, •••" Stratigraphic and Material Interpre;,it/ons of Site Evidence: Investigations Towards the Natur.e.Df Archaeological Deposits Volume I ofII Michael Gerald Berry A thesis submitted in fulfilment ofthe requirements for the degree ofDoctor of Philosophy Department ofArchaeology University ofYork 2008 Abstract This dissertation addresses the failure in common practice to fully integrate different parts ofthe archaeological record systematically, thus leading to a breakdown between excavation theory and practice. The relationship between deposit and assemblage, and thereby the use ofdeposit status designation is examined. A more accurate definition ofstatus is adopted, overcoming the conceptual inadequacy linking find to deposit. The analysis ofstatus is based on the following basic assumptions: firstly, that status is the relationship between the find and the context; secondly, that this relationship is based upon information on the function, chronology and spatial characteristics ofthe finds and contexts. With the concept ofdeposit status established, this thesis presents a method that integrates all the relevant elements ofthe archaeological record that enable an understanding ofdeposit signatures; deposits and assemblages. Deposit types are examined, checking the relationships between basic physical descriptions and interpreted function. Assemblage data for ceramics and faunal remains are integrated based upon quantification that reflects their separate formation histories. The resulting deposit signatures provide a platform for new and interesting means ofcreating site narrative. The new narratives reflect developments and changes in deposit formation, and ultimately, the landuse history ofa site. This thesis demonstrates that the integration offinds and site data allows for more fruitful interpretation ofexcavation data. This approach helps to match site details with specific research agendas in both academic and commercial contexts, and can help achieve the maximum potential for research output. Table of Contents Volume I Chapter 1 1 Introduction 1 1.1 General Introduction 1 1.2 Aims and Objectives 2 1.3 Chapter Structure Outline 6 Chapter 2 8 Towards a Unification of Stratigraphic and Material Data 8 2.1 Introduction 8 2.2 Stratigraphic Study: The Development ofThoughts and Techniques .. 10 2.3 Harris and Afterwards 20 2.4 Excavation and Recovery Methods 26 2.5 Site Formation Processes 31 2.6 Material Assemblages 36 2.7 Assemblage Composition: Infiltrated and Residual Finds 41 2.8 Conclusions 45 Chapter 3 46 Theorizing Depositional History 46 3.1 Introduction 46 3.2 Recovery: Methods, Levels and Practices 47 3.3 Theories ofTime 49 3.4 Taphonomic Theory and Practice 56 3.5 Concepts ofStatus 61 3.6 Conclusions 68 Chapter 4 75 Methodology 75 4.1 Introduction 75 4.2 Selection Rationale for Case Studies 77 4.3 Rationale for Defining Deposits 79 4.4 Status Sequence Graphs 83 4.5 Quantitative Methods: Ceramic Statistics as Measures ofSite Formation History 88 4.6 Quantitative Methods: Faunal Statistics as Measures ofSite Formation History 93 4.7 Material Quantification and Seriation 95 4.8 Conclusions 101 1 Chapter 5 103 Case Study: Mount Vernon, House for Families 103 5.1 Introduction 103 5.2 Site Background and Research History 104 5.3 Data Construction 107 5.4 Analysis 115 5.5 Review and Summary ofTrends 123 5.6 Conclusions 127 Chapter 6 131 Carlisle Millennium Project, The City Ditch (MIL 3 & 4) 131 6.1 Introduction 131 6.2 Site Background and Research History 132 6.3 Data Construction '" 134 6.4 Analysis 139 6.5 Review and Summary ofTrends 148 6.6 Conclusions 152 Chapter 7 159 12-18 Swinegate, york. 159 7.1 Introduction 159 7.2 Site Background and Research History 160 7.3 Data Construction 162 7.4 Analysis 166 7.5 Review and Summary ofTrends 173 7.6 Conclusions 177 Chapter 8 183 The Barley Hall, 2 Coffee Yard, york 183 8.1 Introduction 183 8.2 Site Background and Research History 184 8.3 Data Construction 186 8.4 Analysis 190 8.5 Review and Summary ofTrends 196 8.6 Conclusions 199 Chapter 9 204 109-113 George Street, Parramatta, NSW, Australia 204 9.1 Introduction 204 9.2 Site Background and Research History 206 9.3 Analysis 209 9.4 Summary and Analysis ofTrends 215 9.5 Conclusions 221 .. 11 Chapter 10 223 Case Study Synthesis 223 10.1 Introduction 223 10.2 Summary and Comparison 226 10.3 Statistical Trends and Interpretation 234 10.4 Conclusions 238 Chapter 11 239 Development ofthe Method 239 11.1 Introduction 239 11.2 Problems and Adaptations 239 11.3 Future Directions and Impact on Practice 242 11.4 The Structure and Use ofArchaeological Data 248 11.5 Conclusions 251 References i Volume 2 Appendix 1: Tables 1 Chapter 5 Tables: Mount Vernon, House for Families 2 Chapter 6 Tables: Carlisle Millennium Project, The City Ditch (MIL 3&4) 24 Chapter 7 Tables: 12-18 Swinegate, york .47 Chapter 8 Tables: The Barley Hall, 2 Coffee Yard, york 60 Chapter 9 Tables: 109-113 George Street, Parramatta, NSW, Australia 84 Appendix 2: Figures 101 Appendix 3: Correlation Analysis enclosed in diskette 111 Acknowledgments This thesis is the result ofthe advice, aid and encouragement ofmany colleagues during the last three years. The work is my own and I accept responsibility for any mistakes or omissions, however, the completion ofthis thesis required the help provided by many people. It is my hope that this work addresses issues and concerns recognised by many archaeologists and is ultimately a valuable contribution to the practice ofarchaeology. This dissertation would not have been possible but for the guidance ofmy friend and advisor, Professor Steve Roskams. To Steve lowe a great debt for his intelligence and ingenuity during our discussions. The ideas and theories that underlie the method developed in this thesis were founded during our many talks over the past years. All the past and present members ofmy Thesis Advisory Panel have contributed vital guidance to this work. I am indebted to Tania Dickinson and Kevin Walsh for providing the necessary direction as head ofmy advisory panel. I am grateful to Martin Carver for challenging my ideas and making me think in different directions. Terry O'Connor provided crucial guidance on all things faunal, without which I would surely have been lost. The timely completion ofthis thesis comes as a result ofthe help ofthis group. lowe a debt ofgratitude to the examiners ofthis work. Paul Lane and Clive Orton both provided valuable critiques that helped shape the final product here. Their insights created a challenging and enjoyable discussion ofthis work, and I am better for it. I wish to thank all those that made data available to me for study. Their contribution oftime and advice is invaluable. I am indebted to Eleanor Breen, formerly at Historic Mount Vernon, for her encouragement and introduction to the Digital Archaeological Archive ofComparative Slavery. The efforts ofJillian Galle and all those at the DAACS serve as an example to us all. John Zant at Oxford Archaeology North kindly made the data from the Carlisle Millennium IV Project available, and answered all ofmy many questions. The York Archaeological Trust was pivotal in making their archives and lab space available to me. I am most thankful to Ailsa Mainman, Christine Kyriacou, Mark Whyman and Rachel Cubitt. Finally, I am indebted to Mary Casey and the staffofCasey & Lowe Pty Ltd for allowing me to use the site archive from 109-113 George Street, Parramatta. I must also thank the many people that contributed in one way or another to the pages that follow. This includes Michael Jones, Jenn Mann, Paula Gentil, Alisdair Brooks, Ben Gourley, and Cath Neal. Finally, I want to make the deepest thanks to my wife Andrea for her unending support. She has believed in me more than I have believed in myself. Her tireless efforts and support during this PhD dissertation require thanks I lack the words to fully express. v Chapter 1 - Introduction Chapter 1 Introduction 1.1 General Introduction The role ofthe finds assemblage in archaeological interpretation has evolved over many decades. The relationships between assemblages and their parent deposits have been treated in many different ways during the long development of archaeological field practice. A look at the last 40 years of archaeological excavation reveals a steady increase in the number and manner ofcontrolled excavation methods. Methods such as single context planning and the Harris matrix have placed a focus upon establishing stratigraphic sequences and gaining better control over the recovery offinds. Overall, controlled excavation methods have been based on obtaining finds assemblages from clear contexts, rather than just recovering structural evidence and bits oftreasure. This is, in part, a result of the development ofcontract driven archaeology. In order to justify the expense of both government and private sector investment, the recovery of cultural heritage was argued to be necessary not just at the individual artefact level but as a collective assemblage (Roskams, 1992: 27). However, this has not happened. Richard Bradley (2006) addressed the resulting failure in output when he looked closely at the excavation report as its own literary genre. Bradley noted that the common format ofa report sees stratigraphic evidence occupy one section, while the artefact analysis another. It is not always clear that any common aim exists among the authors ofrespective sections. Specialists can focus upon the finds themselves, only using excavation evidence to illuminate areas oftheir own concerns. As a result the format ofthe excavation report has not changed dramatically in 70 years (Bradley, 2006: 667). The call for contextualised finds and clear stratigraphic sequences followed the development ofthe modem archaeological industry. As the practice of field archaeology developed, as an aspect of"rescue" archaeology, government and funding bodies became interested in establishing clear protocols. This lead to the 1 Chapter 1 - Introduction development ofdeposit models as a part ofthe site evaluation process: constructing predictive methods ofassessing the intensity ofarchaeological deposits within a specific area.