Mark,
The reason I am open to methodology is that some people assume cisterns,
privies and well fill represents one single episode of deposition (ie. the day
after the original function terminated). The resulting treatment of these
features is less emphasis on mapping, sketching, photos, and more on rapid
recovery. This theory of single episode deposition follows that there is no meaning
to the top or bottom, so why bother to document? The extension of the lack
of documentation is to dispose of nearly everything in the deposit as
"redundant." The extreme of this method is followed by curatorial facilities that
believe all prehistoric objects are "unique," but historic materials are not and
dumping of most historic items is acceptable. One such curatorial facility
in California dumps all the ferrous metal, most of the glass, most of the
undecorated ceramics, and focuses on "goodies" (watch parts, unusual embossed
glass, pretty jewelry, a single nail, a single sample of one thing or another)
in order to reduce curation costs. This dumping, however, terminates the
possibility of retesting the evidence of the single episode theory. What if the
theory is wrong?
I could go on, but you get my point.
Ron May
Legacy 106, Inc.
In a message dated 1/17/2009 1:37:17 P.M. Pacific Standard Time,
[log in to unmask] writes:
Ron,
Sorry, I was feeling a little out of sorts ... and the question
seemed so basic that my first thought was: "Didn't this person ever
go to a field school?" "Should this person even be allowed to work
on a historic site, or any site, for that matter?"
But, after some introspection, I came to the conclusion that there is
in fact no such thing as a stupid question, only a stupid answer ...
Guilty as charged.
Of course, the methodology used to dig a cistern is whatever is
appropriate to the feature, the site, and what questions are being
asked ...
Cisterns, by there very nature, are filled in AFTER their use,
although there may be some contemporary materials included as well,
especially in their basal units.
Here in Illinois, we am typically working with rural farmstead
cisterns, associated with an existing or former residence. Defined
at the surface, these features probably average about 2-3 meters in
diameter x 1.5 - 2.5 meters deep. Given the relatively large size,
and unknown content, our standard strategy is to bisect or quarter
them (depending on the overall size), usually digging that first unit
in arbitrary levels (10-20 cm), screening the fill as we go, and
likely taking flot samples as we go.
After taking the first quarter or half, as the case may be, a
decision is then made as to whether further excavation is
appropriate. From that point, an additional sample or the entire
feature excavated, but in this case using natural levels, if any,
based on the stratigraphy revealed in the first fractional unit.
Taking flots, screening fill, etc.
We have found this to be a very useful and cost-effective method, and
have used the same basic technique on other large features, cellar
holes, etc. Essentially a Phase II evaluation technique that can be
rolled over directly into full mitigation, if appropriate.
I would note that the Illinois literature, mostly gray, is full of
details about cistern excavations, and I would be more than willing
to share a few citations if the interested party would like to
contact me off list ...
Mark
--
Mark C. Branstner, RPA
Historic Archaeologist
Illinois Transportation
Archaeological Research Program
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
209 Nuclear Physics Lab, MC-571
23 East Stadium Drive
Champaign, IL 61820
Phone: 217.244.0892
Fax: 217.244.7458
Cell: 517.927.4556
[log in to unmask]
"I hope there's pudding" - Luna Lovegood (HP5)
"If you only have a hammer, every problem looks like a nail"- Anonymous
**************A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy
steps!
(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100000075x1215855013x1201028747/aol?redir=http://www.freecreditreport.com/pm/default.aspx?sc=668072%26hmpgID=62%26bcd=De
cemailfooterNO62)
|