What is the name of the excavation? The process of archaeological excavations. Analysis, interpretation and publications

I continue the topic of the inconsistency of versions of the thickness and composition (clay) of cultural layers that are exposed during archaeological excavations
Previously posted materials:

Kostenki
At the beginning of 2007, the scientific world of the planet was shocked by a sensation. During excavations near the village of Kostenki Voronezh region It turned out that the finds were about 40 thousand years ago.

Apparently, archaeologists came up with this date due to the depth of the finds. Because even taking into account all the radiocarbon dating carried out, the age is doubtful for one reason: scientists still do not know the content of radioactive carbon in the atmosphere of the past. Was this indicator constant or did it change? And they build on modern data.

I would draw the attention of archaeologists to the depth of the artifacts. It is they who speak of a cataclysm. How can archaeologists themselves not see this objective fact?
Although they themselves write about this, but omit the conclusions:

It turns out that during the cataclysm-flood there was strong volcanic activity! The ash layer is substantial, considering that the nearest volcano is thousands of kilometers away. This means that due to such a smoky atmosphere, there was a long and harsh winter!

Animal bones. As in the case of mammoths, there is a huge cemetery.

“Horse” layer IV “a” from the Kostenki site 14. Excavations by A.A. Sinitsyn

Layer of mammoth bones from the Kostenki site 14. Excavations by A.A. Sinitsyn

At the 2004 conference, a section of the Kostenki 12 site is examined

Excavations on the Angara River (Irkutsk region - Krasnoyarsk Territory)
Here the thickness of the “cultural layer” can be explained by river floods in the past. But the river cannot deposit such an amount of clay and sand; it will rather wash it away and carry it downstream. I think the water stood for a long time, and then the river washed its floodplain in these sediments. So:

Excavation at the Okunevka monument

Archaeological excavations of Ust-Yodarma

Excavations at the construction site of the Kuyumba-Taishet oil pipeline at the Paleolithic and Neolithic sites "Elchimo-3" and "Matveevskaya Square" in the Lower Angara region on the left and right banks of the Angara

And we found this:

Iron arrowheads! In the Paleolithic and Neolithic eras!!??

In total, about 10 thousand square meters were excavated. m, excavation depth - 2.5 m.
During excavations, archaeologists found about 10 arrows from the 13th–15th centuries with iron tips. All the arrows were in one place, which surprised archaeologists.

And they immediately rejuvenated the find to the 13th–15th centuries! Those. it looks like this. If during excavations archaeologists find only bone products, primitive stone objects and tools, this is the Neolithic or even Paleolithic. And if the products are made of bronze - the Bronze Age. Made of iron - no earlier than the 13th century! Or even after the arrival of the Europeans, after Ermak.

At this depth:

The following iron products are found:

Remains of stone buildings on the Angara under a layer of clay

If we return to how thick and what exactly the cultural layer looks like, then look at these photos:

Excavations in Novgorod

A log house rotted almost to the ground into humus on the surface of the earth - everything is as it should be (Novgorod)

Excavations of the Ust-Poluy sanctuary, Yamalo-Nenets Autonomous Okrug

A wall or a fence made of logs was simply cut off by a stream of water or mudflows. Those. the wall was not burned, it did not rot, the logs were simultaneously broken at the base

Archaeological Museum Berestye, Belarus

"Berestye" is a unique archaeological museum in the city of Brest (Belarus), on the cape formed by the Western Bug River and the left branch of the Mukhavets River, on the territory of the Volyn fortification Brest Fortress. The museum was opened on March 2, 1982 on the site of archaeological excavations carried out since 1968. The museum is based on the uncovered remains of the ancient Brest settlement, a craft settlement built in the 13th century. On the territory of “Berestya”, at a depth of 4 m, archaeologists excavated streets paved with wood, the remains of buildings for various purposes, located on an area of ​​​​about 1000 m². The exhibition features 28 residential log buildings - one-story log buildings made from coniferous logs (including two of them that have survived for 12 crowns). Wooden buildings and pavement parts were preserved with specially developed synthetic substances.

Around the uncovered ancient settlement there is an exhibition dedicated to the way of life of the Slavs who inhabited these places in ancient times, archaeological finds made during excavations are presented - products made of metals, glass, wood, clay, bones, fabrics, including numerous jewelry, dishes, details weaving machines. The entire exhibition is located in a covered pavilion with an area of ​​2400 m².

After excavations, the object was surrounded by a building and covered with a glass roof. But look, it is 3-4 m below the current level of the earth's surface. Were the ancients so wild that they built fortifications in pits? Cultural layer again? As we found out, it does not happen like this at the age that the buildings are given.

This is what the fort might have looked like

The sidewalk was obviously made during reconstruction from the remains of the roof, etc., that were dug up, but they didn’t know where to put it...

Iron ax found during excavations

Tool

Found leather shoes. This fact suggests that the disaster occurred here quite recently. But it is possible that the soil isolated the shoes from oxygen and this is why it owes such preservation.

Glass bracelets. So in what century did glass appear?

An interesting fact is that the skulls of a cat, dog, horse and bison were found. Question: were they buried next to their dwellings (or by throwing out the skulls of an eaten bison and horse nearby) or were they all covered by a mudslide wave? And so quickly that even cats and dogs could not sense the threat, as they usually sense earthquakes and try to escape.

The profession of an archaeologist first of all requires nerves of iron and endurance. While conducting research, scientists sometimes pull things out of the ground that make your heart skip a beat. In addition to ancient dishes, clothing and writings, they find the remains of animals and people. We invite you to learn about the most terrible archaeological excavations.

Screaming mummies

Egypt is full of mysteries and secrets, many of which have already been solved. While studying the tombs in 1886, researcher Gaston Maspero came across an unusual mummy. Unlike the other bodies found earlier, she was simply wrapped in sheep's clothing. And her face was twisted in a terrible grimace, while the creepy mummy’s mouth was open. Scientists have put forward different versions, among which was poisoning, burial of an Egyptian alive. In fact, everything turned out to be quite simple. When wrapping the body, the mouth was also tied with a rope. Apparently poor fastening led to the rope falling off, and the jaw, unheld by anything, fell down. As a result, the body took on such a terrible appearance. To this day, archaeologists find mummies that are still called screaming.

Headless Vikings

In 2010, the list of the most terrible archaeological excavations was supplemented by scientists who carried out work in Dorset. The group hoped to find household equipment of their ancestors, their clothing, and working tools in order to supplement historical data about their life. But what they stumbled upon horrified them. Scientists have discovered the remains of human bodies, but without heads. The skulls were located not far from the grave. Having carefully studied them, archaeologists came to the conclusion that these were the remains of Vikings. However, there were not enough skulls. Therefore, we can conclude that the punitive forces took several heads as a trophy. The burial of 54 Vikings took place in the 8th-9th century.

Unknown creature

Amateur scientists, taking a walk through a National Park in New Zealand, came across a karst cave. The young archaeologists decided to visit it. Walking along the corridors of the cave, the group saw a skeleton that was well preserved, but presented an eerie sight. The rather large body had rough skin, a beak, and huge claws. I don’t understand at all where this monster came from; the guys urgently left the cave. Further research showed that these were the remains of an ancient moa bird. Some scientists are sure that she still lives on the planet, just hiding from people.

Crystal Skull

Archaeologist Frederick Mitchell Hedges made a stunning discovery while walking through the jungles of Belize. They found a skull made of rock crystal. The weight of the find increased by 5 kg. Tribes living nearby claim that the skull is a Mayan heritage. There are 13 of them scattered around the world, and whoever collects the entire collection will gain access to the secrets of the universe. Whether this is true or not is unknown, but the mystery of the skull has not been solved to this day. What’s surprising is that it was made using a technology that contradicts the chemical and physical laws known to mankind.

Who are searchers, treasure hunters, archaeologists, black archaeologists, trackers and others. Let's look at the names and clans of search engines.

IN lately The topic of excavations and searches with metal detectors has become increasingly widespread. On television every now and then there are reports about search engines, black archaeologists and others. But they do not always objectively reflect reality. There is also a lot of information on the Internet, on forums and news sites. There, they also do not always clearly name a person with a metal detector in his hand.

In this article we will briefly describe our view of the situation from within the search engine community.

White archaeologists

Official archaeologists carrying out scientific activities and conducting official excavations. These are professional scientists who study history through artifacts and through detailed excavations that provide a wealth of information. After all, we know much of the history of events thanks to the work of archaeologists. Their story is not fake or made up, they opened it with their own hands for all of us.

Black archaeologists

Black archaeologists are sometimes called all people with metal detectors, but this is not entirely true. In our understanding, “black archaeologists” are people who conduct barbaric excavations of historical sites that are monuments of history and archeology, violating and destroying them. And in fact, it doesn’t matter whether this person has a metal detector or whether a shovel and a pickaxe are enough for him. It is also worth mentioning that some people call “black archaeologists” people from official archeology, but those who conduct illegal excavations, taking advantage of their official position, and also often sell official finds from excavations on the black market. Unfortunately, there are such people too, not many, but they do exist. Fortunately, the majority of noble real archaeologists! And the barbarians who go to dig a monument are simply “barbarians” in Africa too.

Black Diggers

Often intertwined with “black archaeologists”. These are “amateurs” who violate historical monuments and conduct searches at archaeological sites. Their goal is to profit from their finds. The media often generalizes all amateurs into this one unpleasant group, but believe me, this is not really true. Most search enthusiasts do not carry out barbaric excavations of monuments and do not earn millions from their finds, as many will think after watching the next report on TV. There are not many black diggers; in our hobby there are more ordinary people who are passionate about the process of searching with a metal detector, who avoid archaeological sites and dig in ordinary fields, on the sites of old villages.

Black Rangers

Search engines that search by military themes. They are looking for them at the battlefields. But this is not about everyone who is passionate and not indifferent to past war stories. Everything in this group involves weapons. People from this group often illegally “play” with found ammunition and weapons, which can result in legal penalties. Any ammunition and weapons found must be handed over to the police or the authorities must be informed about their discovery for the safe destruction of the ammunition. Many people die due to explosions from rusty bombs and grenades. We strongly recommend that you treat accidentally discovered ammunition with caution and strictly follow the letter of the law.

Search teams

These are true patriots and they are driven by noble motives. They conduct excavations at battle sites (WWII, etc.), search for and try to establish the identities of the soldiers who died many years ago, our grandfathers and great-grandfathers, bury them with honors, and preserve information for history. Their actions are selfless and noble. Their finds (with the exception of ammunition, they are destroyed) are restored and placed in military museums. They often lead entire expeditions. The state has recently been trying to help them. But nevertheless, they often do their noble work with their own money.

Search engines

Search engines with metal detectors are ordinary people, passionate about this hobby. They look for coins, old objects left in places where villages once existed, treasures, gold jewelry, etc. It is a fascinating hobby that captures the hearts and souls of many people. It's enough to try once. Real search engines respect archeology and history and never destroy monuments. They mainly search in ordinary fields, in places where villages used to stand, there were fairs, or simply on old roads.

Search engines can also be divided by type of search into:
Beachgoers- people keen on searching for gold jewelry lost while swimming and relaxing near the water.
Treasure hunters- enthusiastically and purposefully search for treasures, studying this particular topic, collecting data on who and where could have buried the treasure, collecting and checking legends. And luck often smiles on them in the form of a box of coins, for example from the 17th-19th centuries.
Digging in WWII- fans of searching on military topics, often part of search teams.
Just search engines- These are universal search engines that conduct a variety of searches from coins to gold jewelry. You can search for a lot. You can simply look for all the ancient objects in your native village, even on your own site, you can look for fair places where there are a lot of coins, you can look for villages that disappeared in the 18-19th century with their way of life, you can just look for places where interesting events took place a hundred or two hundred years ago.

This is how a huge search community is formed, from archaeologists to amateurs who are not indifferent to history and finds. Collections are being created and museums are being replenished. History is recreated and random but amazing things are found!

It is enough to pick up a metal detector and a shovel, decide on the place and purpose of the search, and believe me, you will not remain indifferent. The main thing is to follow the law and not destroy historical monuments, and when interesting objects are discovered, report information to local historians and archaeologists for research.

We wish you successful finds, treasures, discoveries and good mood from searching with a metal detector! After all, the main thing in our hobby is the pleasure from the search process itself!

The issue of the need for excavations, their area and location is decided on the basis of reconnaissance data, depending on the specific needs of restoration and the degree of preservation of the monument. There are three types of openings - trenches, pits and excavations (Fig. 41, 42, 43).

41. Cathedral of Metropolitan Peter of the Vysoko-Petrovsky Monastery. Results of excavations in the interior. The layers of the late 17th-18th centuries have been removed. in the altar and central parts, the original floors, altar structures, felled pilasters, etc. are exposed.
1 - modern concrete floor;
2 - bedding under floors of the 18th-19th centuries;
3 - wood decay of the floor from the end of the 17th (?) century;
4 - bedding under decay;
5 - lime pouring under the brick floor of the 16th (?) - 17th centuries;
6 - remains of brick floor layouts;
7 - base of the altar barrier of the 16th-17th centuries;
8 - brick floors of the altar of the 16th-17th centuries;
9 - foundations of thrones of the 16th-17th centuries;
10— service niches of the altar;
11 - base of the altar;
12— foundation of the altar barrier;
13 - sandy outburst (continental), bedding under the floor of the 16th century;
14—layer of the monastery XIV—XVI centuries. with traces of an ancient wooden temple;
15 - gravestone slabs at the cemetery level of the 15th century;
16— preserved parts of pilasters;
17—general plan of the temple indicating the excavated part


42. Research of the remains of the unpreserved wall of the Sovereign’s courtyard in Kolomenskoye using pits and trenches
Trench A is an example of cutting through a fallen wall in order to restore the original height and decor of the facade while maintaining the basement;
trench B is an example of tracing the route of the wall along the ditch from the dismantled foundation;
Trench B is an example of determining the moment of termination of construction based on stratigraphy.
The complete absence of construction remains on the day surface of the foundation and above proves that the brick part of the wall was not erected
1 - white stone foundation;
2 - brickwork of the wall;
3 - the front part of the collapsed masonry in profile;
4 - construction debris in the ditch from the dismantled foundation;
5 - turf of the 18th-20th centuries;.
6 - cultural layer after dismantling the wall (XIX-XX centuries);
7—cultural layer of the late 17th century. (after building the wall);
8 - layer of wall construction;
9 - mainland

43. The altar apse of the northern vestibule of the Church of St. Michael the Archangel in Smolensk, uncovered by excavations. An example of thorough cleaning of an excavation

A trench as a reconnaissance tool is indispensable when studying ensembles with insignificant layer thickness. It is used to search for lost structures or parts thereof, to establish the relationship of individual buildings and sites. By means of trenches, the problems of studying the relief and organizing the territory of the ensemble in ancient times are solved. If an ancient structure is discovered, it is necessary to expand a section of the trench into an excavation large enough to fully study it. Under no circumstances should the structure be destroyed in order to deepen or extend the trench. On multi-layered monuments with a thick cultural layer (1 m or more), trenches are harmful, since they touch numerous objects and cut through them, preventing them from being fully explored or at least understood what they are. Trenches along the perimeter of the walls are undesirable from an archaeological point of view.

Trenches are often laid on the territory of restored objects during adaptation. They should be used for archaeological exploration, since it is still impossible to abandon the laying. The opening of the cultural layer of trenches is carried out manually to the mainland at a width no less than that accepted in archeology (1.5-2 m). Only after the completion of archaeological research in the communications zone can the mechanisms be allowed to operate. This procedure should not be replaced by simple archaeological surveillance, except in cases where the cultural layer and layout of the territory are well known and the discovery of antiquities is unlikely.

The concept of a pit in archeology is quite strict and is not applicable to any hole. free form and the profile dug on the monument. A pit is understood as a small rectangular excavation with an area from 1x1 to 4x4 m. Smaller pits cannot be laid on monuments even with a very thin cultural layer; with larger sizes, the pit is almost always considered an excavation. On architectural monuments, pits isolated from each other are acceptable for solving engineering and technical problems. The pits should not be too numerous, since they provide extremely fragmentary information and do not allow one to understand the layout of structures found in the ground and even the stratigraphy.

The main means of archaeological research of a monument with a wide area is an excavation, i.e. a rectangular section of the surface, excavated layer by layer to the mainland (soil untouched by human activity). The usual excavation area is from 100 to 400 m2. The absolute size depends on the objectives of the study and the thickness of the cultural layer. Excavations should make it possible to examine the monument or ensemble being restored as completely as possible, linking individual sections of its territory with one another and obtaining not only a general stratigraphic picture, but also a detailed idea of ​​the plans of the disappeared buildings or parts of the building. Lost parts, especially entire structures, can only be explored over a wide area, i.e. excavation Excavation is required for large excavation works (vertical planning) or when removing soil from the interior of the monument.

Trenches and excavations must be positioned so that they are adjacent to the wall of the building with their narrow side - this the only possibility connect the layers of the structure with the surrounding thickness of the cultural layer. Digging only around the perimeter of buildings or digging numerous pits near them that are not connected to each other hopelessly pulls buildings out of the cultural layer, harms not only this layer as a historical source, but also the architectural monuments themselves, and destroys the information stored in the layer.

Excavations are carried out manually using the layer-by-layer-square method adopted in archaeology, with mandatory sorting or sifting of the earth and cleaning up each “bayonet” removed. Finds from each layer are selected, described, sketched and stored in layers and squares (or pits, areas, rooms, etc.). Each find must be accurately recorded in its place in the vertical and horizontal planes, and the depths, as in general during excavations, are measured from a single reference point. All finds are collected, including mass-produced ceramic and building materials, and not just the “most interesting” ones - individual and architectural ones. (Finds are state property and must go to the museum after processing.) You should carefully monitor the structure of the uncovered layer - color, consistency, amount of sand, clay and humus, inclusions of construction residues (chips, wood, stone, brick, lime, mortar), traces of combustion (coal, ash, burnt soil), etc.

The reliability and completeness of stratigraphic information largely depend on the thoroughness of the layout and cleaning of excavations. They must be planned and tied to the ground with a high degree of accuracy, have right angles and parallel straight sides. The walls of the excavation must be perfectly vertical and carefully protected for fixation. The layering pattern is traced directly along the stripping, and then the resulting lines are transferred to the drawing. Similarly for layered plans: careful horizontal clearing allows you to read the contours of holes in the ground, spots of emissions, and the edges of ditches. An important requirement of the methodology is the study of all exposed layers of the cultural layer, and not just those related to the history of the monument being studied. It should be remembered that even a very late monument can be located above an archaeological site: a pagan burial ground, a Stone Age site, etc. The excavation should be carried to the mainland, even if the layers of immediate interest to the architect remain above. The exception is the excavation of monuments in cities with a multi-meter cultural layer, where there may be a gap of a meter or more from the base of the foundation to the mainland. Lowering the excavation to such a depth is dangerous for the safety of the building.

The study of the upper, most recent layers is also important. They carry information about the life of the studied monument to the new and modern times, right up to modern times. Material from the 18th–19th centuries. is of growing interest to historians - ethnographers, art historians, and museologists. The first attempts are being made to create a unified archaeological-ethnographic scale. Restoration researchers working with the late layer within developing cities have a unique opportunity to enrich these sciences new information. Historians know the antiquities of the Stone, Bronze and Iron Ages much better than things from the late Middle Ages (XIV-XVII centuries), which are few in museums and which, until recently, were not paid due attention to during excavations.

One of the basic rules of field methodology is to carry out all archaeological work only in the presence, with the participation and under the guidance of the owner of the Open Sheet (lead researcher). It is strictly forbidden to entrust supervision of work to foremen, restoration workers, etc. In no case should one be limited to preliminary instructions to those working and subsequent fixation. You should constantly and carefully manage the progress of work, while simultaneously comprehensively recording your observations and conclusions. Information is not contained in the monument in finished form, it only appears in the researcher’s brain as a result of comprehension of observations and is recorded by the researcher himself. Therefore, when working, you should under no circumstances rush; the layer should be removed methodically, so that there is time to fix emerging situations.

To understand the history of a building, it is necessary to understand the order of layers of both the monument itself and the cultural layer, to understand their sequence, correlation, mutual dependence, i.e. understand stratigraphy. Typically, five most typical main strata can be traced. The first from below are the layers of building construction, which are characterized by abundant emissions of the mainland or an older layer from the foundation ditches, leveling bedding for floors, spills of clay, mortar, lime, layers of brick, stone, wood chips and associated elements of the construction site (lime pits , created, sometimes kilns, various kinds of workshops). The level of this construction covers the upper edge of the foundation, sometimes it also covers part of the base. At this level, an attempt should be made to ascertain the design of the original porches and external staircases (very often rebuilt parts of the building) and the early layout of the surrounding area. It must be remembered that the marks of the ancient floor and the day surface 1) behind the walls of the building do not always coincide. Finds in the building layer are usually no older than the building itself; thus, the dates of finds and buildings are mutually verified or determined.

Above the building construction level and above the floor there are layers of habitation, usually humus, relatively horizontal. They may include a series of new floors laid on top of the original one, with debris and underfills enclosed between them, and on the outside - layers of minor repairs, blind areas, porches, paths, gutters, etc. At this stage, disturbances of the original building layers begin, as holes were dug in them due to the use of the building and territory. The habitation layer includes layers major repairs, partial destruction, redevelopment, reconstruction, etc., sometimes significantly distorting the appearance of the original building. They combine the remains of ancient building materials from dismantling and new ones used in reconstructions.

The next layer is associated with the final destruction of the building or part of it and is usually formed by the mass of the rubble. These are piles of debris from a collapsed roof, fallen masonry blocks of walls and vaults, sometimes with ash and coal, which in this case indicate the cause of destruction. Such layers go obliquely downwards from the surviving sections of the walls and reliably cover the upper (i.e. last) residential layer, so that the date of destruction can be easily determined from its contents.

The fourth layer is formed by essentially the same ruins, but gradually smoothed out under the influence of atmospheric phenomena. The depressions between the loosely lying fragments are gradually tightened and overgrown with turf. Under the collapse layer, thin ribbons of sagging and alluvium are formed, including small construction remains. This layer may in some places have lenses deposited during the periodic use of the preserved parts of the ruined building as shelter and temporary housing. The last layer is traces of the dismantling of ruins for the extraction of building materials, clearing the area for new construction, etc. It is usually easy to trace trenches or pits from stone sampling, treasure hunters' passages, traces of the work of archaeologists of the 18th-19th centuries, if any. This will also include the results of modern work.

Of course, this stratigraphic scheme is too general to be used in an undeveloped form on any site. In order to get closer to the specific stratigraphy of a site and be able to imagine the life of a monument for a certain period, in archeology they use the concept of a building layer (or horizon), which describes a complex of structures that existed at the same time (even with a different date of origin). Within the tier, construction periods are distinguished, each of which is associated with a specific, specific ancient construction activity on the site, and therefore each of them has its own day surface. The establishment of these surfaces, their relative and absolute dating is the core of any archaeological study of an architectural monument. For example, the first construction

the layer must necessarily be divided into two levels - before the start of construction and at the time of “commissioning” of the finished building. Often they differ significantly from one another (and from different sides of the building there is different picture). There are artificial fills that level the soil or change the topography, sometimes quite powerful, but there are also cases of cutting off the soil before starting work. Usually, the difference between the two surfaces determines the amount of ejection from the ditch (well readable due to the ocher color of the mainland, if you get to the bottom of it) and debris from construction work.

Of course, for an architectural archaeologist, both the history and the appearance of the site before the construction of the building being restored are not indifferent. What was there? Wasteland or inhabited place? How was it used? Has life here changed with the construction of the building under study? Was it preceded by something similar in function and what happened to it?

In the second and third layers, which characterize the lifetime of the building and are therefore usually thicker than the first layer, the number of intermediate day surfaces increases sharply, especially since in addition to repair and construction periods, here it is necessary to identify “non-construction” levels that record certain historical moments in life settlements (eg large fires). By identifying all the intermediate surfaces and placing them between construction periods within one of the tiers, the researcher obtains relative dating, i.e. finds out which repairs took place before and which after the fire, how individual extensions relate to each other in time, etc. To obtain absolute dates for surfaces, it is best to link at least several layers with data from written sources. Particularly important for this are layers of coal and ash, marking the level of large fires noted in chronicles or ice documents.

It is extremely important to create a solid chronostratigraphic lattice of the building layers of the entire complex, since in this case the absolute dates associated with specific buildings or layers make it possible to calculate the rest with some approximation. This method of cross-stratigraphy is also applicable on one building to correlate its different parts in time. The layers of the fourth and fifth periods are stratigraphically much simpler; the main thing in them is the contents of the rubble itself, since it is here, in piles of construction debris, that often contains everything necessary to restore the structure and decor of the building. Dismantling of rubble should be considered as a special case of archaeological research and carried out with all possible attention, sorting out the materials that come across (blocks with carvings, profiled blocks, patterned bricks, bricks with clamps, bricks from the facades of the masonry and from its interior, bricks without traces of mortar, used for paving, stove bricks, tiles, floor tiles, tiles, etc.) in order to then make measurements, calculations, sketches, and selection of collectible items.

The layer stratigraphy diagram outlined here is in practice read by the researcher just the opposite, because excavations are carried out from above: from later layers, layers of destruction and dismantling, to ancient construction ones. Therefore, when excavating, you need to constantly remember the stratigraphic tasks set and collect material to solve them, studying in detail and recording the layers being removed. The material can then be adjusted to the excavation profiles.

Unfortunately, the picture of stratigraphy is almost never simple and clear, as in the diagram. The urban layer (near ancient buildings in particular) was dug up many times. The most common cases of digging are various economic and industrial pits (wells, cellars, basements, garbage pits, waste pits, settling tanks), pits and ditches for the foundations of later buildings. Monastic and church complexes are characterized by burial pits, crypts, etc., which severely damage the layer. The most recent disturbances of the layer are pits left after repair of foundations, restoration or research work of the 19th-20th centuries, communication trenches, etc.

This damage to the uniformly deposited layer results not only in discontinuities in the horizontal stratigraphy, but also in the penetration of later materials into earlier layers and into the continent. They also “bring” early things to the late day surfaces as part of the ejecta from the pits. If these pits, excavations and outbursts are missed and not identified, then all absolute dating, and stratigraphy in general, will become hopelessly confused. The sooner and more fully the holes are identified, the better. Sometimes the dark humus layer is inseparable in color from the filling of the pit, but usually the pit is distinguished by light continental inclusions or a “colored” border - due to ancient wood lining or coating, firing of the walls, etc. A pit can almost always be found by its looser filling and a different composition of finds, especially construction waste, kitchen scraps, and furnace emissions. It is not difficult to identify a hole even in the dug-up layer itself, if it falls into the profile, as well as when it cuts through a horizontal building layer. Then the pit is selected without damaging the surrounding layer, its profile, shape, dimensions, filling, and findings are recorded. It is very important to establish the level from which the hole is dug and the filling period. The more often the digging is done, the more holes there are (when they repeatedly break each other, it is very difficult to untangle them), the more difficult the researcher’s task. There are cases of complete destruction of the stratigraphy of a site, then it is necessary to look for another, better preserved place near the monument; as a rule, it is located. If the cultural layer is excessively damaged, it makes sense to look for ancient layers inside the building or under the ruins of its unpreserved parts. Usually they are stored near porches, exits, building doors and under paths if their direction has not changed for a long time.

1) In archeology, the day surface is a level formed in a certain period as a result of long-term habitation.

Archaeological excavation process

Archaeological excavation is an extremely precise and usually slow-moving process, more than simple digging. The true mechanics of archaeological excavations are best learned in the field. There is an art in the mastery of a spatula, brush and other devices when cleaning archaeological layers. Cleaning layers exposed in a trench requires a keen eye for changing soil color and texture, especially when excavating post holes and other objects; A few hours of practical work is worth a thousand words of instructions.

The excavator's goal is to explain the origin of each layer and object discovered at a site, whether it is natural or man-made. It is not enough to simply excavate and describe a monument; it is necessary to explain how it was formed. This is achieved by removing and fixing the overlapping layers of the monument one by one.

The basic approach to excavating any site involves one of two main methods, although they are both used on the same site.

Excavations through layers visible to the eye. This method consists of separately removing each layer that is fixed by the eye (Fig. 9.10). This slow method is commonly used at cave monuments, which often have complex stratigraphy, as well as at open sites such as buffalo slaughter sites on the North American plains. There it is quite easy to identify layers of bones and other levels at the preliminary stage: test stratigraphic pits.

Rice. 9.10. General view of the main section at Cuello, a stratified Maya site in Belize. Identified layers are marked with tags

Excavations in arbitrary layers. IN in this case the soil is removed in standard sized layers, their size depending on the nature of the monument, usually from 5 to 20 centimeters. This approach is used in cases where the stratigraphy is poorly distinguishable or when layers of settlement are moving. Each layer is carefully sifted for artifacts, animal bones, seeds and other small objects.

Of course, ideally one would like to excavate each site in accordance with its natural stratigraphic layers, but in many cases, as in the excavations of coastal California shell middens and some large residential mounds, it is simply impossible to discern the natural layers, if they ever existed at all. existed. Often the layers are too thin or too caked to form discrete layers, especially when they are mixed by wind or compacted by later settlement or livestock. I (Fagan) excavated a number of African agricultural settlements at a depth of up to 3.6 meters, which were logical to excavate in selective layers, since the few visible layers of settlement were marked by a concentration of fragments of the walls of collapsed houses. Most of the layers contained fragments of pots, occasionally other artifacts, and many fragments of animal bones.

Where to dig

Any archaeological excavations begin with a thorough study of the surface and drawing up an accurate topographic map of the monument. Then a mesh is applied to the monument. Surface surveys and the collection of artifacts collected during this time help develop working hypotheses that form the basis for archaeologists deciding where to dig.

The first decision to be made is whether to undertake a complete excavation or a selective one. It depends on the size of the monument, the inevitability of its destruction, on the hypotheses that will be tested, as well as on the available money and time. Most excavations are selective. In this case, the question arises about the areas that should be excavated. The choice may be simple and obvious, or it may be based on complex premises. It is clear that selective excavations to determine the age of one of the Stonehenge structures (see Fig. 2.2) were carried out at its foot. But excavation sites for a shell midden that does not have surface features will be determined by selecting random grid squares on which to search for artifacts.

In many cases, the choice of excavation may or may not be obvious. When excavating the Maya ritual center at Tikal (see Figure 15.2), archaeologists wanted to learn as much as possible about the hundreds of mounds located around the main ritual sites (Coe - Soe, 2002). These mounds stretched for 10 kilometers from the center of the site at Tikal and were identified along four carefully studied strips of protruding earth. It was obviously not possible to excavate every mound and identified structure, so a test trench excavation program was set up to collect random dateable ceramic samples to determine the chronological span of the site. Through a well-designed sampling strategy, the researchers were able to select about a hundred mounds for excavation and obtain the data they were looking for.

The choice of where to dig may be determined by considerations of logic (for example, access to a trench can be a problem in small caves), available funds and time, or, unfortunately, the inevitability of destruction of part of the monument located close to the site of industrial activity or construction. Ideally, excavations should be carried out where the results will be maximized and the chances of obtaining the data necessary to test working hypotheses are best.

Stratigraphy and sections

We already briefly touched on the issue of archaeological stratigraphy in Chapter 7, where it was said that the basis of all excavations is a properly recorded and interpreted stratigraphic profile (R. Wheeler, 1954). A cross-section of the site provides a picture of accumulated soils and habitat layers that represent ancient and modern history terrain. Obviously, a person recording stratigraphy needs to know as much as possible about the history of the natural processes to which the monument was subjected, and about the formation of the monument itself (Stein, 1987, 1992). The soils covering archaeological remains underwent transformations that radically affected how artifacts were preserved and how they moved through the soil. Burrowing animals, subsequent human activity, erosion, and grazing livestock all significantly alter the overlapping layers (Schiffer 1987).

Archaeological stratigraphy is usually much more complex than geological strata, since the observed phenomena are more local in nature and the intensity of human activity is very large and often involves constant reuse of the same area (Villa and Courtin, 1983) . Successive activities can radically change the context of artifacts, structures, and other finds. A site settlement may be leveled and then reoccupied by another community, which will dig deeper into the foundations of its buildings and sometimes reuse building materials from previous occupants. Pillar holes and storage pits, as well as burials, go deep into older layers. Their presence can only be detected by changes in the color of the soil or by the artifacts they contain.

These are some of the factors that should be taken into account when interpreting stratigraphy (E.C. Harris and others, 1993).

Past human activity when the site was occupied and its consequences, if any, for earlier stages of occupation.

Human activities include plowing and industrial activity following the last occupancy of the site (Wood and Johnson 1978).

Natural processes of sedimentation and erosion during prehistoric occupation. Monument caves were often abandoned by occupants when the walls were destroyed by frost and pieces of rock fell inward (Courty and others, 1993).

Natural phenomena that changed the stratigraphy of the site after it was abandoned (floods, rooting of trees, burrowing animals).

Interpretation of archaeological stratigraphy involves reconstructing the strata history of a site and subsequent analysis of the significance of observed natural and settlement strata. Such an analysis means separating the types of human activity; separation of layers resulting from the accumulation of debris, construction residues and consequences, storage trenches and other objects; separation of natural and human-caused effects.

Philip Barker, an English archaeologist and excavation specialist, is a proponent of combined horizontal and vertical excavations to record archaeological stratigraphy (Fig. 9.11). He pointed out that a vertical profile (section) gives a stratigraphic view only in the vertical plane (1995). Many important objects appear in cross-section as a thin line and can only be deciphered in the horizontal plane. The main task of a stratigraphic profile (section) is to record information for posterity, so that subsequent researchers have an accurate impression of how it (the profile) was formed. Since stratigraphy demonstrates the relationships between monuments and structures, artifacts, and natural layers, Barker preferred cumulative recording of stratigraphy, which allows the archaeologist to simultaneously record layers in section and in plan. Such fixation requires particularly skillful excavations. Various modifications of this method are used both in Europe and North America.

Rice. 9.11. Three-dimensional stratigraphic profile (section) of the Devils Mouse monument in Texas, Armistad Reservoir. Complex layers are correlated from one excavation to another

All archaeological stratigraphy is three-dimensional; we can say that it includes the results of observations in both the vertical and horizontal planes (Fig. 9.12). The ultimate goal of an archaeological excavation is to record three-dimensional relationships at a site, as these relationships provide an accurate location.

Rice. 9.12. 3D fixation in the traditional way (top). Using a measuring square (below). Close-up view of the square from above. Horizontal measurements are taken along the edge (trench), perpendicular to the line of network poles; vertical measurement is carried out using a vertical plumb line. Electronic devices are now commonly used for 3D capture.

Capturing data

Archaeological recording falls into three broad categories: written materials, photographs and digital images, and field drawings. Computer files are an important part of record keeping.

Written materials. During excavations, the archaeologist accumulates working notebooks, including monument diaries and diaries. A monument diary is a document in which the archaeologist records all events at the monument - the amount of work done, daily work schedules, the number of workers in excavation groups and any other labor issues. All dimensions and other information are also recorded. A site diary means a complete account of all events and activities at the excavation site. More than just a tool to assist an archaeologist's failing memory, it is a document of the excavation for future generations of explorers who may return to the site to add to the collection of the original finds. Therefore, reports on the monument must be kept in digital form, and if in writing, then on paper, which can be stored in archives for a long time. A clear distinction is made between observations and interpretations. Any interpretations or thoughts on them, even those that are discarded after consideration, are carefully recorded in the diary, whether it is regular or digital. Important finds and stratigraphic details are carefully recorded, as well as apparently minor information that may later prove vital in the laboratory.

Monument plans. Monument plans range from simple outline plans drawn up for burial mounds or landfills, to complex plans of an entire city or complex sequence of buildings (Barker, 1995). Accurate plans are very important, since they record not only the objects of the monument, but also the pre-excavation measuring grid system, which is needed to establish the general layout of the trenches. Computer mapping programs, now in the hands of specialists, have greatly facilitated the production of accurate maps. For example, using AutoCad, Douglas Gann (1994) produced a three-dimensional map of the Homolyovi pueblo near Winslow, Arizona, which is a more vivid reconstruction of the 150-room settlement than its two-dimensional map. Computer animation allows any person unfamiliar with the monument to vividly imagine what it was like in reality.

Stratigraphic drawings can be drawn in a vertical plane or can be drawn axonometrically using axes. Any type of stratigraphic drawing (report) is highly complex and requires not only drafting skills, but also significant interpretive abilities. The complexity of fixation depends on the complexity of the site and its stratigraphic conditions. Often different layers of habitat or some geological phenomena are clearly marked on stratigraphic sections. At other sites, the layers can be much more complex and less pronounced, especially in dry climates when the aridity of the soil makes the colors faded. Some archaeologists have used scaled photographs or survey tools to document sections, the latter being absolutely necessary for large sections such as those through city ramparts.

3D fixation. Three-dimensional recording is the recording of artifacts and structures in time and space. The location of archaeological finds is fixed relative to the monument grid. Three-dimensional fixation is carried out using electronic devices or tape measures with a plumb line. It is especially important at sites where artifacts are recorded in their original position, or where specific periods in the construction of a building are selected.

New technologies allow for greater accuracy in three-dimensional fixation. The use of theodolites with laser beams can dramatically reduce fixation time. Many excavators use devices and software that instantly convert their digital recordings into outline plans or 3D representations. They can almost instantly display the distributions of individually plotted artifacts. Such data can even be used when planning excavations for the next day.

MONUMENTS

TUNNELS IN COPANA, HONDURAS

Digging tunnels rarely happens in archaeological excavation practice. The exception is such structures as the Mayan pyramids, where their history can only be deciphered with the help of tunnels, since otherwise it is impossible to get inside. The extremely expensive and slow process of creating tunnels also creates difficulties in interpreting the stratigraphic layers that exist on each side of the trench.

The longest modern tunnel was used to study the series of successive Maya temples that make up the great Acropolis at Copan (Fig. 9.13) (Fash, 1991). At this point, excavators created a tunnel in the eroded slope of the pyramid, undermined by the nearby Rio Copan River. In their work, they were guided by deciphered Mayan symbols (glyphs), according to which this political and religious center dates back to the period from 420 to 820 AD. e. Archaeologists followed ancient squares and other objects buried under a compressed layer of earth and stone. They used computer survey stations to create three-dimensional presentations of changing building plans.

The Mayan rulers had a passion for commemorating their architectural achievements and the rituals that accompanied them with elaborate symbols. The tunnel's creators had a valuable reference in the inscription on a ritual altar called the "Altar of Q", which gave a textual indication of the ruling dynasty in Copan, provided by the 16th ruler Yax Pek. The symbols on the "Altar of Q" speak of the arrival of the founder of Kinik Yak Kyuk Mo in 426 AD. e. and depict the subsequent rulers who adorned and contributed to the growth of the great city.

Fortunately for archaeologists, the Acropolis is a compact royal area, which has made deciphering the sequence of buildings and rulers relatively easy. As a result of this project, individual buildings were correlated with the 16 rulers of Copan. The earliest structure dates back to the reign of the second ruler of Copan. In general, buildings are divided into separate political, ritual and residential complexes. By 540 AD. e. these complexes were united into a single Acropolis. It took years of tunneling and stratigraphic analysis to unravel the complex history of all the destroyed buildings. Today we know that the development of the Acropolis began with a small stone structure decorated with colorful frescoes. This may have been the residence of the founder of Kinik Yak Kyuk Mo himself. His followers changed the ritual complex beyond recognition.

The Acropolis of Copan is an extraordinary chronicle of Mayan kingship and dynastic politics, which had deep and complex roots in the spiritual world revealed by the deciphering of symbols. It is also a triumph of careful excavation and stratigraphic interpretation under very difficult conditions.

Rice. 9.13. Artistic reconstruction central region in Copan, Honduras, made by artist Tatyana Prokuryakova

The entire fixation process is based on grids, units, shapes and labels. Monument grids are usually broken using painted stakes and ropes stretched over trenches if fixation is necessary. For fine-scale capture of complex features, even finer grids can be used that cover just one square of the overall grid.

At Boomplaas Cave in South Africa, Hilary Deacon used a precision grid laid down from the cave roof to record the positions of small artefacts, objects and environmental data (Figure 9.14). Similar grids have been erected over maritime disaster sites in the Mediterranean (Bass, 1966), although laser fixation is gradually replacing such methods. Different squares in the grid and at monument levels are assigned their own numbers. They make it possible to identify the position of the finds, as well as the basis for their fixation. Labels are attached to each bag or applied to the find itself; the square number is indicated on them, which is also entered in the monument’s diary.

Rice. 9.14. A pedantic fixation on the excavations at Boomplaas Cave in South Africa, where researchers uncovered dozens of tiny layers of habitat and fragile data on environmental conditions relating to stone age. During excavations, thin layers of sediment were moved, and the position of individual artifacts was recorded using a net suspended from the ceiling of the cave

Analysis, interpretation and publications

The archaeological excavation process ends with filling the ditches and transporting finds and documents from the site to the laboratory. Archaeologists return with a full report on the excavations and all the information necessary to test the hypotheses that were put forward before going into the field. But the work is far from finished. In fact, it is just beginning. The next step in the research process is to analyze the findings, which will be discussed in Chapters 10–13. Once the analysis is complete, the interpretation of the monument begins (Chapter 3).

Today, the cost of printing is very high, so it is impossible to fully publish materials about even a small monument. Fortunately, many data retrieval systems allow information to be stored on CDs and microfilm, so specialists can access them. Posting information online is becoming commonplace, but there are interesting questions about how permanent cyber archives actually are.

In addition to publishing materials, archaeologists have two important responsibilities. The first is to place the findings and documents in a repository where they will be safe and accessible to subsequent generations. The second is to make research results accessible to both the general public and fellow professionals.

PRACTICE OF ARCHEOLOGY

MAINTENANCE OF DOCUMENTATION AT THE MONUMENT

I (Brian Fagan) keep various notes in my notebooks. The most important are the following.

Daily diary about excavations, which I begin from the moment we arrive at the camp and finish on the day we wrap up the work. This is an ordinary diary in which I write about the progress of the excavations, record general thoughts and impressions, and write about the work in which I was busy. It is also a personal account in which I write about conversations and discussions, and other “human factors” such as disagreements between expedition members on theoretical issues. Such a diary is absolutely invaluable when working in the laboratory and when preparing publications about excavations, since it contains many forgotten details, first impressions, and thoughts that suddenly came to mind that would otherwise be lost. I keep diaries during all my research, as well as simply during visits to monuments. For example, my journal reminded me of details of a visit to a Mayan site in Belize that had escaped my memory.

At Çatalhöyük, archaeologist Iain Hodder asked his colleagues not only to keep diaries, but also to post them on an internal computer network, so that everyone knew what other members of the expedition were talking about, and also to maintain an ongoing discussion about individual trenches, finds and problems of excavations. Judging by my own personal experience, I am inclined to think that this is a wonderful way of combining a continuous stream of theoretical discussion with practical excavation and record keeping.

Monument Diary is a formal document that includes the technical details of the excavation. Information about excavations, sampling methods, stratigraphic information, records of unusual finds, main objects - all this is recorded in the diary, among many other things. This is a much more organized document, a real logbook of all the daily activities at the excavation site. The monument's diary is also the starting point of all the monument's documents, and they all refer to each other. I usually use a notepad with insert sheets, then I can insert notes about objects and other important discoveries in the right place. The diary of the monument should be kept on “archival paper”, since it is a long-term document about the expedition.

Logistics diary, as the name implies, this is the document where I record accounts, main addresses, and various information related to the administrative and everyday life of the expedition.

When I started doing archaeology, everyone used pens and paper. Today, many researchers use laptop computers and send their notes to base via modem. Using a computer has its advantages - the ability to instantly duplicate very important information and enter your information into research materials while being directly at the monument. The Çatalhöyük excavation site has its own computer network for the free exchange of information, which was not possible in the days of pens and paper. If I enter my documents into a computer, I make sure to save them every quarter hour or so and print them out at the end of the day to protect myself from a computer crash where weeks of work can be destroyed within seconds. If I use pen and paper, I make photocopies of all documents as quickly as possible and keep the originals in a safe.