DOCSLIB.ORG

Principles of Archaeological Stratigraphy (1989)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Principles of Archaeological Stratigraphy (1989) , •••" 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.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Archaeological Sequence Diagrams and Bayesian Chronological Models
    This is a repository copy of Archaeological sequence diagrams and Bayesian chronological models. White Rose Research Online URL for this paper: http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/90295/ Version: Accepted Version Article: Dye, T.S. and Buck, C.E. (2015) Archaeological sequence diagrams and Bayesian chronological models. Journal of Archaeological Science, 63. 84 - 93. ISSN 0305-4403 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jas.2015.08.008 Reuse Items deposited in White Rose Research Online are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved unless indicated otherwise. They may be downloaded and/or printed for private study, or other acts as permitted by national copyright laws. The publisher or other rights holders may allow further reproduction and re-use of the full text version. This is indicated by the licence information on the White Rose Research Online record for the item. Takedown If you consider content in White Rose Research Online to be in breach of UK law, please notify us by emailing [email protected] including the URL of the record and the reason for the withdrawal request. [email protected] https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/ 1 Title Archaeological Sequence Diagrams and Bayesian Chronological Models 2 Authors Thomas S. Dye1 and Caitlin E. Buck 3 Ailiations University of Hawai‘i at Manoa¯ and University of Sheffield 4 Address for correspondence 735 Bishop St., Suite 315, Honolulu, HI 96813 5 Email for correspondence [email protected] 6 Approximate number of words 5071 1Corresponding author. 1 7 Abstract 8 This paper develops directed graph representations for a class of archaeological sequence 9 diagrams, such as the Harris Matrix, that do not include information on duration.
    [Show full text]
  • For the Record: the What, How and When of Stratigraphy
    No. 83/84, 2007 70 Ontario Archaeology For the Record: The What, How and When of Stratigraphy Henry C. Cary and Joseph H. Last Ontario archaeologists approach stratigraphy from a number ofdirections, a situation born from the adop­ tion and adaptation of Canadian, American, and British field techniques. Each method is suitable for cer­ tain conditions, but we suggest that stratigraphic excavation must be used to understand site formation. Our technique focuses on the single stratigraphic unit and asks ofit three questions: what is its nature? (jill buried sad, or flature); how did it get there? (primary or secondary deposition); and when was it deposited' (the relationship to other layers and flatures). Posing these questions during excavation ensures that crucial infor­ mation is not lost once the site is disturbed and allows the archaeologist to determine the site-wide sequence and phases ofdevelopment later in the analysis. Detailed stratigraphic recording and analysis is often seen as time consuming, especially in mitz.'gation excavations, but we will introduce methods currently in use at stratigraphically complex military sites in Ontario that effict rapid, thorough, and accurate recording. Introduction Archaeological Services, Military Sites, a small group dedicated to cultural resource management Archaeologists in Ontario approach strarigraphy in of military National Historic Sites in Ontario. diverse ways. Some dig in arbitrary spits, then Over the past 24 years we have developed a system record and correlate the stratigraphic profile later to help us answer these inquiries. We do not intend in the analysis. Many excavate stratigraphically. to argue that our method is more effective than any removing each stratum in the reverse order of dep­ other, but merely want to present how it applies to osition while leaving baulks afterward drawn in our research.
    [Show full text]
  • THE BULLETIN Number 84 Summer 1982
    THE BULLETIN Number 84 Summer 1982 CONTENTS The Tiger Lily Site, Long Island, New York: A Preliminary Report Stanley Wisniewski and Gretchen Gwynne 1 The Archaeology of Walter's Spit Donna Ottusch 18 The Sojourner's Rockshelter Paul Weinman and Thomas Weinman 29 Don't Miss AENA 10 30 An Important Exhibit 30 No. 84, Summer, 1982 1 THE TIGER LILY SITE, LONG ISLAND, NEW YORK: A PRELIMINARY REPORT Stanley Wisniewski Metropolitan Chapter Gretchen Anderson Gwynne Gong Island Chapter INTRODUCTION On the north shore of Long Island, New Yo rk, sheltered from the North Atlantic by the fish-shaped body of the Island, lies Mount Sinai Harbor. a small, tidal basin of glacial origin ringed by low hills. The harbor is protected from the open waters of Long Island Sound by a sandy barrier bar (Cedar Beach), now channeled at the west end permitting the tidal exchange of salt water from the sound (see map). (The barrier bar has apparently existed since the time of first human occupation of the area. although the location of its opening into the sound has changed from time to time.) Tidal exchange from the sound is an important condition for shellfish growth at Mount Sinai Harbor and archaeological evidence has shown the harbor to have been the source of a variety of saltwater shellfish throughout its long, history of human occupation. In the prehistoric period, the now-dredged harbor was all extraordinarily rich marshland into which emptied at least three freshwater streams as well as numerous rivulets of fresh groundwater run-off. These fresh-water sources provided the marsh with the saline balance necessary for the proliferation of oysters and other shellfish.
    [Show full text]
  • Adapting the Harris Matrix for Software Stratigraphy
    Adapting the Harris Matrix for Software Stratigraphy Andrew Reinhard Edward Harris’s (1979) landmark work, Principles of preservation of these born-digital archaeological Archaeological Stratigraphy, from which sprouted sites. the idea and practice of the Harris matrix, became This is not a new concern for people who work within the broad my windmill (or albatross) in 2017 as I attempted to umbrella of “digital humanities.” “Software archaeology”—the leverage its data visualization technique onto a digital attempt to reverse-engineer poorly documented (or undocu- mented) software in order to restore and preserve functionality— archaeological site. This visualization would not only has existed formally for over 15 years.1 Digital preservation is allow archaeologists to understand the composition also not a new idea and forms a border of software archaeology; namely, what to do with software post-use or post-“excavation.”2 and history of a digital built environment—something None of the software archaeology approaches, however, treat important to the emerging field of digital heritage— software as archaeological sites in the traditional sense, and I wanted to see what would happen if I conducted a truly archaeo- but also would contribute to the conservation and logical investigation of a software application using a tool known ABSTRACT In 1979, Edward C. Harris invented and published his eponymous matrix for visualizing stratigraphy, creating an indispensable tool for generations of archaeologists. When presenting his matrix, Harris also detailed his four laws of archaeological stratigraphy: superposition, original horizontal, original continuity, and stratigraphic succession. In 2017, I created the first stratigraphic matrix for software, using as a test the 2016 video game No Man’s Sky (Hello Games).
    [Show full text]
  • Churchyard Archaeology.Pdf
    Churchyard Archaeology: Archaeological Investigations at the First Baptist Church in America Edited by Zachary Nelson and Katherine Marino Report of Field Investigations at the First Baptist Church in America, Providence, Rhode Island, undertaken August-December, 2006 Churchyard Archaeology: Archaeological Investigations at the First Baptist Church in America. Edited by Zachary Nelson and Katherine Marino Copyright 2007 Report of Field Investigations at the First Baptist Church in America, Providence, Rhode Island undertaken August-December, 2006. Zachary Nelson, Principal Investigator Table of Contents List of Figures .......................................................................................................... iii List of Tables ........................................................................................................... viii Acknowledgments .................................................................................................... ix Section I: The Church and its Archaeology Chapter 1. Churchyard Archaeology and Picnics Zachary Nelson and Zöe Agoos........................................................ 2 Chapter 2. A Brief History of the First Baptist Church in America Katherine Marino............................................................................. 7 Standing Artifacts: New England Church Architecture Cody Campanie................................................................................. 16 Map and Pictoral History of the First Baptist Church Tina Lee Charest..............................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Bringing Methodology to the Fore: the Anglo-Georgian Expedition to Nokalakevi Paul Everill, Nikoloz Antidze, Davit Lomitashvili, Nikoloz Murgulia
    Bringing methodology to the fore: The Anglo-Georgian Expedition to Nokalakevi Paul Everill, Nikoloz Antidze, Davit Lomitashvili, Nikoloz Murgulia Abstract The Anglo-Georgian Expedition to Nokalakevi has been working in Samegrelo, Georgia, since 2001, building on the work carried out by archaeologists from the S. Janashia Museum since 1973. The expedition has trained nearly 250 Georgian and British students in modern archaeological methodology since 2001, and over that same period Georgia has changed enormously, both politically and in its approach to cultural heritage. This paper seeks to contextualise the recent contribution of British archaeological methodology to the rich history of archaeological work in Georgia, and to consider the emergence of a dynamic cultural heritage sector within Georgia since 2004. Introduction A small village in the predominantly rural, western Georgian region of Mingrelia (Samgrelo) hosts a surprising and spectacular historic site. A fortress supposedly established by Kuji, a semi-mythical ruler of west Georgia in the vein of the British King Arthur, provides the stage for the story of an alliance with King Parnavaz of east Georgia (Iberia) and the overthrow of Hellenistic overlords. As a result Nokalakevi has become a potent political symbol of a united, independent Georgia and a backdrop to presidential campaign launches. Known as Tsikhegoji in the Mingrelian dialect, meaning Fortress/ Castle of Kuji, the Byzantine name Archaeopolis (old city) mirrors the literal meaning of the Georgian name, Nokalakevi – ruins where a town was – in suggesting that, even when the Laz and their Byzantine allies fortified the site in the 4th, 5th and 6th centuries AD, the ruins of the Hellenistic period town may have still been visible.
    [Show full text]
  • Archaeological Recording Practices Guidelines for Archaeological Excavation and Recording Techniques
    Archaeological Recording Practices Guidelines for archaeological excavation and recording techniques www.northumberlandnationalpark.org.uk Contents This field training pack aims to support you with archaeological recording processes. These will include: Excavating a Feature 3 Recording Introduction 4 Recording Using Photography 6 Drawing Conventions 9 Drawing Sections 10 Drawing Plans 12 Levelling and Coordinates 14 Recording Cuts 16 Recording Deposits 17 Recording Interpretation 20 General Discussion 22 The Harris Matrix 23 Finds 26 Environmental Samples 27 Human Remains 29 Health and Safety 30 Glossary of Terms 31 2 Gemma Stewart 2013 Excavating a Feature Archaeological excavation is the primary means in which we gather information. It is critical that it is carried out carefully and in a logical manner. The flow chart below has been provided to show the steps required for fully excavating and recording a feature. Identify feature Clean area to find the extent of the feature Consider if pre-excavation photos and plan are required Select appropriate equipment Use nails and string to mark out section for excavation Excavate the feature/deposit carefully removing the latest context first If finds are present bag finds from each context separately Take environmental samples if necessary Remove any loose spoil and tidy feature ready for recording Take out numbers (context, section and plan) Photograph the feature/section Draw the section Draw the plan Measure levels Complete context sheets File paperwork 3 Recording Introduction Excavation results in the destruction of contexts, therefore, a detailed and correct record of the archaeology discovered is required in order to produce and maintain a permanent archive.
    [Show full text]
  • Possibilities for Analysing Stratigraphic Data
    Possibilities for Analysing Stratigraphic Data Possibilities for Analysing Stratigraphic Data Irmela Herzog, Bonn Introduction More than 25 years after the first publication on the principles of archaeological stratigraphy by Edward Harris (Harris, 1975; www:harrismatrix) many archaeologists consider the corresponding methods of excavation, recording and analysis as a matter of course (Renfrew / Bahn 1996, 102; Roskams 2001, 110). Even in Germany, a small Harris matrix can be found on the cover of a new book on methods in archaeology (Eggert 2001). In my view there is no other appropriate way to record and analyse deeply stratified sites in urban areas. This paper presents a new computer program for Harris matrix generation which draws not only on my experiences with my first Harris program created more than ten years ago (Herzog / Scollar 1991; Herzog 1993), but provides new possibilities for data exploration and presentation. My aim is to assist the analysis and display of stratigraphic relationships in datasets of 500 contexts or more. According to the MAP 2 standard established by English Heritage in 1991, for small projects, i.e. ones with less than 500 stratigraphic units, the Harris matrix is created manually (Watson 2000, 152). Personally, even in the case of 200 or 300 contexts, a special program for Harris matrix design is helpful, but with more than 500 stratigraphic units, such a program becomes mandatory, in order to maintain control of the data set. Some of the currently available computer programs for Harris matrix generation are based on a graph editor (Ryan 1995; www:gnet; www:ArchEd), where the user may position the boxes manually.
    [Show full text]
  • Excavation Report
    T H A M E S V A L L E Y ARCHAEOLOGICAL S E R V I C E S Roman occupation on land off Orchard Way, Harwell, Oxfordshire Archaeological Excavation by Pierre-Damien Manisse Site Code: OWH19/62 (SU 4881 8915 ) Roman occupation on land off Orchard Way, Harwell, Oxfordshire An Archaeological Excavation For Heritage Plan by Pierre-Damien Manisse Thames Valley Archaeological Services Ltd Site Code OWH 19/62 November 2019 Summary Site name: Land off Orchard Way, Harwell, Oxfordshire Grid reference: SU 4881 8915 Site activity: Archaeological Excavation Date and duration of project: 15th July to 2nd August 2019 Project coordinator: Tim Dawson Site supervisor: Pierre-Damien Manisse Site code: OWH 19/62 Area of site: 2300 sq. m. Summary of results: A number of cut features (ditch, gullies, pit) were revealed spanning Late Iron Age/Early Roman to Later Roman times. They included a refuse pit, possible well or water hole, parts of enclosures, several parallel gullies that could be traces of land exploitation and two other perpendicular gullies that might have defined a pathway. A cremation unurned but contained within a container of perishable material, such as a casket, had been highly decorated with nails. Location and reference of archive: The archive is presently held at Thames Valley Archaeological Services, Reading and will be deposited at Oxfordshire Museum Service in due course. This report may be copied for bona fide research or planning purposes without the explicit permission of the copyright holder. All TVAS unpublished fieldwork reports are available on our website: www.tvas.co.uk/reports/reports.asp.
    [Show full text]
  • Public Notice
    DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY JACKSONVILLE DISTRICT CORPS OF ENGINEERS ST 2833 NW 41 ST. UNIT 130 GAINESVILLE, FLORIDA 32606 REPLY TO ATTENTION OF June 1, 2018 Regulatory Division West Branch Tampa Permits Section Gainesville Field Office PUBLIC NOTICE Permit Application No. SAJ-2011-02369 (SP-JED) TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: The Jacksonville District of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) has received an application for a Department of the Army permit pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. §1344) and Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. §403) as described below: APPLICANT: Florida Department of Environmental Protection Attn: Marshall W. Flake 3900 Commonwealth Blvd. Tallahassee, FL 32399 WATERWAY AND LOCATION: The project would affect waters of the United States associated with the Gulf of Mexico. The project site is located at the .Honeymoon Island State Park, 1 Causeway Boulevard, in Sections 7, 8, 17, and 18, Township 28 South, Range 15 East, Dunedin, Pinellas County, Florida. Directions to the site are as follows: From the intersection of US-19 and SR-586 (Curlew Rd.) in Pinellas County, proceed west along Curlew to Dunedin Causeway. Follow the causeway to Honeymoon Island State Park. Once inside the park, continue to the south beach parking lot to access the dredge area, or the north beach parking lot to access the fill area. APPROXIMATE CENTRAL COORDINATES: Latitude 28.057553° Longitude -82.825009° PROJECT PURPOSE: Basic: The basic project purpose is shoreline stabilization. Overall: The overall project purpose is dredging to obtain suitable fill material to perform beach and dune renourishment to stabilize the of Honeymoon Island shoreline.
    [Show full text]
  • Mega-Projects Archaeological Investigations Peer Review Report
    WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION MEGA-PROJECTS ARCHAEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS PEER REVIEW REPORT Prepared for: Washington State Department of Transportation Environmental Services Office PO Box 47332 Olympia, WA 98504-7332 Prepared by: SRI Foundation 333 Rio Rancho Drive, Suite 103 Rio Rancho, NM 87124 May 31, 2011 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY In April 2009, the Washington State legislature passed a budget bill containing a proviso statement that the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) conduct an independent peer review of the archaeological investigations associated with four of WSDOT’s “mega-projects.” These projects included the: • Alaskan Way Viaduct and Seawall Replacement Program, Seattle • Interstate 5 Columbia River Crossing, Vancouver • Mukilteo Multimodal Ferry Terminal Project, Mukilteo • SR 520 Program: Bridge Replacement and HOV Project, Seattle This report describes the process used in conducting the archaeological peer review and presents the review’s findings. The objectives of the peer review were twofold: • To determine if the archaeological investigations were done to professional and regulatory standards; and • To assist WSDOT in developing specific practices or methodologies to ensure that the development of archaeological data recovery plans, curation methods, and public benefit/education strategies meet professional and regulatory standards. In addition, the peer review addressed the following three questions for each project: • Was the approach (i.e., methods) used reasonable? • Was the scope
    [Show full text]
  • Dynamic 3D Visualisation of Harris Matrix Data Miroslaw Stawniak, Krzysztof Walczak, Bogdan Bobowski
    Dynamic 3D Visualisation of Harris Matrix Data Miroslaw Stawniak, Krzysztof Walczak, Bogdan Bobowski To cite this version: Miroslaw Stawniak, Krzysztof Walczak, Bogdan Bobowski. Dynamic 3D Visualisation of Harris Ma- trix Data. Virtual Retrospect 2005, Robert Vergnieux, Nov 2005, Biarritz, France. pp.67-72. hal- 01759198 HAL Id: hal-01759198 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01759198 Submitted on 11 Apr 2018 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. Version en ligne Tiré-à-part des Actes du colloque Virtual Retrospect 2005 Biarritz (France) 8, 9 et 10 novembre 2005 Vergnieux R. et Delevoie C., éd. (2006), Actes du Colloque Virtual Retrospect 2005, Archéovision 2, Editions Ausonius, Bordeaux M. Stawniak, K. Walczak, B. Bobowski Dynamic 3D Visualisation of Harris Matrix Data . pp.67-72 Conditions d’utilisation : l’utilisation du contenu de ces pages est limitée à un usage personnel et non commercial. Tout autre utilisation est soumise à une autorisation préalable. Contact : [email protected] http://archeovision.cnrs.fr Dynamic 3D Visualisation of Harris Matrix Data Miroslaw Stawniak, Krzysztof Walczak, Bogdan Bobowski DYNAMIC 3D VISUALISATION OF HARRIS MATRIX DATA Miroslaw Stawniak, Krzysztof Walczak : The Poznan University of Economics Department of Information Technology Mansfelda 4, 60-854 Pozna, Poland [email protected] [email protected] Bogdan Bobowski University of Zielona Góra Institute of History, Department of Archaeology, Ancient and Medieval History al.
    [Show full text]