| PREVIOUS | CONTENTS | FORWARD |
A common pattern is used for the outline of analytical excavation reports. Each report contains a list of contents, figures and tables, sometimes plates, further a list of abbreviations or a glossary and the acknowledgements. The chapters will vary according to topics but basically they contain the following:
The latter point I feel is important because it offers the reader an insight as to how the single records were transformed to higher levels of interpretation, and how they became statements in this report.
- gives a broad overview of how the chapters are arranged,
explaining the presentation of phasing, dating and chronology.
The main text of the publication of Roman Industry on the island of Southwark consists of chapters written by various specialists for stratigraphy, finds, metal and bone working. The industrial character of the material needed an introduction to contemporary metalworking techniques, such as experimental bronze casting and Roman iron forging, and an introduction of the social environment of Roman crafts.
The report of the Uppermost Geology should be backed up by soil sample analysis; The Stratigraphic Sequence is presented as Sub Phases and Phases of construction, and they divide into sections according to Areas of Land Use. These are described in chronological order across the entire study area. The text of each section refers back to groups. Each sub phase finishes with a Discussion of the development accompanied by two tables, one summarising the groups and their dating evidence, the other drawing together the finds pointing to metal and bone working. Each Phase ends with a detailed Dating Discussion.
The Synthesis takes all analysed data into account including the specialist reports. This discussion is the conclusion of all analytical work done. You will have noticed how many steps there were to be made before the story of a site could unfold. The finds and samples are considered using the same grouping and phasing structure.
Supported by discussions the chronological sequence is reconstructed under specific aspects. The buildings and their settings are discussed, their alignments, comparison of walls and floors, room sizes, the kind of roofing and workshop space. The drains, wells and hearths are specified and in their categories compared over time. The workshop remnants, the finds, the crucible and moulds, the samples and waste disposal, are discussed.
Apart from the archaeological findings it has long been demanded to go further and take also into account economic, social and political circumstances (Cunliffe 1983). Therefore the workshop economy is looked at in a Roman context, considering sources and supply of raw materials with estimates of the metals and fuel used, the scale of production and the potential demand. Finally the social origins of the metal workers, ritual and recreational aspects are set into context with the Londinium scene.
If such wider special, economic and social aspects are taken into account, transparency is very important, giving the reader a chance to follow the argument back step by step, down the grouping ladder, to each single context. But this may not be enough: in order to draw meaningful conclusion it is necessary to look beyond the boundaries of sites and to put them into perspective with comparative sites, in this case in the Roman city. Only such wider considerations will allow interesting conclusions. Such work, however, needs research, further reading, comparison and time for reflection. Sufficient time allocated for the synthesis will make a stark difference to the meaningfulness and therefore the quality of a publication.
It is interesting to note that this point was experienced by many archaeologists and expressed at a conference in York. "Reflexive" trends are tried in Malm, Sweden, where time is allocated for reflection already during excavation (asa.berggren@malmo.se). Perhaps the pendulum is starting to swing the other way, from the timesaving, closely managed and often shallow routine publication of the 1990s towards a more time consuming but profounder, further reaching interpretation?
| RETURN TO TOP |