3.2 Methodology

Emphasis during the assessment has focused on selective scanning of the material rather than in-depth analysis of a larger body of data, with a view to providing accurate estimates of the time needed for the analysis rather than following the analytical track for any aspect through to its conclusion. The highly computerised nature of the record at West Heslerton and the application of G-Sys™ software have facilitated the rapid quantification of the data which would otherwise have taken a great deal longer.

3.2.1 Artefacts

3.2.1.1 Providing a sequence

Although it has not been possible to provide a detailed phased sequence at this stage, one of the assessment objectives was to determine to what extent this would be possible at all. This has necessitated the extensive work on the finds, firstly in order to break them down into groups for the supporting specialists to undertake their part in the assessment process, and secondly to review the Early Anglo-Saxon ceramics against the developing record, gathered in the field during the period of the excavation. The petrological work of Alan Vince has been of particular importance in testing the integrity of the fabric groups identified by visual inspection in the field.

3.2.1.2 Assessment of non-bone finds

The overall finds assemblage from the site amounts to over 100,000 items, excluding the animal bone, of which there are more than half a million fragments, and a large number of environmental samples. The task of re-sorting the non-bone finds from storage by context to an order more suited for extraction for specialists has been considerable, but has enabled aspects such as residuality and contamination to be summarily assessed. The ceramics in particular were examined with reference to additional data fields that would be needed to complete the analysis; detailed processing of a sample to correctly gauge times needed was unnecessary since these could be calculated from similar material being processed as part of another project.

3.2.1.3 Finds submitted to the AML

The worked bone and metalwork were grouped together and assessed as they were extracted for dispatch to the AML for the conservation assessment and as such could not be examined in detail; however, the quality of the record generated in the field and the recent experience of writing up the material from the cemetery meant that little more was necessary to assess adequately the time needed to process this material in the analysis stage.

Other materials were assessed primarily from the record. The assessment has benefited greatly from the fact that one individual, Christine Haughton, has undertaken the finds management and recording work in the field since the start of the project. This has made full integration of much of the finds data into the assessment possible and meant that times required for assessment of much of the material could easily be calculated on the basis of the work undertaken for the publication of the cemetery report and work on other similar assemblages.

Table 3.1 Summary totals of principal object types by material

A summary listing of metal, worked bone and worked stone artefacts is given in Table 3.1 above; the list is not exhaustive and excludes many of the less diagnostic objects for which there is either only a single example in the database or still a question about identification. The material is not further broken down by period; however, mostly it derives from Anglo-Saxon contexts. In the case of the lava the count is of records, the number of pieces being considerably greater. The numbers will increase when material from the flots and any accidentally packed with the animal bone are identified. All counts will also increase by a small percentage when some of the remaining unidentified material is properly studied; the overall ratio is, however, broadly correct.

3.2.2 The context and integrated record

A considerable amount of work was necessary to check through the computerised archive and the many backups created during the excavation period. This ultimately led to a complete rebuild of the context and object databases, and the identification of a block of corrupted object records within the primary and backup disk series; this material will need to be re-recorded as part of the post-excavation process, but representing as it does less than 1% of the object record, will not reduce the validity of the assessment as a whole. A large percentage of the recovered material was given an individual 3D location using initially a Kern™ Electronic Distance Meter and later a Nikon™ total station. Data still, however, had to be manually logged and some effort was needed to identify the degree of human error in transmitting and entering the tag numbers used to link the 3D co-ordinates to the individual finds. Hardware errors, particularly from the Psion™ data loggers used on Site 2, also resulted in a degree of loss. Despite these problems and the fact that in a number of areas less detailed approaches were employed as part of the overall sampling strategy to gather comparative data-sets, some 80% of the material incorporates a 3D co-ordinate, thus facilitating the automation of parts of the assessment and a substantial part of the proposed analysis. Environmental samples were additionally given 3D co-ordinates and when not recorded in the field can be generated using a series of sample key drawings prepared as overlays to the section drawings. From the outset, the spatial nature of the data-set and the potential need for spatial analysis, integrating a variety of data-sets as part of the interpretation, was identified as a major feature of the data collection process. The relatively short life-span of the site and the fact that there are few later intrusions, coupled with the total exposure, if not excavation, of the areas examined, provides the potential for methods to be applied at the post-excavation stage that would not be valid on smaller, more disturbed sites.

Although the application of detailed 3D recording of finds required more detailed recovery and finds management in the field and necessary additional time to open the required bags at the post-excavation stage, this is far outweighed by the benefits at the analytical stage. The excavated contexts rarely required arbitrary sub-divisions to be made simply to assist in defining the location of derived material, ensuring that the context record more accurately relates to the features examined rather than being heavily subdivided and thus generating data processing problems at the analytical stage. This is particularly important with reference to the extensive spreads of material in the western part of the site (see also 2.6.9 Recording systems).

3.2.3 The stratigraphic component and use of Master Contexts

The use of a single unique context sequence as the primary reference for all data, whilst greatly improving data management and the ease of record checking, introduces difficulties in identifying context groups. A number of excavation units have identified this problem and developed an additional level of record through which context groups which might represent a single event or activity sequence can be identified. At West Heslerton these context groups are defined as Master contexts and distinguished in the component records by the incorporation of the context number preceded by an 'M' in the stratigraphic relationship field. The Master context is ultimately a crucial part of the record which will expand as the analysis goes forward to generate the key context groups drawn upon in the interpretation of the site. On a large site, where there is little good vertical stratigraphy, the Master contexts provide a method of grouping together individual stratified sequences in a way that makes it easier to handle the spatial component. As an assessment tool, energies were confined to identifying the Master contexts for each of the 130 Grubenhäuser since these features form a distinctive source of sealed assemblages and, in particular, the source of most of the flotation samples.

Fig. 3.1 Master context matrix for Grubenhaüs 11AA00005

Each Master is represented both by links within the data-structure, which allow comparison between assemblages from each of the Master contexts, and through a graphical representation as a Matrix fragment in which the Context Cuts form representative containers for their Fills. Principal Master contexts were identified in the field; many, however, will have to be generated as part of the analysis, particularly with regard to the extensive midden deposits and surface spreads preserved beneath the headland in the western part of the settlement. The process of checking and cross-referencing the component contexts and associated assemblages will generate a series of key groups from which the development sequence can be defined and supported. On a site with more readily dateable material this process could largely be mechanised; however, the special needs generated by the lack of good dating material makes an integrated and interactive approach necessary. The data-sets recovered are such that for the Master contexts of the major cut features the full assemblage, including the environmental evidence, can be examined together. Clearly the majority of the Master contexts will need to be defined and their integrity checked in order to identify key groups more precisely for detailed analysis. This will initially require a combined approach, using both the context records together with careful examination of the objects, particularly the ceramics.

© Internet Archaeology URL: http://intarch.ac.uk/journal/issue5/westhes/3-2.htm
Last updated: Tue Dec 15 1998