Mail*Link® SMTP               Harris Matrix
 
The discussion on the Harris Matrix has been rather interesting. When I was at the SHA Conferrance in Cincinatti I attended one of the urban archaeology workshops and somebody in the discussion on interpretation mentioned "maybe we should try to use one of these new fangled Harris Matrix's on our urban sites" I thought it was a joke and started chuckling until I realised they were serious.
 
Well, talk about comming from another culture, seems as if we Australians share with Americans the same boring TV shows, the Vietnam War and Coke but not the Harris Matrix!
 
When I was a heritage administrator I expected those applying for excavation permits to use the Harris matrix and now that I apply for permits, use of the Harris matrix is the norm. To do anything else seems in my opinion, to be unprofessional.
 
Harris's book should be mandatory reading for archaeology students (along with a  good book on soils) as it is such a simple explanation of stratigraphy. I gather from the dicussion that it is out of print which is a shame.
 
Harris's principles were sucessfully adapted by the late Martin Davies to cover standing structures which is something I have not seen in the American littrature but is an important inovation as well.
 
I must say I have found digging stratigraphically occaisionally a bit daunting especially when you have a seemingly bottomless deposit of sediment with no discernable change. I tend to put in arbitary spits simply as a precauction against my own incompetance.
 
As I work in prehistoric as well as historical sites I feel qualified to say that there is just as much a need for the Harris matrix and Harris's principals in prehistorical archaeology even if the deposits seem to be more natural.
 
If you are going to dig archaeological sites whithout any understanding of the principals of stratigraphy then you might as well stick to potatoes.
 
Iain Stuart
University of Sydney