28th September 2012, 06:29 PM
When I was trained on Wessex Arch field schools, they gave guidance on filling in the "Description" section which included giving our own interpretation. That was only four and five years ago. When did it fall out of favour?
I've always been led to believe that the interpretation of the person who dug a feature/context is both encouraged and important, and feeds into the overall interpretation. I'm only a beginner, but I've never been told just to record something without forming and expressing some kind of personal opinion about it. In any case, many elements on a context sheet (or in my more direct experience, pottery recording sheet) are subjective and interpretive. If you ever find a Munsell Chart still in use, you'll be hard pressed to get two people to agree on which code to apply to the same context (or pot sherd). I couldn't usually agree with myself if I tried it twice in succession.
I've always been led to believe that the interpretation of the person who dug a feature/context is both encouraged and important, and feeds into the overall interpretation. I'm only a beginner, but I've never been told just to record something without forming and expressing some kind of personal opinion about it. In any case, many elements on a context sheet (or in my more direct experience, pottery recording sheet) are subjective and interpretive. If you ever find a Munsell Chart still in use, you'll be hard pressed to get two people to agree on which code to apply to the same context (or pot sherd). I couldn't usually agree with myself if I tried it twice in succession.