Field Analysis:Why Boundaries
From SASSA
SASSA Home Page ⇒ Field Analysis Home Page ⇒ Field Recording ⇒ Why? ⇒ Context Boundaries
[edit] Why record boundaries?
In archaeology, cut boundaries are recorded as separate contexts. However, depositional and soil horizon boundaries can also provide valuable information about site formation processes.
Boundaries can provide evidence of post-depositional disturbance including erosion surfaces (unconformities), the rate of burial, and the nature of deposition. Rapid rates of burial and erosional contacts are usually characterised by sharp or abrupt boundaries. Whilst gradual rates of accumulation tend to result in more gradual or diffuse boundaries.
Often the most important evidence is the way in which a range of soil/sediment properties change at the boundary. This helps to distinguish the overprinted effects of post-burial processes, which tend not to respect the depositional boundaries, from the depositional stratigraphy and buried soil horizonation. Such an approach may be particularly useful in deep sedimentary sequences. An example of recording scheme using this approach is that adopted by Worcestershire Historic Environment and Archaeology Service’s investigation in deep alluvium in the Lugg Valley, Herefordshire. An example of this recording scheme can be found as an attachment at the bottom of this page.
The recording of cut boundaries as separate contexts is standard archaeological practice. However, all deposit boundaries provide information about site formation processes and a short written description is often better than relying on the section drawing where boundaries can appear distorted and gradations often disappear altogether. Descriptive terms and meanings for boundary description can be found here.
