Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rdxmf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T16:47:31.906Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Ceramic Petrology and Prehistoric Pottery in the UK

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 February 2014

Elaine L. Morris  and
Ann Woodward
Elaine L. Morris
Affiliation:
Department of Archaeology, University of Southampton, Avenue Campus, Southampton SO17 1BJ
Ann Woodward
Affiliation:
Institute of Archaeology and Antiquity, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham B15 2TT
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Initial compilation of a digital record of petrological thin-sections prepared from ceramics found in the United Kingdom, the English Heritage UKTS database, was completed in 1994. This paper was commissioned by English Heritage as one of a series of period studies designed to synthesise and review the contents of the database. From the total of c. 20,000 thin-sections recorded, c. 5500 (28%) relate to prehistoric pottery. Within the prehistoric entries, coverage varies both by period and by region. The main results are summarised by region, and a series of general discussion points is highlighted. The themes of technology, production, and exchange, the movement of pottery in the earlier prehistoric period, and the potential symbolic significance of inclusions such as rock, bone, and grog are all considered. Finally, recommendations for the minimum standardisation of petrological reports on prehistoric ceramics, and for further research, are outlined.

Résumé

La compilation initiale des données numériques provenant de coupes minces pétrologiques préparées à partir de céramiques trouvées au Royaume-Uni, la base de données appelée UKTS d'English Héritage, fut terminée en 1994. Cette étude, commissionnée par English Héritage, fait partie d'une série d'études par périodes destinée à faire la synthèse et à réviser le contenu de cette base de données. Sur un total d'environ 20 000 coupes minces répertoriées, environ 5000 (28%) se rapportent à la poterie préhistorique. L'étendue des entrées relatives à la préhistoire varie à la fois en fonction de l'époque et de la région. Les principaux résultats sont résumés par régions et une série de sujets de discussion généraux sont soulignés. Des thèmes tels que la technologie, la production, les échanges, le mouvement de la poterie pendant la période du début de la préhistoire et la possibilité que des inclusions telles que roche, os, et débris aient une signification symbolique, sont tous examinés.

Zusammenfassung

Die anfängliche Zusammenstellung eines digitalen Datensatzes petrologischer Dünnschliffe von Keramik aus dem Vereinigten Königreich, die UKTS Datenbank des staatlichen Englischen Denkmalschutzes wurde 1994 abgeschlossen. Dieser Artikel wurde vom staatlichen Englischen Denkmalschutz im Rahmen einer Serie von Perioden-Forschungen in Auftrag gegeben, die darauf ausgerichtet waren, die Inhalte der Datenbank zu synthetisieren und zu überprüfen. Von den insgesamt ca. 20,000 nachgewiesenen Dünnschliffen, gehören ca. 5500 (28%) zu prähistorischer Keramik. Bei den prähistorischen Dateneinträgen variiert die Verteilung nach Zeiten und Regionen. Die Hauptergebnisse werden nach Regionen zusammengefasst und eine Reihe von allgemeinen Diskussionspunkten wird herausgestellt. Es werden sowohl die Themen Technologie, Produktion und Austausch als auch Bewegung von Tonware in frühen prähistorischen Perioden und die potentielle symbolische Bedeutung von Einschlüssen wie z.B. Gestein, Knochen und Grus berücksichtigt. Schließlich werden für die minimale Standarisierung von petrologischen Berichten zu prähistorischer Keramik und für weitere Forschungen Empfehlungen gegeben.

Résumen

La base de datos UKTS de English Heritage es el compendio inicial de un registro digital de secciones petrológicas de cerámicas halladas en el Reino Unido que fue completado en 1994. Este trabajo ha sido encargado por English Heritage como parte de una serie de estudios de periodos que tiene por objeto sintetizar y revisar el contenido de la base de datos. Del total de casi 20.000 secciones hechas, casi 5.500 (28%) provienen de cerámicas prehistóricas. Dentro de las entradas prehistóricas, la cobertura varía tanto entre periodos como por regiones. Los resultados principales se presentan por regiones, y se destacan una serie de puntos de debate generales. Se tratan los temas de tecnología, producción, e intercambio, el movimiento de cerámica en el periodo prehistórico más temprano, y la posible relevancia simbólica de inclusiones como roca, hueso, e impurezas. Finalmente, se apuntan recomendaciones para una mínima estandarización de los registros petrológicos de cerámica prehistórica, y para posibles investigaciones futuras.

Type
Research Article
Information
Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society , Volume 69 , 2003 , pp. 279 - 303
Copyright
Copyright © The Prehistoric Society 2003

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Allen, C.S.M. 1988. Bronze Age Pottery of the Second Millennium BC in the East Midlands of England. Unpublished PhD thesis. University of NottinghamGoogle Scholar
Allen, C.S.M., Firman, R.J., Knight, D., & Williams, D.F. 1992. Fabrics. In Knight D. Excavations of an Iron Age Settlement at Gamston, Nottinghamshire. Transactions of the Thornton Society of Nottinghamshire 96, 16–90Google Scholar
Allen, C.S.M., Harman, M. & Wheeler, H. 1987. Bronze Age cremation cemeteries in the East Midlands. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 53, 187–221CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allen, C.S.M., Knight, D. & Williams, D.F. 1998. Vessel fabrics. In Elliott L. & Knight D. An early Mesolithic site and first millennium BC settlement and pit alignments at Swarkestone Lowes, Derbyshire. Derbyshire Archaeological Journal 119, 79–153Google Scholar
Arnold, D.E. 1981. A model for the identification of non-local ceramic distribution: a view from the present. In Howard, H. and Morris, E.L. (eds), Production and Distribution: a Ceramic Viewpoint, 31–44. Oxford: British Archaelogical Reports International Series 120Google Scholar
Arnold, D.E. 1985. Ceramic Theory and Cultural Process. Cambridge: University PressGoogle Scholar
Avery, M. 1982. The Neolithic causewayed enclosure, Abingdon. In Case, H.J. & Whittle, A.W.R. (eds), Settlement patterns in the Oxford region: excavations at the Abingdon causewayed enclosure and other sites, 10–50. London: Council for British Archaeology Research Report 44Google Scholar
Bamford, H.M. 1985. Briar Hill Excavations 1974–1978. Northampton: Northampton Development Corporation Archaeological Monograph 3Google Scholar
Barclay, A. 1988. Ferro-oolitic Pottery – a contextual study of resource exchange and distribution of Neolithic and Bronze Age pottery from East Lincolnshire. Unpublished BA dissertation. University of Leicester.Google Scholar
Barclay, K. 2001. Scientific Analysis of Archaeological Ceramics. Oxford: OxbowGoogle Scholar
Braun, D.P. 1983. Pots as tools. In Moore, J.A. & Keene, A.S. (eds), Archaeological Hammers and Theories, 107–34. New York: Academic PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, L. 1991. Later prehistoric pottery. In Sharpies, N.M., Maiden Castle Excavations and Field Survey 1985–6, 185–203. London: English Heritage Archaeological Report 19Google Scholar
Brown, L. 1997. Marketing and commerce in late Iron Age Dorset: the Wareham/Poole Harbour pottery industry. In Gwilt, A. & Haselgrove, C.C. (eds), Reconstructing Iron Age Societies, 40–5. Oxford: Oxbow Monograph 71Google Scholar
Brown, N. 1991. Middle Iron Age decorated pottery around the Thames Estuary. Essex Archaeology & History 22, 165–6Google Scholar
Cleal, R.M.J. 1995. Pottery fabrics in Wessex in the fourth to second millennia BC. In Kinnes, & Varndell, (eds) 1995, 185–94Google Scholar
Cleal, R.M.J. 1996. The pottery from pit 2. in Rawlings M. & Fitzpatrick A.P., Prehistoric sites and a Romano-British settlement at Butterfield Down, Amesbury. Wiltshire Archaeological Magazine 89, 1–43Google Scholar
Cleal, R.M.J., Cooper, J. & Williams, D. 1994. Shells and sherds: identification of inclusions in Grooved Ware, with associated radiocarbon dates from Amesbury, Wiltshire. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 60, 445–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cunliffe, B. 1978. Iron Age Communities in Britain. London: Routledge & Kegan PaulGoogle Scholar
Cunliffe, B. 1979. The Iron Age pottery from Chilgrove 1. In Down, A.Chichester Excavations IV, 184–5. Chichester: PhillimoreGoogle Scholar
Cunliffe, B. 1984. Danebury, An Iron Age Hillfort in Hampshire Vol. 2 The excavations 1969–1978: the finds. London: Council for British Archaeology Research Report 52Google Scholar
Cunliffe, B. 1991. Iron Age Communities in Britain, 3rd edition. London: Routledge & Kegan PaulGoogle Scholar
Cunliffe, B. 2000. The Danebury Environs Programme, The Prehistory of a Wessex Landscape Volume 1 Introduction. Oxford: English Heritage and Oxford University Committee for Archaeology Monograph 48Google Scholar
Cunliffe, B. & Brown, L. 1987. The later prehistoric and Roman pottery. In Cunliffe, B.Hengistbury Head, Dorset, Volume 1: The Prehistoric and Roman Settlement, 3500 BC–AD 500, 205–321. Oxford: Oxford University Committee for Archaeology Monograph 13Google Scholar
Cunliffe, B. & Phillipson, D. 1968. Excavations at Eldon's Seat, Encombe, Dorset. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 34, 191–237CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cunliffe, B. & Poole, C. 1991. Danebury, An Iron Age Hillfort in Hampshire Vol. 5 The excavations 1979–1988: the finds. London: Council for British Archaeology Research Report 73Google Scholar
Cunliffe, B. & Poole, C. 2000. The Danebury Environs Programme, The Prehistory of a Wessex Landscape, Volume 2, Parts 1–7. Oxford: English Heritage and Oxford University Committee for Archaeology Monograph 49Google Scholar
Cunnington, M.E. 1923. The Early Iron Age Inhabited Site at All Cannings Cross Farm, Wiltshire. Devizes: George SimpsonGoogle Scholar
Cunnington, M.E. 1929. Woodhenge. Devizes.Google Scholar
Dacre, M. & Ellison, A. 1981. A Bronze Age urn cemetery at Kimpton, Hampshire. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 47, 147–203CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Darvill, T.C. 1982. The ceramic fabrics. In Britnell W.J. The excavation of two round barrows at Trelystan, Powys, 193–5. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 48, 133–202Google Scholar
Darvill, T.C. 1983a. The Neolithic of Wales and the Midwest of England: a systemic analysis of social change through the application of action theory. Unpublished PhD thesis. University of Southampton.Google Scholar
Darvill, T.C. 1983b. The petrology of the Neolithic pottery from Cherhill. In Evans J.G. & Smith I.F. Excavations at Cherhill, North Wiltshire, 1967. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 49, 43–118Google Scholar
Darvill, T.C. 1986. The petrology of prehistoric ceramics from Four Crosses. In Warrilow W. Owen G. & Britnell, W.J. Eight ring ditches at Four Crosses, Llandissilio, Powys. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 52, 53–88Google Scholar
Darvill, T.C. 1991. Early prehistoric pottery fabrics from the Breiddin hillfort. In Musson, C.The Breiddin Hillfort. A Later Prehistoric Settlement in the Welsh Marches, 193–5. York: Council for British Archaeology Research Report 76Google Scholar
Davies, S.M. 1981. Excavations at Old Down Farm, Andover, part II: prehistoric and Roman. Proceedings of the Hampshire Field Club and Archaeological Society 37, 81–163Google Scholar
Denham, V. 1985. The pre-Belgic Iron Age pottery. In Bamford, 1985, Mf. 207–10Google Scholar
Dinn, J. & Evans, J. 1990. Aston Mill Farm, Kemerton: excavation of a ring ditch, middle Iron Age enclosures, and a grübenhaus. Transactions of the Worcestershire Archaeological Society 12, 5–66Google Scholar
Ellison, A.B. 1975. Pottery and Settlements of the Later Bronze Age in Southern England. Unpublished PhD thesis. University of Cambridge.Google Scholar
Ellison, A. 1978. A petrological study of samples of the Bronze Age pottery. In Bateman J. A Late Bronze Age cremation cemetery and Iron Age/Romano-British enclosures in the parish of Ryton-on-Dunsmore, Warwickshire, 19–20. Transactions of the Birmingham and Warwickshire Archaeological Society 88, 9–47Google Scholar
Finch, L.A. 1971. Report on the petrological examination of sherds from Durrington Walls. In Wainwright, G.J. & Longworth, I.H.Durrington Walls: Excavations 1966–1968, 409–10. London: Report of the Research Committee of the Society of Antiquaries of London 29Google Scholar
Firman, R.J. 1994. Petrological examination of pottery from Crickley Hill. In Dixon, P.Crickley Hill; The Hillfort Defences, 209–12. Nottingham: Crickley Hill Trust and the Department of Archaeology, University of NottinghamGoogle Scholar
Foster, P.J. 1998–1999. Late Iron Age/Early Roman Northamptonshire: A study in the use of ceramic analysis to investigate social, economic and landscape changes. Northamptonshire Archaeology 28, 129–35Google Scholar
Freestone, I. 1979. The petrology of an Iron Age coin mould from Braughing. In Partridge C. Excavations at Puckeridge and Braughing, Hertfordshire 1975–79, Hertfordshire Archaeology 7, 129–30.Google Scholar
Freestone, I. 1992. Petrology of the Bronze Age pottery. In Bewley R. H., Longworth I. H., Browne S. Huntley J. P. & Varndell G. Excavation of a Bronze Age cemetery at Ewanrigg, Maryport, Cumbria, 340. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 58, 325–54Google Scholar
Freestone, I. & Humphrey, M.S. 1992, Report on the Petrology of Prehistoric Pottery from Staple Howe, Yorkshire. London: British Museum Research Laboratory Report 4653Google Scholar
Freestone, I. & Rigby, V. 1982. Class B cordoned and other imported wares from Hengistbury Head, Dorset. In Freestone, I., Johns, C. & Potter, T. (eds), Current Research in Ceramics: thin section studies, 29–40. London: British Museum Occasional Paper 32Google Scholar
Freestone, I. C. & Middleton, A.P. 1991. Report on the petrology of pottery from Burton Fleming and Rudston. In Stead, I.M.Iron Age Cemeteries in East Yorkshire; Excavations at Burton Fleming, Rudston, Garton-on-the-Wolds, and Kirkburn, 162–4. London: English Heritage Archaeological Report 22Google Scholar
Gibson, A. 1995. First impressions: a review of Peterborough Ware in Wales. In Kinnes, & Varndell, (eds) 1995, 23–39Google Scholar
Gibson, A. & Woods, A. 1990. Prehistoric Pottery for the Archaeologist. Leicester: University PressGoogle Scholar
Guilbert, G. & Vince, A. 1996. Petrology of some prehistoric pottery from Mam Tor. Derbyshire Archaeological Journal 116, 49–59Google Scholar
Haselgrove, C. & Allon, V. 1982. An Iron Age settlement at West House, Coxhoe, County Durham. Archaeologia Aeliana 19, 25–51Google Scholar
Heslop, D.H. 1987. Querns. In Heslop, D.H.The Excavation of an Iron Age Settlement at Thorpe Thewles, Cleveland, 1980–1982, 84–9. London: Council for British Archaeology Research Report 65Google Scholar
Hodges, H.W.M. 1965. Thin sections of sherds from Windmill Hill. In Smith, I.F.Windmill Hill and Avebury. Excavations by Alexander Keiller 1925–1939, 43–4. Oxford: University PressGoogle Scholar
Howard, H. 1981. Fabric analysis. In Needham S. An assemblage of Late Bronze Age metalworking debris from Dainton, Devon, 192–4. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 46, 177–216Google Scholar
Howard, H. & Morris, E.L. (eds), Production and Distribution: a ceramic viewpoint, 31–44. Oxford: British Archaeological Report S120Google Scholar
Howard, H. 1983. The Bronze Casting Industry in Later Prehistoric Southern Britain. Unpublished PhD thesis. University of SouthamptonGoogle Scholar
Howard, H. 1991. Refractory ceramic fabrics from the Breiddin hillfort. In Musson, C.The Breiddin Hillfort, A Later Prehistoric Settlement in the Welsh Marches, Mf. 3, 222–6. York: Council for British Archaeology Research Report 76Google Scholar
Hughes, M.J., Cowell, M.R., & Hook, D.R. 1991. Neutron Activation and Plasma Emission Spectrometric Analysis in Archaeology: Techniques and Applications. London: British Museum Occasional Paper 82Google Scholar
Humphrey, S. & Freestone, I. 1991. Report on the Petrology of Iron Age Pottery from West Heslerton, Yorkshire. London: British Museum Research Laboratory File 4653Google Scholar
Jackson, D. & Dix, B. 1986–1987. Late Iron Age and Roman settlement at Weekley, Northants. Northamptonshire Archaeology 21, 41–93Google Scholar
Jenkins, D. 1987. Report on the petrography of pottery from Trefignath and Din Dryfol, Anglesey. In Smith, C.A. & Lynch, F.M.Trefignath and in Dryfol: the excavation of two megalithic tombs in Anglesey, 60–73. Aberystwyth: Cambrian Archaeological Monograph 3Google Scholar
Jenkins, D. & Williams, J. 1999. Thin section analysis of the pottery from Upper Ninepence. In Gibson, A.The Walton Basin Project: excavation and survey in a prehistoric landscape 1993–7, 120–5. York: Council for British Archaeology Report 118Google Scholar
Kinnes, I. & Varndell, G. (eds). 1995. ‘Unbaked Urns of Rudely Shape’. Essays on British and Irish Pottery for Ian Longworth. Oxford: Oxbow Monograph 55Google Scholar
Lane, T. & Morris, E.L. (eds). 2000. A Millennium of Saltmaking: prehistoric and Romano-British salt production in the Eenland. Heckington: Lincolnshire Archaeology & Heritage Reports Series 4Google Scholar
Liddle, D.M. 1935. Excavations at Hembury Fort, Devon. Proceedings of the Devon Archaeological and Exploration Society 2, 135Google Scholar
Macpherson-Grant, N. 1991. A re–appraisal of prehistoric pottery from Canterbury. Canterbury's Archaeology 1990/1991, 38–48Google Scholar
Marsden, P. 1998. The prehistoric pottery. In Beamish M. A Middle Iron Age Site at Wanlip, Leicestershire. Transactions of the Leicestershire Archaeological and Historical Society 72, 44–62Google Scholar
McOmish, D. 1996. East Chisenbury: ritual and rubbish at the British Bronze Age–Iron Age transition. Antiquity 70, 68–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Middleton, A.P. 1987. Technological investigation of the coatings on some ‘haematite-coated’ pottery from southern England. Archaeometry 29, 250–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Middleton, A.P. 1995. Prehistoric red-finished pottery from Kent. In Kinnes, & Varndell, (eds), 1995, 203–10Google Scholar
Morris, E.L. 1981. Ceramic exchange in western Britain: a preliminary view. In Howard, H. & Morris, E.L. (eds), Production and Distribution: a ceramic viewpoint, 67–81. Oxford: British Archaeological Report S120Google Scholar
Morris, E.L. 1985. Prehistoric salt distribution: two case studies from western Britain. Bulletin of the Board of Celtic Studies 32, 336–79Google Scholar
Morris, E.L. 1991a. Ceramic analysis and the pottery from Potterne: a summary. In Middleton, A.P. & Freestone, I. (eds), Recent Developments in Ceramic Petrology, 277–87. London: British Museum Occasional Paper 81Google Scholar
Morris, E.L. 1991b. The pottery. In Bellamy P.S. The investigation of the prehistoric landscape along the route of the A303 road improvement between Andover, Hampshire and Amesbury, Wiltshire 1984–1987. Proceedings of the Hampshire Field Club & Archaeological Society 47, 5–81Google Scholar
Morris, E.L. 1994a. Production and distribution of pottery and salt in Iron Age Britain: a review. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 60, 371–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morris, E.L. 1994b. The organisation of pottery production and distribution in Iron Age Wessex. In Fitzpatrick, A.P. & Morris, E.L. (eds), The Iron Age in Wessex: Recent Work, 26–9. Salisbury: Association Française D'Etude de L'Age du Fer and Trust for Wessex ArchaeologyGoogle Scholar
Morris, E.L. 1995. Study 10: Pottery production and resource locations: An examination of the Danebury collection. In Cunliffe, B.Danebury; an Iron Age Hillfort in Hampshire Vol. 6, a hillfort community in perspective, 239–45. York: Council for British Archaeology Research Report 102Google Scholar
Morris, E.L. 1996. Iron Age artefact production and exchange. In Champion, T.C. & Collis, J. (eds), The Iron Age in Britain and Ireland: recent trends, 41–65. Sheffield: J.R. Collis Publications, Department of Archaeology & Prehistory, University of SheffieldGoogle Scholar
Morris, E.L. 1998. Aspects of research into later prehistoric ceramics. In Woodward, A. & Gardiner, J. (eds), Wessex Before Words, 60–2. Salisbury: Wessex ArchaeologyGoogle Scholar
Morris, E.L. with Gingell, C.J., Seager Smith, R. & Mepham, L. 2000. Pottery. In Lawson, A.J. with Gingell, C.J.Potterne 1982–5: animal husbandry in later prehistoric Wiltshire, 134–77. Salisbury: Wessex Archaeology Report 17Google Scholar
Morris, E.L., Earl, G., Poppy, S., Westcott, K. & Champion, T.C. 1998. The Later Prehistoric Pottery Collections Register and Bibliography for England: a Gazetteer. Southampton: English Heritage and Department of Archaeology, University of SouthamptonGoogle Scholar
Morris, E.L. & Champion, T. C. 2001. Seven thousand collections – on the Web. Antiquity 75, 253–4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Orton, C., Tyers, P. & Vince, A. 1993. Pottery in Archaeology. Cambridge: University PressGoogle Scholar
Palmer-Brown, C. 1993. Bronze Age salt production at Tetney. Current Archaeology 136, 143–5Google Scholar
Parker Pearson, M. 1990. The production and distribution of Bronze Age pottery in south-west Britain. Cornish Archaeology 29, 5–32Google Scholar
Parker Pearson, M. 1995. Southwestern Bronze Age pottery. In Kinnes, & Varndell, (eds), 1995, 89–100Google Scholar
PCRG 1997. The Study of Later Prehistoric Pottery: General Policies and Guidelines for Analysis and Publication. Oxford: Prehistoric Ceramics Research GroupGoogle Scholar
Peacock, D.P.S. 1968. A petrological study of certain Iron Age pottery from western England. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 34, 414–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peacock, D.P.S. 1969a. A contribution to the study of Glastonbury ware from southwestern Britain. Antiquaries Journal 49, 41–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peacock, D.P.S. 1969b. Neolithic pottery production in Cornwall. Antiquity 43, 145–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peacock, D.P.S. 1977. Ceramics in Roman and Medieval archaeology. In Peacock, D.P.S. (ed.), Pottery and Early Commerce; characterization and trade in Roman and later ceramics, 21–33. London: Academic PressGoogle Scholar
Peacock, D.P.S. 1988. The gabbroic pottery of Cornwall. Antiquity 62, 302–4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peacock, D.P.S. 1982. Pottery in the Roman World; an ethnoarchaeological approach. Harlow: LongmanGoogle Scholar
Peacock, D.P.S. & Williams, D. F. 1978. Petrological examination. In Drury, P.J.Excavations at Little Waltham 1970–71, 58–9. London: Chelmsford Excavation Committee Report 1/Council for British Archaeology Research Report 26Google Scholar
Pieksma, E.J. & Williams, D.F. 1994. Petrological examination. In Quinnell, H. & Blockley, M.R.Excavations at Rhuddlan, Clwyd: 1969–73, Mesolithic to Medieval, 134–6. London: Council for British Archaeology Research Report 95Google Scholar
Pryor, F. 1980. Excavation at Fengate, Peterborough, England: the third report. Northampton: Northamptonshire Archaeological Monograph 1/Royal Ontario Museum Archaeology Monograph 6Google Scholar
Raymond, F. 1994. The pottery. In Bradley, R.J., Entwhistle, R. & Raymond, R.Prehistoric Land Divisions on Salisbury Plain, 69–90. London: English Heritage Archaeological Report 2Google Scholar
Rice, P.M. 1987. Pottery Analysis. Chicago: University PressGoogle Scholar
Russell-White, C.J., Lowe, C.E. & McCullagh, R.P.J. 1992. Excavations at three Early Bronze Age burial monuments in Scotland. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 58, 285–323CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rye, O.S. 1981. Pottery Technology; Principles and Reconstruction. Washington DC: TaraxacumGoogle Scholar
Saville, A. 1990. Hazleton North. The Excavation of a Neolithic Long Cairn of the Cotswold-Severn group. London: English Heritage Archaeological Report 13Google Scholar
Sharpies, N. 1991. Maiden Castle. Excavations and Field Survey 1985–6. London: English Heritage Archaeological Report 19Google Scholar
Sillar, B. & Tite, M.S. 2000. The challenge of ‘technological choices’ for materials science approaches in archaeology. Archaeometry 42, 2–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stamataki, P. 2000. Report on the Prehistoric Pottery from Shoeburyness. Southampton: Department of Archaeology, University of Southampton, unpublished, archive reportGoogle Scholar
Stanford, S.C. 1982. Bromfield, Shropshire – Neolithic, Beaker and Bronze Age sites, 1966–79. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 48, 279–320CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swain, H.P. 1987, The Iron Age pottery. In Heslop, D.H.The Excavation of an Iron Age Settlement at Thorpe Thewles, Cleveland, 1980–1982, 57–71. London: Council for British Archaeology Research Report 65Google Scholar
Timby, J.R. 1983. Gallo-Belgic Fine Wares; a study in characterisation, distribution and development during the first centuries Be and AD. Unpublished PhD thesis. University of SouthamptonGoogle Scholar
Timby, J.R. & Williams, D.F. 1988. Petrological notes. In Martin, E.Burgh, The Iron Age and Roman Enclosure, 27. Ipswich: East Anglian Archaeology 40Google Scholar
Tomalin, D. 1982. The formal and textural characteristics of the Biconical Urn assemblage from Shaugh Moor enclosure 15, and their implications. In Balaam N. D., Smith K. & Wainwright G.J. The Shaugh Moor project: fourth report – environment, context and conclusion. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 48, 203–78Google Scholar
Tomalin, D. 1983. British Biconical Urns: their character and chronology and their relationship with indigenous Early Bronze Age ceramics. Unpublished PhD thesis. University of SouthamptonGoogle Scholar
Tyers, P. forthcoming. Ceramic petrology and Romano-British pottery studies. BritanniaGoogle Scholar
Vince, A.G. 1994a. The Petrology of Some Pottery and Briquetage from Burgh–le-Marsh, Lines. Lincoln: City of Lincoln Archaeological Unit Report 190Google Scholar
Vince, A.G. 1994b. Interim Report on Wanlip and Kirby Muxloe Thin-Sections. Lincoln: City of Lincoln Archaeological Unit ReportGoogle Scholar
Vince, A.G. 1995a. Wanlip, Leicestershire. Petrological Report 2. Lincoln: City of Lincoln Archaeological Unit ReportGoogle Scholar
Vince, A.G. 1995b. The Petrology of Some Prehistoric and Anglo-Saxon Pottery from Carsington, Derbyshire. Lincoln: City of Lincoln Archaeological Unit Report 185Google Scholar
Vince, A.G. 1995c. The Petrology of Clay and Briquetage Samples from Tetney, Lincolnshire. Lincoln: City of Lincoln Archaeological Unit Report 201Google Scholar
Vince, A.G. 1995d. Tetney 1993/1994. Petrological Report. Lincoln: City of Lincoln Archaeological Unit Report 194Google Scholar
Vince, A.G. 1995e. The Petrology of Some Later prehistoric Pottery from Easingwold, Yorks. Lincoln: City of Lincoln Archaeological Unit Report 206Google Scholar
Vince, A.G. 1996a. The Petrology of Some Prehistoric Pottery from Castle Hill, Folkestone 1991. Lincoln: City of Lincoln Archaeological Unit ReportGoogle Scholar
Vince, A.G. 1996b. The Petrology of Some Iron Age Pottery from Kirby Muxloe, Leicestershire. Lincoln: City of Lincoln Archaeological Unit ReportGoogle Scholar
Vince, A.G. 1997. Petrology. In Britnell W. J., Silvester R.J., Gibson A.M., Caseldine A.E., Hunter K.L., Johnson S., Hamilton-Dyer S. & Vince A. A Middle Bronze Age round-house at Glanfeinion, near Llandinam, Powys. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 63, 179–97Google Scholar
Vince, A.G. 2001. Ceramic petrology and post-medieval pottery. Post-Medieval Archaeology 35, 106–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vince, A.G. forthcoming a. Ceramic petrology and Anglo-Saxon pottery studies. Medieval ArchaeologyGoogle Scholar
Vince, A.G. forthcoming b. The United Kingdom Thin-Section Database. Internet Archaeology (http://intarch.ac.uk)Google Scholar
Wainwright, G.J. 1970. An Iron Age promontory fort at Budbury, Bradford-on-Avon, Wiltshire. Wiltshire Archaeological & Natural History Magazine 65, 108–66Google Scholar
Wandibba, S. 1982. Production and Acquisition of Pottery in the Iron Age: Petrological Investigations from Hampshire. Unpublished PhD thesis. University of SouthamptonGoogle Scholar
Wardle, P. 1992. Earlier Prehistoric Pottery Production and Ceramic Petrology in Britain. Oxford: British Archaeological Report 225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, D.F. 1978a. Petrological analysis of the pottery. In Christie P. The excavation of an Iron Age souterrain and settlement at Cam Euny, Sancreed, Cornwall. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 44, 309–433Google Scholar
Williams, D.F. 1978b. Petrology of Iron Age/Roman pottery from Nornour, Isles of Scilly. London: Ancient Monuments Laboratory Report 2560Google Scholar
Williams, D.F. 1979. Petrological Examination of Iron Age Pottery from Longbridge Deverill, Cow Down, Wiltshire. London: Ancient Monuments Laboratory Report 3010Google Scholar
Williams, D.F. 1980. Petrological Examination of Late Bronze Age/Early Iron Age Pottery from Mucking, Essex. London: Ancient Monuments Laboratory Report 3077Google Scholar
Williams, D.F. 1984. Petrology of Iron Age pottery from Heybridge, Essex. London: Ancient Monuments Laboratory Report 4157Google Scholar
Williams, D.F. 1987. An Iron Age ‘Glastonbury Ware’ Vessel from Abbeydale, Gloucester. London: Ancient Monuments Laboratory Report 172/87Google Scholar
Williams, D.F. 1988. Pottery fabric analysis. In Cunliffe, B.Mount Batten, Plymouth, A Prehistoric and Roman Port, fiche 1:B8–11. Oxford: Oxford University Committee for Archaeology Monograph 26Google Scholar
Williams, D.F. 1989. Petrological examination of the Bronze Age and Iron Age Pottery. In Ellis P. Norton Fitzwarren hillfort: a report on the excavations by Nancy and Philip Langmaid between 1968 and 1971. Somerset Archaeology & Natural History 133, 1–74Google Scholar
Williams, D.F. 1991a. Petrological analyses of some Iron Age pottery. In Sharples, 1991, M.9: F6–F7Google Scholar
Williams, D.F. 1991b. Roman amphora. In Sharples, 1991, 203–5Google Scholar
Williams, D.F. 1991c. A Petrological Note on Some Iron Age Sherds from Sites in Winchester, Hampshire. London: Ancient Monuments Laboratory Report 112/91Google Scholar
Williams, D.F. 1991d. Petrological analysis. In Nowakowski J. Trethellan Farm, Newquay: the excavation of a lowland Bronze Age settlement and Iron Age cemetery. Cornish Archaeology 32, 5–242Google Scholar
Williams, D.F. 1992. A note on the petrology of some Iron Age sherds from Gamston, Nottinghamshire. London: Ancient Monuments Laboratory Report 14]92Google Scholar
Williams, D.F. 1993. Possible Durotrigian Pottery from South Cadbury Castle, Somerset. London: Ancient Monuments Laboratory Report 50/93Google Scholar
Williams, D.F. 1995. A Petrological Note on Late Bronze Age and Iron Age Pottery from Wasperton, Warwickshire. London: Ancient Monuments Laboratory Report 3/95Google Scholar
Williams, D.F. 1997. Summary of petrological analysis. In Fitzpatrick, A.P.Archaeological Excavations on the Route of the A27 Westhampnett Bypass, West Sussex, 1992. Wessex Archaeology, Salisbury, 120Google Scholar
Williams, D.F. & Woodward, A. 1990. Fabrics. In Bell, M.Brean Down Excavations 1983–1987, 121–3. London: English Heritage Archaeological Report 15Google Scholar
Williams, J. & Jenkins, D. 1999. A petrographic investigation of a corpus of Bronze Age cinerary urns from the Isle of Anglesey. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 65, 189–230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Willis, S. 1996. The briquetage. In Abramson P. A Late Iron Age settlement at Scotch Corner, North Yorkshire. Durham Archaeological Journal 11, 7–18Google Scholar
Woodward, A. 1995. Vessel size and social identity in the Bronze Age of southern Britain. In Kinnes, & Varndell, (eds) 1995, 195–202Google Scholar
Woodward, A. 2000. When did pots become domestic? Special pots and everyday pots in British prehistory. Medieval Ceramics 22–3, 3–10Google Scholar
Woodward, A. 2002. Inclusions, impressions and interpretation. In Hill, J.D. & Woodward, A. (eds), Prehistoric Britain: the ceramic basis, 106–18. Oxford: OxbowGoogle Scholar