| Summary : Probable Post Medieval gravel and flint digging on Hambledon Hill. The earthworks on Hambledon Hill were surveyed by RCHME in 1996. See the archive report for fullo details. The main causewayed enclosure (ST 81 SW 17) and its immediate environs are pitted with shallow depressions, ranging from small amorphous scoops to large rectilinear areas. These result from the extraction of flint gravels, probably continuing throughout the Post Medieval period. The distribution of the diggings suggests that extraction was organised on a parish basis. Outlying pits visible on aerial photographs of the Hanford and Stepeleton Spurs were intitially thought likely to represent Neolithic flint mining, and two examples, both on the Hansford Spur, were excavated by Roger Mercer during his 1974-86 excavation programme on Hambledon Hill. The pits were irregular and fairly shallow, with slight evidence for galleries exploiting a seam of of poor quality flint. The excavation recovered no evidence that the flint extraction occurred as early as the Neolithic. A Post Medieval date is now considered far more likely. |
More information : (ST 849 122) Between late May and late August 1996 the Cambridge and Exeter offices of RCHME carried out an earthwork survey and aerial photographic interpretation of the complex of monuments on Hambledon Hill as part of the project to record Industry and Enclosure in the Neolithic period (1).
The main causewayed enclosure (ST 81 SW 17) and its immediate environs are pitted with shallow depressions, ranging from small amorphous scoops to large rectilinear areas, resulting from the extraction of flint gravels, probably continuing throughout the Post-Medieval period. Their distribution suggests that the extraction was organised on a parish basis.
A number of outlying pits visible on aerial photographs, lying on the Hanford Spur and the Stepleton Spur, were initially thought to be possible neolithic flint mines (1a). Two examples, on the Hanford Spur, were excavated by Roger Mercer (1b); the pits were irregular and relatively shallow, but had slight evidence for galleries, penetrating a seam of poor-quality tabular flint. The excavation recovered no evidence that the pits were Neolithic, and this possibility is now considered unlikely.
For further details, see RCHME Level 3 client report and plan surveyed at 1:1000 scale, held in Archive. (1)
|