The element comprises three questions that test your understanding of the practical methods and techniques (finding archaeological sites), (Excavation: Theory and Practice) and (Establishing chronologies). There is no need to include references in your answers to Element 1.
In the first question you are asked to look at the results of a geophysical survey that has detected a set of linear features - most likely field systems and enclosure boundaries. Your job is to decide where to place three small excavation trenches in order to gain an understanding of the site and the relative phasing of the features present.
In the second you are presented with an archaeological section that shows a range of excavated contexts. Your task is to summarise the stratigraphic relationships that are present by producing a Harris Matrix, noting the key archaeological events that took place on the site.
In the final question you are asked to identify which of the contexts you would radiocarbon date, in order to provide an absolute date to anchor the sequence revealed in your Harris Matrix.
Part 1 – where to dig?
Geophysical survey (using Fluxgate Gradiometry) was carried out across a ploughed arable field that has been identified as a possible site for a new housing development. The results of the original survey are shown below – the darker the feature the stronger its magnetic response.
On the basis of the results shown above, an interpretation plot has been produced which summarises the key features present. Overlain on this is a 12.5m grid. You have been given the time and funding to excavate three of these squares in order to characterize these features and unravel as much as you can of their sequence.
TASK: identify the three squares you would prioritise for excavation (e.g. A1; L4 etc..) and explain briefly the rationale behind your selection [max. 200 words].
In the site’s eastern section, we seem to be dealing with at least two ditched enclosures of rather rectangular shape, perhaps dating to the Iron Age, judging from their layout. But they do not seem to be contemporary. Grid U8 allows to investigate the intersection of two of the major features in this area, each of them having different orientations and therefore probably a different time horizon. This allows us to extrapolate more widely on the dating of the features in this section as well as their potential function. In grid T5 we can examine the sequence of three different features that intersect here as they are unlikely to be contemporary due to their different orientations and shape.
The situation in the western part of the site appears to be rather different: there are two circular features that might be prehistoric roundhouses, but the linear ditches do not seem to make up a typical prehistoric ditched enclosure that we would expect for a prehistoric settlement. Instead, one of the ditches seems to cut through one of the circular features; hence it is important to excavate plot G8 in order to understand the chronology of the round house, the ditches leading to the west and east, and the curious triangular feature to the north of G8.
*
Part 2 – constructing a sequence ( tutorial on the Harris matrix)
Excavation across one area of the site revealed the following contexts.
As you can see there are 14 contexts in total – curly brackets denote layers (fills) whilst square brackets denote cuts. As well as the section drawing above the following notes have been extracted from the context description:
Contexts (001) and (002) contained material typical of the manuring scatters you typically recover from post-medieval ploughsoil.
Upon excavation, Context (005) showed evidence for what appeared to be disturbance that had taken place long after the layer had originally been deposited.
TASK: draw a Harris Matrix for the contexts shown in the section drawing & then describe the key archaeological events that took place [max. 200 words].
NB: you can draw a matrix using Microsoft Word using the following steps:
• Write out the context numbers as required.
• Put a box around each one using the ‘Insert’ ‘Shapes’ function in Word.
• Add the connecting lines using the same function.
• If you have problems you can always hand-draw the matrix and scan or photograph it, pasting the image into your assignment (we’re not marking you on your IT skills!).
Matrix – a flow diagram
Describe the key archaeological events that took place [max. 200 words].
There are two separate groups of features that are probably not contemporaneous.
Starting with the left group, the earliest human activity seems to have been cut no. 014, roughly 40 cm deep, fill no. 011… before the large cut no. 012 cut through the feature 011/014. 010 is the first fill of the pit/ditch cut by 012, followed by 007 and 009, which at first sight appear as if they might have been contemporary, but a closer study of the two fills suggests that 009 must have been there first, probably just some earth falling into a pit from the right hand side, before fill 007.
001 – topsoil…
Part 3 – playing the dating game
You have the funding to carry out one radiocarbon (C14) determination on this group of contexts. The material recovered from the various contexts is as follows:
(011) = a cache of flint tools
(005) = the articulated skeleton of a rabbit
(004) = a coin
(007) = a large number of small fragments of Oak charcoal recovered from the wet sieving of a soil sample
(008) = Sherds of badly eroded pottery
(010) = Carbonised twigs and branches found on the base of the feature (fill)
TASK: which of the contexts would you date using C14 and why? What chronological questions would your absolute date resolve and which would be left unanswered? [max. 200 words].
205 words
Since we are dealing with radiocarbon dating, I excluded finds that can be dated more precisely by other methods: the coin 004 may provide us with a more precise date, while the pottery 008 might perhaps also be dated on stylistic grounds despite its eroded state of preservation. And since we need organic substances for C14 dating, we can also exclude the flint stone tools from context 011. This leaves us with three organic samples. Having excluded the small fragments of oak charcoal that were only discovered from the wet sieving of a soil sample, making it probably too small a sample for C14 dating, we are left with the rabbit skeleton in 005 and the carbonised twigs and branches in 010. A radiocarbon date for context 010 appears to be most promising as a date would provide us with a terminus ante quem for cut 014 and fill 011 and a terminus post quem for the subsequent contexts: (009, 007, 005, 003, 002). Unfortunately, this will not provide any dating information for the features 004, 006, 008 and 013; it will be difficult to tell whether this group was contemporary or not, unless the badly eroded pottery can shed some light on their date.
Sample Solution