0.96 0.96 9.3
S2WB 1.67 0.39 0.48 2.54 24.7
S2WG 3.3 0.28 Flagon 0.16 3.74 36.4
S2WO 0.12 0.12 1.2
S2WP 0.15 0.15 1.5
S3WG P. P.
S5HO P. P.
S5WG P. P.
S6AWB 0.11 0.11 1.1
S6BWB P. P.
S8WG 0.07 0.07 0.7
S9WO ?Flagon P. P.
S10WG P. P.
S11WO 0.28 0.28 2.7
S12 P. P.
S17WG 0.24 0.24 2.2
GIHSS P P.
TOTAL 8.31 0.39 0.48 0.80 0.14 0.16 10.28
(80.7%) (3.8%) (4.7%) (7.8%) (1.4%) (1.6%)

40
 Excavations at Ford Airfield

By far the most common wares are Arun Valley industry Fig. 20.18. Necked-jar in fabric S2TG with darker patches. Ext. rim
products (80%): this is not surprising as kilns of this diameter 160 mm. Similar to examples from Ounces
industry and of mid-to-late first-century date were recently Barn, Boxgrove (Middleton 1995, Fig. 19.131) and the
excavated at the Horticultural Research International Site in Littlehampton kilns (Laidlaw and Lyne 2000, Fig. 4.2)
Littlehampton, only three kilometres away on the other side Mid-Late 1st century 1098.
of the River Arun (Lovell 2000).
Fig. 20.19. Bead-rimmed bag-shaped jar of a form similar to
examples from Wiggonholt (Evans 1974, Fig. 11.47)
The second most significant pottery supplier was the industry in fabric S2WB. 1090.
or industries producing wares in Rowlands Castle type fabrics
(13%), at Rowlands Castle itself on the Hampshire-Surrey Fig. 21.20. Straight-sided dish with beaded rim in Fabric S2WB
border (Hodder 1974), at Fishbourne (Lyne Forthcoming B) with polished surfaces. Ext. rim diameter 260 mm. A
and probably elsewhere in the vicinity of Chichester. Pottery similar dish came from a Claudian context at Chapel
from other sources is insignificant but includes a possible St, Chichester (Down 1978, Fig. 10.8–14). 1098.
Chapel Street, Chichester kilns product (Down 1978), body
sherds from at least one grog-tempered East Sussex Ware Fig. 20.21. Cupped flagon rim in grey Fabric S2WG. Ext. rim
cooking-pot, Alice Holt/Farnham industry greyware sherds diameter 110mm. 1098.
and fragments from a Gallo-Belgic whiteware butt-beaker
Fig. 20.22. Girth beaker of similar profile to example from Chapel
and lagena.
Street kilns in Chichester (Down 1978, Fig. 10.4-8.10)
in hard brittle Fabric S17WG of probable similar origin.
Some of the material is pre-Conquest in date but most belongs Ext. rim diameter 90 mm. c AD 45–50. 1090.
to the period c AD 43–70 and is very largely made up of jars
and other closed forms. Soot-soaked Atrebatic Overlap wares Fig. 20.23. Gallo-Belgic butt-beaker in pinkish-cream Fabric
account for only 9% of the pottery and surface-blackened S11WO. Ext. rim diameter 100 mm. c AD 43–70.
ones for 26%: the overwhelming bulk of the pottery is wheel- 1098.
turned and most is fired grey. The following pieces are of
particular interest: The following piece came from the fills of the ditch on the
south side of the enclosure:
Fig. 19.7. Everted rim jar in grey Rowlands Castle ware fabric Fig. 20.24. Gallo-Belgic platter imitation in Hardham ‘London’
S1AG. Ext. rim diameter 180 mm. 1098. ware fabric S6BWB with polished surfaces. Ext. rim
diameter 180 mm. c AD 50–70+. 1289.
Fig. 19.8. Necked jar with hooked-over rim in similar fabric with
superficial external reddening. One of two. 1098. The small amounts of Hardham fineware and total absence
Fig. 19.9. Necked bowl in similar fabric. Ext. rim diameter 160
of Wiggonholt cream ware products from the enclosure ditch
mm. 1098.
fills suggests that occupation became a lot less intense after
AD 60. A general dearth of finewares of any description from
Fig. 19.10. Bead-rim jar in similar fabric. Ext. rim diameter 160 both the Enclosure 2 ditch and other contemporary features
mm. 1099. further suggests that the site was of low social status during
the period c AD 43–70.
Fig. 20.11. Another jar with short vertical rim in similar fabric but
finished on a tournette. Ext. rim diameter 190 mm. A
similar form was present in the upper fill of the pre- Assemblage 4: From the fill of Ditch 25 at its northern
Flavian ditch at the Cattlemarket site in Chichester end (Context 1197)
(Down 1989, Fig. 21.2-6). 1103.
The 57 sherds (1006 gm.) of pottery from this context
Fig. 19.12. Everted rim storage jar in grey Rowlands Castle fabric
constitute too small an assemblage for any form of meaningful
S1BWG. Ext. rim diameter 260 mm. 1098.
quantification. The material does, however, seem to be of
Fig. 19.13. Jar with stubby everted rim in blackened buff-brown broadly the same date and make-up as that from the Enclosure
Arun Valley fabric S2WB. Ext. rim diameter 200 mm. 2 ditch and includes the following interesting pieces:
1090.
Fig. 20.25. Necked jar in black fabric S2WSS with orange-brown
Fig. 19.14. Necked-jar in grey fabric S2WG. Ext. rim diameter 120 patches and burnished vertical lines on its body and rim
mm. 1098. top polish. Ext. rim diameter 160 mm. This is a typical
Fig. 19.15. Necked bowl in similar fabric. One of two. 1098. Southern Atrebatic Late Iron Age form and occurs at
Hazel Road, North Bersted (Lyne Forthcoming A),
Fig. 20.16. Another example but in blackened fabric S2WB with Ounces Barn, Boxgrove (Middleton 1995, Fig. 20.155),
polished exterior. Ext. rim diameter 140 mm. Similar Copse Farm, Oving (Hamilton 1985) and elsewhere in
forms were present in Ditch 15 at Ounces Barn, West Sussex. The form does not seem to have survived
Boxgrove (Middleton 1995, Fig. 19.145). Mid-Late 1st much later than c AD 50. 60–80 cm. down in fill.
century 1098.
Fig. 20.26. Over-fired and warped everted-rim jar sherd in blue-grey
Fig. 20.17. Another example but with slack profile, in similar fabric fabric S2WG with orange margins. Ext. rim diameter
fired grey. Ext. rim diameter 140 mm. Paralleled at 180 mm. 60–80 cm. down.
Ounces Barn, Boxgrove in Ditch 12 (Middleton 1995,
Fig.16.68). Identical forms in similar fabric were made Fig. 20.27. Bead-rim jar in similar fabric. Ext. rim diameter 150
in the Phase 2 Pre-Flavian Horticultural Research mm. Similar to an example from the Claudian latrine
International site kilns at Littlehampton (Laidlaw and slot at Chapel Street, Chichester (Down 1978, Fig.
Lyne 2000, Fig. 4.4). c AD 43–70. 1098. 10.6-6). 60–80 cm.

41
Excavations at Ford Airfield

Figure 19 Late Iron Age/early Roman Pottery

42
 Excavations at Ford Airfield
Figure 20 Late Iron Age/early Roman Pottery

43
Excavations at Ford Airfield

Early Roman c AD 60/70–150 ditch D11 fills (Contexts 1081 and 1501) yielded three further
similar sherds, including two joining rim fragments from a
Assemblage 5: From the fills of Ditch D26 (Contexts Dressel 1B amphora (c 75–10 BC). Yet another bodysherd
1310, 1312, 1463 and 1532) in similar fabric came from Pit 12 (1420).

This ditch produced 608 sherds (6496 gm.) of pottery of

mainly pre-Flavian character and including the following The Samian
four complete pots found inverted in the feature: The material poverty of the pre-Flavian occupation of the site
alluded to above is further reflected in there being only one
Fig. 20.28. Necked jar in handmade, soot-soaked fabric S5HSS sherd of samian in the excavated assemblages. This piece is
with brown surface patches. Ext. rim diameter 180 mm. from a South Gaulish Dr.18 platter and came from the fills
Paralleled at Ounces Barn, Boxgrove (Middleton 1995, of Ditch 1214.
Fig. 21.164). Mid-1st century.
Fig. 20.29. Necked bowl in handmade, soot-soaked fabric S2HSS Charred Plant Remains
with brown surface patches. Paralleled in Ditch 12 at
Ounces Barn, Boxgrove (Ibid., Fig. 16.68) where dated (Pat Hinton)
c AD 43–70. Ext. rim diameter 80 mm.
Fig. 20.30. Everted-rim jar in coarse gritted grey Rowlands Castle Samples of soil, each of 1–40 litres, were processed by the
type fabric S1BWG with superficial surface reddening. excavators by flotation machine. The floated results (flots),
Ext. rim diameter 220 mm. which varied in volume from 1–25ml, were then examined by
Fig. 20.31. Large necked-jar with wavy combing on the shoulder,
the writer using a stereo microscope at 7–40X magnification.
in coarse grey fabric S1BWG fired patchy black with
All but the smallest of the dried flots were passed through
brown margins. Ext. rim diameter 150 mm.
a stack of sieves of >4mm–0.25mm mesh sizes to facilitate
sorting. Smaller amounts were searched in entirety but a
These four pots are difficult to date with any precision but few of the larger amounts, particularly the smaller fractions
should be earlier than AD 60 and could be as early as Late (<1mm), were sub-sampled and numbers of small seeds
Iron Age in date. This suggests that they were placed in the such as fat hen (Chenopodium album) were estimated. The
ditch soon after it was dug around AD 60 and were already remaining parts of these samples were however scanned for
old at the time of their deposition. additional seeds or fragments.

Rubbish with potsherds continued to be dumped in the In Tables 1, 3 and 4 all taxa are represented by seeds unless
feature, albeit in very small quantities, until after AD 70 and otherwise indicated and the term ‘seed’ is used throughout to
includes fragments from the following vessels: include seeds, caryopses, nutlets, etc. Nomenclature accords
with Stace (1997). A list of common names of the identified
Fig. 20.32. Flanged dish in black Fabric S3WSS. Ext. rim diameter plants is included (Table 2).
160 mm. A similar form, but with horizontal rilling, was
made in the Phase 4 kilns at Littlehampton (Laidlaw
Several samples with larger numbers of seeds, in particular
and Lyne 2000, Fig.4.17) and is dated c AD 70–150.
two from the Late Bronze Age and some Roman features, are
1310.
particularly informative. Many of the other samples contain
Fig. 20.33. Flanged platter in sandfree grey-black fabric S6BWB only small numbers of cereal grains and wild plant seeds and
with profuse mica. Ext. rim diameter 140 mm. 1312 nine contain no charred plant material other than charcoal.
The condition of the seeds varies considerably; those from
Assemblage 6: From the fill of semi-circular gully D27 the smaller scatters are often damaged or degraded whereas
(Context 1402) those protected by numbers in the larger deposits are often
well preserved. Full details of all samples which contained
The 61 sherds (374 gm.) of very broken-up pottery from this
charred seeds are recorded in Table 1 (Late Bronze Age),
feature are very largely of Pre-Flavian or earlier character
Table 3 (Late Iron Age) and Table 4 (Early Roman).
and may be entirely residual in nature. There are only two
rim sherds, including the following:
The probable predominance of emmer among the glumed
Fig. 20.34. Necked-bowl or jar in handmade buff-grey fabric wheats in the Late Bronze Age, the apparent increase of spelt
GS1HG. Ext. rim diameter 120 mm. Similar to an in the Late Iron Age samples and the dominance of spelt in
example from Ounces Barn, Boxgrove (Middleton the Roman period is typical of wheat cultivation as reflected
1995, Fig. 13-11). c 0–50 AD. in many other sites. Wheat is almost always the major cereal
identified from sites on the coastal plain of Sussex, e.g at
Only three of the pits within the enclosure (1464, 1466, 1473) Littlehampton (Lovell, forthcoming), Boxgrove (Bedwin &
may be later than AD 70: this and tiny amounts of c AD Place 1995), Bognor (Hinton, unpublished client report) and
70–150 dated pottery from the enclosure ditch fills suggest Westhampnett (Fitzpatrick et al., forthcoming).
that full-time occupation ceased soon after AD 60 and was
replaced by much more limited, occasional activity over the Linseed is found more rarely than cereals but this does not
next hundred years. necessarily reflect its importance. It requires no heating in the
earlier stages of preparation and so, unlike the glumed wheats
The amphorae fragments which need drying and parching, is less likely to become
accidentally burned. The plant has been reported from British
The Enclosure 1 ditch fills (Context 1225) produced a single prehistoric sites; first as impressions in Neolithic pottery
sherd from an Italian Dressel 1A or 1B amphora: the field (Helbaek 1952), and increasingly as charred or waterlogged

44
 Excavations at Ford Airfield

seeds at Middle and Late Bronze Age sites onwards. It is not Table 12 A summary of the results
possible to say whether the plant was cultivated for its oil-rich context type bone age sex pyre
seeds (linseed) or for fibre (flax). When grown for fibre the wt. goods
uprooted plants require a longer period of processing which
1095 *urned 52.3g young infant ? sheep
includes softening in water. The association with cereals in cremation burial
this deposit does seem to imply that the plant was grown for
the nutritious seeds. 1296 ?unurned 46.3g adult 18–40 ?
cremation burial yr.
In the majority of samples from all phases there is little * denotes undisturbed
information to be gained as to the processing stage of the
cereals as found. Only in two samples from the Early Roman All the bone was white, indicative of a high degree of
phase is chaff in sufficient quantities to suggest that whole oxidation (Holden et al. 1995a & b), and showed the classic
spikelets of wheat (rather than fully prepared grain) may be dehydration fissures indicative of the burning of ‘green’ bone.
involved. It is likely that the earlier stages of processing, i.e. It is probable that an unknown quantity of bone will have
threshing and first sievings took place nearby. been lost from 1296 in consequence of the known truncation.
Consequently it would be inappropriate to comment of the
The alluvial soils of the coastal plain, and the adjacent quantity of bone included in the deposit other than to observe
greensands, would have been eminently suitable for cereal that the it represents only c 3% of the average weight of bone
production and those represented here most likely were grown from an adult cremation (McKinley 1993).
in the vicinity, although barley would be an appropriate crop
for the lighter calcareous soils of the chalk downs. Flax or The maximum fragment sizes recovered were relatively
linseed can be grown in varying conditions, from clays to small, 20mm skull and 22mm long bone and the vast majority
light sandy soils but it flourishes on friable loams. Peas grow of the bone from each deposit (minimum 82%) was less
better on light soils and beans, while tolerating most soils, are than 10mm in size. There are a number of factors which
best on medium loams. (Newsham & Gunston 1947). These may affect bone fragment size, including deposit type, bone
crops then could well have been locally produced. The wild preservation and level of disturbance (McKinley 1994b); in
plant seeds provide little information since they are mainly the case of 1095 the young age of the individual will have
of species which readily grow in any disturbed ground. been a contributory factor.

The chief value of the plant remains from this site is probably There is no evidence to suggest deliberate selection of certain
their illustration of a progress of activity in an area which was skeletal elements for burial.
becoming increasingly open to cross-channel contacts, and
which became in the later Iron Age and the Roman period an The recovery of cremated animal bone – pyre goods – from
important centre of cereal production and distribution. cremation burials of this date has been recorded elsewhere
(McKinley et al 1997), sheep/goat comprising one of the
Cremated Bone most commonly recovered species.
Jacqueline Mckinley
Other Specialist Reports
Cremated bone from two Late Iron Age deposits was received
for analysis, which followed the writer’s standard procedure The following specialist reports, not included in full here,
for the examination of cremated bone (McKinley 1994a, are contained within the Assessment Report held by West
5–21). Age was assessed from the stage of skeletal and tooth Sussex County Council:
development (Beek 1983, McMinn and Hutchings 1985) and
the general degree of age-related changes to the bone (Bass
Metallurgical remains – Jeremy Hodgkinson
1987). Sex was ascertained from the sexually dimorphic traits
of the skeleton (Bass 1987).
Metalwork – Luke Barber
Results Animal bone – Lucy Sibun
A summary of the results is presented in Table 12.
Charcoal – Sophie Seel
Deposit 1296 – made in the upper fill of a ditch– was clearly
substantially disturbed, the very small amount of bone Geoarchaeological investigations – Chris Pine and Patrick
recovered being spread over a relatively wide radius of 1m. Hunter
The bone was heavily worn and no fragments of trabecular
bone were recovered; both observations are indicative of Worked flint – Chris Butler
burial in acidic soil conditions (McKinley 1997, 250–251),
in this case accentuated by the burial apparently being made Fire-cracked flint
unurned and by the subsequent disturbance.
The remains for two individuals were identified, one a young Fired clay and ceramic building material
infant, the other a young-mature adult. No pathological
lesions were observed. Objects of stone

45
Excavations at Ford Airfield

REFERENCES
Adkins, L. and Excavations at Beddington, 1982, London Down, A. 1989 Chichester Excavations 6, Chichester.
Adkins, R. 1983. Archaeology 4, 326–9.
Drewett, P. 1999a Late Hunters and Gatherers, in Leslie, K. and
Adkins, L. and New research on a Late Bronze Age enclosure Short, B. (eds) An Historical Atlas of Sussex,
Needham, S. at Queen Mary’s Hospital, Carshalton, Surrey 14–15.
1985. Archaeological Collections 76, 11–50.
Barber, L. 1994. The excavation of a Romano-British site 1999b. First Farming Communities and Communal
at Moraunt Drive, Middleton-on-Sea, West Monuments, Leslie, K. and Short, B. (eds) An
Sussex, 1992, Sussex Archaeol. Collect. 132, Historical Atlas of Sussex, 20–21.
87–100. Ellison, A. and Pits and Postholes in the British Early Iron Age:
Barrett, J. 1980. The pottery of the later Bronze Age in lowland Drewett, P. 1971 some alternative explanations. Proc. Prehist.
England, Proc. Prehist. Soc. 46, 297–320. Soc. 36, Part 1, 183–194.
Bass, W.M. l987 Human osteology Missouri Arch Soc. Evans, K.J. 1974 ‘Excavations on a Romano-British site, ,1964’.
Bates M.R. The Chronology, Palaeogeography and Sussex Archaeol. Collect. 112, 97–151.
Parfitt S.A. Archaeological Significance of The Marine
Field, D. and Evidence for a Bronze Age settlement on
Roberts M.B. Quaternary Record of The West Sussex Coastal
Needham, S. Coombe Warren, Kingston Hill, Surrey
1997 Plain, Southern England U.K. Quaternary
1986 Archaeol. Collect. 77, 127–51.
Science Reviews Vol. 16.
Bedwin, O. 1983. The development of prehistoric settlement on Fitzpatrick, A. P. Archaeological Excavations on the Route of the
the West Sussex coastal plain, Sussex Archaeol. 1997 A27 Westhampnett Bypass, West Sussex 1992,
Collect. 121, 31–44. Vol. 2, Wessex Archaeology Report No. 12.
Bedwin, O. and Excavations at Copse Farm, Oving, West Fitzpatrick, A. et Untiltled, excavations at Westhampnett.
Holgate, R. 1985. Sussex, Proc. Prehist. Soc. 51, 215–46. al. forthcoming
Bedwin, O. and The excavation of an Iron Age settlement at Ford, S., Bradley, Flint Working in the Metal Age, Oxford Journal
Pitts, M. W. North Bersted, Bognor Regis, West Sussex, R., Hawkes, J. of Archaeology 3, 157–173.
1978. Sussex Archaeol. Collect. 116, 293–346. and Fisher, P.
Bedwin, O. and Late Iron Age and Romano-British occupation 1984
Place, C. 1995. at Ounces Barn, Boxgrove, West Sussex;
excavation 1982–83, Sussex Archaeol. Collect. Fox, C.F. and The Early Iron Age site at Findon Park, Findon,
133, 45–101. G.R. Wolseley, Sussex, Antiquaries Journal 8, 449–60.
1928
Beek, G.C. van Dental Morphology: an illustrated guide,
1983 Bristol: Wright PSG. Gardiner, M. Knapp Farm, Bosham: a significant find of
and Hamilton, S. Bronze Age pottery. Sussex Archaeol. Collect.
Bell, M. 1977 Excavations at Bishopstone, Sussex Archaeol.
1998 135, 71–117.
Collect. 115, 1–299.
Bradley, R, Lobb, Two Late Bronze Age settlements on the Kennet Gilkes, O. J. Further discoveries at Darlington Nurseries,
S, Richards, J, gravels: excavations at Aldermaston Wharf and 1992 Rustington, West Sussex, Sussex Archaeol.
& Robinson, M. Knight’s Farm, Burghfield, Berkshire. Proc. Collect. 130, 233.
1980 Prehist. Soc. 46, 217–96.
1993 Iron Age and Roman Littlehampton, Sussex
Brown, N. 1998 A Late Bronze Age Enclosure at Lofts Farm, Archaeol. Collect. 131, 1–20.
Essex, Proc. Prehist Soc. 54, 249–302.
Gilkes, O. J. and Archaeological discoveries at Toddington,
Budgen, W. 1922 Hallstatt pottery from Eastbourne, Antiquaries Hammond, P. West Sussex, Sussex Archaeol. Collect. 129,
Journal 2, 354–60.2. 1991 241–44.
Champion, T. Settlement and Environment in Later Bronze
1980 Age Kent, in Barret, J. and Bradley, R. (eds.) Green, C.M. ‘Handmade pottery and Society in Late Iron
Brit. Archaeol. Rep. 83, 223–46. 1980 Age and Roman East Sussex’, Sussex Archaeol.
Collect. 118, 69–86.
Cleere, H. F. & The Iron Industry of the Weald.
Crossley D. W. Hamilton, S. The Iron Age pottery, 27–30. In O. Bedwin,
1995 1977 Excavations at Harting Beacon, West Sussex; a
second season 1977, Sussex Archaeol. Collect.
Cotton, M.A. and Ivinghoe Beacon excavations (1963–65), 117, 21–36.
Frere, S.S., 1968 Records of Buckinghamshire 18, 187–260.
Crew, P. 1991 ‘The Experimental Production of Prehistoric Hamilton, S. The Iron Age pottery, 196–203. In O. Bedwin
Bar Iron’, Historical Metallurgy, 25, 21–36. 1980 Excavations at Chanctonbury Ring, Wiston,
West Sussex 1977, Britannia XI, 173–222.
Cunliffe, B. 1991 Iron Age Communities in Britain (3rd edition),
London and New York: Routledge. Hamilton, S. ‘Iron Age Pottery’, in Bedwin, O. and Holgate,
1985 R., ‘Excavations at Copse Farm, Oving, West
De Roche, C. D. The Iron Age pottery, 40–74, in M. Parrington
Sussex’, Proc. Prehist. Soc. 51, 220–228.
1978 The Excavations of an Iron Age Settlement,
Bronze Age Ring-Ditches, and Roman Hamilton, S. Late Bronze Age and Iron Age pottery, 43–44.
Features at Ashville Trading Estate Abingdon 1986 In R. Holgate, Excavations at the late prehistoric
(Oxfordshire) 1974–76. London: Council of and Romano-British enclosure complex at
Archaeology Research Report 28. Carne’s Seat, Goodwood, West Sussex, 1984,
Down, A. 1978 Chichester Excavations 3, Chichester. Sussex Archaeol. Collect. 124, 35–50.

46
 Excavations at Ford Airfield

Late Bronze Age pottery, 53–63. In D. Rudling, McKinley, J.I. Bone fragment size and weights of bone from
Hamilton, S. The excavation of a Late Bronze Age site at 1993 modern British cremations and its implications
1987 Yapton, West Sussex, 1984, Sussex Archaeol. for the interpretation of archaeological
Collect. 125, 51–67. cremations. International J. Osteoarchaeology
3: 283–287.
Hamilton, S. Bronze Age pottery, 8. In D. Rudling,
1990 Archaeological finds at Rustington, West 1994 The Anglo-Saxon cemetery at Spong Hill,
Sussex, 1986–88, Sussex Archaeol. Collect. North Elmham Part VIII: The Cremations. East
128, 1–20. Anglian Archaeology No. 69.
Hamilton, S. First Millennium BC Pottery Traditions 1994b Bone fragment size in British cremation burials
1993 in Southern Britain. unpubl. Ph.D. thesis, and its implications for pyre technology and
University of London. ritual. J. Arch. Sci. 21: 339–342.
Hamilton, S. Sussex not Wessex: a regional perspective on 1997a ‘The cremated human bone from burial
forthcoming Southern England c. 1200 to 200 BC, in D. and cremation-related contexts’, p. 55–72
Rudling (ed.) The Archaeology of Sussex to AD in Fitzpatrick, A. P. 1997 Archaeological
2000. Brighton: Sussex University Press. Excavations on the Route of the A27
Hawley, , W. Further excavations at Park Brow, Archaeologia Westhampnett Bypass, West Sussex, 1992
1927 76, 30–40. Volume 2. WA Report No. 12.
Helbaek, H. 1952 Early Crops in Southern England, Proc. Prehist McKinley, J.I., Archaeological Excavations on the Route of the
Soc. 18 pt. 2, 194–233. Smith, P. and A27 Westhampnett Bypass, West Sussex, 1992
Fitzpatrick, Volume 2. WA Report No. 12.
Hodder, I. 1974 ‘The distribution of two types of Romano- A.P. Animal
British Coarse Pottery in the West Sussex bone from the
region’, Sussex Archaeol. Collect. 112, 86–96. burials and other
Hodson, F.R. Some pottery from Eastbourne, the ‘Marnians’ cremation-related
1962 and the pre-Roman Iron Age in southern contexts’ p. 73–
England, Proc. Prehist. Soc. 28, 140–155. 76 in Fitzpatrick,
A. P. 1997
Holden, J.L., Scanning electron microscope observations of
Phakley, P.P. and incinerated human femoral bone: a case study. McMinn, R.M.H. A colour atlas of human anatomy London:
Clement, J.G. Forensic Science International 74, 17–28. and Hutchings, Wolfe Medical Publications.
1995a R.T. 1985
1995b Scanning electron microscope observations Mepham, L. 1997 ‘Pottery’, in Fitzpatrick, A., Archaeological
of heat-treated human bone. Forensic Science Excavations on the Route of the A27
International 74, 29–45. Westhampnett Bypass, West Sussex,1992.
Hunn, J.R. 1993 The Block Fenn fieldsystem: 1992 investigations, Volume 2:the Late Iron Age, Romano-British
Fenland Research 8, 10–13. and Anglo-Saxon cemeteries, Wessex Archaeol
Rep No.12, 114–137.
King, A. C. 1979 Results of Aerial Reconnaissance in West
Sussex, 1976, Sussex Archaeol. Collect. 117, Middleton, H. R. ‘The pottery’ in Bedwin, O. and Place, C.
257. and Rudling, D. Late Iron Age and Romano-British occupation
1995 at Ounces Barn, Boxgrove, West Sussex;
Laidlaw, M. and ‘Pottery’, in Lovell, J. Excavations at excavation 1982–83, Sussex Archaeol. Collect.
Lyne, M. A. B. the Horticultural Research International, 133, 45–101.
2000 Littlehampton, West Sussex, Wessex
Archaeology Report Ref. 44125.04. Monaghan, J. Upchurch and Thameside Roman Pottery: a
1987 ceramic typology, first to third centuries A.D.,
Longley, D. 1980 Runneymede Bridge 1986: Excavations on BAR Brit. Ser. No. 173, Oxford.
the Site of a Late Bronze Age Settlement.
Guildford: Surrey Archaeological Society Needham, S. Chronology and periodisation in the British
Research Volume 6. 1996 Bronze Age, Acta Archaeologica 67, 121–40.
Lovell, J. 2000 Excavations at the Horticultural Research Needham, S. and Runneymede Bridge, Egham: a Late Bronze
International, Littlehampton, West Sussex, Longley, D. 1980 Age riverside settlement, 397–416 in J.C.
Wessex Archaeology Report Ref. 44125.04. Barrett and R. Bradley (eds) Settlement and
Lovell, J. Society in Later Bronze Age Britain. Oxford:
Excavations at Worthing Road, Littlehampton.
forthcoming. British Archaeological Reports 83.

Lyne, M.A.B. ‘The pottery’, in Gilkes, O., Excavations by Needham, S. and Refuse and disposal at Area 16 East, Runnymede,
Forthcoming A Basil Wedmore at Hazel and Berghstede Roads, Spence, T. 1996 Runnymede Bridge Research Excavations,
North Bersted. (PROVISIONAL TITLE). Volume 2. London: British Museum Press.

Lyne, M.A.B. B ‘The pottery’, in Manley, J., Excavations Newsham, J.C. & Crops and Tillage. Methuen, London.
Forthcoming at Fishbourne 1995–99 (PROVISIONAL Gunston, J. 1946
TITLE).
Nye, S. & Jones, Hengistbury Head, Dorset. Volume 1. The
Lyne, M.A.B. The Alice Holt/Farnham Roman pottery M. prehistoric and Roman settlement 3500bc–
and Jefferies, industry, CBA Res. Rep. 30. AD 500. Oxford University Committee for
R.S. 1979 Archaeology, Monograph 13:323–328.
Masefield, R.B. Ford Wastewater Treatment Works – An Orton, C.J. 1975 ‘Quantitative Pottery Studies, Some Progress,
1999 Archaeological Evaluation. RPS unpublished Problems and Prospects’, Science and
report. Archaeology 16, 30–5.

47
Excavations at Ford Airfield

Pearson, G.W.and High precision calibration of the radiocarbon Rudling, D. 1990 Archaeological finds at Rustington, West
Stuiver, M.1986 timescale, 500–2500 BC. Radiocarbon 28(B): Sussex, 1986–88, Sussex Archaeol. Collect.
839–862. 128, 1–19.
Pearson, G.W., High-precision 14 C variations from AD 1840 Rudling , D. et. Downland Settlement and Landuse: The
Pilcher, J.R., to 5210 BC. Radiocarbon 28, 911–934. al. 2002 Archaeology of the Brighton Bypass. UCL Field
Baillie, M.G.L., Archaeology Unit Monograph 1.
Corbbett, D.M.,
and Qua, F. 1986. Salisbury, E. Weeds and Aliens. Collins, London.
1961
Pitts, M. W. 1980 A gazetteer of Mesolithic finds on the West
Sussex coastal plain, Sussex Archaeol. Collect. Seager Thomas, New evidence for the Late Bronze Age
118, 153–162. M. 1998 occupation of Selsey Bill. Sussex Archaeol.
Collect. 136, 7–22.
Place, C. 2000 Littlehampton and Bognor Regis UWWTD
Ford Airfield Site (AT0374) Post Excavation Smith, R.A. 1927 Park Brow, the finds and foreign parallels,
Assessment. RPS unpublished Report. Archaeologia 76, 14–29.
Prehistoric The Study of Later Prehistoric Pottery: Stace, C. 1997 New Flora of the British Isles. 2 nd. Edn.
Ceramics Guidelines for Analysis and Publication. University Press, Cambridge.
Research Group Prehistoric Ceramics Research Group
1992 Occasional Paper 2. Stuiver, M. and Users guide to the programs CALIB and
Reimer, P.J. 1987 DISPLAY, Rev 2.1. Quaternary Isotope
Pryor, F. 1996 Sheep, stockyards and field systems: Bronze
Laboratory,University of Washington.
Age livestock populations in the Fenlands of
eastern England, Antiquity 70, 313–24. Wessex Westhampnett Bypass, Chichester, West
RPS Consultants Bognor to Littlehampton Transfer Pipeline: an Archaeology. Sussex: Assessment of Potential and Proposals
(Masefield, R.) Archaeological Watching Brief, unpublished 1993 for Analysis. Wessex Archaeology Assessment
1999 client report. Report W474d.

Rudling, D. 1987 The excavation of a Late Bronze Age site at White, G.M. Prehistoric remains from Selsey Bill, Antiquaries
Yapton, West Sussex 1984. Sussex Archaeol. 1934 Journal 14, 40–52.
Collect. 125, 51–67.
Wolseley G.R., Prehistoric and Roman remains on Park Brow,
Rudling, D. 1998 Roman Villas in Sussex. Sussex Archaeol. R.A. Smith, and Archaeologia 76, 1–40.
Collect. 136, 41–65. W. Hawley, 1927

48