The most recent definitions of the (insular) Neolithic in Britain suggest it is a period marked by the adoption of:-

i) ground stone tool technology
ii) ceramics
iii) domesticates (cereals/animals)

and more recently,

iv) the construction of monuments (megalithic)

(See Bradley 2007: The Prehistory of Britain and Ireland, pp27-87, and see Thomas, J. 1991 (reprinted 1999): Understanding the Neolithic, pp13-33)

As these are the defining components of the Neolithic, most archaeologists (even those arguing for a Chalcolithic in Britiain) accept that the term 'Chalcolithic' refers to the period when metals were first used (copper mainly, but including gold/silver).

One of the problems with identifying the first use of metals in Britain and Ireland is due to the fact that unlike stone, metal can be recyled by melting it down again... so the earliest evidence for its use comes from the Corlea Trackay in Ireland (a metal, presumable copper axe) was used to cut the timbers of the trackway which was found preserved in peat there.

What we Can say with a degree of certainty, is that by the time stone elements were being incorporated into the monument at Stonehenge, metals were being used (flat axes certainly).

Composition analysis of the early British and Irish bronzes has identified a number of recurring impurities in British and Irish bronzes. These can be summarised as being: - antimony, arsenic, bismuth, cobalt, iron, lead, nickel, silver and zinc. These are present at less than 1% and can therefore be considered to be unintentional and present in the bronze due to their presence in the copper or tin ores.

A handful of bronze axes in Britain have an arsenic content of just over 1.5% (arsenical bronze), the source ore has been identified as being in Wales (see the Brithdir hoard).

The available tin outside Cornwall was really minimal in comparison, and given the huge deposits of tin in the south-west, since at least 1978 archaeologists have supposed a maritime trade in Cornish bronze with the Mediterranean (McKerrell).

Ultimately, there must have been a very organised tin trade within the British Isles... because the tin levels in British and Irish bronzes were so universally consistent (compared with elsewhere in continental Europe). As only 10% tin is required to make the optimal bronze (25g sufficient for a 250g axe etc), tin was relatively portable (compared with copper).

The recent conference at Bournemouth University addressed the question of a British Chalcolithic. The website is here:-

http://www.bournemou...s/chalcolithic/

The earliest dates for metal axes in Britain and Ireland are indeed quite early... see the Corlea Trackway in Ireland...

Interestingly, British And Irish bronze objects had the most consistent levels of tin in Europe (generally between 8 and 14% after type 3 flat-axes). Compositional analysis shows that in Europe, bronze often had very variable quantities of tin... frequently outside the optimum. This has been interpreted as being a result of problems with tin procurement (there wasn't enough).

The tin deposits in Britain (primarily Cornwall, but there are riverine deposits elsewhere, especially Ireland), were the largest in Europe at the time. Copper too, was in plentiful supply, and some of the largest prehistoric copper-mines in Europe are in Britain (Wales and Ireland).

Not all causewayed enclosures may have fulfilled the same purpose. A single radio carbon date from a ditch full of cattle bones surely can't provide an accurate date for all the activity surrounding the deposition of bones in a ditch several feet deep. As the bone deposits are not entirely bone (they are mixed with earth and other materials), isn't it possible that the depositions took place over a lengthy period and were not the single event some of the published works would have you believe.

If the bones were being deposited over several hundred years, then they represent not a 'feast' event but an accumulation of rubbish...

There is mention of them having found some sarsen.... any further details?