186 POST-FIELDWORKANALYSIS AND ARCHIVING
- Additional information may become available
from the processing of samples. The need for a
continuing dialogue between all specialists, includ-
ing archaeologists and scientists, throughout this
phase is self-evident. The evaluation of the archae-
ological evidence will probably raise new questions
or modify those originally formulated. The sci-
entific studies may also raise problems or provide
additional information with a direct and signi-
ficant bearing on archaeological analysis and later
interpretation. - Finds-specialists will often be able to make obser-
vations on accurate drawings and written records,
but on occasion they will want to see the original
material. This can raise security problems, both in
terms of safe transport and storage at a new loca-
tion. Keeping a very careful record of what has
gone where is crucial. It may be less trouble to
bring the specialist to the material. - It must be borne in mind that specialists may
damage, alter or destroy material as part of their
analyses. Material that must not be changed should
be clearly identified (e.g. organic remains for dat-
ing purposes should not be treated with biocides and
objects for display should not be sectioned). - Finally, the work of the specialist should be acknow-
ledged in any report or publication and the issue
of copyright clarified in the terms and conditions
under which the work is carried out (see chapter 20).
The need to establish and maintain an organized
recording system that allows easy cross-referencing – for
example, between finds, drawings, written records and plans
- has already been discussed (chapter 8). Evidence col-
lected in post-fieldwork recording should be entered into
the same system. Indeed, it is during the post-fieldwork
analysis stage that the flexibility, reliability and efficiency
of the system will really be tested.
INTERPRETATION AND GATHERING
SUPPORTING EVIDENCE FROM OTHER
SOURCES
After the evidence has been analysed, conclusions about
the site and interpretations of the material and its
significance can be offered. Some people argue that
interpretation should be avoided until the excavation or
investigation is completed; that the objective collection of
evidence is the most important part of fieldwork; and that
preconceptions should not be allowed to influence what
is recorded. However, human nature being what it is, most
people find it impossible not to interpret and formulate
ideas as investigations progress, and many would consider
it very useful to formulate explanations for the evidence
as it appears. Most important, however, is the need to
prevent preconceptions and prejudices from affecting
judgements made when collecting information, and to
maintain the distinction between observation and inter-
pretation through to final publication.
At this stage it is often useful to cast the net very
widely in the search for information that will assist in this
phase of the investigation. The evidence from the site itself
may well have produced more questions than answers. One
of the first places to look for supporting, or even contra-
dictory, information and ideas is the developing corpus
of archaeological literature. A poor researcher is one who
does not make considerable efforts to become familiar-
ized with the results of similar projects elsewhere. What
evidence was recovered? What conclusions were drawn?
What preconceptions were derived and what mistakes
were made? Do these agree or conflict with the observa-
tions from the site currently under investigation?
It is not always easy to track down every publication
concerning comparable sites and material. A reasonable
way to start is to attempt to locate an article that gathers
together the available evidence. Following up references
within this article may lead to more detailed discus-
sions of particular aspects of the subject concerned.
Synthesized works are not generally satisfactory on their
own. As a general rule, it is important to get as close to
the primary source or original publication as possible. Each
step away from the original publication may mean that
some information has been filtered out by subsequent
writers or presented in a way that was not intended by
the original researcher (see chapter 9).
Open and regular communication with other resear-
chers and frequent attention to journals are good ways of
tracking down useful articles. It can take some effort to
stay in touch with what other workers are doing and writ-
ing but it is also a fundamental part of archaeological
research and essential for effective interpretation and
publication (see chapter 20).Producing an Archaeological Archive
The complete collection of all records and finds from a
site is called the archive. An archaeological archive in a
publicly accessible place is a valuable tool for researchers,
as it allows reassessment of the evidence in the light of
new techniques that become available, and new informa-
tion gained from other sites. The fuller the archive, the
more effective any reassessment will be. It is not good
archaeological practice to exclude material from the
archive because it is considered unimportant. It is