The peer-reviewed journal of the Ontario Archaeological Society
ARTICLE ABSTRACTS
"From Crap to Archaeology:" The CRM Shaping of Nineteenth-Century Domestic Site Archaeology
Neal Ferris
This paper reviews the history of CRM investigations into nineteenth-century Euro-Canadian domestic sites in southern Ontario and considers how that history has shaped the current state of the practice. This history is not a lengthy one: prior to the late 1980s CRM archaeologists could and did regularly ignore nineteenth- century materials. Instrumental in changing attitudes were the research and publications of Ian and Thomas Kenyon, which went a long way towards finding a broader acceptance for this kind of site. But while many nineteenth-century domestic sites are now documented and excavated every year, methods of excavation and analysis can often be by rote, a sort of mimicking of what ìIan would have done,î without considering whys and why-nots. In effect, the potential and value of this important archaeological and social historical site type has been slow to advance beyond initial acceptance of the site type in the 1980s.
Approaches to the Excavation of Plough-Disturbed Early Nineteenth-Century Domestic Sites in Southern Ontario
Dana R. Poulton and Christine F. Dodd
Nineteenth-century homesteads are among the most common sites encountered in archaeological resource assessments in Ontario. Despite that, it is only in the past 25 years that assessments have come to include these sites as a matter of course. In addition, formal standards and guidelines for the assessment and excavation of nineteenth-century domestic sites have only recently been drafted (MCL 2004, 2006). As a result, there has been more variability in the approach to excavating these sites than other types of sites, such as lithic scatters and Iroquoian villages. This article describes the experience of one particular cultural resource management (CRM) firm in the assessment and excavation of plough-disturbed Euro-Canadian domestic sites. The sample comprises five early nineteenth-century sites in southcentral Ontario that collectively span a 35 year period, from circa 1810 to the mid-1840s. The paper examines the relative success of different excavation strategies, from partial Stage 3 test excavation to systematic test excavation and mechanical stripping. It also includes a discussion of the relative merits of Stage 4 block excavation.
Stand by Your Ruin: Strategies for Assessing a Built Environment
Dena Doroszenko
In historical archaeology, there has been an increasing emphasis on the archaeology of the homelot. This concern has fostered an interest in the arrangement of features within the homelot and the ways in which the landscape and buildings were used to define social relations. The nature, scale, and significance of earthmoving activities on domestic sites, urban and non-urban, are often dramatic reflections of changes in the householdóchanges in size, composition, economic and/or social standing, and division of labour. There is a need for an integrated methodology incorporating analytical tools that can provide fine-grained information on earthmoving activities as well as environmental changes. There is a need to understand site use over time from both an archaeological and documentary perspective. There is also a need for a comparative database on the treatment of the homelot in Ontario. The study of land use is best approached from a diachronic perspective, especially given the fact that what remains from the earliest occupation may be difficult to interpret without understanding what happened later. The analysis of landscape treatment should be combined with a quantitative analysis of fully delineated phases of feature construction and refuse deposition that relate to the documentary chronology of household composition. In this manner, the archaeology of domestic spaces can contribute to our understanding of how people in the past consciously altered their immediate surrounding as they sought to establish and maintain order in the larger context of the external world.
For the Record: The What, How and When of Stratigraphy
Henry C. Cary and Joseph H. Last
Ontario archaeologists approach stratigraphy from a number of directions, a situation born from the adoption and adaptation of Canadian, American, and British field techniques. Each method is suitable for certain conditions, but we suggest that stratigraphic excavation must be used to understand site formation. Our technique focuses on the single stratigraphic unit and asks of it three questions: what is its nature? (fill, buried sod, or feature); how did it get there? (primary or secondary deposition); and when was it deposited? (the relationship to other layers and features). Posing these questions during excavation ensures that crucial information is not lost once the site is disturbed and allows the archaeologist to determine the site-wide sequence and phases of development later in the analysis. Detailed stratigraphic recording and analysis is often seen as time consuming, especially in mitigation excavations, but we will introduce methods currently in use at stratigraphically complex military sites in Ontario that effect rapid, thorough, and accurate recording.
Beyond the Mean Ceramic Date: The Interpretive Potential of Historic Ceramics in Cultural Resource Management
Katherine L. Hull
While the mean ceramic date (MCD) is a useful, and often central, application of our ceramic data from historic sites, it does not represent the limit of the ceramic assemblageís interpretive potential. Cultural resource managers are often limited to the MCD because of the constraints placed upon our time (deadlines, backlogs, and planning) and budgets. This paper will suggest that mitigation archaeologists can implement a few tested, effective, and relatively simple analytical tools to amplify the impact of their research and to make an explicit connection between CRM and anthropological archaeology. Specifically, we can attempt to discern and compare social position through an evaluation of the quantity, quality, and variety of ceramic assemblages. Additionally, it is suggested that the often time-consuming process of arriving at a minimum vessel count may be unnecessary as sherd count delivers much of the same information.
Back to the OA main page