Back to top: Introductory
The epistemic framework
The epistemic aspect of archaeological field work relates to the way in which data are acquired and defined within a coherent explanatory/categorization system, and are then integrated into a larger frame of reference. We may look at this from three parallel points of view and we will organize the material accordingly.
- Context refers to the way in which data occur physically, in the ground or otherwise.
- Method refers to the type os analysis that is brought to bear on the data.
- System refers to the specific categories used
Here is an overview of the entire framework, which will be discussed in some detail below.
context method system 1 matrix aggregative stratigraphy 2 assemblage structuring typology integrative 3 selected whole restructuring conservation presentation
.
Back to top: Introductory
1. Aggregative analysis of the matrix: Stratigraphy
Matrix. – This refers to the original state when data are being disengaged from the soil which acts, precisely, as the amorpohus matrix in which the "things" are found. photo of small picks in the ground
The data emerge from an amorphous matrix where they have come to rest as the result of multiple cultural and natural forces, and over very long periods of time.
In a few cases, the original state is preserved, and we can see the data in their primary functional aggregation. The most obvious case obtains when several walls are seen to constitute a room or a whole building. Another case is that of objects laying on the same floor level, or contained with a pit. These aggregates may be seen as portions of the otherwise disaggregate universe as it is uncovered by the excavation.
For the most part, the data show no structural relationship to each other – i. e., they do not reflect their original functional setting. Their primary definition is thus tied to their findspot and their association with the other elements with which they are in contact. This process is subsumed under the concept and the practice of stratigraphy.
the four aspects
Back to top: Introductory
2. Structuring of the assemblages: Typology and integrative
Stationary features (such as walls) and movable items (objects and samples) are seen in their identity as individual elements but correlated to other elements of the same kind: they constitute an exhaustive and comprehensive collection for study purposes.
Back to top: Introductory
Typology
| Assemblage. – | photo |
Once excavated, data can be assembled into meaningful wholes according to two distinct criteria.
The first criterion looks at data depending on their intrinsic qualities: we construct typologies on the basis of inner-referential attributes, i. e., attributes that refer exclusively to the data as such, e. g., shape or material for ceramics, iconography for glyptics, paleography or linguistic analysis for texts.
Back to top: Introductory
Integrative
The second criterion looks at the data with a view to integrate them into a broader picture, in terms of a variety of extra-referental attributes: these include comparison with data from other excavated sites; analysis of materials with techniques such as Carbon 14 analysis; confrontation with the broader historical framework as defined by textual data.
Back to top: Introductory
3. Re-structuring of selected wholes: Conservation and presentation
A selection of the stationary elements in the grounds, essentially walls and permanent features such as pavemetns or platforms, is not removed. This is then the selected whole that is preseved for conservation and presentation.
This leads by necessity to a re-structuring of what is preserved. It is in its original setting, it is true, but is mostly in a ruined state, and in any case, without its immediate
Back to top: Introductory
Conservation
Two important factors affect the selection process:
It is for these reasons that archaeological preservation must be inscribed in the excavation strategy, and is therefore part of the grammar. One must indicate the reasons behind the determination as to the disposition of any given element so as to make explicit the nature of the conservation process. | photo of high section |
Back to top: Introductory
Presentation
converse of museums – the photo of the objcts in their setting, e. g. The service wing of AP
Back to top: Introductory
The role of Museums
Museums play a major role in the re-structuring phase: in this case, it is movable items that are singled out and placed on view as individual “selected wholes.” These items are handed over by the archeologist to the curator, and thus our grammar has no direct bearing on the final disposition of these items.
There is, however, an important dimension that our grammar plays, and that is to provide the full details of each and every object brought to the Museum. There is thus no problem of the type Museum face when they must go through their archival records to know about provenance and original context of the objects in their care.
Back to top: Introductory
Theory and its implementation
The theoretical framework I have described is closely reflected in the digital unit books. The two images on the right show how the unit books mirror the theoretical scheme of the Grammar:
In other words, the Grammar sidebar highights the theoretical orientation that governs the system, as explained above. The A16 unit book sidebar is in the section on Overviews within the Synthetic section, and it highlights the orientation one would expect when dealing with the materials from the excavation. |
 
|
 
|
Back to top: Introductory