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 13 changed one line
!!!C.1 Data dictionaries and recording-practice guidelines
!!!C.1 Data dictionaries and recording-practice guidelines
At line 22 changed one line
!!C.1.1 Keeping the recording-practice guidelines up to date
!!C.1.1 Keeping the recording-practice guidelines up to date
At line 25 changed one line
!!C.1.2 Quality assurance procedures
!!C.1.2 Quality assurance procedures
At line 28 changed one line
!!!C.2 Modelling the past on HERs
!!!C.2 Modelling the past on HERs
At line 38 changed one line
!!C.2.2 Current models
!!C.2.2 Current models
At line 46 changed one line
[{Image src='fig10.gif' alt='Figure 10: The event-monument-source data model.'}]
[{Image src='fig10.gif' alt='Figure 10: The event-monument-source data model.'}]
At line 88 changed one line
[{Image src='fig11.jpg' alt='Figure 11: Throckmorton known archaeological sites prior to the 2001 foot and mouth epidemic'}]
[{Image src='fig11.jpg' alt='Figure 11: Throckmorton known archaeological sites prior to the 2001 foot and mouth epidemic'}]
At line 94 changed one line
An archaeological assessment by the Curator, taking all available evidence into account, suggested that the site had a high likelihood of producing deposits of Prehistoric to Medieval date, with a focus of settlement lying directly under the airfield. It was decided that the potential of the site was such that a formal programme of recording was required during groundworks. This took place in three stages (Figure 13):
An archaeological assessment by the Curator, taking all available evidence into account, suggested that the site had a high likelihood of producing deposits of Prehistoric to Medieval date, with a focus of settlement lying directly under the airfield. It was decided that the potential of the site was such that a formal programme of recording was required during groundworks. This took place in three stages (Figure 13):
At line 98 changed one line
[{Image src='fig12.jpg' alt='Figure 12: Placename evidence from 1774 Throckmorton Enclosure map.'}]
[{Image src='fig12.jpg' alt='Figure 12: Placename evidence from 1774 Throckmorton Enclosure map.'}]
At line 103 changed one line
[{Image src='fig13.jpg' alt='Figure 13: Throckmorton events undertaken as part of foot and mouth mitigation.'}]
[{Image src='fig13.jpg' alt='Figure 13: Throckmorton events undertaken as part of foot and mouth mitigation.'}]
At line 119 changed one line
!!!C.4 Monuments
!!!C.4 Monuments
At line 129 changed one line
HER officers need to decide to what extent the data will be 'lumped' together or 'split'. Will every single post-hole, pit and linear feature be recorded and cross-referenced to a main site record? Or will all features of all periods on a site or a plot of land be recorded on a single record? Some wreck and aircraft sites will be in a number of pieces and may have debris associated with them.
HER officers need to decide to what extent the data will be 'lumped' together or 'split'. Will every single post-hole, pit and linear feature be recorded and cross-referenced to a main site record? Or will all features of all periods on a site or a plot of land be recorded on a single record? Some wreck and aircraft sites will be in a number of pieces and may have debris associated with them.
At line 140 changed one line
This approach is based on the need to present information about the phases of activity on a site. One or more records will be created for each parcel of land or sea according to the information available about each distinct structure or phase of activity.
This approach is based on the need to present information about the phases of activity on a site. One or more records will be created for each parcel of land or sea according to the information available about each distinct structure or phase of activity.
At line 156 changed 2 lines
!!C.4.2 Levels of interpretation: elements, monuments and landscapes
HER officers need to consider the degree to which information has been interpreted in the records that are being created. Maritime records and landscapes should be recorded to the same level of detail as terrestrial records.
!!C.4.2 Levels of interpretation: elements, monuments and landscapes
HER officers need to consider the degree to which information has been interpreted in the records that are being created. Maritime records and landscapes should be recorded to the same level of detail as terrestrial records.
At line 170 changed one line
!!C.4.3 Relationships between records
!!C.4.3 Relationships between records
At line 178 changed one line
[{Image src='fig14.gif' alt='Figure 14: Relationships between monument records.'}]
[{Image src='fig14.gif' alt='Figure 14: Relationships between monument records.'}]
At line 186 changed one line
!!C.4.4 Artefacts and ecofacts
!!C.4.4 Artefacts and ecofacts
At line 189 changed one line
Some HERs have records of the locations at which thousands of archaeological objects were found and others, especially those in museums, record additional information describing the character of individual objects. Because of the way many HERs have developed primarily as development control tools the funding has not been available to record artefacts or environmental information in a way which allows consistent searching across the record. Most HERs contain records of find spots and find scatters in their areas and an interesting object found by itself in a field may be recorded separately. However, the position is less clear-cut when recording artefacts and ecofacts from archaeological excavations as a similar object found during an excavation may not even be indexed within the site record. Excavations can produce thousands of items and HER officers face the dilemma of deciding how this material should be entered into the HER database.
Some HERs have records of the locations at which thousands of archaeological objects were found and others, especially those in museums, record additional information describing the character of individual objects. Because of the way many HERs have developed primarily as development control tools the funding has not been available to record artefacts or environmental information in a way which allows consistent searching across the record. Most HERs contain records of find spots and find scatters in their areas and an interesting object found by itself in a field may be recorded separately. However, the position is less clear-cut when recording artefacts and ecofacts from archaeological excavations as a similar object found during an excavation may not even be indexed within the site record. Excavations can produce thousands of items and HER officers face the dilemma of deciding how this material should be entered into the HER database.
At line 191 changed one line
The push from government and the archaeological community to develop HERs as research and educational tools has emphasised the need for HERs to reconsider the recording of archaeological objects and environmental data in their records. The outputs of the Portable Antiquities Scheme has also prompted many HERs to reconsider how they record archaeological objects.
The push from government and the archaeological community to develop HERs as research and educational tools has emphasised the need for HERs to reconsider the recording of archaeological objects and environmental data in their records. The outputs of the Portable Antiquities Scheme has also prompted many HERs to reconsider how they record archaeological objects.
At line 193 changed one line
In the vast majority of cases it will be impractical for HERs to attempt to record every single artefact or ecofact but a consistent approach can be achieved by remembering that the HER is only an index to information. Finds and environmental indices can be created which allow rapid, consistent recording of groups of artefacts and ecofacts by broad type with additional information such as the existence of specialist reports. At present working parties sponsored by English Heritage are developing systems and thesaurii for recording finds and environmental material within HERs. In addition EH and ALGAO are working with the Portable Antiquities Scheme to ensure the transfer of information reported by metal detectorists into HERs.
In the vast majority of cases it will be impractical for HERs to attempt to record every single artefact or ecofact but a consistent approach can be achieved by remembering that the HER is only an index to information. Finds and environmental indices can be created which allow rapid, consistent recording of groups of artefacts and ecofacts by broad type with additional information such as the existence of specialist reports. At present working parties sponsored by English Heritage are developing systems and thesaurii for recording finds and environmental material within HERs. In addition EH and ALGAO are working with the Portable Antiquities Scheme to ensure the transfer of information reported by metal detectorists into HERs.
At line 196 changed one line
*The HER's collecting policy should clearly state the approach an HER has adopted for recording environmental data, objects, find spots and find scatters.
*The HER's collecting policy should clearly state the approach an HER has adopted for recording environmental data, objects, find spots and find scatters.
At line 203 changed one line
!!!C.5 Monument records
!!!C.5 Monument records
At line 207 changed one line
Monument records may have originated as records in a card-index system, which were recast as computer records on flat file databases and subsequently migrated to one of the new generation of relational databases. HER numbers generally provide a link between a computer record and paper files, photographs and record maps. However, numbering systems designed for card indexes and record maps may be less suitable for relational databases. For example, the system designed by the OS was based on a 1:10,000 sheet map reference followed by a running number. Numbers were manually allocated and duplicate numbers were sometimes created by mistake. As computer systems require each record to have a unique reference number, migration often means that monument records retain an HER number from an earlier system and also have a unique ID number automatically generated by the system.
Monument records may have originated as records in a card-index system, which were recast as computer records on flat file databases and subsequently migrated to one of the new generation of relational databases. HER numbers generally provide a link between a computer record and paper files, photographs and record maps. However, numbering systems designed for card indexes and record maps may be less suitable for relational databases. For example, the system designed by the OS was based on a 1:10,000 sheet map reference followed by a running number. Numbers were manually allocated and duplicate numbers were sometimes created by mistake. As computer systems require each record to have a unique reference number, migration often means that monument records retain an HER number from an earlier system and also have a unique ID number automatically generated by the system.
At line 213 changed one line
!!C.5.2 Core data for monument records
!!C.5.2 Core data for monument records
At line 236 changed one line
[{Image src='fig15.jpg' alt='Figure 15: The monument record for the chapter house at Waltham Abbey displayed in exeGesIS SDM Ltd's HBSMR software.'}]
[{Image src='fig15.jpg' alt='Figure 15: The monument record for the chapter house at Waltham Abbey displayed in exeGesIS SDM Ltd's HBSMR software.'}]
At line 248 changed one line
[{Image src='fig16.jpg' alt='Figure 16: Indexing monument records using the Thesaurus of Monument Types and other terminology lists in exeGesiS SDM Ltd's HBSMR software.'}]
[{Image src='fig16.jpg' alt='Figure 16: Indexing monument records using the Thesaurus of Monument Types and other terminology lists in exeGesiS SDM Ltd's HBSMR software.'}]
At line 267 changed one line
[{Image src='fig17.jpg' alt='Figure 17: Creating links between a monument record and associated people and events in exeGesiS SDM Ltd's HBSMR software.'}]
[{Image src='fig17.jpg' alt='Figure 17: Creating links between a monument record and associated people and events in exeGesiS SDM Ltd's HBSMR software.'}]
At line 316 changed one line
Chapter House excavated prior to guardianship and display. Shown to be a two-period structure, rectangular in plan in both phases with 5 pairs of buttresses on internal and external faces. The 2nd structure has been identified with the work of Henry II (1180-1220). 10 conventional burials and 1 heart burial were discovered. The pre-chapter house remains comprised chalk footings, associated timber features and a large ditch with domestic material. <2> Human remains found in coffins of chapter house. Finds also included a stone head and other fragments from a statue, possibly early 14th century and 4 or 5 leather shoes or boots pre-1200 in date. <3> Part of a tiled floor also found. <4> Prior to excavation one wall of the original north wall of the chapter house was standing and had been reused in the later, post medieval Denny mansion house. <5> Other ref: <1> <6>
Chapter House excavated prior to guardianship and display. Shown to be a two-period structure, rectangular in plan in both phases with 5 pairs of buttresses on internal and external faces. The 2nd structure has been identified with the work of Henry II (1180-1220). 10 conventional burials and 1 heart burial were discovered. The pre-chapter house remains comprised chalk footings, associated timber features and a large ditch with domestic material. <2> Human remains found in coffins of chapter house. Finds also included a stone head and other fragments from a statue, possibly early 14th century and 4 or 5 leather shoes or boots pre-1200 in date. <3> Part of a tiled floor also found. <4> Prior to excavation one wall of the original north wall of the chapter house was standing and had been reused in the later, post medieval Denny mansion house. <5> Other ref: <1> <6>
At line 331 changed one line
__SMR Number__ 80 - MEX607 __Site Name__ Waltham Abbey - Chapter House
__SMR Number__ 80 - MEX607 __Site Name__ Waltham Abbey - Chapter House
At line 377 changed 2 lines
%%image-caption
''Figure 18: A report showing a monument record in the Essex Heritage Conservation Record. (© Essex County Council 2007).''
%%image-caption
''Figure 18: A report showing a monument record in the Essex Heritage Conservation Record. (© Essex County Council 2007).''
At line 381 changed 2 lines
!!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?
!!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?
At line 384 changed one line
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:
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:
At line 386 changed one line
''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.''
''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.''
At line 398 changed one line
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.
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.
At line 400 changed one line
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.
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.
At line 405 changed one line
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 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:
At line 407 changed one line
''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.''
''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.''
At line 409 changed one line
''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.''
''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.''
At line 411 changed one line
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:
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:
At line 426 changed one line
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.
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.
At line 444 added 275 lines
!!!C.6 Events
MIDAS defines a diverse range of activities as events, all involving the collection of information or judgements about the monuments at a particular location. ALGAO has agreed a more precise definition of events as being 'A single episode of primary data collection over a discrete area of land. This event can only consist of one investigative technique and is a unique entity in time and space' (Bourn 1999).
All events have the following unique characteristics:
*__They involve some form of activity or work__: Under the ALGAO definition this involves collection of primary data in the field. This includes activities aimed at yielding either positive or negative archaeological results and that collect data about artefacts, ecofacts, features or landscapes as a by-product. In addition to these activities the MIDAS definition includes activities involving the interpretation of primary data and those involving management or interpretation of the site.
*__An activity is undertaken in relation to a defined geographic area__: For example, the area of an excavation trench or survey, the area covered by an aerial photo or a series of evaluation trenches.
*__An activity is undertaken at a fixed moment in time__: All events are unique and once completed their exact circumstances can never be repeated. However, although the date of modern events is normally known, the precise date of historical events can be more difficult to identify.
*__An activity is undertaken by a person or organisation__: All events are carried out by specific individuals who bring to the activity their personal skills and experience. Again, although identifying the individuals responsible for organising a modern event is normally easy, this is not the case with past events.
When creating event records HER managers should bear in mind the following points:
__Negative events__: Some archaeological surveys, evaluation and other investigations take place but find no evidence for human activity (referred to as negative evidence). However, information about the methods and techniques used and the circumstances in which these events occurred is valuable to archaeologists planning subsequent events on the same or adjacent sites. Therefore, it is recommended practice to create event records whether or not the event produces evidence for human activity on the site. For example, a watching brief that produces no results should be recorded as an event, as would a watching brief in which archaeological deposits are observed. Negative events are equally as important in evaluating the archaeological resource as events that find traces of human activity and both should be recorded with the same rigour.
__Events carried out for purposes other than archaeological or architectural investigation__: Events such as aerial surveys or geotechnical test pits are often carried out for purposes other than archaeological investigation. However, such activities can also produce useful information: for example aerial photographs taken for map-making reveal crop-marks and earthworks, cores taken for geological purposes contain palaeobotanical remains and sediments. Events which produce results that are useful to archaeological or historical investigations are worth recording.
__Projects__: A project may involve different techniques of survey or excavation carried out at different times, by different people/organisations on different pieces of land. For example, a programme of research into a hill fort and its hinterland, such as at Danebury, may span a period of years and involve several excavation seasons, geophysical and aerial surveys and programmes of field-walking, As each of these activities is carried out at a distinct time and place and by a particular organisation, a series of related event records should be created and possibly linked together as a project.
!Interpretation of primary data
Much research involves interpretation of primary data collected during one or more events. For example, aerial-photographic interpretation, desk-based assessments and documentary research all involve examination of primary data and produce secondary sources such as plans and reports. Source records should be created in HER databases (see C.8) for any air-photo transcriptions, plans or reports that are produced as a result of this research. These source records may then be linked to any associated monument records thus enabling the materials to be retrieved for future reference and further research.
As well as creating a source record, it is also useful to record information about the act of interpretation itself. Details about the person or organisation that carried out the work, when and in what circumstances, are of value in assessing the validity of the interpretation in future. Although activities involving the interpretation of data (whether primary or secondary) do not fall within the ALGAO definition of an event, they are included in the MIDAS definition. HER managers may wish to record 'Interpretation events' in their databases but alternatively might incorporate a description of how the source was created in the text of the source record.
!!!C.7 Event records
This section of the manual will look at the information recorded in event records in more detail.
!!C.7.1 A constant feature of HER databases
Once an event has taken place it cannot be repeated and in the same way, once an event record has been created on an HER database it should not need to be changed. Events are simply factual records of who did some work, when, where and how. However, it may be necessary to add information at a later date about the location of finds, archives or digital data produced during the event.
!!C.7.2 Core data standards for events
The minimum information recommended for event records is:
*__PRN__: a number that uniquely identifies the event record in the HER
*__Name__: a descriptive name by which the event may be identified
*__Event type__: the type of work carried out during the event, for example geophysical survey
*__Grid reference__: an OS grid co-ordinate locating the event
*__Administrative Unit__: the administrative area in which the event falls, for example county/district/parish
*__Organisation__: the body responsible for undertaking work on site
*__Person__: people responsible for undertaking work on site
*__Date__: the date range when the event took place.
!!C.7.3 OASIS (On-line AccesS to the Index of archaeological investigationS)
The core data standards for events as outlined in C.7.2 form the backbone of an OASIS record. (see also C.8.1)
!Background
The OASIS project aims to provide access to the large and growing body of archaeological grey literature and to make it available to researchers and teachers. OASIS is a collaborative venture between the Archaeology Data Service (ADS), the English Heritage National Monuments Record (NMRE), and the Archaeological Investigations Project (AIP).
From the early 1990s, English Heritage funded an annual data collection exercise to compile an index of archaeological investigations across England. The results have been published as annual hard copy volumes, ''The Gazetteer of Archaeological Investigations in England'', issued as supplements to the ''British and Irish Archaeological Bibliography''. An archive copy of the database which provides the information for the printed volumes published to date has been deposited with the English Heritage NMR. Since 1978 the NMR has also compiled a separate database of archaeological interventions, ''The Excavation Index''. By 1998 this held records for over 55,000 archaeological interventions in England. Data was collected from a variety of sources, combining bibliographic recording with direct supply in the form of reports, proformas and microfilm deposited with the NMR. The scope of the Index covers both invasive and non-invasive methods of fieldwork. holding basic data on the location and results of fieldwork. From September 1998 selected fields from the Index have been available on the Internet via the ADS on-line catalogue ArchSearch ([http://archaeologydataservice.ac.uk/archsearch/|http://archaeologydataservice.ac.uk/archsearch/]), together with the related Microfilm Index.
The OASIS project was developed in response to the need to provide a single unified index to archaeological investigations, a means of accessing the associated grey literature and an online method by which the index could be maintained. A major achievement of the project was to integrate the AIP records with the Excavation Index to provide a single concorded list. The concordance programme delivered a fully unified record for archaeological interventions in England to 1998. Where a fuller electronic copy of a report is available on-line, either on the ADS server or on the web site of the contractor or HER it is possible to include the URL of the resource as a bibliographic reference. As curators begin to require deposition of digital reports and as they make them available on the Internet it will be possible to build up an online virtual library of grey literature, directly linked from the index.
OASIS also aims to use IT to ease the flow of information from those undertaking fieldwork to the wider archaeological community, while ensuring that validation and quality assurance are not lost. The current situation involves tremendous duplication of effort. OASIS aims to capture the data once, hold it in a database, and then to allow all those parties who have a legitimate interest in it to access it. An on-line web-based Data Submission Form has been created, which is being used to inform the relevant monument records of the completion of specific field or post-excavation tasks, such as the deposition of ‘grey literature’ reports or of archives. The report can be completed on-line to provide details of all aspects of the intervention required by the local planning authority. Once the form has been completed to the satisfaction of the contractor it is saved within the OASIS database. HERs are allowed access to the same database to participate in checking and enhancing the records on-line. It is recognised that the diversity of local practices will mean that the information flow may vary according to region and the OASIS form and database holdings module is flexible enough to accommodate the various roles required by the different organisations involved. At periodic intervals a copy of all new validated Excavation Index records will be supplied to the ADS and made available on-line via ArchSearch.
A full Scottish version has now been developed and was launched in October 2006.
!HER use of the OASIS form
An Historic Environment Record (HER) will see a list of all of the projects in their area when they log on to OASIS. The status column will tell them whether the project is ready to be validated by the HER or is still undergoing completion by the archaeological unit. In the screen shot below all the fully completed OASIS projects are hidden from view to avoid cluttering up the list. The HER can view all the data in the new project and amend and add to it as necessary. They may want to allocate an HER event number to the project in the project details section of the form for example. Once they have viewed the data they can validate it by ticking a box at the bottom of each section of the OASIS form. Once the HER has fully validated a record, an e-mail will be sent to the relevant HER informing them that the OASIS record is ready to be checked by them.
%%image-caption
[{Image src='fig19.jpg' alt='Figure 19: Example of a project summary page from the OASIS form.'}]
''Figure 19: Example of a project summary page from the OASIS form (© Archaeology Data Service 2003).''
/%
After validation an HER may sign off the record and download the project data as XML. For more detailed instructions about how to use the OASIS form go to [http://oasis.ac.uk/|http://oasis.ac.uk/] or request manual from the NMR.
HERs can promote the use of the OASIS recording form by contractors by making it a requirement in development control briefs or requesting a copy of the OASIS summary sheet within their grey literature reports. Example wording for use within a brief can be found below.
At the start of work (immediately before fieldwork commences) an OASIS online record [http://oasis.ac.uk/|http://oasis.ac.uk/] must be initiated and key fields completed on Details, Location and Creators forms.
All parts of the OASIS online form must be completed for submission to the HER. This should include an uploaded .pdf version of the entire report (a paper copy should also be included with the archive).
(See also Section B)
!!C.7.4 A typical event record
Figure 20 shows how an event may be recorded in an HER database (in this case exeGesIS SDM Ltd’s HBSMR software).
%%image-caption
[{Image src='fig20.jpg' alt='Figure 20: How an event may be recorded in an HER database.'}]
''Figure 20: How an event may be recorded in an HER database (Essex County Council and exeGeSIS SDM Ltd 2007).''
/%
!!!C.8 Sources
The term 'sources' covers various materials that provide information about the monuments in a locality. They include: documentary archives, maps, plans, antiquarian books, photographs, drawings, airphoto interpretation plots, publications, reports, journal articles, digital data and geophysical survey data.
It should be noted that these sources may, in turn, now be available in variety of formats: hard-copy, online, or a combination of the two.
!!C.8.1 Online sources
Key Internet information sources for HERs at time of writing can be located via the following websites.
!HEIRNET
The __HEIRNET__ - the Historic Environment Information Resources NETwork – enables access to Historic Environment Information Resources (HEIRs) for conservation, research, learning and general interest, and promotes HEIRs, informing information managers about new developments in IT and offering them technical advice. It can be accessed via the following links:
*HEIRNET at: [http://www.britarch.ac.uk/heirnet/|http://www.britarch.ac.uk/heirnet/],
*HEIRNET Register: [http://ads.ahds.ac.uk/heirnet/index.cfm|http://ads.ahds.ac.uk/heirnet/index.cfm] search the Register for details of Historic Environment Information Resources held by organisations across the UK. The register contains details of organisations holding information about archaeological sites, monuments, historic buildings and finds.
*HEIRPORT: [http://ads.ahds.ac.uk/heirport/|http://ads.ahds.ac.uk/heirport/] search the Historic Environment Portal, resources available include the ADS, the Royal Commission on the Ancient and Historic Monuments of Scotland, Scottish Cultural Resources Access Network and the Portable Antiquities Scheme.\\
Technical advice: [http://www.britarch.ac.uk/HEIRNET/techadvice.html|http://www.britarch.ac.uk/HEIRNET/techadvice.html]
!The OASIS Project – Online Access to the Index of Archaeological Investigations
The OASIS Project is being developed to provide an online index to archaeological grey literature that has been produced as a result of large-scale developer funded fieldwork (see also C 7.3). The OASIS data capture form has been designed to help in the flow of information from data producers, such as contracting units, through to local and national data managers, such as HERs/HERs and NMRs. The resulting information will be validated by the relevant NMR and passed onto the ADS for inclusion in its online catalogue. OASIS can be found at: [http://oasis.ac.uk/|http://oasis.ac.uk/]
!biab online – the British & Irish archaeological bibliography
The biab online database contains datasets covering publications from AD 1695 to the present day on archaeology and the historic environment, historic buildings, maritime and industrial archaeology, environmental history, and the conservation of material culture - with a geographical focus on Britain and Ireland. It contains collection, unit and item level references and is developing an HER-compatible download function which will enable direct import into HERs. The service will also provide links to online documents and publisher websites plus tables of contents for key journals. It is also planned that the bibliography and the Archaeological Investigations Project (and OASIS) data will be able to be queried from a single interface. biab online, the British & Irish archaeological bibliography can be found at: [http://www.biab.ac.uk|http://www.biab.ac.uk]
!The Council for British Archaeology (CBA)
The Council for British Archaeology’s website provides information and links to: Defence of Britain project database; Database of Radiocarbon Dates; Training Online Resource Centre (TORC); and the forthcoming Online Guide to Archaeological Research (OGAR) at: [http://www.britarch.ac.uk|http://www.britarch.ac.uk]
!The Archaeology Data Service (ADS)
The ADS hosts many of the above services as part of its remit to facilitate the long term preservation of a broad range of digital datasets. The ADS’s on-line ArchSearch facility is a valuable resource for HERs in cross-checking and identifying missing resources/sites (see section F8.3 for a description of ArchSearch). Links to this resource can be found on the ADS site at: [http://archaeologydataservice.ac.uk/|http://archaeologydataservice.ac.uk/]
!Use of online & digital sources
External digital data can be used as a source in either of the following ways:
#A copy can be incorporated into the HER, treated as a backlog for Monument or Event record construction.
#Alternatively, they can be treated as a source, with a reference to the specific data via the UID of the external dataset, for example.
Which option to choose depends on how searchable that reference needs to be. So for example a general reference to a dataset on Roman sites in Britain (say a British Archaeological Reports – BAR – gazetteer) could be treated as a source attached to existing monument records in the HER. However, if the HER wanted to use the BAR in more detail it might be necessary to actually import the data.
Whatever the format, when creating source records, the issues discussed below should be considered.
!!C.8.2 Distinguishing sources and events
By their nature, sources contain information describing both events and monuments. As described above there are different kinds of sources. There are the primary data and archive collected during an event, for example the finds, photographs, digital-survey data and samples. Then there are interpretative accounts of the features observed during the event, such as the excavation report, maps and plans. Although an excavation report provides a source of information describing the event itself, the report should be recorded in the HER database as a source and considered as the product of the event.
This is equally true of historical documents, maps, drawings and photographs. Although these were produced following an event such as a land survey, often little information is available about that event and the documents may provide the only surviving record that it took place. HER officers are recommended to create source records to enable users to retrieve the original documents from the County Records Office, local museum or other repositories. However, there may be occasions when HER officers may consider that there is insufficient additional information available to create an event record from such historical documents.
!!C.8.3 Interpreting monuments from sources
Most HER databases include some monument records which are based on information obtained from historical documents: for example antiquarian books may refer to monuments or features that are no longer visible, or place names recorded on maps suggest the presence of monuments in past landscapes. The problem is that limited information is available about the event to help to assess the reliability of the source and the interpretation given. Monument records that are derived simply from a historical document will have a measure of unreliability because it is difficult to validate the information.
!!C.8.4 Verbal reports
Most sources have a physical form. They are objects that need to be stored on shelves or in cabinets and drawers and to be cared for as important parts of the HER's collections. However, another important source of information for HERs comes in the form of verbal reports. For example, a member of the public may visit the HER and report the location where an object was found. Normally the HER officer will make notes based on the conversation and these will be held in supplementary files and referenced to any record that is made in the HER database. It is not recommended practice to record the information directly into the database without also making notes of the conversation on paper to go on file. Clearly, this information is difficult or even impossible to validate, and the reliability of the locations reported can vary dramatically, particularly if the reporting takes place some time after the object was found.
!!!C.9 Level at which sources will be catalogued
As described above, sources comprise materials of all shapes and sizes, plus digital versions available through online sources. Books, photographs, maps and documents are probably those most frequently used by HERS. It is important, therefore, to examine at what level cataloguing will take place.
Consider a journal series published by a learned society, for example Antiquity. This series might be catalogued by the HER on three levels:
#the collection level, that is, a single source record could be created for all volumes in the series
#the unit level, that is, source records might be created for each individual volume
#the item level, that is, source records might be created for every article within each journal of the series.
Cataloguing at the collection level provides a useful first step. Such a source record will help HER managers to record details about the collection, the originator, the materials/items included and any copyright or other issues to be considered.
However, as a general rule of thumb, it is probably most practical for HERs to catalogue their collections at the unit level. It is useful for each book, box of photographs or set of papers to have a single source record which contains information about the place where that unit is stored and other details that help to manage the HER's collections.
Cataloguing at the item level may be appropriate in some circumstances. For example, HER managers may decide to create source records for particularly useful articles in a journal without recording all the other articles at this level. Cataloguing at item level can be a significant overhead and HER managers might prefer to number the items uniquely within a unit (for example the photographs in a box) and create a single source record containing a list of the items and their identifying numbers.
Consider, for example, a set of photographs from a single roll of film taken by J K S St Joseph during a flight on 3rd July 1979. Each image on the roll of film will have a unique negative number and the film and negative number may be used to identify each photographic print from the film. HER managers might decide to create two source records. One source record will be for the roll of film, containing details of its storage location and the type and format of the film. A separate source record might be created for the set of prints, giving details of the print numbers and their storage location, which will normally be different to that of the film for collections management reasons. At a later date, separate source records might be created for each individual print, perhaps if the prints were scanned or if the subject content of the photographs were to be described in detail.
As described in section C.8.1 many datasets are now available online and are able to be downloaded into the HER if necessary.
!!!C.10 Source records
This section of the. manual will look at the information recorded in source records in more detail.
!!C.10.1 Core data standards for sources
The minimum information recommended for source records is:
*__PRN__: a number that uniquely identifies the source record in the HER
*__Title__: a descriptive name by which the source may be identified
*__Archive type__: an index to the type of source material, for example bibliographic, photograph
*__Originator__: the body or person responsible for originating the material, for example the author
*__Date__: the date when the source was produced
*__Repository__: index to organisations holding original archives or copies of secondary sources
*__External reference__: the reference number by which the source can be identified in the repository.
!!C.10.2 A typical source record
Figure 21 shows how a bibliographical source may be recorded in an HER database. Neolithic Settlement of the Thames Basin (Holgate 1988) is a BAR report and is typical of many publications that form part of a larger series.
*__Computer-generated number__: RC 103954, uniquely identifies the source record.
*__Title of the volume__: Neolithic settlement of the Thames Basin recorded in the title field and the BAR number recorded in the Part No. field allow the volume to be identified both in the HER's library and on listings.
*__References__: can be used to record any numbers identifying the volume used by external bodies, in this case the ISBN number has been recorded. This is useful because it helps users to identify the volume in other libraries.
*__Monuments__: links have been created to monument records referenced in this source. The Specific Reference field allows the pages within the report which refer to a particular monument to be recorded.
%%image-caption
[{Image src='fig21.gif' alt='Figure 21: A typical source recorded in exeGesIS SDM Ltd’s HBSMR software.'}]
''Figure 21: A typical source recorded in exeGesIS SDM Ltd’s HBSMR software (Essex County Council and exeGeSIS SDM Ltd 2007).''
/%
!!!C.11 Consultations and planning casework
One of the primary roles of local-authority archaeological and historic buildings services is to provide advice on the implications of development and land-use change to local planning authorities and to other organisations and individuals. For many services, planning applications form the largest element of their conservation workload. However, consultations also include those relating to tree planting, hedgerow removal, agri-environmental schemes and the activities of statutory undertakers.
Given the importance of this advisory service, and its relevance to monuments, the built heritage and to areas of land, it is important that details are accurately recorded and linked to the HER databases.
!!C.11.1 The archaeological conservation process
The process of archaeological conservation in relation to land-use proposals is a clear, established system, based upon the procedures used in other areas of environmental management.
The key elements of the conservation process can be summarised as:
*__Appraisal__: this first stage involves the conservation archaeologist considering an application or enquiry and using the HER and any other readily available information to provide a professional judgement as to the impact of the proposal on the historic environment.
*__Assessment__: if an impact is likely to occur, and there is insufficient data in the HER to make an informed judgement, then the conservation archaeologist will make a recommendation. This may be that the applicant or organisation be asked to provide the result of a professional archaeological assessment involving a desk-based assessment, field evaluation or building assessment.
*__Mitigation__: on the basis of the assessment phase, an appropriate conservation recommendation can be made in order to mitigate any adverse impacts that may result from a proposal.
In practice, archaeological conservation is rarely straightforward and is often complicated by the policies, attitudes and resources of other organisations involved in the process. Any record system must be flexible enough to accommodate variability whilst avoiding excessive detail (making maintenance unrealistic for a busy archaeological service). Additional detailed information will remain within the casework files, linked to any computer system.
!!C.11.2 The historic buildings conservation process
The process of historic buildings conservation in relation to planning proposals is similar to that for archaeological conservation. Until recently, HERs and Historic Buildings Records were maintained in separate local government departments. HERs include historic buildings and some services and are now bringing together advice for archaeology and historic buildings. However, this is a new and developing area for many and it is difficult to offer guidance at this stage. Accordingly, this topic will be expanded in future editions of this manual.
!!C.11.3 Why record conservation advice?
There are several reasons for recording the conservation process on a database:
*__Consistency__: it is important to ensure that responses to consultations are consistent with, or at least taken in the context of, previous advice.
*__Monitoring__: as casework progresses through the conservation cycle, it needs to be tracked. Often projects can last several years and the database should contain sufficient information to enable an archaeological officer to understand the current status of any particular project.
*__Statistics__: local clients/partners and organisations involved in national research often request statistics about conservation advice and the HER should be able to produce this in a variety of forms.
*__Searching__: the database can act as an index to the more detailed casework files held elsewhere in hard copy format.
ALGAO:UK, which represents the majority of local-authority archaeological services in England, Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland, and the Isle of Man has begun the process of undertaking annual surveys of its membership to gather information on conservation casework. This will enable the identification of national trends and gauge the effectiveness of policy and legislation relating to the historic environment.
!!C.11.4 Consultation record and recommendations
Any information system needs to be sufficiently flexible to be able to reflect the complexities and iterative nature of the consultation process. The details of incoming consultations should be recorded as well as the details of outgoing advice. It should be possible to record not just the initial response to a consultation (for example a desk based assessment), but also any subsequent recommendations (for example a field evaluation or mitigation recording). To complete the picture, the recommendation should be linked to any resulting event(s) (see Figure 22).
%%image-caption
[{Image src='fig22.gif' alt='Figure 22: Consultation and conservation advice.'}]
''Figure 22: Consultation and conservation advice.''
/%
!Consultation data
A typical consultation record for a planning application from the North Yorkshire County Council HER which uses exeGesIS SDM Ltd’s HBSMR software, version 3.04 is shown in Figures 23 and 24. Other types of consultation, such as countryside management works, are each recorded slightly differently depending on how we use the data for statistical and other purposes.
%%image-caption
[{Image src='fig23.jpg' alt='Figure 23: A typical consultation record from the North Yorkshire County Council HER showing the details tab.'}]
''Figure 23: A typical consultation record from the North Yorkshire County Council HER showing the details tab (North Yorkshire County Council and exeGeSIS SDM Ltd 2007).''
/%
The Details tab records the baseline information about the consultation, in this example, a full planning application.
*__Organisation and Contact__ record the Local Planning Authority and planning officer
*__Applicant and Agent__ are self-explanatory
*__External reference number__: this is used to record the unique external reference number allocated by the consulting body (such as the planning application number) or by the conservation archaeologist where no other acceptable reference is available.
*__Case Officer__ records the curatorial archaeologist dealing with the consultation
*__Log Date__ records the date the planing application appeared on the weekly list
*__Target Date__ records the date the consultation response is required by
*__Consultation__: this is used to record the nature of the consultation, for example what type of planning application, whether it is a pre-application enquiry from a developer or a countryside management scheme. The terms that can be used in North Yorkshire are controlled by a look-up table based upon a locally-adapted version of the ALGAO Consultation Type wordlist ([http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/files/FISH/ALGAOConsType_1.html|http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/files/FISH/ALGAOConsType_1.html]).
*__Development Type__ records the general nature of the development or land-use change proposal. The terms that can be used in North Yorkshire are controlled by a look-up table based upon a locally-adapted version of the ALGAO Work Proposed wordlist ([http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/files/FISH/ALGAOWorkProposed_1.html|http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/files/FISH/ALGAOWorkProposed_1.html]).
*__Site name__: it may be useful to record a site name or plot number, especially if different to the location, as many developments have distinctive names which are not part of the subsequent address.
*__Parish records the civil parish in which the proposal is located. In North Yorkshire each parish has a four-figure code, the initial number of which identifes which of each of the seven districts it is part of.
*__Location__: this records the address of the site in question or the broad area under consideration.
*__Proposal__ records in more detail than Development Type the nature of the consultation proposal
!Recommendation data
The Consultation Stages tab is used to record the advice given and subsequent stages relating to that consultation, as well as the dates these occurred.
%%image-caption
[{Image src='fig24.jpg' alt='Figure 24: A typical consultation record from the North Yorkshire County Council HER showing the Consultation Stages tab and the link to the related event record.'}]
''Figure 24: A typical consultation record from the North Yorkshire County Council HER showing the Consultation Stages tab and the link to the related event record (North Yorkshire County Council and exeGeSIS SDM Ltd 2007).''
/%
__Stage__ In North Yorkshire, this has been simplified and all are classed as ‘curatorial work’.
__Action__ In this example of the North Yorkshire planning application, each of the stages visible in Figure 24 record when the consultation was sent by the LPA, the advice given and when (in this instance, for evaluation by trial trenching), the preparation of a WSI and the date, and the receipt of the evaluation report, and date. A further four stages that are not visible in Figure 24 document the subsequent advising of a watching brief, the preparation of a WSI for this, the receipt of the report and the advising of compliance with the archaeological condition. The terms used are controlled by a look-up table.
__Stage Start and Completion Dates (see Figure 24 ) for__:
*Stage 1: records when the application was requested and received respectively (in this example the application was sent to us automatically, so only an end date is recorded). This allows us to distinguish between those planning applications that we request and those that come to us direct, and also to record the length of time between request and receipt.
*Stage 2: Start date is when the application was received. Completion Date is when the advice was given/sent. This stage allows us to prepare statistical information for our local performance indicator based up the length of time taken to respond to planning application consultations.
*Stage 3: Only Completion Date is filled in to record when a WSI was prepared. This stage can also be used to record ‘WSI Agreed’ if a WSI is sent to us for comment and agreement. In this instance Stage Start date can be completed to record when the document was received.
*Stage 4: records when a report has been received in the Completion Date. This data is also recorded in the corresponding Source record for the report.
__Overall Outcome__ records the final outcome of the Local Planning Authority’s decision on the planning application. The terms that can be used in North Yorkshire are controlled by a look-up table based upon the ALGAO Final Outcome wordlist ([http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/files/FISH/ALGAOFinalOutcomeLUT_1.htm|http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/files/FISH/ALGAOFinalOutcomeLUT_1.htm])
__Date Completed__ is used in North Yorkshire to record when the intial consultation response was made (in this instance the same date as for the Completion Date of Stage 2).
!!!C.12 Monument management
The risks facing archaeological monuments in the landscape are well documented (Darvill and Fulton 1998) Many of the potential threats of damage or destruction can be avoided, or significantly reduced, by adopting a sympathetic management regime for the monument. Organisations with direct responsibilities for conservation of the historic environment, such as the National Trust and the National Parks, can implement such a regime using the HER as a key tool. Some HERs are also beginning to record this information as a result of co-operation with departments of their local authorities who manage land (for example Country Parks), through English Heritage-funded projects to secure management agreements for scheduled monuments and as part of historic buildings-at-risk surveys.
Since 1991, the National Trust has been developing a computerised HER system to help deal with management by recording the archaeological monuments in its care and generating reports to determine monitoring programmes, repair works and integrated management strategies. These processes can be divided into three broad interrelated categories: monitoring, to assess the condition of the monument; recommendations, to outline the requirements for preservation and activities, to record work carried out (Figure 26).
%%image-caption
[{Image src='fig25.gif' alt='Figure 25: Monument management process.'}]
''Figure 25: Monument management process.''
/%
!!C.12.1 Monitoring
It is essential that any decisions affecting management are based on a good level of understanding of the individual monument, its place in the wider landscape and the factors which have led to its current state of preservation. The first step to achieving this is the monitoring of the monument in its setting during a field visit. The aim is to provide a 'snapshot' of the monument's condition and to flag up any actual and potential risks or damage caused by factors such as land use, visitors, burrowing animals or natural processes.
The monitoring record is compiled in the field using a proforma. This should include information about:
*stability
*vulnerability
*physical damage
*visibility
*accessibility
*land use on and around the monument.
%%image-caption
[{Image src='fig26.jpg' alt='Figure 26: Successive monument monitoring reports as recorded in the National Trust SMR.'}]
''Figure 26: Successive monument monitoring reports as recorded in the National Trust SMR (© National Trust and exeGesIS SDM Ltd 2007).''
/%
This page (revision-35) was last changed on 18-Sep-2012 10:42 by Alison BennettTop