layer of burning near the bottom and a severed human forearm thrown casually in. Instead, the massive bank on the inner lip appeared to have been revetted or reinforced and in one place there were traces of a massive timber-lined gateway. Although there are at present no radiocarbon dates available, the pottery was identical to that from the main causewayed ditches. A field survey suggested that the outworks may extend round other spurs of the hill; if so the total area enclosed by the outwork system would be well over 70 acres.

vated, and 80-90 pits have been found. Of these 30 contained no material, but 60 contained enough material to show that they were Neolithic. However since these clearly only represent the base of much larger pits, it is impossible to draw any meaningful conclusions from them. The only thing that can be said is that they appear to be specialised, different pits containing different types of objects. Some pits for instance, contained a type of gabbroic pottery which is entirely absent from the ditches.

In addition to the causewayed enclosure, two other features had been recognised by the earlier investigators, the cross dykes set just outside the main causewayed ditch, and the outworks a considerable distance further away. The cross dykes proved to be identical in every way to the main causewayed ditches, and can thus be considered to be part of the causewayed camp, extending the enclosure around the spurs of the hills leading up to it.

The outwork, however, of which a 35 metre length was stripped on the eastern side, was entirely different. It was far more massive than the camp ditches, and although it was causewayed—this appears to be the natural way of digging a Neolithic ditch—yet it appears to be defensive. There were no traces of any ritual deposits, merely a

Crickley Hill

The problems of defence also made their appearance at another major excavation, at Crickley Hill in Gloucestershire. Here Philip Dixon began by excavating an Iron Age hill fort, but for the last three years he has concentrated on the Neolithic causewayed camp which somewhat unexpectedly, he found in the centre of the Iron Age enclosure.

Here there are two main phases. The earlier is a typical causewayed camp with a double row of interrupted ditches. In one place it was clear that the bank belonging to the inner ditch overlay an earlier series of scoops and causeways, proving what is elsewhere suspected, that the digging of the causewayed ditches may well have been a comparatively late feature of the site's ritual use.

After the abandonment of the causewayed enclosure, but still within the Neolithic period, a more substantial bank was built on the top of the earlier ditch. This bank, most remarkably, was faced with at least two tiers of drystone walling, and was pierced by a narrow entrance passage closed by a gate. The ditch of this phase has so far proved to be without interruptions, and the whole arrangement resembles the defences of a small hill fort.

As the interior of Crickley had not been ploughed it was hoped that, for once, the internal layout of a causewayed enclosure could be recovered. Despite the large area

336