Thanks Dino. No idea of the original diameters of these objects, as there aren't any fired manufactured edges left on them. All edge surfaces appear to have been broken/taken off and show a brown/black/brown colour profile.
For the predominantly Bronze Age site we don't have any other vessels in that type of fabric - the assemblage mainly consists of small Beaker sherds. It stands out in the Iron Age/Romano-British assemblage as well, which is mainly BBW with assorted odd bits of IA/RB gear. As none of the other vessels or sherds from either site seem to have that kind of dimpling, we're at a bit of a loss. For both assemblages, the size, depth and weight of the sherds are unusually large.
Pottery wasters are a good one, although there's no significant evidence of pottery manufacture on the sites (which doesn't rule out secondary deposition, or that it was just outside the excavation area). There aren't any other sherds in this fabric on either site as might be expected for wasters - and as you say, what the dimples would be doing on the inside of a vessel, is a mystery.
Thanks for the ideas!
For the predominantly Bronze Age site we don't have any other vessels in that type of fabric - the assemblage mainly consists of small Beaker sherds. It stands out in the Iron Age/Romano-British assemblage as well, which is mainly BBW with assorted odd bits of IA/RB gear. As none of the other vessels or sherds from either site seem to have that kind of dimpling, we're at a bit of a loss. For both assemblages, the size, depth and weight of the sherds are unusually large.
Pottery wasters are a good one, although there's no significant evidence of pottery manufacture on the sites (which doesn't rule out secondary deposition, or that it was just outside the excavation area). There aren't any other sherds in this fabric on either site as might be expected for wasters - and as you say, what the dimples would be doing on the inside of a vessel, is a mystery.
Thanks for the ideas!