 So, I will summarise some of the work in the later further assembly of either the fire station in Saturday, and what the site might be able to reveal about human activity there and in the wider legislature landscape. And from the start I should stress that this is a collaborative project, and it is still in progress, and many of the results are preliminary and unprobliwtional. The site was discovered in 2013 during valuation work by Oxford Archaeology in advance of the building of the new fire station at Guildford. The archaeological horizon is just below the present landscape as you can see there. The site is not previously known and the discovery could not have been predicted. Once it was found, Oxford Archaeology contacted Nick for an expert advice and they ensured that there was an upper valley of experts working on the site and you probably recognise Will Mills in many of the photos. Guildford Fire Station is a good example of where the planning process was worked well regarding these rare sites. In this case, Surrey County Council was both the planning authority and the developer and they quickly recognised the rarity and importance of the site. It was probably their support that ensured that time was on average for excavation and they've also been very supportive of the post excavation work. Just to put you in context, a quick look at Google Maps at the top, you can see what made this work. There's the old fire station, there's the site just before excavation. Skip ahead five years to June Bishop and you'll see the new fire station. I think this reminds me of what Gareth said earlier about the difficulty of stripping back modern developments to try and imagine the hunt together. If we pull back and Google over a little bit, you can see that the site lies very near to the present valley floor close to the riverway. There's the fire station. Today, the fire station is probably no more than a few hundred metres from the present river. I'm taking an even wider view here, looking at the geomorphology of the area. Guildford is right there. It's where the Red Circle is. It's a city on the way, which is a major tributary of the Thames. It runs north towards the Thames and cuts through north-downs. North-downs being the major rig of chalk hills in south-east England. The riverway cuts through there with one of these gaps that's been defined by the geomorphology of the area. If we look at this topographic map, prepared by Oxford Archaeology, shows the landscape around the site and the site's relationship to the way river system as it flows downstream. Here's this little gap right there. It's an excellent location for hunter-gatherers activity for all sorts of reasons. That little gap provides that erosion area, provides a good source of hemp raw material. It's a good hunting location. Perhaps somewhere in the area there's going to be a forward, as the main velocity itself indicates. These are a couple of images of the excavation progress to show you what the site looked like during the excavations. The flint artefacts are very well preserved and most are uncatenated. It was recognised at the time that microwear might be a possibility, and the artefacts were all bagged, unwashed, and many were retained there, here in the sediments. There is another little scatter here that I'm going to include to call. It was also obvious from the start that refitting was a very good possibility. The archaeological finds for Isam lies in a sequence of medium to iron-grained sands that overlaid coarse-banded flint-plot cobbles, graded chalk and sandstone. It's worth noting that both the solid-flection crosses that underlie this sequence and the sands above form traceable units that can be followed over a wider area. It will be perhaps possible in the future to trace these levels to perhaps predict the location of other similar sites. This is Oxford Archaeology's stratigraphic cross-section through the site of Cossack's G2 sands containing the artefacts there. Preliminary results from optically stimulated luminescent stating of these sands has produced a really tight group of ages in the early middle phase of the Windermere interstudio, so around 13,000 years ago. First, the first stage in many things analysis is a classification and a sandwich composition which was done by Nick and Michael and myself not long after the end of the excavation. There are over 15,000 objects in the cattle and of these about five and a half thousand were recovered during the excavation and most of them have three-dimensional ornaments. The rest were results from processing of the environmental samples, mostly under two centimetres, and they are a refit from that five ways. Most of the stages of manufacture can be found in the assembly and even indicate in their very tiny micro-devils. A total of the Oxford Archaeology of some of the 120-plus re-touched floors, many of them are near as many as London and Alistair Bradley, which is probably a different source of the site. In this case, the furans depicted here are very well-made blades. It's worth mentioning here that some of these blades were made by the service of the soft hammer technique, the very low repair box, and a lot of them do have one in their own technique. Next step was the micro-vary analysis, which was undertaken by our colleague Sonia Tomaso of the Asia University, and she's very kindly allowed us to present some furan published results. Sonia came to Oxford and she screened the entire assemblage microscopically, identified about 600 pieces of the potential use square traces. Of these, a sample of 337 artefacts was selected to be transported to the edge for more detailed microscopic analysis of trace-well lab. Trace-well lab also has a very expensive experimental archaeology programme, and so there she had reference to the experimental reference collection of about 3,000 tools. These are the aims of the micro-vary analysis to evaluate the surface condition of the flinus, to identify the types of use square and to see what they can tell us about reconstructing human activities at the site. Unfortunately, many of the artefacts turned out to have been affected by surface alterations that could not be seen by the naked eye, and this is probably due to movement in the sandy deposits, and so they couldn't be included in the study. However, she did get her positive result for about 80 artefacts. So a quick summary for some of the findings. The site does contain hunting projectiles, bats and retouch bladlets, which showed damage and use square traces typical of shock barrel heads. Here you see those linear impact traces caused by detached flin particles, scratching against the surface at the moment of impact. And here you've got some of those impact fractures themselves. And it's perhaps worth mentioning here too that most of the apthes is most of the points at Guildford are broken. It's perhaps what they're doing on the site is re-tooling. Although we've had to list the reasons why it came up there over the last five months. But evidence for other manufacturing activity she found there on the scrapers, where the use work would be attributed to various stages of processing many dry hides. This includes the heavy edge around the associated bits, scraping dry animal hides on on the bottom two pictures. On this perforator, she found a stiff lateral edge damage associated with microscopic friction polish that indicates possible and poor bone working activity. The elements are most frequent occurring to along the site. On this one, she's been finding wear traces that indicate use of grooving and percussion on hard material. G-val or jiffins is a striker light, where the heavily rubbed end has rounded in deep striations characteristic of percussion against an iron ritual property by writers. It was only when the micrograph analysis was finished that the refitting could stop. They wanted to reduce the handling of this material until the analysis was finished. This work has been taken in place at the Ashmolean Market Museum, I was out there with my partner. I should say also that the work was financed by both the refitting and the micrograph at Historic England. The need for this work could not have been predicted at the site before the site was found. The refitting had very specific aims and project design, and the work is now at final stages. So far, we've got over 500 refits and 50 refit groups. I won't go through these individually, but with the first one, the site which was asking, is the site of Palam Sestil occupied only once? The answer is that it does seem to be a marginal site when referring to post-depositional disturbance. The second one, the chain ferritoire, and should allow comparisons with other sites in the UK and Europe. The more detailed look at the manufacturer of tools on the site. Here, the use and reshot made of the tools seems to be very localised, but the relationship of the tools to the napgim sequence is still a bit unclear, and the rest is still in progress, and hopefully we'll be able to report that in future. This is a scattered plot produced by archaeology of all the material found on the site. The density plot does indicate that there are too many clusters of the flint artefact. The northern part of the site and the southern part of the site. They do seem to be discrete episodes of napping, and there are a few and more many refits between the two groups. In addition, some of the squares slightly outside of those fence areas contain concentrations of core rejuvenation flames, suggesting that individual napping events are also likely to be very localised within the sites. I've got a couple of pictures of some of the refits. These are by Ian Hartrides at the Institute of Archaeology, and a work on the photography of the sites again has just really just begun. This particular refit for appear is typical of several on the site, in that it represents early stages of core preparation. There's a similar style of napping in most of these cases, especially regarding the initial stages of the cores, the extra-cresting, and then the consistent rejuvenation of platforms and flaking faces throughout the process. A lot of the cobbles, they seem to be derived from the chalk, perhaps from not very far away. In these stages, although there is a little bit of hard hammer, most of the napping sequences is soft hammer. As I said before, some have been soft hammer from very long, well-made periods. This refit group perhaps shows the most visible evidence that there are things missing in the order sequence. What you have here is a very large crested blade from those preliminary stages of manufacture. We've also got little worked-out core, there's quite a lot of the core materials in place, lots of gaps. On this miscore special and many others, what seems to be happening is they're setting up these cores for making large blades, but the blades aren't there. There are some to long, curved, well-made blades at the site, and lots of them are useful tools. The rest of these sequences are just not present on the site. Oh, it's possible that they're there. I'd like to make two types of sites. Of course, we could have missed them, but I think it's highly likely that these are collected and exported off the site by the windings. Most of the flint is very high quality, derived from chalk, but the more occasionally other materials use, this particular core here is made on a river cobble, probably from the grantile's ability to weigh, not far away from the site. It's not quite as well-mapped as the other examples, but it is well-integrated with main scatter on, but it's hard to see it when you're intrusive. Of course, as well as the napkin with the groups, we do have some of the tools on the site, but also what we've looked into that they use is a review of what the grant is. Other tools found on the site are broken, as I mentioned before. Refitting can certainly help understanding what happens within a site, but this meeting is supposed to be about the landscape purpose, so I'm returning to this view here. To remind ourselves of the landscape setting of the site, just north, there's a fire station, just north of this gap here, in the Chawbysgafnys, this is probably the source of most of the flint or material you would to the site. Paul, I know you have a look at the flint raw material from way down the farm, but I don't think you have very definitive answers what it might be for. Did you look at the northbound? I'm asking that because if you follow about 17km down the way valley, you'll find that's where main waymanna farm is. It's another major up-and-coming site that we've heard about in passing from England and so on times today. The distance is probably less than a day in Germany. I don't think it's unreasonable to start thinking about these sites and how they might work in the landscape together and indeed if they were connected to each other in any way. There's quite a bit to note here that in London's report, many observations of the two assemblages there are very distinct similarities between the two sites. Two assemblages are similar. Waymanna farm, as you've heard, is reported as having a significant number of well-made blades brought into the site in a low proportion of the initial stages of poor preparation, almost a complement of Guildford. Not flying the kite and saying that they're going to be three bits of tea in the two sites, but we'll have to start on from about a half minute where the guilt that might be an extraction site taking things to the right side by waymanna farm. So just to conclude, a couple of key points. Lough of fire station is an example of a well-preserved upper power of the open air sites surviving the chance found in the present land surface. Re-fitting shelves and assemblages for modules with no major disturbances. It also shows that flint material was probably being acquired near vicinity and was being worked to produce blades and that some of those blades were probably being exported. My provider however shows the rights of other activities that are going on at the site and there's a high potential for looking at similar sites in the same river catchment. Guildford highest vision should not be seen in isolation. And just to end up, I'd like to thank all of the people in the organisation's working on project and deeply apologise to anyone who might have left off the list.