7.1: Interpreting and Documenting Archaeological Information


The mere documentation of archaeological phenomena involves at every stage interpretation, whether something is a layer or feature, a disturbed or undisturbed context. Whether a soil change is anthropogenic or a natural discolourartion, or a natural layer. The documentation of a find will reflect this interpretation and depict it in written, drawn or other graphic form. This section cannot cover the whole topic of how the archaeologist observes, interprets and documents the archaeological record.

The removal of archaeological evidence from an archaeological site, whether by excavation or other research process requires documentation. This is because the evidence that is embedded in the patterning of the material traces is destroyed as soon as it has been revealed, making it a mono-directional exploration. Keeping track of all the intermediate steps between the state at the beginning of the research and the deposition of the project archive is essential for the study of the site by the archaeologists.

The features of archaeological documentation are discussed in the ARCHES database.

Sullivan 1978 discusses the general features of scientific inference. As a discipline, archaeology relies on the development of rigorous models that reflect the way information about the past is transmitted to the present via material remains. There are many discussions around the concepts of archaeological evidence, the justification of archaeological conclusions and the nature of the links between inference and evidence. Another area of discussion concerns the relationships between archaeological theory and archaeological evidence. The process of generating archaeological knowledge consists of establishing and marshalling the relevant data to arrive at and support conclusions about past phenomena.

Watson 2017 expands on the topic of archaeological inference in an important article:
The science of archaeology is based on a multi-leveled interdisciplinary system of descriptions, laws, and explanations. Archaeologists try to provide systemic descriptions and to confirm hypotheses about past social structures on the assumption that they are represented by selected parts of extant material remains. Inferences are about and based on processes and relations among social structure, material culture, and its unaltered, altered, and selected remains. Archaeological inference depends on principles of cultural behavior, the accumulation and alteration of material, and archaeologists' methods. These physico-chemical, geological, biological, psychological, sociological, anthropological, and methodological principles derive from the present behavior of men and material.
Bibliography:
r

ARCHES Archaeological Resources in Cultural Heritage: a European Standard

Alan Sullivan 1978, 'Inference and Evidence in Archaeology: A Discussion of the Conceptual Problems', [in]: Advances in Archaeological Method and Theory (Vol. 1), edited by M.B. Schiffer. New York. pp 183-222.

Watson Richard A. 2017, 'Inference in Archaeology'   American Antiquity Volume 41, Issue 1January 1976 , pp. 58-66.


Tamara Kroftova comments:
"Artefact hunters often claim that "anyone can do archaeology" and that an ivory tower background is not necessary to dig up old things from holes in the ground. The problem is that to do so responsibly, to observe the archaeological evidence and mutual relationships that comprise it, and produce reliable interpretations of it that can be passed on to scholarship, instead of simply squandering it in a selfish hunt for trophy items, a certain amount of basic knowledge must be acquired. The very fact that most artefact hunters in Britain dismiss this fact so lightly indicates that they are ill-prepared for the task of introducing best practice and responsibility into the collection-driven exploitation of the archaeological record."



Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

2.1: What is archaeology?

Image
Archaeological research   as a process There are many possible ways to define the subject and object of study. This is the definition of archaeology used here: Archaeology is the study of aspects the human past through the documentation and analysis of physical remains and traces, their associations and contexts, by the methodology of archaeology and dissemination of the results and conclusions. 1) " The study of aspects of the human past ", The past might be very remote, from the Lower Palaeolithic, where it may intercalate with palaeontology (but archaeologists don't do dinosaurs), to almost the present day (periods when other but not all aspects of the past are amply documented by other sources), 2)  " aspects of the human past ", many areas of the human past are arguably beyond the reach of even the most creative of archaeological thought, 3) " through the documentation ", the archaeological evidence does not exist in a vacuum, curran...
Read more

3.3: Archaeological layers

Image
In talking about archaeological context we tend to think of it in terms of being composed of individual layers. These are discrete units of sediment, debris, rock, and other materials that form or accumulate as the result of natural processes, human activity, or both. In order to describe them and indicate their position on a site and in its sequence, these layers are generally numbered sequentially (with the lowest number being that removed first). An individual layer or deposit may be termed (following geological nomenclature) a stratum, and multiple layers are called strata. Therefore the study of their sequence is called stratigraphy (description of what we call the stratification). One of the simplest ways to depict layers is to depict them as a vertical sequence and this is frequently done in the form of a section (or 'profile') through them. Here is an explanation from Michigan State University 'Campus Archaeology' page "Archaeology 101: Reading strati...
Read more

4.1 What the archaeological record looks like in the Ground

Image
If the responsible artefact hunter is to  record the bits of the archaeological record destroyed in removing artefacts in collection-driven exploitation of a site, obviously they need to know what it is they are looking for, in other words, what the archaeological record looks like. At this point, many textbooks would show the reader a section or two showing the superimposed layers ("like a cake"). But that actually is not the way the stratification of a feature are actually encountered in the field. The suggestion that it is the section that is always paramount in the recording and interpretation of a site is a very damaging one. This is despite the prevalence of s ingle-context recording in the standard excavation methodical toolkit for over half a century. The main manner in which the stratigraphical units of a site are met is from above, from the working surface. The first point that this raises is that this should at all times be kept clean of loose soil, trample ...
Read more