+- 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: Yep..time for another hypothetical game (/showthread.php?tid=431)
Yep..time for another hypothetical game - drpeterwardle - 5th February 2007
One of the parameters Troll has set is as follows:
"Previous work...one small shaft sunk just off centre in the antiquarian days (like most barows countrywide!)"
I would thus question the importance of the monument. What we need is a dba to tell us what was found in the C19 and how much of the monument was investigated.
It may be a small team investigating the structure of the barrow and what is beneath it is all that is neccessary.
Troll how about giving us the results of the dba?
Peter
Yep..time for another hypothetical game - beamo - 6th February 2007
Troll
Based on the followeing assumptions I would estimate the number of person days required for full excavation to be in the region of 250, giving a team size / duration of 25 people for 10 weeks. If time was not a consideration I would prefer to go with 10 people for 25 weeks, as it is much easier to control quality if there are fewer people.
Ditch is continuous (i.e. no terminals) and averages 1m deep and 1m wide at surface level. There are some isolated and discrete placed deposits at the base.
Mound is fairly symmetrical and is 2m high at centre. Stone covering on the mound is a single layer on the surface rather than the whole mound being stone built. There are no placed deposits or intermediate land surfaces within the mound make-up.
There is one single but sustantial central burial chamber.
The whole of the mound is underlain by a buried land surface that contains worked flints in distinct concentrations but no actual features.
Beamo
Yep..time for another hypothetical game - 1man1desk - 6th February 2007
Actually, I think 250 person-days is 25 people for 2 weeks, not 10 weeks.
A couple of case-studies might throw some light on how widely estimates could vary, without more detailed information.
Early in my career I worked on excavations of 2 round barrows, each of which took 5 months for a team of 10-14, as far as I remember (say, 1300 person days each). Mind you, these were large barrows (from memory, up to 40m diameter), with several phases of enlargement, each involving filling in the old ditch and putting in a new one further out and enlarging the mound. One of them had a large and complex Beaker primary burial as well as inserted secondary burials.
Later on, I excavated 2 smaller, simpler round cairns and a fairly complex (but not very big) long mound, all in 2 seasons of 2 weeks each with about 15 people (again from memory - this is quite a long time ago). Say about 300 person days total for 3 monuments.
Both of these projects came before the days of competitive tendering; they were funded and managed by English Heritage and Historic Scotland respectively.
1man1desk
to let, fully furnished
Yep..time for another hypothetical game - vulpes - 6th February 2007
[:I]
Yep..time for another hypothetical game - beamo - 7th February 2007
1m1d - well spotted
I did mean 250 man days, so would be 10 people for 5 weeks.
Beamo
Yep..time for another hypothetical game - drpeterwardle - 7th February 2007
OK Troll if cant have the results of the dba.
As this mound has a "burial chamber" and a kerb is it actually a bowl barrow - ie a bronze age monument?
We dont know where this mound actually is which is a key piece of infomation.
Round barrows can be neolithic see Ian Kinnes Round Barrows and Ring Ditches in the British Neolithic 1979. If this is the case there is a stong case for NI on grounds of rarity.
In terms of the time to excavate I could see this as being 100, 250 or 500 person days.
If the substantial burial chamber is actually that and has orthostats we are talking of months of excavations for 2-3 people if it has not been excavated already. I cant think of a round barrow rather a cairn with an actual burial chamber.
Peter Wardle
Yep..time for another hypothetical game - the invisible man - 8th February 2007
If Neolithic the chamber may well have been timber, and/or a clay or stone "pavement", or perhaps a shaft grave, and quite likely with sequential burials.
Allow plenty of time for frowning and stroking of chins/beards.
We owe the dead nothing but the truth.
Yep..time for another hypothetical game - troll - 10th February 2007
Thankyou everyone for all your input.Bombshell time I`m afraid...the route of a new road was`nt even going to go through the barrow, total removal was required because the site of the barrow was earmarked for a settling tank to drain the new road.Geofiz identified a 6 metre round barrow...no resistance survey carried out to check fiz results, consultants in the process did not commission an evaluation to test the fiz results.Commercial unit then came up with four men/one supervisor/four weeks based on the fiz.Removal of overburden reveals a kerbed 17 metre barrow.Original time/labour estimate retained.Rapid mattock and machine completely removes barrow.Curator and EH turn up for a site visit on the penultimate day, wander about for an hour then leave. The curator mumbled something about thermoluminescence dating of ditch silts before stumbling away! Turns out that the "client" in this case is a county council. The team of fieldworkers who were forced to butcher this monument are nauseated to say the least.[:0]
..knowledge without action is insanity and action without knowledge is vanity..(imam ghazali,ayyuhal-walad)
Yep..time for another hypothetical game - himalaya - 11th February 2007
So this wasnt a hypothetical situation then, troll? It all seemed a bit specific when you mentioned staff numbers early on.
How was the barrow excavation approached then - what did the machining and mattocking involve? was the mound thoroughly trowelled, to check for secondary interments/features, post settings, etc, at each significant deposit before machining off the mound material. Was the mound thoroughly recorded (sections etc)? What percentage of the ditch was excavated? Were there any primary burials?
I can understand your frustration that the mound had to be touched in the first place, but what were the specific shortcomings of the excavation?
Yep..time for another hypothetical game - troll - 11th February 2007
A full account of the full horror of this little event is not appropriate here, the field team did what they could in the time allowed but, the end result is simply that a superb and nigh-on totally intact kerbed round barrow was removed to facilitate a f***ing drainage pond and, under the pathetic and painfully unprofessional conditions imposed upon the field team by those who should know better, the monument was butchered.Yet another example of just how this wonderful contractual system of ours has patently failed miserably-on a grand scale. I intend to hunt the council and the county mounty into a corner on this-just for starters.:face-huh:
..knowledge without action is insanity and action without knowledge is vanity..(imam ghazali,ayyuhal-walad)