Clodgy Moor Boat Slate: More than we can possibly imagine.

Graham E Hill 2017 amanda.blunsdon@btinternet.com Tel. 01736 330117

Abstract Also towards a BSc(Hons) Archaeology

1

I pay to argue
Abstract
In 2008 an engraved piece of slate was found whilst field-walking at Clodgy Moor Cornwall. Although
the expectation of the finder was that its decoration shared a similar date to the Grooved Ware
pottery and Neolithic flint tools at the site, the apparent simplicity of the prominent lines meant that
no reliable date was likely to be proved.

On closer inspection to make the first drawing, it was found impossible to follow the profusion of tiny
details or indeed to entirely separate the human working from the natural ripples on that side of the
slate. What could be agreed with archaeologists that saw the engraving was that it was of a sailing
boat. The finder attempted to gain academic interest for the object and collected a set of statements
from archaeologists, which in this document will be challenged. Director Ian Wall hopes to display
the boat slate in the Royal Cornwall Museum to support a slate engraved with Ogham script, found
by David Edwards over a kilometre away in Paul village. Based upon references from no nearer to
Cornwall than Wales and Bulgaria the boat slate may be labelled as Early Medieval and graffiti.
After a discussion of this evidence, the boat slate will be compared to mostly under-recorded
Neolithic objects from Britain, and beyond and will bring to life our Grooved Ware culture and
Western European mythology in the third millennium BC. We need no longer to be jealous of the
Australian Aborigines who tell their unbroken story.

Fig. 0

Images on the title page and

here are placed to
disorientate the viewer.
Feelings of confusion, nausea
and anger may be
experienced during the
reading of this document.

Share with me:

The shock of the old.

Table of Contents
1.0 Introduction 1
2.0 Methodology: challenging the seven assertions 1
.2.1 The seven assertions 1
.2.2 The Medieval references given for Clodgy Moor Boat Slate 3
.2.3 Other ship graffiti we could add 5
.2.4 A ship depiction from Clodgy Moor, Cornwall. 7
.2.5 Comparanda of ancient ship engravings 9
3.0 Undermining the British Neolithic paradigm 11
.3.1 We should not always separate human work from natural rock features 11
.3.2 Humans sometimes worked very small, smaller than archaeologists see or expect to see 14
.3.3 Shadow hides and makes detail in sophisticated carving. 15
.3.4 The British Neolithic is said to be largely devoid of representational art 16
.3.5 Symbols may be signifiers of essential attributes and knowable by empirical deduction 17
.3.6 Combinations of symbols in a specific context may convey a complex message 18
4.0 A bestiary of British Neolithic Representational Art . 19
.4.1 The Links of Noltland Figurines 19
.4.2 Skara Brae Figurine 21
.4.3 Stray find on Orkney 22
.4.4 Brodgar Boy 22
.4.5 Dagenham Idol 23
.4.6 God Dolly 23
.4.7 Windmill Hill Chalk figurines 24
.4.8 Grimes Graves Venus 24
.4.9 Great Goddess of Clodgy Moor (Potential Neolithic Idol) 25
.4.10 Links of Noltland decorated stone. 26
4. 11 Cissbury Deer 27
4.12 Clodgy Goose scraper 28
4.13 Flint pebble manuports 29

5.0 Unpacking Clodgy Moor Boat Slate (Picture stone) 30

6.0 Closing statement 74
7.0 Introduction to the first translation 74
8.0 Bibliography 74
9.0 Appendices 80
I Page 544 of Hills finds catalogue 80
II Description by Matt Mossop 81
III Modes accession documents 82
IV Some of the unrecorded and otherwise lost finds from West Cornwall 84
V The first translation 86
Images and Tables
Fig. 1. a letter written in righteous anger 2
Fig. 2. Llanfaglan boat engraving 3
Fig. 3. Polish ship graffiti 4
Fig. 4. Ship carved on a Maughold stone 5
Fig. 5. Karlby Stone 5
Fig. 6. Engravings of 11-13th century ships from Portugal 6
Fig. 7. Engravings of 13th century ships and galleys from Portugal 6
Fig. 8. Drawing interpreted by Sean Taylor as a mid-masted, triangular-sailed ship 7
Fig. 9. The first drawing from Hills notes 7
Fig. 10. An enhanced photo of a tracing off computer screens from an RTI of Clodgy Moor ship. 8
Fig. 11. RTI image of the ship where the waterline is terminated to respect finer details. 8
Table 1. A table of the previously discussed images at constant scale. 9
Table 2. A table of dimensions and areas of the ship engravings. 9
Table 3. Bar chart of the complexity of the ancient ship engravings as numbers of lines. 10
Table 4. Bar chart of the concentration of detail in the ancient ship engravings as lines / m2. 10
Fig. 12. Needingworth Stone. 12
Fig. 13. Drawing and close view of the inscribed details. 13
Fig. 14. Rock formations on Carn Galva, West Penwith, Cornwall. 14
Fig. 15. Akhenatum and Neffertiti with their children. Egypt. 15
Fig. 16. Two images from RTI 3137 of Clodgy Moor Idol. 16
Fig. 17. Typical non-representational British Neolithic engravings. 17
Fig. 18. The meaning of a direction arrow. 17
Fig. 19. Naively annotated Domodedovo Airlines evacuation card. 18
Fig. 20. Westray Wife figurine. 19
Fig. 21. Second Links of Noltland figurine. 20
Fig. 22. An attempt to reproduce the second (clay) Links of Noltland figurine. 20
Fig. 23. The third Links of Noltland figurine. 21
Fig, 24. Skara Brae figurine. 21
Fig. 25. Harray figurine. 22
Fig. 26. Brodgar Boy with its extra segments 22
Fig. 27. Dagenham Idol 23
Fig. 28. God Dolly 23
Fig. 29. A selection of Windmill Hill culture chalk carved Neolithic objects 24
Fig. 30. Grimes Graves Goddess. 24
Fig. 31. Claimed Neolithic idol found at Clodgy Moor in 2005. 25
Fig. 32. Decorated stone found in Neolithic house ruin, Links of Noltland in 2008. 26
Fig. 33. One of a small number of figurative carvings from British flint mines. 27
Fig. 34. Clodgy Goose Scraper. 28
Fig. 35. Manuports 29
Fig. 36. Only a surface find. 30
Fig. 37. Recorded by Hill and cleaned 5 years later after non-engagement by specialists. 31
Fig. 38. Different methods of photographing Clodgy Moor Boat Slate. 32
Fig. 39. Flint tool marks described as a plough scuff by a senior archaeologist 33
Fig. 40. Some characteristic flint tool marks on the boat slate. 33
Fig. 41. Enlarged from fig. 39 34
Fig. 42. Experiments in magnification using water and locally found clear quartz. 35
Fig. 43. Experimental flint tools make three or more scratches per millimetre 36
Fig. 44. Crude demonstration of drilling tiny holes in slate using flint. 36
Fig. 45. With no obvious structural explanation. 37
Fig. 46. The concentration of dots of red ochre lumps 38
Fig. 47. Image left: Ochrous spots mostly are concentrated on and below the solar motif. 38
Fig. 48. Below: further enlarged view show that some ochre spots have a bubble-like structure. 38
Fig. 49. Many of the red ochrous lumps are indicated in this image. 39
Fig. 50. Red ochre spots on the boat itself are dominantly within the incised lines. 39
Fig. 51. Left and enhanced RTI below: Ochreous spots extend in decreasing concentration 40
Fig. 52. The red lumps in the ochre pigment on the boat are dominantly within the engraved lines. 41
Fig. 53. The sun set is matched by an equal sized crescent: the moon. 42
Fig. 54. The crescent moon appears to be occulting at least three stars. 43
Fig. 55. Introducing the Beaker man: a complex set of scratches above the boat. 44
Fig. 56. A beaker pot sherd CORN-294E07 45
Fig. 57. Introducing Clodgy Moor stone axe-man. 46
Fig. 58. Interpretation of motif as a Clodgy Moor axe-man 47
Fig. 59. Introducing the dagger. 48
Fig. 60. Schematic relating boat slate motif to Amesbury Archers daggers. 49
Fig.61. A fertility symbol negates the death-dealing dagger. 50
Fig. 62. Above left: Microscopic montage of group of ochreous adhesions. 51
Fig. 63. Left: Same area is nested to the left of a prominent rock ripple. 51
Fig. 64. ochreous adhesions have been highlighted by the engraving of diamonds about them. 51
Fig. 65. Ancient chess-board and net patterns potentially explained. 52
Fig.66. Introducing the Navigator 53
Fig. 67. Interpretation of punctuated stroke as the navigator/priest. 54
Fig. 68. Interpreting the zig-zag work as a snake 55
Fig. 69. Introducing the owls head 56
Fig. 70. Comparison of European owl to British Neolithic motifs. 57
Fig. 71. Rope fastenings for tensioning a stitched plank boat. 58
Fig. 72. Sickle and wheat harvest imagery 59
Fig. 73. This scratch represented as a sickle is of small diameter compared to those on the back. 60
Fig. 74. Introducing St Michaels Mount as The Omphalos 61
Fig. 75. Explanation of the symbol below the boat 62
Fig. 76. Demonstrating that a Clodgy Moor symbol is from Megalithic and Grooved Ware culture 63
Fig. 77. Introducing the priestess 64
Fig. 78. A scene of an apparent human sacrifice is depicted. 65
Fig.79. A sacred and profane explanation of how the boat is defiled by dung. 67
Fig.80. An intimate depiction from the very centre of the Boat Slate tableaux. 68-9
Fig. 81. Chane opratoire suggested here is provisional 70
Table 5. British and European Neolithic figurative concordance. 71
Table 6. British and European Neolithic non-figurative concordance. 72
Fig. 82. Exhibitions involving the public. 73
1.0 Introduction

This dissertation has the task of revealing some of the visually coded story in a picture-stone found
at Clodgy Moor (Mossop, 2010, 9), and cross-references a spatially and culturally related stone idol
(Hill, 2014c, 14), supported by a growing collection of British Neolithic representational objects
mostly found in the 21st century. Patterns will be recognised with symbols found in common and
with European Neolithic comparisons. Of such archaeological tasks, Lewis Binford writes:

If we accepted the challenge to conduct pattern-recognition studies at a sophisticated level, we also

had to face the problem of seeing many new things for which our received knowledge was
inadequate to guide accurate interpretation. Lewis R. Binford (1989, 271).

The symbolic understanding here to be demonstrated challenges received knowledge and the failure
of the British Neolithic paradigm is evidenced in chapters 2 and 3.

The preliterate and symbolic content lends itself to a heavily graphical presentation, which
dominates the latter part of this paper. John Swogger proposes:

Comics and archaeology should be natural cousins. After all, most ancient languages Egyptian
hieroglyphics being an obvious example exploit the same image/text synergies as comics.
(Swogger, 2012)

6,000 words dissertation limit is inadequate only due to my post-literate symbolic incompetence.

2.0 Methodology: challenging the seven assertions

From 2008- 16 assertions by archaeologists who had seen Clodgy Moor Boat Slate: a picture stone,
were collected (Fig. 1) and their refutation forms the basis of the methodology. They are listed
below with outlines of research directions in italics.

2.1 The seven assertions

1. The slate was inscribed using a pin. It will be demonstrated to have been made by a variety of
sharp lithic (flint) tools.

2. If it was inscribed using flint tools then it is still not necessarily old. The lithic tool competence and
Grooved Ware culture details disprove that.

3. Below the boat, running up from the lower edge is a plough scuff. No, it is a set of individual tool
marks to respect a diagonal rhythm in the slate ripples.

4. The slate is a fragment from a larger picture. It appears that the ship was drawn incomplete and
symbolically trapped in the stone with major lines terminating before the edge.

5. It is graffiti. It is far too complex with main lines giving way to intense inscribed detail, low and
sunken relief sculpture and with ochreous pigment use.

6. A competent archaeological artist will draw it. They will fail as it is a 3-D sculpture, modelled in
shadow when rotated under raking sunlight.

7. The depiction cannot be Grooved Ware if a copper dagger is shown on it. The Beaker Amesbury
Archer was buried with copper daggers in 2300 BC. The Grooved Ware culture ended in 2200 BC.

1
 Fig. 1 The basis for research; a letter written in righteous anger to [redacted] who was to have described the boat
slate.
After Hill showed a senior archaeologist a piece of pot from field 490 that they identified as
Grooved Ware (PAS, 2011c, CORN-F96837), they recognised a sailed boat on a slate (Fig. 1) from
the same field and after years of prompting, took some photos and claimed to have made a
2
 rubbing when interviewed on 11/09/13. Hill has photos to argue that no apparent damage was
done to the engraving by this act of desecration.

.2.2 The Medieval references given for Clodgy Moor Boat Slate

The slate might be displayed temporarily in Royal Cornwall Museum in 2017. Archaeologist Charles
Thomas showed the object to maritime specialists in London and could not get a definitive answer.
Hill has heard differing opinions, ranging from Iron Age to Medieval. In 2012 RCM opinion was
hardening about a Medieval date with mention of a similar example from Wales. Ian Wall, director
of RCM confirmed this view.

The slate has been looked at by a number of prehistoric and medieval specialists who have
concluded that the engraving is most likely early Medieval, a claim supported by comparanda from
Wales and Bulgaria. (Ian Wall. Email pers. com. 31/11/16).

Lewis Binford makes the following point about the former practice of archaeology:

The conventions used by archaeologists to assign meaning to the archaeological record were
conventions that accommodated the properties of the archaeological record to the a priori views of
the archaeologists and their colleagues about what the past had been like. (Binford, 1989, 282).

There is no Portable Antiquities Scheme database entry and no document containing references
about the boat slate, despite being in communication with the Finds Liaison Officer about the
matter from 2008- 2014. The inadequately and inaccurately completed Royal Cornwall Museum
TRURI: 2014. 21 accession document is Appendix III (with my commentary). In 2015 Hill obtained
a copy and returned it to RCM with amendments. The references below are the only relevant
ones that Hill could find from Wales and Bulgaria and without being given the actual references
on two occasions, is left to make his own deductions as to the basis for the RCM argument.

Wales: Llanfaglan Cross graffiti

Fig. 2, Llanfaglan boat engraving. Size approx. 0.2 X 0.1 m. Images Prof. Madeleine Gray 2013

In her blog Early Medieval Inscribed Crosses Prof. Madeline Gray (Gray, 2013) shows a simple
boat engraving (Fig. 2) on an Early Medieval Cross at Llanfaglan decommissioned church.
(Wooding and Yates, 2011, 129)

3
Bulgaria: Pliska, Basarab, Nikopol and Preslav graffiti

Fig. 3, Bulgarian boat graffiti, annotated with dimensions from his text. Images Dimitar Ovcharov 1977

Fig. 3 is likely to be the Early Medieval reference used by RCM. Dimitar Ovcharov ascribes these
drawings to the 10th century (Ovcharov, 1977, 9).

4
 .2.3 Other ship graffiti we might add
An Early Medieval example from The Isle of Man (Fig. 4) was suggested by fellow student
Rebecca Davies. It is added to a Celtic cross and is possibly a Viking ship (Cubbon, 1952, 70)

Fig. 4, Ship carved on a Maughold stone, Isle of Man. Drawing cc William Cubbon, p.70, 1952 and image Kevan
Rimmer (Pinterest)

A pebble found on a beach at Karlby, Denmark (Fig. 5) has a ship engraved on it and Elizabeth le
Bon discussed possible affinities to prehistoric, Roman classical period and Viking ships and
artistic styles (le Bon, 1994) and quite reasonably, was unable to decide between them.

Fig. 5, Karlby Stone. Images/text Elizabeth le Bon 1994

5
Publicized Medieval ship engravings are found in Norfolk (Norfolk Medieval Graffiti Survey,
2010) and also in Cornwall, with a Late Medieval representation of two sailing ships at Crane
Godrevy (Nowakowski, 2007, Fig. 16). Its size is judged to be in the 0.1 or 0.2 m range and is of
similar complexity to the Bulgarian Early Medieval examples, though more representational in
naval architectural details.

Galley and ship engravings dating from the 11th to 13th century from Portugal (Figs. 6,7) are in
the 0.2- 0.7 m size range (Gomes et al. 2014).

Fig. 6, Engravings of 11-13th century ships from Portugal. Images and text Mrio Varela Gomes et al. 2014

Fig. 7, Engravings of 13th century ships and galleys from Portugal. Images and text Mrio Varela Gomes et al.
2014

6
A drawing on a Bronze Age pot sherd was found on St. Agnes, Scilly Isles (Fig. 8) and described by
Sean Taylor. Hill agreed that it may have a pennant (Kennal building, Truro, pers. com. 2012)

Fig. 8, Drawing interpreted by Sean Taylor as a mid-masted, triangular-sailed ship on a Bronze Age pot sherd from
St. Agnes, Scilly Isles. Image National Maritime Museum Cornwall.

Sean pointed out that the pot sherd associated with an excavated round house in 2009 was
inscribed before firing, hence securely dating it to 1000-800 BC. He speculated that it might
represent a Phoenician ship and might be the oldest representation of a masted ship in the UK.
There is a similarity between some depictions of ships from 13th century Portugal (Fig. 6) with
the one found at St. Agnes, 2,000 years before. Therefore typology will not always date ship
depictions.

.2.4 A ship depiction from Clodgy Moor, Cornwall.

Fig. 9 is recorded on page 544 of Hills notes (Appendix I). It was revealed as a ship after a light
clean-away of adhering dirt. The first drawing makes it apparent that the rippled surface played
some part in the composition. In this dirty state Tom Goskar made a Reflectance Transformation
Image (RTI) on 30/5/13 (Fig. 11). A tracing off RTI images (fig. 10) was made to plot inscribed
marks. A further clean has revealed more and confirmed the inadequacy of a description that
ignores sculpting, natural surface, drilled and stabbed marks, pigment, shadow and light angle.

Fig. 9. The first drawing from Hills notes shows an interest in the rippled surface and that the lower hull line is
terminated. Drawing and image Graham Hill 2008.

7
Fig. 10. An enhanced photo of a tracing off computer screens from an RTI of Clodgy Moor ship. Even with adhering
dirt, the terminated lower hull line is seen to respect a miriad profusion of finer details. Image Graham Hill 2017.

Fig. 11. RTI image of the ship where the lower hull line is terminated to respect finer details. Note the orange
sediment obscuring potentially even finer details. Image Graham Hill/Thomas Goskar 2014 .

8
 .2.5 Comparanda of ancient ship engravings
Table 1. A table of the previously discussed images at constant scale

Table 2. A table of dimensions and areas of the ship engravings. The no. of construction lines, lines
per unit area, and Log10 of the lines per unit area are used to construct bar charts.

9
Table 3. Bar chart of the complexity of the ancient ship engravings as numbers of lines

Table 4. Bar chart of the concentration of detail in the ancient ship engravings as lines / m2.

Tables 1-4 demonstrate that even if the Boat Slate is Early Medieval it is noteworthy.

10
3.0 Undermining the British Neolithic paradigm

.3.1 We should not always separate human work from natural rock features

It is a basic task of classification to separate human work from that of nature, however sometimes it
misses the point.

A stone found by Susie Sinclair in 2010 on a geology field trip at Needingworth Quarry proved to not
be a fossil, but two pairs of eye-like motifs and ascribed to Grooved Ware culture by C. J. Evans of
Cambridge Archaeological Unit (Fig. 12). Hill suggested to him that the eyes were engraved to draw
the viewer into a closer look, whereby the ripples from ancient tides and animal burrows might
convince the viewer that there was a whole world of decorative structure. In 2016 C. J. Evans
published (Evans, 2016, 68) and his artist has added an unwarranted feint circle to the drawing of
the motifs as though (s)he too was entranced by the stone into using their imagination (Fig. 13).

Hill suggests that there are many ancient works where use has been made of natural features and
that sometimes through careful embellishment the artist has intended that the viewer imagines an
inner life of potentially unlimited decoration that may only be constrained by cultural expectation.
Our problem would be in not knowing precisely what imaginative limits were expected for the
intended viewer.

The painted caves at Chauvet and Lascaux contain examples of flow-stone rock buttresses that have
been painted into the muscled limbs of animals. Nearby formations hint at more animals emerging
from the rock. We are allowed to imagine horses and bison, but not kangaroos.

Rebecca Aroon discussing geological features and rock art states that the physical act of carving
draws directly from the natural surface and the two cannot be separated with ease. (Aroon, 2011,
13).

Antonia Thomas notes the similarity between the patterns of cracks in the rocks of Orkney and
Neolithic engravings at Ness of Brodgar:

In making this connection between the bedrock and the decoration, it is possible to see a thread
which runs through the whole chaine operatoire of a block of building stone from quarrying through
to stoneworking, construction and appreciation. (Thomas, 2016, 215)

And significantly she noted that excavators had been fooled into thinking that naturally angular slabs
on the site had been worked rather than chosen.

The potential sophistication of the ancient cultures represented by the recovered archaeological
record was appreciated by Lvi-Strauss, apparently in contradiction to normative assumptions of
contempory philosophical debate.

what I have tried to emphasize is that actually the thought of people without writing is or can be
in many instances, on the one hand, disinterested- and this is a difference in relation to Malinowski-
and, on the other hand, intellectual- a difference in relation to Lvy- Bruhl. (Lvi-Strauss, 1978, 12)

Hence the uninformed destruction by inadequate recording of archaeological sites and

misrepresented exhibits in displays and lost artefacts in museum stores are a legacy of
archaeological practice.

11
Fig. 12. Needingworth Stone. Seeing a pair of eye-like motifs and then finding a smaller pair primes the viewer to look
for more details. The stone then appears to seethe with possibilities given the clever choice of stone by the Neolithic
master. Image courtesy of C.J. Evans, Cambridge Archaeological Unit.

12
 Extra circle
drawn that is
not on the
artefact.

Fig. 13. Drawing and close view of the inscribed details. The artist has not included the linear lithic scratch as part of the
intended drawing but has included another faintly incised circle which does not exist, except in their imagination
(indicated with a blue arrow). Image (Evans, 2016, 69)

Seeing the larger eyes and then the smaller ones as only the latest manifestations of a continual
coming into being in the stone, we might apply Tilleys Phenomenology of Landscape (1994) to a

13
smaller scale and consider human alteration of rock surfaces as an action designed to draw attention
to the natural features of the rock, giving them meaning. At the scale of raised megalithic stones,
Hill identifies three erected stones pointing along their axes to natural rock formations in West
Penwith near Lands End (Hill, 2011). Christopher Tilley and Wayne Bennett in 2001 describing the
super-natural spaces of West Penwith Cornwall, state:

We argue that 'nature' provides a fundamental conceptual resource for understanding cultural
form, and that 'natural' architecture had a super-natural significance for prehistoric populations.
(Tilley and Bennett, 2001, 335).

It is as though the shapes in the rocks and landscape were the template for Grooved Ware culture
itself (Fig. 14).

Fig. 14. Rock formations on Carn Galva, West Penwith, Cornwall. Images cc Graham E Hill 2016

3.2 Humans sometimes worked very small, smaller than archaeologists see or expect to see.

Upper Palaeolithic example: Montgaudier composition, France. Evan Hadingham points out that the
microscope is essential to their decipherment (Hadingham, 1980,252).

Mesolithic example: Pendant from Star Carr, Yorkshire. Nicky Milner explains: The mysterious lines
on the surface of the pendant were barely visible before the team used digital microscopy
techniques to observe them through high-resolution imagery (Milner, et al., 2016).

Neolithic example: Ivory knife handle found at Abydos, Egypt. Melinda K. Hartwig writes of the
carved heads on it: It is difficult to conceive of them being executed with crude tools and without
magnification. The minute human figures have faces as small as one millimeter[sic], with carefully
drawn, expressive features (Hartwig, 2014, 62).

Bronze Age example; Bush Barrow dagger. The hilt was studded with thousands of minute gold pins
of 0.2 mm diameter (Clarke et al. 1985, fig. 4.75).

Hellenistic Greek example: Antikithera mechanism, found undersea near Greece. K. Efstathiou
calculates the accuracy of manufacture of the gear teeth as +/- 0.2 mm (Efstathiou et. al., 2012,
Table 8). Von Dniken was almost correct in claiming 0.1 mm accuracy (Von Dniken, 1973, 113).

Historic example: Shinto carvings into wheat grains, exhibited in Royal Albert Memorial Museum,
Exeter. The exhibit card reads: they cannot see what they are carving but rely on touch. By
14
breathing deeply they slow down their heart beat so that their hands are steady (RAMM, 2016,
exhibit).

Present: Artist Willard Wigan. Describing the physiological challenge of carving microscopically,
speaking at a filmed lecture he stated: And then I actually slow down my whole nervous system.
And then I work between my heartbeat, I have one-and-a-half seconds to actually move
(TEDGlobal, 2009).

Philosopher Walter Benjamin explained small prehistoric portable miniatures thus:

Surrounded by the world of giants, children use play to create a world appropriate to their size. But
the adult who finds himself threatened by the real world and can find no escape, removes its sting
by playing with its image in reduced form (Benjamin, 1928, 100).

We have not established much but we might say that the humans focussed on calm, slowing their
heartbeats, and between breaths made these marks.

3.3 Shadow hides and makes detail in sophisticated carving.

When tasked to draw an archaeological object we may make several projections to establish a stone
tool. An inscribed slate elicits a single drawing. Antonia Thomas criticises the art of archaeological
representation.

the archaeologist as image-maker controls what is represented and therefore, what is known about
a particular object (Thomas, 2016, 191).

A carved rock may be photographed or drawn at the most revealing sun or even artificial light angle
(Figs. 15, 16). A portable stone engraved on one side may be shown by one image, however Clodgy
Moor Boat Slate is not explained by one drawing as the carving is revealed by raking light yet hidden
by the ripples in the slate, so that the details and shadows make different pictures according to the
light direction; a kind of shadow art (Mitra and Pauly, 2009).

Fig. 15. Akhenatum and Neffertiti with their children. A sunken relief sculpture is modelled by shadow.
Image cc Gerbil 2016.
15
 Fig. 16. Two images from RTI 3137 of Clodgy Moor Idol. Images Thomas Goskar/Graham Hill 2015

3.4 The British Neolithic is said to be largely devoid of representational art

Writing of British rock art, Richard Bradley states:

This was a largely non-representational art, but in Brittany it encapsulated a series of images
depicting important features from daily life, including axes, bows and arrows, and domestic animals.
(Bradley, 1991, 79)

Richard Bradley states in conclusion:

Thus Galician art contains carvings of idols of a kind evidenced in Portugal and apparently related
to those in north-west Spain, Brittany and Ireland. It also contains drawings of weapon types which
have their closest counterparts in the British Isles. It is because of such long-distance links that we
are entitled to consider Atlantic rock art as a unitary phenomenon. (Bradley, 2002, 66)

The boat slate (Ibid) will show images of such weapons.

Julian Thomas reported the number of anthropomorphic representations as extremely rare, noting
possible figurines at Westhay, Somerset and doubtful examples from Windmill Hill. The possibly
fake example from Grimes Graves was also mentioned (Thomas, 2005, 167).
His namesake Antonia Thomas stated to Hill:

As I am sure you are aware, British Neolithic art is unusual in being almost entirely devoid of
figurative elements. (Antonia Thomas Email pers. com. 25/09/14)

And

It is now generally accepted that the overriding characteristic of megalithic art in Britain and Ireland
is the dominance of non-figurative designs. (Thomas J., 2016, 20).

Non-figurative Neolithic art familiar to A. Thomas is included in Fig. 17.

16
Fig. 17. Typical non-representational British Neolithic engravings. Top, Ness of Brodgar Orkneyjar 2006.
Lower, Clodgy Moor Idol (detail) Graham Hill

3.5 Symbols may be signifiers of essential attributes and knowable by empirical deduction

Fig. 18. The meaning of a direction arrow

The direction arrow is signified by flocks of migrating birds and the shape of piercing objects (Fig.
18). This is but one tiny insight into the Neolithic mind and such archetypal signifiers are
acknowledged by Levi-Strauss, retelling a myth of the essential binary qualities of the skate (wide
and visible or thin and invisible) fighting the south wind in (Levi-Strauss, 1978, 7).

17
3.6 Combinations of symbols in a specific context may convey a complex message

Fig. 19. Naively annotated Domodedovo Airlines evacuation card Domodedovo Airlines

18
This Il 96 evacuation card (Fig. 19) is an example of a picture story to be read in the aeroplane. Its
visual context establishes the syntax. The semantics of the juxtaposed cartoons and symbols may
convey the intended message, even if the text is linguistically opaque. A partial semiotic
interpretation of these symbols was potentially possible by a Neolithic passenger, according to Hill.

Like-wise Hill will make a translation of the Neolithic Boat slate, given the remarkable and complex
juxtaposition of symbols and images. No doubt some laughable mistakes will be made, just as the
notional Neolithic person thought that a gold cape would help them to float in the sea.

4.0 A bestiary of British Neolithic Representational Art.

There may be much more to be discovered in museum store rooms and in archaeological spoil
heaps.
.4.1 The Links of Noltland Figurines

Fig. 20. Westray Wife. Height 41 mm. EASE Archaeology/Historic Scotland, National Geographic Magazine
The first figurine found at Links of Noltland is 41 mm tall, sandstone and both sides are intensely
scratched. An eye-brow motif is noted on the head and it has indicated dress fastenings or
breasts (Towrie, 2009a).

20
Fig. 21. Second Links of Noltland figurine. Images EASE Archaeology/Historic Scotland
This clay figurine has the mark for a missing head (Towrie, 2010a). What has been interpreted as
the front has a pierced lozenge motif (Fig. 21). Hill sees this differently. See next image (Fig. 22).

Fig. 22. An attempt to reproduce the second (clay) Links of Noltland figurine. Note that its interpretation here is
that the flat side is the back.

20
Fig. 23. The third Links of Noltland figurine, stone and with an eye-brow motif on the head. Image EASE
Archaeology/Historic Scotland
This figurine is slightly larger and its apparent crudity allows the knowledgeable person to search for
the eyebrow motif, eyes, beak and net-based body decoration, probably including a pubic triangle.
Scottish archaeologists spotted at least some of the features straight away, having been primed by
previous finds (Towrie, 2012).
.4.2 Skara Brae Figurine
Fig, 24. Skara Brae figurine. Found in the 1860s and misplaced
until 2016. Whalebone. 95 x 75 mm.
Image Stromness Museum and Rebecca Marr, 2016.

Fig. 24 shows the Skara Brae whalebone figurine (Towrie, 2016) whose pierced carving seems to be
prefigured by the vesicular structure.

21
.4.3 stray find on Harray

Fig. 25. Harray figurine. Image Andrew Appleby

Harray figurine (Fig. 25) named Grimeston Girlie when it was found in 1976 in a field by Andrew
Appleby. American archaeologists agreed with Appleby that it was anthropomorphic and it now
appears to be similar to those figurines found in secure Orcadian Neolithic contexts (Burnham 2010;
Towrie, 2010c).

.4.4 Brodgar Boy

Sent: 06 April 2014 19:42
To: Nick Card [Site Director, Ness of Brodgar excavation]
Subject: Brodgar boy reinterpreted.
Dear Nick,
The Brodgar boy, named after finding the top fragment would surely have
had a different name if it had been found with the lower segment and even
another piece below that.
Could it be that structure 14 was northerly sited to take the smell away from
the temple complex on the prevailing wind with purity of the site maintained
and a convenient place to gather the manure for raising crops? Visitors
would know that the building was a toilet (like the cell in the homes at Skara
Brae) by the clay poo hanging in the doorway!
All the best,
Graham Hill

RE: Brodgar boy reinterpreted.

FROM Nick Card TO You [received 06 April 2014 19:49]
To [Graham Hill]
Now why didn't I think of that!
Fig. 26. Brodgar Boy with its extra segments, found in 2010. Image Sigurd Towrie, 2010
A week after the named find, the lower section was found nearby with confusing results (Towrie,
2010b).

22
 .4.5 Dagenham Idol

Fig. 27. Dagenham Idol, pine wood, found in 1922. Image Coles 1990
Dated to the Later Neolithic- Early Bronze Age (Fig. 27), one eye socket is deeper; perhaps a
precursor of the myth of Odin giving away an eye for wisdom, according to Bryony Coles. (Coles,
1990, 332)
.4.6 God Dolly

Fig. 28. God Dolly, ash-wood, 1966, Somerset Levels. Neolithic. Image Coles, 1990
A wooden hermaphrodite figurine (Fig. 28), dated to the Neolithic (Coles, 1990).

23
.4.7 Windmill Hill Culture Chalk figurines.

Fig. 29. A selection of Windmill Hill culture chalk carved Neolithic objects including potential figurines. Piggott, 1954

Incomplete chalk figurines are known from Windmill Hill and Maiden Castle (Fig. 29) with phalli from
such sites as Thickthorn long Barrow, Windmill Hill, Knap Hill and Grimes Graves (Piggott, 1954, Fig.
14).

.4.8 Grimes Graves Venus

Grimes Graves Goddess/Venus (Fig. 30) was
found in suspicious circumstances in 1939
by A. L. Armstrong (Barber et al. 1999, 64)
despite supporting evidence being found
nearby of an altar and chalk phalli. This
object is overdue for research as to its
authenticity.

Fig. 30. Grimes Graves Goddess. Grimes Graves. Image British Museum

24
.4.9 Great Goddess of Clodgy Moor (Potential Neolithic Idol)

Fig. 31. Claimed Neolithic idol found at Clodgy Moor in 2005. 42 X 35 mm. Image from 100 microscope images Hill
Found in 2005 in a scatter of flint, and ground stone tools, with Later Neolithic pottery disturbed
into the plough-soil nearby, this brightly coloured and scratched stone (Fig. 31) was reinterpreted as
a figurine on 18/2/14 by Hill in the knowledge of similar recent discoveries on Orkney and also by
Cheryl Straffon after examining it on 13/4/14. An RTI was commissioned with the help of the Mick
Aston Fund (Hill, 2015). It is now on display at Museum of Witchcraft and Magic, Boscastle (MWM,
2017).
25
Fig. 31. Claimed Neolithic idol found at Clodgy Moor in 2005 (back). Note two parallel sets of lithic scratches to engage
with the vertical rock banding to make a checker-board pattern.

Combining the underlying net pattern of the front with the checker-board of the back is a potent
life-giving water symbol as shown later in Fig. 65 (p. 52).

25
 .4.10 Links of Noltland decorated stone.

Fig. 32. Decorated stone found in Neolithic house ruin, Links of Noltland in 2008. Image EASE Archaeology/Historic
Scotland. The pecking marks/shadows elicit an imaginative response from the viewer (see Fig. 12).

26
Hazel Moore, Director of EASE Archaeology and excavated Links of Noltland said of Figs. 31 and 32:

It is very interesting to see your decorated stone and for comparison with the Links of Noltland
example. Our stone was found prior to the discovery of the Westray Wife and although the
'eyebrow' motif was noted, the stone was found amongst surface rubble and we felt uncertain about
making any more of it at that time. Since then, however, we have found another two stone figurines,
part of a ceramic one, together with eyebrow motifs carved into the walls of a Neolithic house. It
seems likely (to us at least) that the same personage/ concept is being invoked in all of these cases . I
am intrigued by your stone- and can see the resemblance to the owl/ bird headed deities, as seen in
France and elsewhere. In the Orcadian context, we know of only one other figurine- - a carved bone
figurine from Skara Brae (unfortunately now lost) and another occurrence of the eyebrow motif
from the chambered tomb at Holm of Papa Westray . (Hazel Moore, Email pers. com. 26/3/14)

4. 11 Cissbury Deer

Fig. 33. One of a small number of

figurative carvings from British flint
mines. Image Anne Teather, 2016, 52

Fig. 33 is one of a small group of figurative carvings from British flint mines. Anne Teather suggests
that this object is the first example of Neolithic representational art. (Teather, 2015; 2016).

27
4.12 Clodgy Moor Goose scraper

Image CC BY SA 3.0 Michael Maggs

Fig. 34. Clodgy Goose Scraper. A piece of fine nodular imported Beer flint at Clodgy Moor Boat Slate find spot, may have
been altered to resemble a Greylag Goose.

Fig. 34, a notched tool PUBLIC-A536B7 (Portable Antiquities Scheme, 2011a) was recorded for
Clodgy Moor Project (Jones, 2013).

28
4.13 Flint pebble manuports

Fig. 35. Manuports.

Humans still curate
interesting stones
and they may have
picked up ones that
looked like heads in
prehistoric times

The curation of manuports that look like heads may be noticeable in locations where the rock type
was not deposited there by natural processes. The Australopithicene example (Fig. 35) may be the
first ancestral art (British Museum, 2017). Teather ( 2014, 240) reports a cats head flint nodule at
Blackpatch and flint nodule phalli and testicle-like nodules are recored at Grimes Graves. Flint
pebbles illustrated (Fig. 35) have no or slight human intervention and were apart from the South
African example, from flint scatters in West Cornwall [Hill finds catalogue, mostly unpublished].
29
5.0 Unpacking Clodgy Moor Boat Slate (Picture stone)

Fig. 36. Only a surface find. Clodgy Moor Boat slate was found in the disturbed soil of a ploughed field with these
objects.

The boat slate is only the potentially most important of unusual surface finds (Fig. 36; Appendix III)
that have not been recorded or recorded as an uncontroversial object, perhaps for fear of
colleagues specialist opinions later proving to be wrong (Hill, forthcoming and Appendix IV).
30
Fig. 37. Recorded by Hill immediately and cleaned 5 years later after non-engagement by specialists.

Not recorded for the Portable Antiquities Scheme since its find in 2008, despite numerous
representations, accessioned by Royal Cornwall Museum, with an incomplete Modes document
missing dimensions and mass (Fig. 37 and again Appendix III); director Ian Wall was contacted as
recently as 20/4/17 to protest about the matter. The relevant parties will again be aware of my
concerns.

31
Fig. 38. Different methods of photographing Clodgy Moor Boat Slate

32
 Addressing the 7 archaeologists assertions from chapter 2 will lead to the slates secrets being
revealed (fig. 38). The work was not made using a metal pin. Where the sediment does not obscure
the surface then striated and multiple scratches are visible, characteristic of flint tool use (dErrico,
1995, Greenfield, 2006; Gu et al. 2014). A set of tool marks suggested to have been made to respect
a rhythm amongst the natural ripples was described as a plough scuff by a leading Cornish
Archaeologist. Microscopy and enlarged images easily demonstrate this mistake to the public (Figs.
39, 41).

Fig. 39. Flint tool marks described as a plough scuff by a senior archaeologist at the lower edge of the altered surface
beneath the boat depiction. Image reduced from a 1 metre sized photographic montage seen at public exhibitions.

Fig. 40. Some characteristic flint tool marks on the boat slate and a dihedral burin graver in Beer nodular flint, with
polish from use as a burin (PAS. PUBLIC 885821) of possible Later Neolithic/EBA date found near the boat slate.

33
34
Fig. 41. Enlarged from fig.39
but still much smaller than
seen by the public. Do you
see a plough scuff or a set of
marks made by flint tools?
Montaged figures such as
this form part of my public
engagement and are used in
this dissertation.

The major scratch is

diagonally crossed to
imply a net pattern from
the enhanced natural
ripples (Fig. 41). Page 34
continues with other
light angles.

34
34
34
34
34
34
Experiments using flint and metal tools and observation of the results with hand lens or low power
microscope are effective to determine characteristic differences. Double lines, occasional parallel
lines and striated interiors of marks are lithic mark characteristics. The boat slate demonstrates
these (Fig. 40).

Fig. 42. Experiments in magnification using water and locally found clear quartz.
Archaeologist Charles Thomas (2014) described the Clodgy Moor boat as nearly microscopic. The
potential magnifying aids for focussing light to see the smallest details range from a water drop (Egri,
2010) over a hole in a waxy leaf to a water drop on a quartz crystal facet to ground clear quartz
lenses (Fig. 42). Clear quartz is a surface find in West Cornwall, however no ground quartz artefacts
are recognised there. Such functionally magnifying plano-convex lenses are to be found in the third
millennium BC (Temple, 2000), in Egypt as statuary eyes (Tiradritti, 1998, 62) and in the Priam
treasure from Troy (Antonova et al.1996, 156).

35
Fig. 43. Experimental flint tools make three or more scratches per millimetre, approaching the detail of the boat slate.
Fineness of work and the variety of tool marks on the boat slate would imply a complex tool kit and
the experience to use it. Flint tools are capable of making these marks (Fig. 43) and metal tools
leave unstriated traces (Gu et al. 2014).

Fig. 44. Crude demonstration of drilling tiny holes in slate using flint.

The diamond-shaped motif that cuts the upper line of the hull was incised at the marking out
stage as the hull line is shallow through its centre. Its Grooved Ware/ Megalithic associations are
shown in fig. 76. Its upper edge is accentuated by a line of 0.2-0.3 mm diameter drillings. These are
possible to make using a flint tool (Fig. 44).

36
Fig. 45. With no obvious structural explanation, the rayed disk at the centre of the depiction might be the sun

A potential structural explanation of a droppable rudder (larboard) was made for the suggested solar
motif (Fig. 45). It would enable the forward sail rig to be more effective in tacking according to a
sailor interviewed at its exhibition at Chacewater in 2016. Given the visual puns of lines doing
37
multiple duties on this depiction then this explanation should be cached. The major interpretation is
of a sun and it is setting with a red ochreous stain and ochre lumps concentrated on and below the
motif (Fig. 46, 49) and particularly in the engraved lines as though the paint has been wiped (Figs. 50,
52). Some of the ochreous spots below the boat have the annular structure of burst bubbles and the
paint may have been spat onto the slate (Figs. 47, 48). Importantly, several of these adhering red
lumps occur on the fractured edge of the slate toward the top left edge (Fig. 51), tending to counter
assertion 4 (ibid.) that the slate was broken after the image was made.

Fig. 46. The concentration of dots of red ochre lumps is about and below the solar motif as though it is setting.
Fig. 47. Image left: Ochreous spots are
concentrated on and below the solar motif.

Fig. 48. Below: A further enlarged view

shows that some ochre spots have a bubble-
like structure as though they were
deposited in a frothy mixture; perhaps spat
from the mouth.

The intriguing possibility of the ochre being symbolically spat to heal a wound (in the world order) as
well as to make the sun set is suggested by ochres medicinal properties (Velo, 1986, 226).

38
Fig. 49. Many of the red ochreous lumps are indicated in this image.

It should be noted that almost all the ochre lumps on the boat itself are within the incised lines.

Fig. 50. Red ochre spots on the boat itself are dominantly within the incised lines. A prominent yellow spot is at the
termination of the lower hull line in this wetted view (See Fig.77).

39
Fig. 51. Left and enhanced RTI below:
Ochreous spots extend in decreasing
concentration over the image. There is
one in the mast incision and three
occur (highlighted by red arrows)
beyond the break line at the edge of
the slate, indicating that the slate was
broken before the paint was applied.

40
Fig. 52. The red lumps in the ochre pigment on the boat are dominantly within the engraved lines. Some of those below
the boat have been engraved around. (Photograph made during a visit to British Museum, London).

41
Fig. 53. The sunset is matched by an equal sized crescent: the moon.
The fact of the sun and moon being of equal apparent size is found by observing eclipses (Fig. 53).
Ancient knowledge is implied here.

42
Fig. 54. The crescent moon appears to be occulting at least three stars. Such a dense grouping of stars is only seen in the
Pleiades.

43
The moon is on the deck and may be occulting closely spaced stars (Fig. 54). The furthest right might
be doing double duty as the support for a steering oar on the other side. The Pleiades is closely
grouped enough to mostly fit behind the lunar disk. The moon occults the Pleiades many times in a
season every 18.9 years (Rao, 2005). The sun, moon, solar barque and Pleiades are apparently
included (State Office for Heritage Management and Archaeology, 2017) on the Nebra Sky Disc
(1600 BC) which is made with Austrian copper and Cornish gold (Ehser et al. 2011).

Fig. 55. Introducing the Beaker man: a complex set of scratches above the boat. The wetted view has a notional fish.

A finely worked figure above the boat is noteworthy (Fig. 55). It comprises a bold vertical line with
alternating sets of horizontals and diagonals running from its left side. Interpreting it as a
representation of a Beaker personage (Fig. 56), it bears close comparison to the beaker pot sherd
found at Clodgy Moor, CORN-294E07 (Portable Antiquities Scheme, 2011b). Potentially Beaker
artefacts on site include a stone bracer CORN-B38773 (PAS, 2010) and barbed and tanged arrow-
heads.

Using the RTI program, the Beaker man changes in rotating light as more lines come into play.
According to my interpretation, he becomes wrapped in a shroud, secured by diagonal ropes and his
head is a skull. A fish is with him. He is buried at sea in his sail. This assertion might be as unfounded
as any of Culture-History Archaeology and yet beyond the remit of Processual Archaeology to test,
to paraphrase Colin Renfrew (Renfrew and Zubrow, 1994, 4).
44
45
Fig. 56. A beaker pot sherd found at Clodgy Moor with stylistic affinities to Rhine examples (Clarke, 1970, 464-5) and
here compared personally to the Sewell example in the British Museum, London.

Fig. 57. Introducing Clodgy Moor stone axe man. Reversed p holds a smaller reversed p from a pair of arms. Note the
doubled striation of the lower arm, indicating likely flint tool work.

46
Fig. 58. Interpretation of motif as a Clodgy Moor axe-man
The grouping of lines near the stern (Fig. 57) have reasonably been interpreted as details of a rudder
and supporting structure, associated with Medieval ships such as cogs (McGrail, 1981, 36). I argue
against this (Mossop, 2010, 6 and Appendix II).

The bow of the boat is slender and does not match a suggested deep hull and rudder at the stern.
The upper-works of the stern are truncated as though converging to a point. The suggested rudder
assembly is not truncated so does not meet the upper-works and may not be part of the boat.

At Clodgy Moor there are concentrations of artefacts consistent with the finishing stages of
completing greenstone axes (Jones et al. 2013). Documented contemporary lithics and pottery finds
on site (Portable Antiquities Scheme) support community occupation and the wide distribution of
similar Cornish axes imply that they had contacts throughout Britain (Bradley and Evans, 1993,45).

I propose that the stern incised grouping is not part of the boat. A back-to front square-headed P
has two out-stretched arms that hold up a similar but smaller P. This anthropomorphic description

47
is informed by the symbolic potential depiction of Clodgy Moor men who have made axes, wielding
them in a votive offering (Fig. 58).
Fig. 59. Introducing the dagger. Downward pointing isosceles
triangle is cross hatched at 0.2-0.3 mm spacing. It forms part
of a longer shape with doubled edge that is pierced by a very
sharp edged square, with a deep circular section hole inside.

48
According to assertion 7 (ibid.)
copper daggers and Grooved
Ware cannot co-exist. If this
depicts one, given its short blade
compared to the handle then a
time when copper was only just
appearing in an archaeological
context in the closing years of
Grooved Ware is here suggested.
The 2300 BC date of the Amesbury
Archer (Fitzpatrick, 2002) and of
the disbandment of the Ness of
Brodgar temple complex at 2200
BC (Thomas, 2016, 195) are here
suggested as overlapping dates.

Fig. 60. Schematic relating boat slate

motif to Amesbury Archers daggers

49
Fig.61. A fertility symbol negates the death-dealing dagger
The sharp square hole throws a circular internal shadow. It cuts the purported outline of the handle
of a copper dagger. Given these pre-conditions it may be said to counter-stamp the dagger image. As
a pierced lozenge motif, it has European Neolithic parallels and in Lithuanian folk tradition (Barber,
1991, 297) is the symbol for pregnancy and fertile fields (Gimbutas, 1982, 205; Welters, 1999, 21).

50
Fig. 62. Above left: Microscopic montage of group of
ochreous adhesions. A white pigment also appears to
be present in this area.

Fig. 63. Left: Same area is nested to the left of a

prominent rock ripple

Fig. 64. Above: Enlarged view showing how ochreous

adhesions have been highlighted by the engraving of
diamonds about them. This confirms the underlying net
pattern of the area below the ship.

The meaning of the red lumps is explained

(Figs. 62-4).
They are the seeds in the fields of Clodgy
Moor and will sprout from the woodwork
(engraved lines) of the boat too.

51
Fig. 65. Ancient chess-board and net patterns potentially explained
60, 000 years old ostrich egg water containers have ladder decorations (Texier, 2010). These and
chess board patterns are found in caves and flint mines, such as Harrow Hill (Lewis-Williams and
Pearce, 2005, 252). They are here suggested to imply the water from clouds to the ground and
through it in the vertical plane. A net patten is often found in association with it on Neolithic vessels
(Gimbutas, 1989,84) and on the Woodcock Corner slate and may imply the water flowing
horizontally over the land (Hill, 2014a). The choice of diagonal and vertical ripple patterns on the
Clodgy Moor slate may have been to divide it between the Cornish land surface and a vertical view
of the boat beyond the shoreline. The net/lozenge is noted as a familiar trope of Grooved Ware
52
ceramic decoration by Rosamund Cleal, who speculates as to its association with water (Cleal and
Macsween, 1999, 6).

Fig.66. Introducing the Navigator; an italicised and punctuated capital stroke made into the top of the boat.

Contemplating the Woodcock Corner Grooved Ware slate disk whilst replicating it in 2012 for a
Royal Cornwall Museum display, the net pattern edged by triangles where they meet the outer
border suggested the territory immediately controlled by a Beaker boat landing party (Hill, 2014a, 3).

The Clodgy Boat has a bold vertical planted into the ship and extending above its upper-works (Fig.
66). It is terminated by a rhombic punched dot. Its vertical is crossed by an italic stroke and a short
and a long straight line project from its top. Some fine lines might be detected between the diagonal
lines.

Interpretation (Fig. 67). This is not a mast and yet it is part of the boat. The punctuated dot is its
head. The long and short lines may be the beams of the gaze of a navigator. Perhaps what he sees
may be a line of triangular pennant symbols. He is standing on the snake, which I demonstrate is
likely to be the polar constellation, Draco in Hill (2014b).

53
Fig. 67. Interpretation of punctuated stroke as the navigator/priest

54
Fig. 68. Interpreting the zig-zag work as
a snake with contemporary Aegean
snake boats (Coleman, 1985, ill. 5).

55
The association between ships and dragons or serpents is noted in the first millennium of the
Common Era with Viking ships often sporting a dragon figurehead. The diagonal stitching on Clodgy
Moor Boat Slate is amenable to several structural or figurative interpretations.
A view into the open top of the boat reveals rowers cross benches and ribs.
The stitching pattern of circumferential bindings of ropes especially on a stitched plank boat.
A traditional decorative form often seen painted on the upper part of the hull of boats.
It may be that all or some of these inferences are correct, however the zig-zag pattern has additional
properties.
It does not fill the gap between the hull lines.
One end is terminated by a lozenge.
The other end departs from the structural upper works of the boat.
This motif appears to also represent a serpent (Fig. 68). Serpents may be found on one depiction of
boats on the Siros frying pans of 2300-2800 BC (Coleman, 1985) and many other prehistoric boat
depictions (Gimbutas, 1989, 247).
The navigator is riding on the navigation snake; the polar constellation Draco..

Fig. 69. Introducing the owls head, a deeply gouged design through a major boat line.

56
The British
Neolithic
eyebrow motif,
found recently
as Holm of
Papay rock
carvings (Towrie,
2009b), on Links
of Noltland
figurines and
known from the
Folkton drums
(Jones et al.
2015) is here
compared to
selected ocular
/owl motifs from
Iberian contexts
(Lillios, 2008,
124) and
through study of
the Boat Slate
and Clodgy
Moor Idol Hill
suggests that
the British
eyebrow motif
evokes a bird-
like head (Fig.
70) and at least
at Clodgy Moor:
an owl (Fig. 69),
an archetype of
consumption of
flesh and the
night and
perhaps the face
of that which
consumes us.
Fig. 70. Comparison
of European owl to
British Neolithic
motifs

57
Clodgy Moor boat is
here postulated to
have been made
using early copper
tools. The
contemporary
stitched plank
design, exemplified
by Egyptian
examples (Casson,
1971), requires a
hogging truss to stop
the bow and stern
from sagging in
waves (Hornell,
1943), marked in
red. The proposed
boat slate example
has this attachment
to the right of the
vertical plough
scratch.

Fig. 71. Rope fastenings

for tensioning a stitched
plank boat.

58
Fig. 72. Sickle and wheat harvest imagery
A bruising line crosses the lower hull line of the boat and continues as a curved doubled scratch (Fig.
72). Below is what may be a head of wheat and an inclusion has been incised around and looks like a
grain with its hull. This may represent a harvest for the boat as much as for the crop.
59
Fig. 73. This scratch represented as a sickle is of small diameter compared to those on the back.
The smooth back of the slate contrasts with the rippled worked side, however it does carry curved
scratches, of bruised appearance and unpatinated (Fig. 73). They are relatively large diameter and
are likely to be plough scratches. In April 2007 deep drainage ploughing (Hill finds catalogue, 2007,
509; Jones et al., 2013, 17) brought to the surface, orangey sediments containing fragile Grooved
Ware pottery and likely this slate.

60
Fig. 74. Introducing St Michaels Mount as The Omphalos, a carving at an ochre spot. A doubled (lithic) mark is the top of
a pentagon-shaped motif with a pit in the middle.

61
Beneath the boat is a potential coastline. The
motif just inland has a peak similar to the
profile of St Michaels Mount (Fig. 74). The
mount might be the focus of the area. In
ancient times this may have been a navel of
the earth such as at Delphi and in ancient
Europe. Such navels are represented with a
net pattern on them and a hole within (de
Boer, 2007). The land of Cornwall is here
represented (Fig. 75) with a net pattern. In the
third millennium BC St. Michaels Mount was
behind the coastline (Barker and Mackey,
1959; French, 1999) and may have been called
The navel.

Fig. 75. Explanation of the symbol below the boat in

terms of European Neolithic to Classical Greek cultures
as a depiction of an omphalos.

The diamond head of a snake, its upper curved

edge picked out with tiny drillings is the
symbol that potentially unites Atlantic
megalithic and Grooved Ware traditions (Fig.
76).

62
 Front cover of G.E. Hills
unpublished
autobiography!

Fig. 76. Demonstration that a Clodgy Moor symbol is from Megalithic and Grooved Ware culture

63
Fig. 77. Introducing the priestess. The third image of the slate wetted shows the only major yellow mark on the boat
slate; her hair.

Where the lower hull line ends (Fig. 50) there is a yellow spot, revealed when the slate is wetted.
A personage with a flared dress and hands held up stands at the waters edge (Fig. 77). The
interpretation is Fig. 78. No convincing references to ancient religions with pairs of flaming altars are
found, however women attend twin altars on some Minoan gold seals [National Archaeological
Museum, Athens].

64
Fig. 78. A scene of an apparent human sacrifice is depicted. It is here sugested that the artist may have made an image of
themselves. The priestess made the slate depictions and included herself in the image.

65
Next page, fig.79. contains a sacred and profane explanation of how the boat is defiled by dung.

The Neolithic use of waste to fertilise crops is established although not at all sites (Bakels, 1997;
Guttmann-Bond et al., 2004; 2016). The detailed interpretation of a complex symbol (Figs. 76, 79) is
however contentious and may remain without support. The image of the pig through its toilet-eating
habits (Harding, 1998; Nelson, 1998, 16) signifies the kind of fertility at the second lozenge: that of
manuring crops. The narrative of the wooden boats power decaying is developed by the red seeds
in its hull lines now being fertilized by the pig dung.

66
67
This and next page (Fig.80) contains an intimate depiction from the very centre of the Boat Slate tableaux. The circle of
life: The midwife whose hands are bony aids the mother to birth the baby girl. An artistic impression of the scene is
rendered in pigments extracted from pebbles obtained from Mounts Bay.

This artistic arrangement of the circle of life, flanked to the right by the axe man presenting his axe
and to the left the priestess holding up a head has its archetype in the impressive sight of a sun or
full moon illuminating banks of clouds on either side. It is both the content of visions [G. E. Hill,
Psilocybe semilanceata, Autumn 2015] and of the arrangement of central motifs with supporters
seen on some commercial brands, logos, military badges and family crests such as of HM The Queen.

68
69
Fig. 81. Chane opratoire suggested here is provisional, given that some operations may also fit in a different order
where the operational effects do not overlap.

The Chane opratoire proposed here (Fig. 81) may be incorrect in some orders of operations
where the effects of operations do not overlap. It is stated however that the sequence is of many
distinct stages, unlike that of the manufacture of graffiti and that incision was followed by sculpting
and drilling and piercing and that even after painting further carving took place.

Next Page. Table 5. British and European Neolithic figurative concordance

Following page. Table 6. British and European Neolithic non-figurative concordance.

70
71
72
Direct to the public

Fig. 82. Exhibitions involving the public. Some are archaeologists too. Next event is 13 th May 2017 St. Johns Hall
Penzance. 10 am- 4.30 pm. Admission is free.

73
6.0 Closing Statement
Every time the large microscope montages of images of the boat slate are shown to the public (Fig.
82) they are impressed by the complexity of work on such a small object. To date this is a conclusion
not drawn or indeed written about by any living archaeologist. For unknown reasons they are unable
to look at these images. Whatever further conclusions may be drawn as to the symbolic content of
the depiction awaits this most basic of acquaintance. In December 2013 I was able to make an
appointment with an archaeologist to show them the detail, a Leica binocular microscope being
made available as requested. As they sat next to me writing the accession document to Royal
Institution Cornwall, I set up the microscope stage. However, I could not bring the object into focus
because I was provided with a large annular fluorescent bulb as the light source.
Then refusing to give up the object, I developed my microscope montage method before showing
the results to the landowner and handing over the slate to him to pass on to the RIC. With this act I
slighted the institution and broke the tacit rules of the chain of command.
Given that at the time of writing it is only hoped that the object will be on temporary display and
that Hill will be informed if this occurs, the reasoning behind putting objects on display being
described as complex then this object may be lost. My engagement with the public in exhibitions
continues however and I still have hope and a little time.

7.0 Introduction to the first translation

Combining all that has been learnt about Clodgy Moor, its flint tools, ground stone artefacts and
pottery, Neolithic figurine and boat slate, an arrangement has been made into the first draft of a
narrative to capture a lost fragment of our aboriginal story. As images, it appears in Appendix V.

8.0 Bibliography
Antonova, I., Tolstikov, V., Treister, M. 1996. The Gold of Troy. London. Thames & Hudson

Aroon, R. 2011. Rock art and prehistoric geologists? Some observations from the Kilmartin Valley.
Past. Number 69. pp.11-13

Bakels, C. C. 1997. The beginnings of manuring in western Europe. Antiquity. Vol. 71, Issue 272, pp.
442-445.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003598X00085057

Barber, E. J. W. 1991. Prehistoric Textiles: The Development of Cloth in the Neolithic and Bronze Ages
with Special Reference to the Aegean. Princeton University Press.

Barber, M., Field, D. and Topping, P.1999. The Neolithic Flint Mines of Britain. English Heritage

Barker, H. and Mackey, C. J. 1959. British Museum Natural Radiocarbon Measurements I. American80
Journal of Science Radiocarbon Supplement, Vol. 1, 1959, P. 81-861

Benjamin, W. 1928. Old Toy in Eds. M. W. Jennings et al. Walter Benjamin: selected Writings 1927-
1930, Harvard 1999.

Binford, L. R. 1989. Debating Archaeology. San Diego. Academic Press Inc.

Bradley, R., and Edmonds, Mark. 1993. Interpreting the axe trade. Cambridge University Press.

74
Bradley, R.1991. Rock Art and the Perception of Landscape. Cambridge Archaeological Journal
l(l):77-101

Bradley, R. 2002. Rock Art and the Prehistory of Atlantic Europe: Signing the Land. Routledge.

British Museum. 2017. South Africa, the art of a nation. Exhibition 2016-17
http://www.britishmuseum.org/whats_on/exhibitions/south_africa.aspx
Accessed online on 2/4/17

Burnham, A. 2010. Venus of the Whins. The Megalithic Portal website

http://www.megalithic.co.uk/article.php?sid=26945
Accessed online on 26/4/17

Casson, L. 1971. Ships and seamanship in the Ancient World. Princeton University Press.

Clarke, D. L. 1970. Beaker Pottery of Great Britain and Ireland. Cambridge. Cambridge University
Press

Clarke, D.V.., Cowie, T. G., Foxon, A. 1985. Symbols of power at the time of Stonehenge. Her
Majestys Stationary Office.

Cleal, R. and MacSween, A. 1999. Grooved Ware in Britain and Ireland. Oxbow books.

Coleman, J. E. 1985. "Frying Pans" of the Early Bronze Age Aegean. American Journal of
Archaeology, Vol. 89, No. 2, pp. 191-219.

Cubbon, W. 1952. Island Heritage: Dealing with Some Phases of Manx History

De Boer. 2007. Delphis Small omphalos; An Enigma. Syllecta Classica, Vol. 18 pp. 81-104 |
10.1353/syl.2007.0005

Efstathiou, K., Basiakoulis, Efstathiou, M., Anastasiou, M., Seiradakis, J. H. 2012. Determination of
the gears geometrical parameters necessary for the construction of an operational model of the
Antikythera Mechanism. Mechanism and Machine Theory 52, pp. 219-31

Egri, ., Horvth, ., Kriska, G., Gbor H. 2010. Optics of sunlit water drops on leaves: conditions
under which sunburn is possible. New Phytology. Volume 185, Issue 4, pp. 979987
DOI: 10.1111/j.1469-8137.2009.03150.x

Ehser, A., Borg, G., Pernicka.E. 2011. Provenance of the gold of the Early Bronze Age Nebra Sky Disk,
central Germany: geochemical characterization of natural gold from Cornwall. European Journal of
Mineralogy. DOI: 10.1127/0935-1221/2011/0023-2140

dErrico, F. 1995. A New Model and its Implications for the Origin of Writing: The La Marche Antler
Revisited. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 5: 2, pp. 163-203

Evans, C. 2016. Twice-crossed river: Prehistoric and palaeoenvironmental investigations at

Barleycroft Farm/ Over, Cambridgeshire. Cambrige Archaeological Unit Landscape Archives Series.
The Archeology of the lower Ouse Valley. McDonald Institute Monographs

Fitzpatrick, A. P. 2002. The Amesbury Archer: a well-furnished Early Bronze Age burial in southern
England. Antiquity. Vol. 76 Issue 293, pp. 629-630.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003598X00090980
75
French, C. N. 1999. The 'Submerged Forest' Palaeosols of Cornwall
Geoscience in south-west England, 9, 365-369.
.
Gimbutas, M. 1982. The Goddesses and Gods of Old Europe. London, Thames & Hudson

Gimbutas, M. 1989. The language of the Goddess. Thames & Hudson

Gomes, V. G., Casimiro, T. M. and Vieira, A. I. 2014. A Medieval Boat Graffito from Silves, Algarve,
Portugal. International Journal of Nautical Archaeology. No. 43, pp. 184- 188

Gray, M. 2013. Early Medieval Inscribed Crosses. Blog. 30/6/2013

https://www.heritagetortoise.co.uk/2013/06/early-medieval-inscribed-stones/
Accessed online on 28/1/17

Greenfield, H. J. 2006. Slicing Cut Marks on Animal Bones: Diagnostics for Identifying Stone Tool Type
and Raw Material. Journal of Field Archaeology, Vol. 31, No. 2, pp. 147-163

Gu. Z, Pan, W., Song, G., Qui, Z., Yang, Y. 2014. Investigating the tool marks of stone reliefs from the
Mausoleum of Cao Cao (AD155AD220) in China, Journal of Archaeological Science, Volume 43, pp.
3137 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jas.2013.12.005

Guttmann, E. B. A., Dockrill, S. J. & Simpson I. A. 2004. Arable agriculture in prehistory: new evidence
from soils in the Northern Isles. Proc. Soc. Antiq. Scot., 134, 5364

Guttmann-Bond, E. B., Dungait , J. A. J., Brown, A., Bull, I, D. Evershed, R. P. 2016. Early Neolithic
Agriculture in County Mayo, Republic of Ireland: Geoarchaeology of the Cide Fields, Belderrig, and
Rathlackan. Journal of the North Atlantic (30):1-32. 2016
doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.3721/037.006.3002

Hadingham, E. 1980. Secrets of the Ice Age. London. Book Club Associates

Harding, P.1998. Goa. Lonely Planet Publications Pty Ltd, p. 197

Hartwig, M. K. 2014. A Companion to Ancient Egyptian Art. John Wiley & Sons

Hill, G. E. 2011. Three megalithic alignments at Lands End, Cornwall. Academic.Edu.

http://www.academia.edu/6975884/Three_megalithic_alignments_at_Lands_End_Cornwall
accessed online on 5/1/16

Hill, G. E. 2014a. Woodcock Corner slate disc explored through replication. In Ed. Adrian Rodda.
Cornwall Archaeological Society Newsletter 134
http://cornisharchaeology.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/CAS_NL134_Feb14.pdf
Accessed online on 6/4/17

Hill, G. E. 2014b. The prehistoric navigation compass and seaworthy ships of the fifth to second
millennium BC.
https://plentymoreplasticinthefish.wordpress.com/
Accessed online on 21/4/17

Hill, G. E. 2014c. Clodgy Moor Boat & Goddess Engraved Finds in Cheryl Straffon (Ed.) Meyn Mamvro,
No. 85
76
Hill, G. E. 2015. Nothing to see here? A Reflectance Transformation Image of a pretty stone that the
finder names The Great Goddess of Clodgy Moor
https://plentymoreplasticinthefish.wordpress.com/
Accessed online on 21/4/17

Hornell, J. 1943. The Sailing Ship in Ancient Egypt. Antiquity. Vol. 17, Issue 65, pp. 27-41

Jones, A. M., Lawson-Jones, A., Quinnell, H., Tyacke A., with Hill, G. E., Tapper, B. and Taylor, R.
2013. Landscapes of Stone: Contextualizing Greenstone Working and Lithics from Clodgy Moor, West
Penwith, Cornwall. Archaeological Journal. 170, 2-29

Jones, A. M., Cochrane, A., Carter C., Dawson I. Digital imaging and prehistoric imagery: a new
analysis of the Folkton Drums. Antiquity. Vol. 89, Issue 347, pp. 1083-1095 DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15184/aqy.2015.127

Lvi-Strauss, C. 1978. Myth and Meaning. London, Routledge

Lewis-Williams, D. and Pearce, D. 2005. Inside the Neolithic Mind. London. Thames & Hudson.

Lillios, K. T. 2008. Heraldry for the dead: memory, identity and the engraved stone plaques of
Neolithic Iberia. University of Texas Presss.

McGrail, S. 1981. The ship. London. Her Majestys Stationery Office.

Milner, N., Bamforth, M., Beale, G., Carty, J. C., Chatzipanagis, K., Croft, S., Conneller, C., Elliott, B.,
Fitton, L. C., Knight, B., Krger, R., Little, A., Needham, A., Robson, H. K., Rowley, C. C. A. , Taylor, B.
2016. A Unique Engraved Shale Pendant from the Site of Star Carr: the oldest Mesolithic art in
Britain. Internet Archaeology 40. http://dx.doi.org/10.11141/ia.40.8

Mitra, N. J.and Pauly, M. 2009. Shadow Art. ACM Transactions on Graphics. Vol. 28. No. 5, Art. 156

Mossop, M. 2010. Cornish stone could show ancient ship in Mike Pitts (Ed.) British Archaeology, No.
113

Museum of Witchcraft and Magic. 2017. 3715 The Clodgy Moor Goddess, possibly a Neolithic
sculpture of the Earth Goddess
http://museumofwitchcraftandmagic.co.uk/object/the-clodgy-moor-goddess-possibly-a-neolithic-
sculpture-of-the-earth-goddess/
Accessed online on 22/4/17
Nelson, S. M. 1998. Ancestors for the Pigs: Pigs in Prehistory. UPenn Museum of Archaeology

Norfolk Medieval Graffiti Survey. 2010

http://www.medieval-graffiti.co.uk/page7.html
Accessed online on 28/1/17

Nowakowski, J. A., Quinnell, H., Sturgess, J., Thomas, C. and Thorpe, C. 2007. Return to Gwithian:
shifting the sands of time. Cornish Archaeology 46, pp. 13-76

Ovcharov, D. 1977. Ship graffiti from Medieval Bulgaria. The International Journal of Nautical
Archaeology and Underwater Exploration, 6.1, pp. 59-77

Piggott, S. 1954. Neolithic Cultures of the British Isles. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press
77
Portable Antiquities Scheme. 2010. Bracer CORN-B38773. Webpage.
https://finds.org.uk/database/search/results/q/bracer+cornwall
Accessed online on 24/4/17
Portable Antiquities Scheme. 2011a. PUBLIC-A536B7. Database webpage.
https://finds.org.uk/database/artefacts/record/id/448680
Accessed online on 28/4/17
Portable Antiquities Scheme. 2011b. CORN-294E07. Database webpage
https://finds.org.uk/database/artefacts/record/id/484740
Accessed online on 4/4/17
Portable Antiquities Scheme. 2011c. CORN-F96837. Database webpage
https://finds.org.uk/database/artefacts/record/id/479090
Accessed online on 29/4/17

Rao, J. 2005. Moon to Hide Beautiful Star Cluster. Webpage

http://www.space.com/1830-moon-hide-beautiful-star-cluster.html
Accessed online on 22/4/17

Renfrew, C. and Zubrow, E. B. W. 1994. The Ancient Mind: elements of cognitive psychology.
Cambridge University Press

State Office for Heritage Management and Archaeology. 2017. Nebra Sky Disc. Webpage.
http://www.lda-lsa.de/en/nebra_sky_disc/scientific_analyses/
Accessed on 24/4/17

Swogger, J. G. 2012. The Sequential Art of the Past: Archaeology, comics and the dynamics of an
emerging genre. Comics Forum Blog

Teather, A. 2014. Mining and materiality: Neolithic chalk artefacts and their depositional contexts in
Southern Britain.

Teather, A. 2015. The first British Neolithic representational art? The chalk engravings at Cissbury
flint mine. Antiquity. Issue 347

Teather, A. 2016. More than flint: the dark underground of Neolithic mining, in Mike Pitts (Ed.)
British Archaeology. No. 149. pp.50-3

TEDGlobal 2009 Filmed July 2009 19:43 Willard Wigan: Hold your breath for micro-sculpture

Temple, R. 2000. The Crystal Sun: Rediscovering a lost technology of the ancient world. London.
Century.

Texier, P-J. Porraz G., Parkington J., Rigaud J-P., Poggenpoel C., Miller C., Tribolo C., Cartwright C.,
Coudenneau A., Klein R., Steele T. , and Verna C. 2010. A Howiesons Poort tradition of engraving
ostrich eggshell containers dated to 60,000 years ago at Diepkloof Rock Shelter, South Africa.
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, vol. 107 no. 14

Thomas, A. 2016. Art and Architecture in Neolithic Orkney: Process, Temporality and Context. Oxford.
Archaeopress Publishing Ltd

Thomas, C. with Forsyth, K. 2014. An ogham inscription from Paul, West Penwith. Cornwall
Archaeology Journal (In preparation)

78
Thomas, J. 2005. Ambiguous symbols: why there were no figurines in Neolithic Britain. Documenta
Praehistorica. Vol. 32. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.4312/dp.32.12

Tilley, C. Y. 1994. A phenomenology of landscape: places, paths, and monuments. Berg.

Tilley, C. and Bennett, W. 2001. An Archaeology of Supernatural Places: The Case of West Penwith
The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, Vol. 7, No. 2, pp.335-362

Tiradritti, F. 1998. The Cairo Museum. Masterpieces of Egyptian Art. Thames & Hudson

Towrie, S. 2009a. The Orkney Venus. Orkneyjar webpage..

http://www.orkneyjar.com/archaeology/linksofnoltland/venus.htm
Accessed online on 21/4/17

Towrie, S. 2009b. Eyebrows link burial chamber with Westray figurine. Orkneyjar webpage.
http://www.orkneyjar.com/archaeology/2009/09/18/eyebrows-link-westray-figurine-with-burial-
chamber/
Accessed online on 24/4/17.

Towrie, S. 2010a. Second figurine found in Westray. Orkneyjar webpage.

http://www.orkneyjar.com/archaeology/2010/07/19/second-figurine-found-in-westray/
Accessed online on 21/4/17

Towrie, S. 2010b. The Brodgar Boy Orkneyjar webpage.

http://www.orkneyjar.com/archaeology/nessofbrodgar/the-brodgar-boy/
accessed online on 24/4/17

Towrie, S. 2010c. Was Orkneys first Venus found in Harray. Orkneyjar webpage
http://www.orkneyjar.com/archaeology/2010/09/02/was-orkneys-first-venus-found-in-harray/
Accessed online on 26/4/17

Towrie, S. 2012. Third figurine from Links of Noltland dig. Orkneyjar webpage
http://www.orkneyjar.com/archaeology/2012/08/29/third-figurine-from-links-of-noltland-dig/
Accessed online on 21/4/17

Towrie, S. 2016. Rediscovered: Long-lost Skara Brae figurine turns up in museum storage. Orkneyjar
webpage.
http://www.orkneyjar.com/archaeology/2016/06/15/long-lost-skara-brae-figurine-turns-up-in-
museum-storage/
Accessed online on 10/2/17
Velo, J. 1986. The problem with ochre. Journal of Mankind Quarterly. 26.3

Von Dniken, E. 1973, IN SEARCH OF ANCIENT GODS: My Pictorial Evidence for the Impossible.
Souvenir Press

Welters, L. 1999. Folk Dress in Europe and Anatolia: Beliefs about Protection and Fertility.
Bloomsbury Academic

Wooding, J. M. and Yates, N. (Eds.) 2011. A Guide to the Churches and Chapels of Wales. 129
Llanfaglan. University of Wales Press.
79
9.0 Appendices
Appendix I Page 544 of Hills finds catalogue

80
Appendix II Description by Matt Mossop

British Archaeology 2010, No. 113

81
Appendix III Modes accession documents

82
83
Appendix IV Some of the unrecorded and otherwise lost finds from West Cornwall

84
85
Appendix V The first translation

86
87
88
This dissertation is rendered to pdf. Best images and more information is available to you and
others. Hill, 2/5/17.

89