+- BAJR Federation Archaeology (http://www.bajrfed.co.uk)
+-- Forum: BAJR Federation Forums (http://www.bajrfed.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: The Site Hut (http://www.bajrfed.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?fid=7)
+--- Thread: The School of Jack (/showthread.php?tid=4991)
The School of Jack - Tool - 23rd July 2013
After many many years of 7.30 starts, but cabbaged until at least 10.00 at the earliest, that's good to hear!
The School of Jack - Jack - 24th July 2013
The School of Jack welcomes tool to the course. The course moderators swell with pride to see that you have already learned some of the most important lessons in commercial archaeology from your background in 'the real world'.
Students who have yet to venture into the cold hard grey of the working world pay heed to tool's words.
The School of Jack - Jack - 24th July 2013
Lesson 10 The context-led recording syste[SIZE=3][SIZE=4]m: Subsection 1 Numbers are important
[/SIZE][/SIZE][SIZE=3][SIZE=4][SIZE=2]
The whole process of recording archaeology is meant to be a systematic process of numbering, drawing, photographing and cross-referencing designed to produce a coherent, understandable and accurate record of the remains of past activity.
The combined records, artefacts and ecofacts is called an archive. In a well-recorded archive, a researcher can go from any one element, be it a photograph, sherd of pottery, flot or section drawing to every other part of the archive that is related via the context number and catalogues.
If this is unclear, here is an example.....
Researcher D(ino) is reading a publication report of an important site and he happens to have the site archive on a desk next to him.
D: 'What? What? That's obviously wrong......the fools. Sounds like that so-called grub-hut is actually a neolithic house......'
D uses the context number mentioned in the publication to find the relevant plans and sections and pours over them for clues. He then looks at a series of photographs take during the excavation of the feature (finding them from the cross-referencing on the context sheets and catalogues) which seem to confirm his suspicions. Finally he digs out the pottery from the lower fills of the features (using section drawings and/or context sheets, the finds assemblage catalogue and summary sheets). He lays out all the bags of pottery from the feature and nods.
'Yep, thought so, Grimston ware.....Well ordered archive though. Good job guys'
Now the obvious lesson here is on site, under pressure to get a job finished in biblical weather it is very difficult to cross every t and dot every i in the records. Are you sure the context number you just wrote on that bag is correct? Will the number rub off in transit? Can whoever washes and re-bags the finds read the number?
It is the responsibility of the digger to get the context numbers right, to fill in the catalogues FULLY and correctly. It's easy to 'forget' bits of cross-referencing, but take responsibility. Check your own work, go back and fill in missing plan numbers on the context sheet etc.....
It is the responsibility of the supervisors to check the archive cross-referencing. It's a massive job, better to do it as your going on, but once everything is check and cross referenced its much easier to spot the unavoidable mistakes.........and there will be mistakes.
[/SIZE][/SIZE][/SIZE]
The School of Jack - kevin wooldridge - 24th July 2013
This is like an unfinished novel...I am still waiting for the climax!! 'There will be mistakes'.....Yes. What happens next?
The School of Jack - Dinosaur - 24th July 2013
Jack Wrote:[SIZE=3][SIZE=4][SIZE=2]If this is unclear, here is an example.....
Researcher D(ino) is reading a publication report of an important site and he happens to have the site archive on a desk next to him.
D: 'What? What? That's obviously wrong......the fools[/SIZE][/SIZE][/SIZE]
Clearly a work of fiction, in reality Researcher D(ino) would probably have done a lot of swearing before, during and after
The School of Jack - kevin wooldridge - 24th July 2013
The bondage based archaeological blockbuster '50 Shades of Munsell'......
The School of Jack - BAJR - 24th July 2013
![[Image: 1069256_10153036330970389_1273130331_n.jpg]](https://fbcdn-sphotos-f-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn2/p280x280/1069256_10153036330970389_1273130331_n.jpg)
One that I made for Past Horizons...
The School of Jack - Jack - 25th July 2013
kevin wooldridge Wrote:This is like an unfinished novel...I am still waiting for the climax!! 'There will be mistakes'.....Yes. What happens next?
Grin........I'll try to not tease you for much longer and provide the release you require
The School of Jack - Dinosaur - 25th July 2013
Would you guys like to be given some privacy? :0
The School of Jack - Jack - 1st August 2013
Lesson 10 The context-led recording system: Subsection 2 context sheets are key[SIZE=2]
Context sheets are not a joke, a scive, or an excuse to hide in the site hut for a rest from the back-breaking digging. The context sheet is a vital piece of the archive as it is the ONLY place where a digger can and should provide their own insights on the context and possible interpretations of the feature, part or even whole of a site. The context sheet is the ONLY place where levels of uncertainty can and should be noted; what external factors have affected the recording/interpretation of the context.
Once a cut appears in a report it is (usually, depending on conventions) a solid line, a definate, an apparent fact.
Though this line may appear as uncertain on the section drawing (be it dotted or with question marks). It is on the context sheet where we find out why and how much doubt lies behind the drawing of the line.
It is not good enough to just write 'cut of ditch' on the sheet and be done. The context sheet is the lynch-pin of the recording system, and for many supervisors/ PO's the main tool for writing up the site narrative.
A good context sheet has all the correct measurements, soil/ profile description, finds information, drawing and photographic cross references and relationships with other contexts (and usually a matrix) needed to write a narrative. A sketch of the feature/deposit, usually in its wider context, on the back can speed up post-ex dramatically.
But so much more information can be included and therefore saved for future researchers. The list is almost endless, and entirely dependent on what you are recording. But remember, the reasons why you think something is so are just as important as the interpretation, as is a gauge of the confidence of the interpretation.
'Feature was backfilled.' is an example of bad recording.
'Feature was probably backfilled deliberately over a short period of time as the fill contained evidence of rotted sods of topsoil, large lumps of re-deposited natural and the stones were poorly sorted and were not formed into tip lines. Also the feature contained four discernible fills, the distinctively convex curved shape of the interfaces between these suggested that the material was tipped/shoveled in from the northern side.' Is an example of good recording.
If you found artefacts in the context where were they? right at the top, in the middle, spread out through a deposit? Where a diagnostic pottery sherd lies within a ditch fill, for instance, helps dictate whether it relates to the early abandonment/disuse of whatever the ditch relates to, is likely to be residual or could be from hundreds of years later.
Was there any discernible pattern to the finds? Were they seemingly placed/dumped in one area, or spread around.
Equally it is important where charcoal or other charred material was within a deposit. Reliability of charred plant material for radiocarbon dating hinges on finding discrete episodes of dumping/deposition and avoiding mixed and/or residual material.
If your describing a fill/ layer the depositional processes involved are key to understanding the deposit and the importance of any artefacts or ecofacts recovered from within. Did the deposit form over time, or in a single event? Is the deposit mixed up, laminated? Do the inclusions form tip-lines or hint at the presence and/or removal of posts. Was the deposit formed by erosion, silting or slumping. Was it [/SIZE][SIZE=2]wind-borne, [/SIZE][SIZE=2]water-borne and/or hill-wash? Are the interfaces with other deposits clear or do they grade in? Are the interfaces uneven?
Was there any unusual factors during the excavation/ recording of the context? Weather, commercial time pressures? Was the deposit investigated in a single half-section or were there a series of interventions? Was the section cut square with the edges of the feature or was there a reason why it couldn't be.
And on and on and on.
To summarise, the information on a context sheet (other than the cross referencing, soil description, measurements etc.) can be split into these categories: Descriptions (including interpretations), Formation (processes), Finds and *uck ups. Or DFFF for short.
[/SIZE]