This page (revision-35) was last changed on 18-Sep-2012 10:42 by Alison Bennett

This page was created on 13-Jun-2012 17:01 by Matthew Stiff

Only authorized users are allowed to rename pages.

Only authorized users are allowed to delete pages.

Page revision history

Version Date Modified Size Author Changes ... Change note
35 18-Sep-2012 10:42 970 bytes Alison Bennett to previous
34 18-Sep-2012 10:31 1 KB Alison Bennett to previous | to last
33 27-Jun-2012 15:04 96 KB Administrator to previous | to last
32 27-Jun-2012 12:53 96 KB Administrator to previous | to last
31 27-Jun-2012 12:32 96 KB Administrator to previous | to last
30 14-Jun-2012 11:27 96 KB Tony Austin to previous | to last
29 14-Jun-2012 11:27 96 KB Tony Austin to previous | to last
28 14-Jun-2012 11:26 96 KB Tony Austin to previous | to last
27 14-Jun-2012 11:25 90 KB Tony Austin to previous | to last
26 14-Jun-2012 10:35 51 KB Tony Austin to previous | to last
25 14-Jun-2012 10:34 51 KB Tony Austin to previous | to last
24 14-Jun-2012 10:19 45 KB Tony Austin to previous | to last
23 14-Jun-2012 09:48 41 KB Tony Austin to previous | to last
22 14-Jun-2012 09:44 36 KB Tony Austin to previous | to last
21 14-Jun-2012 09:38 27 KB Tony Austin to previous | to last

Page References

Incoming links Outgoing links
SectionC...nobody
SectionC

Version management

Difference between version and

At line 314 changed 2 lines
__''Description and Sources''__
__Description__
__''Description and Sources''__\\
__Description__\\
At line 325 added one line
/%
At line 327 added 2 lines
\\
%%panel-box
At line 377 added 67 lines
%%image-caption
''Figure 18: A report showing a monument record in the Essex Heritage Conservation Record. (© Essex County Council 2007).''
/%
!!C.5.4 Indexing monument records
When reading a site report each person will have his or her own idea of what the monuments described within the text are. Most people, if shown a picture of a church, would probably call it a church. What happens if they are shown a picture of a barrow? Is it a tumulus, round barrow, long barrow, mound, burial mound or natural feature?
It is possible that a complex site, investigated on several occasions, has been described using any of the above terms. Consider for example the following fictional site:
''A Bronze Age Round Barrow, excavated by University of Westshire in 1977, Scheduled. First mentioned by the Reverend Herbert James in his book Perambulations about the Parish of Long Stanton. Two amateur excavations were carried out around the turn of the century by local antiquarians. ,Most recently excavated by students from the University of Westshire in 1977.''
The interpretations given by the investigators are as follows:
*1875 Documentary source - Tumulus
*1890 Amateur excavation - Burial Mound
*1910 Amateur excavation - Barrow
*1977 Trial excavation by University of Westshire - Round Barrow
*1978 Scheduled - Round Barrow.
It is essential that when it comes to entering the record on to a database, the information is entered consistently and that the way the information will be retrieved is carefully considered.
!Previous or uncertain interpretations
The example above is an illustration of how terminology changes over the course of time. For many sites the current understanding can be very different from that of earlier times, for example a mound may have been interpreted as a barrow but later evidence may suggest that it is in fact a windmill mound. Often interpretations have a measure of uncertainty, for example a possible Roman road may be suggested from the line of hedge boundaries marked on maps or visible from aerial photographs but the interpretation will be uncertain.
HER officers need to consider how they will index monument records to reflect changing or uncertain site interpretations. The latest interpretation must always be included ROUND BARROW in the example above. Where there are alternative interpretations for the site these should be included in the indexing with some indication of their uncertainty, for example ROUND BARROW (?) or MOUND (?). Past interpretations of the site may also be indexed, although an indication of the limited confidence that can be placed on this interpretation must be included, for example ROAD (?) or LINEAR FEATURE.
The monument record's descriptive text should include a discussion of the site's interpretation, past and present, which reflects any changes in thinking and uncertainties of understanding.
!Changes in form and function
The function of a monument can change significantly over time. A church was given above as an,example of a type of monument that is easy to recognise. However, through time many churches have been added to, altered, used.by different denominations or even converted for other uses, for example into houses. Many other buildings have undergone similar changes in use. When recording buildings it may be necessary to index both the form of the building and its later functions. Consider this example:
''The church of St Peter and St Paul is a medieval church with later additions and alterations. The earliest part of the church is the nave and the aisle, which dates to c.1120. The west bays of the nave and the west front of the church date to c. 1300. The Lady Chapel and undercroft were added to the church in the first quarter of the 14th Century and the west tower in 1662. The main body of the church was restored 1859-60 by Fothergill Watson. At this time the church was reroofed and the east window, with stained glass by A W N Pugin, was installed. The Lady Chapel was restored 1876.''
''Within the church is a 14th-century wall painting of the Last Judgement. There are also memorial brasses of 1560 and 1586, an alabaster table tomb by the Nottingham School dating to 1459 and a wall monument to the Williams family dating to 1815. The church contains the remains of the Norman Choir dating to the first half of the 12th century.''
The church would normally be recorded on a single monument record. Panel 8 shows how the following monument type and phases of use might be indexed:
\\
%%panel-box
!Panel 8: Example of type and phase monument recording
|__MONUMENT TYPE__|__FROM__|__TO__|__DESCRIPTIVE DATE__|__EVIDENCE__
|Church|1100|1140|''c''1120|Documentary
|Church|1280|1320|''c''1300|Documentary
|Church|1859|1860|Restored 1859-60|Documentary
|Lady Chapel|1300|1324|early 14th century|Building
|Lady Chapel|1876|1876|Restored 1876|Documentary
|Tower|1662|1662| |Building
/%
With buildings, HER managers are recommended to index the separate phases of building, re-building and restoration within a single monument record. In the example given above, evidence for the phases in which the church and chapel were built is available from both documentary sources and in the fabric of the building itself. This approach improves information retrieval, as it is possible to distinguish, for example, medieval churches that were restored in the Victorian period from those which survive in their original form. Detailed phase indexing within the same monument record should not affect the ability to count the total numbers of a given monument type in an area. This is because the total number of records will be counted not the number of uses of an index term.
Panel 9 shows how in addition to the monument type and date indexing the following attributes might also be indexed:
\\
%%panel-box
!Panel 9: Example of additional attributes for monument recording
|OBJECT TYPE|FROM|TO|OBJECT MATERIAL
|Commemorative Brass|1560|1560|Brass
|Commemorative Brass|1586|1586|Brass
|Table Tomb|1459|1459|Stone
|Plaque|1815|1815|
|HISTORICAL PERSON|ROLE|FROM|TO
|Fothergill Watson|Architect|1859|1860
|A W N Pugin|Architect|1859|1860
/%
This page (revision-35) was last changed on 18-Sep-2012 10:42 by Alison BennettTop