16th August 2013, 02:02 PM
Hi
I got excited when I saw a survey on sampling (yeah) then a bit despondent on the way the questions were worded. As Dino, Jack and I work for the same unit we work to the same guidelines etc. so our comments are similar.
Q1. A methodology is stated within our WSI/ PD for every piece of excavation fieldwork that we do. But the methodology should and would change dependent on what is required, eg was our clayey northern sites yield very little plant material, on an ongoing five year project the results have been the same....very little...however, the last few samples have produced very nice charred cereal grain assemblage, this was unexpected. Without our methodology these would have been missed.
Q2 and Q3 There are various types of samples (whole earth, GBA, column, grab, artefactual etc.) so this should be done in conjunction with your specialist. Often these two are linked (artefactual and ecofactual). If something comes in for artefactual recovery I see this is a bonus and often use it for environmental recovery also.
Q4. This is dependent on the feature and question asked of said feature. We do 40l or 100% (if smaller). However, if all we are wanting is a parasite squash then a small bags-worth would suffice!
Q5. See Dino's response, its even heated too
Q6Processing can be done during post-ex but is often done during excavation and can alter said methodology.
Q7 If I've went through the whole gamut of site visits, processing, sorting, dealing with other specialists prep, identifying charcoal, seeds and shell, assessing then convincing the SPO's and PMs that charcoal analysis is sexy then I'm gonna make sure that it is in the final rep. That, and the fact I can be persuasive......
Q8. Jack's said most of this but a generic template would be difficult to work, as stated previously, we use template, but this is adapted. Knowledge is the key here. The knowledge of the area, the data that would be useful and further said knowledge, the other sites within the area (I done some research for one of my postgrad degrees on sampling and animal bone, where some work had been done in the area and not much animal bone was seen, but 20 years later and back in the site area and loads of animal bone was recovered, therefore preservational qualities of sediments and soils need to be understood.) Then there is the people, who dictates the strategy, the specialist? The PM? The SPO? The County Archaeologist? The RSA? What about the site location itself? There are too many variables to have a basic template......
Q9. All are useful but none in isolation! This is dependant on the site, the archaeology and the questions being asked.
I would have loved to have filled in your questionnaire but felt I couldn't get my point across with the choices given (hence the mini essay here).
I am always trying to point out how valuable environmental archaeology is and it annoys me no end when I get told archaeological science is useless!!!!!
! Thankfully not from the staff now present here.
But good luck with this, I think its fab :face-approve:
I got excited when I saw a survey on sampling (yeah) then a bit despondent on the way the questions were worded. As Dino, Jack and I work for the same unit we work to the same guidelines etc. so our comments are similar.
Q1. A methodology is stated within our WSI/ PD for every piece of excavation fieldwork that we do. But the methodology should and would change dependent on what is required, eg was our clayey northern sites yield very little plant material, on an ongoing five year project the results have been the same....very little...however, the last few samples have produced very nice charred cereal grain assemblage, this was unexpected. Without our methodology these would have been missed.
Q2 and Q3 There are various types of samples (whole earth, GBA, column, grab, artefactual etc.) so this should be done in conjunction with your specialist. Often these two are linked (artefactual and ecofactual). If something comes in for artefactual recovery I see this is a bonus and often use it for environmental recovery also.
Q4. This is dependent on the feature and question asked of said feature. We do 40l or 100% (if smaller). However, if all we are wanting is a parasite squash then a small bags-worth would suffice!
Q5. See Dino's response, its even heated too
Q6Processing can be done during post-ex but is often done during excavation and can alter said methodology.
Q7 If I've went through the whole gamut of site visits, processing, sorting, dealing with other specialists prep, identifying charcoal, seeds and shell, assessing then convincing the SPO's and PMs that charcoal analysis is sexy then I'm gonna make sure that it is in the final rep. That, and the fact I can be persuasive......
Q8. Jack's said most of this but a generic template would be difficult to work, as stated previously, we use template, but this is adapted. Knowledge is the key here. The knowledge of the area, the data that would be useful and further said knowledge, the other sites within the area (I done some research for one of my postgrad degrees on sampling and animal bone, where some work had been done in the area and not much animal bone was seen, but 20 years later and back in the site area and loads of animal bone was recovered, therefore preservational qualities of sediments and soils need to be understood.) Then there is the people, who dictates the strategy, the specialist? The PM? The SPO? The County Archaeologist? The RSA? What about the site location itself? There are too many variables to have a basic template......
Q9. All are useful but none in isolation! This is dependant on the site, the archaeology and the questions being asked.
I would have loved to have filled in your questionnaire but felt I couldn't get my point across with the choices given (hence the mini essay here).
I am always trying to point out how valuable environmental archaeology is and it annoys me no end when I get told archaeological science is useless!!!!!
! Thankfully not from the staff now present here.But good luck with this, I think its fab :face-approve: