аЯрЁБс>ўџ 35ўџџџ2џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџьЅС'` №ПUbjbjыШыШ ."‰Ђ‰ЂUџџџџџџЄЄЄЄЄЄЄЄИ ( И›Ж@@@@@@@@$Q hЙ p@Єј@@јј@ЄЄ@@U†††јFЄ@Є@†ј††ЄЄ†@4 p уF;Ъ>†k0›†) T) †) Є†”@Zš@†к4ъ@@@@@p@@@›јјјјИИИdИИИИИИЄЄЄЄЄЄџџџџ Bridget Smith 9/22/09 ARCH1900 Archaeological Site Reports A large part of the efficacy of any investigation is the synthesis and communication of the results. In an archaeological excavation, this information needs to be clear and thorough for future excavations on the same site, for archaeologists from other sites interested in comparing their evidence with this site, and for the public, who may not read the full report themselves but who are usually interested in the finds nonetheless. The organization of the site report can contribute a great deal to said efficacy. The Beaudry report, on the Spencer-Pierce-Little Farm in Newbury, Massachusetts, begins with an exhaustive history of the site, creating a context for the information which will be presented in the rest of the report. This is an effective beginning because it provides the background from which the archaeologists were working and supplies a means of understanding the findings. By contrast, the Gibson article on Roger Williams National Memorial dives right into the process of archaeology: she begins with research methods, moves to what the archaeologists found upon arriving at the site, and then spends a few pages on the conditions at the site. This approach is more direct and effectively communicates the experience of being on this site, an appropriate beginning for a national memorial. It also provides a physical setting for the history and usage of the site, which follows the description in great detail, from prehistory all the way to the present. Both of these approaches provide a necessary context to the reader which makes the later information and findings understandable, and both are effective ways to begin an archaeological site report. After the context, both historical and physical, provided by both these articles, they then proceed into archaeological detail, breaking up the information into digestible pieces. Gibson chooses a temporal segmentation, describing the potential value of archaeological excavation by time period. She highlights specific features of each time period, pointing out their archaeological relevance and describing the difficulties of understanding each period. Beaudry, who did actual excavation on her site, chooses a spatial description instead, naming each of the major features (such as farmyard, farm, and kitchen, among others) and describing what was found, supplementing the descriptions with drawn plans. Both approaches here are appropriate to the respective point of the article: Gibson is attempting to make recommendations as to the future of the site, while Beaudry is trying to explain the past. At the John Brown House, our situation is closer to Beaudry’s than to Gibson’s, and the division of our site is similarly comparable, so the latter part of her article would make more sense for our archaeological site report, particularly with the scattering of the units across the yard. Attempting to unite all four units would be folly, especially as two of them are at the top of the hill, one is separated as part of the Hale Ives House, and they were chosen with different purposes. Thus, the best way to describe our findings would be unit-by-unit. For the beginning of the article, a context needs to be established. However, a laundry list of names and dates and documents is nearly as dull as describing the soil types right off the bat, and dullness, despite a prevailing view among the uninitiated, is not a prerequisite for a report such as this. To establish context for the John Brown House, I would like to fit it into the larger setting of Providence and Rhode Island, describing its importance historically and currently, including local oral reports and perspectives. I would try to create a perspective for the readers, describing the site and providing photographs, to give them a visual beyond the black and white plans of the site. Then I would describe the specific history of the site, its owners, construction and destruction, and past excavations. From there, I would move into the units and our findings. As we do not yet have any new findings, I cannot be sure how I would finish the article, but I would attempt again to provide a greater context, to understand what our findings mean for this specific site, and to balance both of those perspectives. Too often, archaeological reports fixate on the small site-specific details, to the detriment of the reader’s understanding of the importance of the site, which seems to eliminate any reason for the excavation. These cannot be ignored, and their inclusion can make an archaeological site report both more interesting and more informative.  <=>є E F Ф е к ! & / e p ” bsдежwˆœ{Ÿѓcd(ШP”уSƒ’УЦxЇЊSЬч}|еTUќјќєќ№єќєьшфрфрфмирдєдарарЬШФдРМИДАЌЈЄЈЌ œ ЈЄ˜”ŒˆœРh’<hъ[рhgy№hЫWЉhž™h/P…hAЪhlіhОBЁhъlhа >h' Oh.ih­N*h>BfhžFohxьhU)h›/@h] ”h6_ohB)~hџ(h†=h'}h‰ ’hМBхh"KгhеO>hЁBЅ4 <=>F еdU§§§§ѕѕѕъъъъ $dрa$gdЁBЅ$a$gdЁBЅ Uў,1hАа/ Ар=!А"А# $ %ААаАа а†œ@@ёџ@ NormalCJ_HaJmH sH tH DAђџЁD Default Paragraph FontRiѓџГR  Table Normalі4ж l4жaі (kєџС(No ListU " џџџџ <=>Fеd W˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€UUUџџqЮ$œ}rЮ$|ќsЮ$ќРtЮ$œюuЮ$<|vЮ${‚€€‰'66W‡––1BBW9*€urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags€State€8*€urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags€City€9*€urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags€place€ ЬeѕKRЁЈ= D ™ Ђ HSW46W3 ;WHSWхъl†=U)­N*’<а >еO>›/@' O>Bf.ižFo6_o'}B)~џ(/P…‰ ’] ”ž™ОBЁЁBЅЫWЉAЪЃcб"Kгъ[рМBхxьgy№lіџ@€TTФѓœTTUА@џџUnknownџџџџџџџџџџџџG‡z €џTimes New Roman5€Symbol3& ‡z €џArial"qˆ№аh­й&fАйF;е€Fе€F!№ ДД24dEE2ƒ№HX)№џ?фџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџЁBЅ2џџ Bridget Smith Breda Smith Breda Smithўџр…ŸђљOhЋ‘+'Гй0|˜АМамшј  8 D P\dltфBridget Smith Breda SmithNormal Breda Smith22Microsoft Office Word@"G,@Š@з;Ъ@Ќ‡иF;Ъе€ўџеЭеœ.“—+,љЎ0є hp|„Œ” œЄЌД М жф FE' Bridget Smith Title ўџџџўџџџ !ўџџџ#$%&'()ўџџџ+,-./01ўџџџ§џџџ4ўџџџўџџџўџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџRoot Entryџџџџџџџџ РF x1уF;Ъ6€Data џџџџџџџџџџџџ1TableџџџџWordDocumentџџџџ."SummaryInformation(џџџџџџџџџџџџ"DocumentSummaryInformation8џџџџџџџџ*CompObjџџџџџџџџџџџџqџџџџџџџџџџџџўџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџўџ џџџџ РFMicrosoft Office Word Document MSWordDocWord.Document.8є9Вq