1 2 Table of Contents Surveying the Field II The Materiality of Roman Battle: Applying Conflict Archaeology Methods to the Roman World Joanne E. Ball…………………………………………………………………4 Methods in Conflict Archaeology: The Netherlands During the Napoleonic Era (1794-1815). Using Detector Finds to Shed Light on An Under-researched Period. Vincent van der Veen………………………………………………………..19 Musket Balls from the Boston Massacre: Are they Authentic? Dan Sivilich and Joel Bohy………………………………………………….31 Revisiting the US military ‘Levels of War’ Model as a Conceptual Tool in Conflict Archaeology: A Case Study of WW2 Landscapes in Normandy, France. David G Passmore, David Capps-Tunwell, Stephan Harrison………………44 A Decade of Community-Based Projects in the Pacific on WWII Conflict Sites Jennifer F. McKinnon and Toni L. Carrell…………………………………..61 Avocational Detectorists and Battlefield Research: Potential Data Biases Christopher T. Espenshade…………………………………………………..68 Maritime Conflict Archaeology: Battle of the Java Sea: Past and Present Conflicts Robert de Hoop and Martijn Manders……………………………………….75 A Battleship in the Wilderness: The Story of the Chippewa and Lake Ontario’s Forgotten War of 1812 Naval Shipyard* Timothy J. Abel……………………………………………………………...88 3 Surveying the Field II The Materiality of Roman Battle: Applying Conflict Archaeology Methodology to the Roman World. Joanne E. Ball Archaeology, Classics & Egyptology, University of Liverpool, Liverpool L69 7WZ
[email protected] ABSTRACT Over the last three decades a growing number of Roman battle sites have been identified across western Europe. Archaeological study of these sites has adapted methodologies developed from the Little Bighorn project onward to the material characteristics of Roman battle, and continue to be refined. Difficulties have been encountered in locating sites within a landscape, due to inadequacies in the historical record.