Using experimental archaeology and micromorphology to reconstruct timber-framed buildings from Roman Silchester: a new approach.
Banerjea, Rowena Y. ; Fulford, Michael ; Bell, Martin 等
[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]
Introduction
A new approach has been developed to reconstruct the architectural
layouts of timber-framed and earthen-walled early Roman urban
structures. Unlike masonry buildings with clearly defined walls, the
interpretation of these structures can be particularly problematic
(Fulford 2012: 259). When reconstructing building plans, there has been
a tendency to 'fill in the gaps' between earthen walls and
post-holes (e.g. Frere 1972: fig. 8; Perring 1987: fig. 65; Millett
1990: fig. 40; Hill & Rowsome 2011: fig. 181). Determining the
internal layout of archaeological buildings requires the identification
of residual superstructure components (evidence for which is often
absent), internal floor surfaces (where they survive), hearths and the
differentiation between internal and external areas (Carver 1987;
Fulford 2012: 258-60). The approach advocated here combines experimental
archaeology and thin section micromorphology to provide more robust
interpretations of roofed, unroofed and semi-open spaces, and for the
locations of doorways. In order to understand fully the structural
components and architectural evidence, it is important to classify
occupation and accumulation deposits correctly during excavation. In
addition, a clear understanding of formation processes enables
reconstruction of dynamic chronologies of architecture and often
repeated, diachronic use of structures (Carver 1987: 10; La Motta &
Schiffer 1999; Fulford 2012: 258). The ability to reconstruct the
architectural layouts of early Roman urban structures is an important
part of understanding the structuring of activities and the spatial
organisation of households. In comparison with public buildings and
villas, little work has been done on residential space within
Romano-British towns (Millett 2001: 64). In addition, to chart the
planning of the earliest stages of Roman urban development, the precise
measurements of individual buildings and properties are essential
(Burnham et al. 2001: 72-73). It is particularly important, therefore,
to understand each stage in the development of domestic urban
properties.
The extent to which building plans are retrieved in Romano-British
archaeology is often limited by the spatial constraints of rescue
excavation and by the bias of antiquarian excavation towards monumental
buildings (Perring 2002). In Britain, the nature of developer-funded
rescue archaeology has placed inevitable constraints on the evaluation
of spatial relationships within towns, as rescue archaeology tends to be
more 'keyhole' in excavation strategy, with an emphasis on the
depth of stratigraphy. Additionally, there is a tendency to report
buildings in the form of a stratigraphic narrative, rather than in terms
of their use of space (Fulford 2012: 257). Frere's excavations at
Verulamium between 1955 and 1961 marked the beginnings of open-area
excavation (Fulford et al. 2006: 7-8). They produced structures with
significant depth and complexity, specifically a sequence of
timber-framed, and later masonry, structures in Insula XIV (Frere 1972).
Silchester (Hampshire, UK) is the site of the Roman regional centre
or civitas capital of Calleva Atrebatum (Figure 1). Unlike the majority
of Roman towns in Britain, which saw subsequent development from the
medieval period up to the present, Silchester was abandoned and has
remained a 'greenfield' site. It became the focus of
antiquarian interest in the later nineteenth century when a sustained
project (1890-1909) was initiated to recover the compete plan of a Roman
town (Boon 1974). Fortunately, these excavations were relatively
superficial, allowing the possibility for modern archaeology with
stratigraphic and geoarchaeological methodologies to explore the
development and changing character of the town from Iron Age origins to
post-Roman abandonment in much greater depth. With such objectives, the
Silchester Town Life Project was initiated in 1997, focusing on a large
area (3000[m.sup.2]) of Insula IX. The fieldwork was completed in 2014.
While the mid and later Roman archaeology has now been published
(Fulford et al. 2006; Fulford & Clarke 2011), work continues on the
publication of the Iron Age and early Roman sequences (periods 0-2). The
research presented here is mostly associated with the timber buildings
(Figure 2) of the as yet unpublished period 2 (AD 70/80-125/50), but
also of the period 3 (AD 125/50-200) occupation (Fulford & Clarke
2011). It complements ongoing research on the geochemistry of the period
2 buildings (Cook et al. 2014). These timber buildings have provided a
unique opportunity to study the internal spatial and chronological
relationships, and to compare the spatial and chronological
relationships between buildings using a geoarchaeological approach
(Banerjea 2011; Cook 2011).
[FIGURE 1 OMITTED]
[FIGURE 2 OMITTED]
The integration of open-area excavation at Silchester, experimental
archaeology from buildings at Butser Ancient Farm and St Fagans in the
UK, and Lejre in Denmark (Figure 1), and micromorphology has enabled
more robust interpretations to be made of architectural layouts of
buildings at Roman Silchester. In some spaces at Silchester,
archaeological features relating to super-structure were absent, and the
nature of the roofs was unknown. Looking at the formation processes
within the experimental hut floors using micromorphology (Banerjea et
al. 2015) has helped to interpret the archaeological record at Roman
Silchester.
[FIGURE 3 OMITTED]
Micromorphology is well established as a tool for interpreting
archaeological site-formation processes. This technique has been widely
applied to the investigation of the use of space within buildings (e.g.
Matthews 1995; Matthews et al. 1997; Shahack-Gross et al. 2005; Milek
& French 2007; Karkanas & Efstratiou 2009; Jones et al. 2010),
as well as external spaces and middening practices (Simpson &
Barrett 1996; Shillito & Matthews 2013; Shillito & Ryan 2013).
The application of micromorphology to Roman urban archaeology has, up to
now, been largely limited to the study of dark earths to determine their
formation processes and to identify traces of past activities (e.g.
Macphail 1994; Macphail et al. 2003a). This study aims to inform the
architectural interpretation of urban spaces that may have been
trampled, damp, open or partially open and, as a result, susceptible to
and affected by weathering, erosion and disturbance. It is therefore
important to understand processes such as trampling (Ge et al. 1993),
clay translocation and coatings (Courty et al. 1989; French 2003: 123,
136; Goldberg & Macphail 2006: 356-58), the formation of new
minerals as a result of diagenesis and decay of inclusions such as ash,
bone and dung (Weiner 2010), and mesofaunal bioturbation (Macphail 1994;
Canti 2003, 2007).
[FIGURE 4 OMITTED]
Experimental archaeology can play an important role in advancing
archaeological interpretations through creating a database of reference
material from known activity areas and modern analogues. These data can
be used to provide more robust interpretations of the archaeological
record (Goldberg & Macphail 2006: 247-48; Macphail & Linderholm
2011: 461; Banerjea et al. 2015), in a similar way as when applied to
ethnoarchaeological research (Matthews et al. 2000; Villagran et al.
2011; Milek 2012). Geoarchaeology is a pathway of research that has
brought together ethnoarchaeology and experimental archaeology to
interpret site-formation processes and to understand the formation of
refuse assemblages, in order to identify the use of space and the
structuring of activities within households. It is necessary, however,
for experimental research to have clear research designs and scientific
rationales (Bell 2009) to feed back into the process of interpreting the
archaeological record, to provide the facility for the physical testing
of hypotheses and also to suggest new systems of data recovery and
recording (Reynolds 1979: 83). Pedological and sedimentological
investigations were generally not considered at the inception of many
experimental archaeology sites (Crowther et al. 1996: 114). Despite
this, when applied to an experimental context, micromorphology has
identified the mechanisms and pathways by which materials are
transported in occupation contexts (Banerjea et al. 2015): activity
areas such as animal husbandry (Macphail et al. 2004; Cand et al. 2006;
Macphail et al. 2006; Macphail & Crowther 2011; Banerjea et al.
2015); short-term changes to soils and sediments (Crowther et al. 1996;
Macphail et al. 2003b); and post-depositional alterations to occupation
deposits (Banerjea et al. 2015).
Field methodology
Most of the experimental buildings investigated in this research
were constructed 16 years prior to sampling and have housed a range of
activity spaces over their lifetime. Micromorphological examination of
structures at Butser, St Fagans and Lejre has enabled formation
processes within buildings to be studied in a temperate climate in
different geological settings, providing examples that inform the
investigation and interpretation of activity traces in a range of
archaeological settlement contexts on several substrates. These
experimental archaeological contexts enabled targeted examination, at a
high chronological resolution, of known activity areas, specific
depositional processes and taphonomy within structures at the
microstratigraphic scale. Specific processes such as dumping, trampling,
decay and collapse were readily observed in the experimental buildings
(Banerjea et al. 2015). For the experimental data to be applicable to
spatial investigations of archaeological urban and settlement sites,
samples were collected for micromorphological analysis from key
locations within the experimental buildings at Butser, St Fagans and
Lejre (Banerjea et al. 2015): from roofed, unroofed and semi-open
spaces; from damp areas within buildings; and from doorways.
The Insula IX excavation at Silchester enabled micromorphology
samples to be collected spatially across several early (ERTBs 1-8) to
mid-Roman (MRTB1) timber buildings dating from periods 2-3 (Figures 3, 4
& 5). Despite the opportunities for extensive spatial examination of
structures, open-area excavation still encounters problems with the
truncation of stratigraphy by features such as the foundations of later
buildings and, at Silchester, trenches from Antiquarian excavations
(Fulford & Clarke 2002). Yet the truncations made through
timber-framed structures have provided windows into the stratigraphy and
section-faces from which micromorphology samples have been collected.
The coordinates (x, y, z) for each micromorphology sample, with the
exception of two samples from MRTB1, were recorded, in order to locate
each sample on the site grid plan for the excavation of Insula IX,
Silchester. Samples from MRTB1 were recorded to a specific 5 x 5 m grid
square. Sampling was targeted to collect levelling deposits, the earthen
and mortar floors of buildings, and occupation deposits. The
archaeological structures featured in this research (Figure 2) are all
similar in shape and overall design: square or rectangular with central
hearths. Experimental structures at Lejre were also square or
rectangular with central hearths, and structures at Butser and St Fagans
were circular with central hearths. At Silchester, where building form
diverges from the regular shape, for example, the additions to ERTB1 and
ERTB8, the irregular shape was probably because they respected the main
road that was in proximity and were shaped to fit around it.
[FIGURE 5 OMITTED]
Laboratory methodology
Micromorphology samples (from Roman Silchester and all of the
experimental sites) were prepared in the Microanalysis Unit at the
University of Reading. The procedure followed is the standard protocol
for thin-section preparation (Murphy 1986). Samples were oven-dried at
40[degrees]C, and then impregnated with epoxy resin while under vacuum.
Slides were prepared to the standard geological thickness of 30[micro]m.
Micromorphological investigation was carried out using a Leica DMLP
polarising microscope at magnifications of x40-400 under plane polarised
light (PPL), crossed polarised light (XPL), and oblique incident light
(OIL). Thin-section description was conducted using the identification
and quantification criteria set out by Bullock et al. (1985) and Stoops
(2003), with reference to Courty et al. (1989). Photomicrographs were
taken using a Leica camera attached to the Leica DMLP microscope.
Results and discussion
Micromorphological characteristics attributed to both trampling as
a formation process and as a post-depositional alteration have been
identified in experimental and archaeological sediments at these
temperate sites (Table 1). In order for compacted trample deposits to
form, experimental archaeological research has demonstrated that damp
environmental conditions must be present. Building collapse or the
partial removal of roofs also played an integral role in the formation
of internal deposits of compacted trample (Banerjea et al. 2015). The
locations of trampled sediment in archaeological buildings have been
used to identify wet areas of buildings such as doorways (Figures 3
& 4) or semi-open spaces (Figure 5) in the archaeological buildings
at Roman Silchester; differentiation between the two may be determined
by the type of clay coatings.
Identifying doorways
The nature of the urban archaeological record in Britain makes it
difficult to identify doorways from excavated field evidence alone; full
plans may not be present or walls may not survive to sufficient height
(Perring 1987; Perring 2002). Porched entrances in Iron Age houses make
doorways easier to identify (Cunliffe 1978; Perring 2002). In addition,
doorways may be particularly difficult to identify from trace
archaeology. When dealing with timber-framed buildings, faint linear
colour distinctions left by sill-beams may be all that remain of a
particular structure (Carver 1987).
At Wroxeter, as part of excavations of the Macellum and Roman
Baths, Ellis suggested that the 'trampled clay' area between
rooms 5 and 8 in building 3 may have marked the doorway (Ellis 2000:
14). Observations from the Butser, St Fagans and Lejre experimental
sites support Ellis's suggestion, showing that in temperate
regions, internal doorways can be wet, trampled areas (Banerjea et al.
2015). In experimental archaeology, compacted trample deposits have been
observed to form in doorways and semi-open spaces (Banerjea et al.
2015). Doorways are also catchment areas for sediment from both outside
and inside the buildings, as observed in the semi-arid site of Saar,
Bahrain (Matthews & French 2005). At Lejre, 'pitting' in
the surface topography of the floor of building 1 (Iron Age village) is
reported to have been caused by several factors: rain erosion, human and
animal trampling, and abrasion by sweeping (Banerjea et al. 2015). In
experimental and archaeological buildings, potential indicators of
doorways from sediments at temperate sites include compacted trample
deposits or mixed trample and accumulation deposits (Table 1), and
post-depositional features such as dusty impure or silty clay coatings,
which may be microlaminated if the area is repeatedly rained on heavily;
for example, a semi-open space. These indicators co-occur
archaeologically in ERTB1, ERTB8 and MRTB1, and show features of
weathering and decay processes such as neomineral formations and organic
staining (Table 1). The clearest evidence for the identification of a
doorway is within ERTB1. Successive layers of trample built up in one
specific part of ERTB 1 (Figure 3), and the presence of dusty impure
clay coatings suggested that this area of the building was damp. Silty
clay coatings that are poorly sorted, have a weak organisation, diffuse
extinction and an absence of lamination are also termed dusty impure
clay coatings, and are indicative of turbulent hydraulic conditions
(Courty et al. 1989).
On an archaeological settlement, the presence of dusty impure clay
coatings can indicate anthropogenic disturbance processes such as
trampling and dumping (Goldberg & Macphail 2006).
ERTB8 also contains compacted trample layers with dusty impure clay
coatings and presents another case study for defining doorways in
archaeological buildings (Figure 4). Post-excavation work on the phasing
and stratigraphy for ERTB8 is not yet completed. Micromorphology has,
however, identified units of compacted trample (Table 1), which inform
the interpretation of this dynamic and evolving building. It is probable
that the earliest trample unit, context 16652, which overlies hearth
8154 (Figure 4a & b), formed once the hearth fell out of use and
this room became an access route into the building. Later, this access
route fell out of use and was covered with gravel levelling, perhaps to
form a yard and the doorway to the building was moved to the edge of the
later compacted trample unit, context 6265 (Figure 4c).
Identifying semi-open spaces
Partially roofed or walled spaces in a temperate urban
archaeological site can be identified by the presence of clay
translocation, particularly microlaminated clay coatings, within units
of compacted trample and discard deposit types, and deposition of wind-
or water-sorted sediment. As the fields overlying the Roman town of
Silchester were previously used as arable land until 1979, it is
important to consider that translocated clays may post-date a site by
many hundreds or thousands of years, relating to processes such as land
clearance, disturbance by ploughing and a fluctuating water table
(French 2003; Goldberg & Macphail 2006). Examination of the
distribution of clay coatings, and study of their formation using
experimental archaeology, has, however, enabled microlaminated silty
clay coatings to be identified in very specific locations within
buildings (Table 1; Figure 5); for example, in MRTB1 at Silchester they
occur within the deposits of compacted trample and a discard deposit
associated with the abandonment of the structure, but not within the
constructed earthen floor surface (sample 666.3) inside the building
(Figure 5). The analysis of deposits within the experimental buildings
has shown that silty clay particles were mobilised due to very localised
redox conditions, associated with the decay of organic matter, and
occurred with deposits of trampled material during or at the end of the
use of particular areas and buildings; for example, after roof removal
(Banerjea et al. 2015).
The evidence for microlaminated silty clay coatings may indicate
that ERTB1, room 1, ERTB8 and MRTB1 had wetter conditions (Table 1). In
MRTB1, the microlaminated clay coatings are localised within compacted
trampled layers (Figure 5a & b), suggesting that this space was
partially roofed or without walls (given the absence of super-structural
components), perhaps a shelter, which was a multi-functional space with
a hearth and where livestock (herbivores) were kept. Compacted trample
deposits are characterised by parallel orientation of soft materials
such as plant remains and dung (Figure 5c & d), implying that
downward compression aligned these malleable inclusions parallel with
the surface of the context below (Banerjea et al. 2015). Harder
materials such as rock fragments, minerals and metallurgical residues
are unoriented (not aligned to any other specific features within
deposits), randomly distributed and do not share orientation with any
other components (Banerjea et al. 2015). The deposit of clods' of
sediment from the soles of feet formed lenses of sediment when
compressed during deposition on comparatively dry surfaces in roofed
spaces. Had the area been completely unroofed it is unlikely that the
compacted material would have built up in layers but rather would have
been churned into one homogeneous unit, as has been observed at
semi-arid sites (Matthews 1995); failing roofs can radically transform
occupation deposits within buildings and eventually lead to soil
development, which may resemble a 'dark earth', as observed on
a temperate experimental site at Lejre (Banerjea et al. 2015). The
effects of failing roofs could have significant implications for the
identification of structures in the archaeological record at temperate
sites in terms of the survival of evidence.
In ERTB8, the microlaminated silty clay coatings occur within
hearth rake-out deposits and in situ hearth ashes from hearth 8102/5690,
and in ERTB1 they occur within accumulation deposits, trampled sediment
and in situ ashes around hearth 1433 (Figures 3 & 4). In both ERTB1
and ERTB8, this may suggest that activities focused on the hearths,
involving trampling around the hearth, the use and spillage of water,
and fluctuating redox conditions from decaying organic materials (fuel
and food residues), could be the mobilising factors of clay
translocation in these units. Experimental research has demonstrated
that chemical alterations can also play a key role in the formation of
silty clay coatings, where the processes that cause the fluctuations in
redox conditions appear to have arisen from chemical changes relating to
the decay of organic matter and dung, and the replacement of organics
with iron and manganese (Banerjea et al. 2015).
Conclusion
Used in conjunction, experimental archaeology and micromorphology
have integral roles to play in characterising archaeological deposits
and interpreting urban site-formation processes. The comparative
analysis of micromorphology from experimental buildings and from
Romano-British structures at Silchester has informed the interpretation
of their architectural layout. This research has enabled the mapping of
dynamic structural modifications and the changing use of urban space
through the identification and changing locations of trampled sediment,
which reveals changes in the way people moved through structures. In a
temperate environment, for successive layers of trampled sediment to
build up, it is necessary for conditions within a structure to be damp
but not fully open to rain, as this would cause churning of the
deposits. The co-occurrence of dusty impure clay coatings and deposits
of compacted trample has been linked to the location of doorways,
particularly as these deposits have built up, superimposed in a specific
location. It has been possible to differentiate between roofed spaces,
such as doorways, and those that were semi-open (partially roofed or
partially walled), and may have served as shelters, particularly for
livestock. Microlaminated silty clay coatings within deposits of
trampled sediment within semi-open structures indicated wetter
conditions. Identification of the specific micromorphological attributes
within trampled sediments can contribute to the interpretation of
specific spaces, particularly in locating doorways and in tracing
structural modifications within other multi-period urban archaeological
sites, and indeed in a variety of settlements with timber-framed or
earthen structures.
doi: 10.15184/aqy.2015.108
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to acknowledge the Arts and Humanities
Research Council for funding Rowena Banerjea's doctoral research;
Lejre Historical and Archaeological Research Centre for grant HAF21/07;
the School of Archaeology, Geography and Environmental Science,
University of Reading, for funding the 'Life-Histories of Buildings
and Site Formation Processes' research project; and the National
Museum of Wales for funding the excavation and sampling of the
Moel-y-Gaer roundhouse at St Fagans. In addition, the authors would like
to thank the staff involved with the Town Life Project at the Silchester
excavations, the University of Reading, and at Butser, Lejre and St
Fagans; and all fieldwork team-members for their assistance and
contributions. Particular thanks go to Christine Shaw, Marianne
Rasmussen, Ken Brassil, Adam Gwilt, Ian Daniels, Nina Helt-Nielsen, Rob
Hosfield, Stephen Nortcliff, Jennifer Foster, Amy Poole and Christopher
Speed. Banerjea would further like to thank Charly French and Helia
Eckardt for their helpful comments relating to her doctoral thesis. The
authors also wish to thank Will Bowden and the anonymous reviewer for
their comments, which made this a clearer and more focused paper.
References
BANERJEA, R.Y. 2011. Microscopic perspectives on the use of period
3 MRTB1/ERTB1, in M. Fulford & A. Clarke (ed.) Silchester: city in
transition. The mid-Roman occupation of Insula IX c. A.D. 125-250/300. A
report on excavations since 1997 (Britannia Monograph Series 25): 63-95.
London: Society for the Promotion of Roman Studies.
BANERJEA, R.Y., M. BELL, W. MATTHEWS & A. BROWN. 2015.
Applications of micromorphology to understanding activity areas and site
formation processes in experimental hut floors. Journal of
Archaeological and Anthropological Sciences 7: 89-112.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s 12520-013-0160-5
BELL, M. 2009. Experimental archaeology: changing science agendas
and perceptual perspectives, in M.J. Allen, N. Sharpies & T.
O'Connor (ed.) Land and people: papers in memory of John G. Evans:
31-45. Oxford: Oxbow.
BOON, G.C. 1974. Silchester: the Roman town of Calleva. Newton
Abbot: David Charles.
BULLOCK, P., N. FEDOROFF, A. JONGERIUS, G. STOOPS & T. TURSINA.
1985. Handbook for thin-section description. Wolverhampton: Waine
Research.
BURNHAM, B., J. COLLIS, C. DOBINSON, C. HASELGROVE & M. Jones.
2001. Themes for urban research: 100 BC-AD 200, in S. James & M.
Millett (ed.) Britons and Romans: advancing the archaeological agenda
(Research Report 125): 67-76. York: Council for British Archaeology.
CANTI, M.G. 2003. Earthworm activity and archaeological
stratigraphy: a review of products and processes. Journal of
Archaeological Science 30: 135-48.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/jasc.2001.0770
--2007. Deposition and taphonomy of earthworm granules in relation
to their interpretive potential in quaternary stratigraphy. Journal of
Quaternary Science 22: 111-18. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jqs. 1017
CANTI, M.G., S. CARTER, D. DAVIDSON & S. LIMBREY. 2006.
Problems of unscientific method and approach in archaeological soil and
pollen analysis of experimental floor deposits; with special reference
to Butser Ancient Farm. Journal of Archaeological Science 33: 295-98.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jas.2005.07.001
CARVER, M.J. 1987. The nature of urban deposits, in J. Schofield
& R. Leech (ed.) Urban archaeology in Britain (CBA research report
61): 9-26. York: Council for British Archaeology.
COOK, S.R. 2011. The geochemistry of 'house 1' in periods
3 and 4, in M. Fulford & A. Clarke (ed.) Silchester: city in
transition. The mid-Roman occupation of Insula IX c. A.D. 125-250/300. A
report on excavations since 1997 (Britannia Monograph Series 25): 53-62.
London: Society for the Promotion of Roman Studies.
COOK, S.R., A. CLARKE, M. FULFORD & J. VOSS. 2014.
Characterising the use of urban space: a geochemical case study from
Calleva Atrebatum (Silchester, Hampshire, UK) Insula IX during the late
first/early second century AD. Journal of Archaeological Science 50:
108-16. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jas.2014.07.003
COURTY, M.A., P. GOLDBERG & R. MACPHAIL. 1989 Soils and
micromorphology in archaeology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
CROWTHER, J., R.I. MACPFIAIL & G. CRUISE. 1996. Short-term,
post-burial change in a humic rendzina soil, Overton Down experimental
earthwork, Wiltshire, England. Geoarchaeology 11: 95-117.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)
1520-6548(199603)11:2<95::AID-GEA1>3.0.CO;2-4
CUNLIFFE, B. 1978. Iron Age communities in Britain: an account of
England, Scotland and Wales from the seventh century BC until the Roman
conquest. London: Routledge.
ELLIS, P. 2000. The Roman hath and macellum at Wroxeter:
excavations by Graham Webster 1955-1985. London: English Heritage
Archaeological Report.
FRENCH, C. 2003. Geoarchaeology in action. Oxford: Routledge.
FRERE, S. 1972. Verulamium excavations: volume 1. Oxford: Oxford
University Press for the Society of Antiquaries.
FULFORD, M. 2012. Urban essentials: perspectives on change in a
residential insula at Silchester (early 2nd to 5th c. A.D.), in M.
Fulford (ed.) Silchester and the study of Romano-British urbanism.
Journal of Roman Archaeology (Supplementary Series 99): 257-72.
FULFORD, M. & A. CLARKE. 2002. Victorian excavation
methodology: the Society of Antiquaries at Silchester in 1893.
Antiquaries Journal 82: 285-306.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0003581500073819
--2009. Silchester Insula IX: the 'Town Life' Project
2006-2009. Reading: Department of Archaeology, University of Reading.
-2011. Silchester: city in transition. The mid-Roman occupation of
Insula IX c. A.D. 125-250/300. A report on excavations since 1997
(Britannia Monograph Series 25). London: Society for the Promotion of
Roman Studies.
FULFORD, M.G., A. CLARKE & H. ECKARDT. 2006. Life and labour in
Late Roman Silchester: excavations in Insula IX since 1997 (Britannia
Monograph Series 22). London: Society for the Promotion of Roman
Studies.
GE, T., M.A. COURTY, W. MATTHEWS & J. WATTEZ, 1993. Sedimentary
formation processes of occupation deposits, in P. Goldberg, D.T. Nash
& M.D. Petraglia (ed.) Formation processes in archaeological context
17. Madison (WI): Prehistory Press.
GOLDBERG, P. & R.I. MACPHAIL. 2006. Practical and theoretical
geoarchaeology. Malden (MA), Oxford & Victoria: Blackwell.
HILL, J. & P. ROWSOME. 2011. Roman London and the Walbrook
stream crossing: excavations at 1 Poultry and vicinity, City of London
(MOLA Monograph 37). London: Museum of London Archaeology.
JONES, R., A. CHALLANDS, C. FRENCH, N. CARD, J. DOWNES & C.
RICHARDS. 2010. Exploring the location and function of a Late Neolithic
house at Crossiecrown, Orkney by geophysical, geochemical and soil
micromorphological methods. Archaeological Prospection 17: 29-47.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/arp.370
KARKANAS, P. & N. EFSTRATIOU. 2009. Floor sequences in
Neolithic Makri, Greece: micromorphology reveals cycles of renovation.
Antiquity 83: 955-67. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0003598X00099270
LA MOTEA, V.M. & M.B. SCHIFFER. 1999. Formation processes of
house floor assemblages, in P.M. Allison (ed.) The archaeology of
household activities: 19-29. London: Routledge.
MACPHAIL, R.I. 1994. The reworking of urban stratigraphy by human
and natural processes, in A.R. Hall & H.K. Kenward (ed.) Urban-rural
connexions: perspectives from environmental archaeology (Monograph 47):
13-43. Oxford: Oxbow.
MACPHAIL, R.I. & J. CROWTHER. 2011. Experimental pig husbandry:
soil studies from West Stow Anglo-Saxon village, Suffolk, UK. Antiquity
Project Gallery 85(330).
MACPHAIL, R.I. &]. LINDERHOLM. 2011. Soil micromorphology
results, in J. Hill & P. Rowsome (ed.) Roman London and the Walbrook
stream crossing: excavations at 1 Poultry and vicinity, City of London
(MOLA Monograph 37): 458-62. London: Museum of London Archaeology.
MACPHAIL, R.I., H. GALINIE & F. VERHAEGHE. 2003a. A future for
dark earth. Antiquity 77: 349-58.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0003598X00092334
MACPHAIL, R.I., J. CROWTHER, T.G. ACOTT, M.G. BELL & G.M.
CRUISE. 2003b. The experimental earthwork at Wareham, Dorset after 33
years: changes to the buried LFH and Ah horizon. Journal of
Archaeological Science 30: 77-93.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/jasc.2002.0823
MACPHAIL, R.I., G. CRUISE, M.J. ALLEN, J. LINDERHOLM & P.
REYNOLDS. 2004. Archaeological soil and pollen analysis of experimental
floor deposits; with special reference to Butser Ancient Farm, Hants,
UK. Journal of Archaeological Science 31: 175-91.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jas.2003.07.005
MACPHAIL, R.I., G. CRUISE, M.J. ALLEN & J. LINDERHOLM. 2006. A
rebuttal of views expressed in 'Problems of unscientific method and
approach in 'Archaeological soil and pollen analysis of
experimental floor deposits; with special reference to Butser Ancient
Farm, Hants, UK". Journal of Archaeological Science 33: 299-305.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jas.2005.07.002
MATTHEWS, W. 1995. Micromorphological characteristics of occupation
deposits and microstratigraphic sequences at Abu Salabikh, southern
Iraq, in A.J. Barnham & R.I. Macphail (ed.) Archaeological sediments
and soils: analysis, interpretation and management. 41-76. London:
Institute of Archaeology, University College.
MATTHEWS, W. & C. FRENCH. 2005. Domestic space at Saar: the
microstratigraphic evidence, in R. Killick & J. Moon (ed.) The Early
Dilmun settlement at Saar (London-Bahrain Archaeological Expedition,
Institute of Archaeology, University College London): 325-37. Ludlow:
Archaeology International.
MATTHEWS, W, C. FRENCH, T. LAWRENCE, D.F. CUTLER & M.K. JONES.
1997. Microstratigraphic traces of site formation processes and human
activities. World Archaeology 29: 281-308. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/
00438243.1997.9980378
MATTHEWS, W, C.A. HASTORF & E. BEGUMS. 2000. Ethnoarchaeology:
studies in local villages aimed at understanding aspects of the
Neolithic site, in I. Hodder (ed.) Towards reflexive method in
archaeology: the example of Catalhoyiik. Cambridge: McDonald Institute
for Archaeological Research & British Institute of Archaeology at
Ankara.
MILEK, K.B. 2012. Floor formation processes and the interpretation
of site activity areas: an ethnoarchaeological study of turf buildings
at Thvera, northeast Iceland. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology
31:119-37. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jaa.2011.11.001
MILEK, K.B. & C. FRENCH. 2007: Soils and sediments in the
settlement and harbour at Kaupang, in D. Skre (ed.) Kaupang in
Skiringssal: 321-61. Aarhus: Aarhus University Press.
MILLETT, M. 1990: The Romanization of Britain: an essay in
archaeological interpretation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
--2001. Approaches to urban societies, in S. James & M. Millett
(ed.) Britons and Romans: advancing the archaeological agenda (Research
Report 125): 60-66. York: Council for British Archaeology.
MURPHY, C.P. 1986. Thin section preparation of soils and sediments.
Berkhamsted: A.B. Academic Publishers.
PERRING, D. 1987. Domestic buildings in Romano-British towns, in J.
Schofield & R. Leech (ed.) Urban archaeology in Britain (CBA
research report 61): 147-55. York: Council for British Archaeology.
--2002. The Roman house in Britain. London: Routledge.
REYNOLDS, P.J. 1979. Iron-Age farm: the Butser experiment. London:
British Museum Publications.
SHAHACK-GROSS, R., R.M. ALBERT, A. GILBOA, O. NAGAR-HILLMAN, I.
SHARON & S. WEINER. 2005. Geoarchaeology in an urban context: the
uses of space in a Phoenician monumental building at Tel Dor (Israel).
Journal of Archaeological Science 32: 1417-31.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jas.2005. 04.001
SHILLITO, L.-M. & W. MATTHEWS. 2013. Geoarchaeological
investigations of midden-formation processes in the Early to Late
Ceramic Neolithic levels at (Jatalhoyuk, Turkey c. 8550-8370 cal BP.
Geoarchaeology 28: 25-49.
SHILLITO, L.-M. & P. RYAN. 2013. Surfaces and streets:
phytoliths, micromorphology and changing use of space at Neolithic
Catalhoyuk (Turkey). Antiquity 87: 684-700. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/
S0003598X00049395
Simpson, I.A. & J.H. Barrett. 1996. Interpretation of midden
formation processes at Robert's Haven, Caithness, Scotland using
thin section micromorphology. Journal of Archaeological Science 23:
543-56. http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/jasc.1996. 0051
STOOPS, G. 2003. Guidelines for analysis and description of soil
thin sections. Madison (WI): Soil Science Society of America.
VILLAGRAN, X.S., A. BALBO, L. MADELLA, M. VILA & J. ESTEVEZ.
2011. Experimental micromorphology in Tierra del Fuego (Argentina):
building a reference collection for the study of shell middens in cold
climates. Journal of Archaeological Science 38: 588-604.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jas.2010. 10.013
WEINER, S. 2010. Microarchaeology: beyond the visible
archaeological record. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/ CBO9780511811210
Received: 21 July 2014; Accepted: 7 October 2014; Revised: 21
December 2014
Rowena Y. Banerjea, Michael Fulford, Martin Bell, Amanda Clarke
& Wendy Matthews *
* Department of Archaeology, School of Archaeology, Geography and
Environmental Science, University of Reading, Whiteknights, Reading,
Berkshire RG6 6AB, UK (Email: r.y.banerjea@reading.ac.uk)
Table 1. Post-depositional alterations within experimental (E) and
archaeological deposits (A) of trampled sediment.
Contextual information
Experimental
Deposit (E)/
type Sample Context Archaeological
number number number (A) Site Building
Compacted BLD1 LD004 E Butser LBD R/H
trample BLD3 LD003 E Butser LBD R/H
768 16660 A Silchester MRTB1
768 16661 A Silchester MRTB1
768 16643 A Silchester MRTB1
767 16644 A Silchester MRTB1
767 16645 A Silchester MRTBl
767 16646 A Silchester MRTB1
767 16647 A Silchester MRTB1
983 5848 = A Silchester ERTB1/
5863 MRTB1
1093 5921 A Silchester ERTB1
968 16657 A Silchester ERTB1
968 16659 A Silchester ERTB1
1277 16662 A Silchester ERTB1
1277 16663 A Silchester ERTB1
1666 16652 A Silchester ERTB8
1719 16673 A Silchester ERTB8
1719 16672 A Silchester ERTB8
1718 16674 A Silchester ERTB8
Mixed L45 016 E Ujre Sunken shack
trample/ SF71 46 E St Fagans Moel-y-
accumulation Gaer R/H
730.1 4232 = A Silchester ERTB1
4245
Weathering
Translocation Chemical alteration
Silty clay Vivianite Manganese
Dusty impure coatings: neomineral neomineral
clay coatings microlaminated Iron formation formation
** *
*** ***
***** ***
**** ***
***
***** *****
****
***** *****
**** *****
**** **** ***
*** ** **
*** * ***
** ** ***
*** ****
** ****
** * * **** **
**** *** ** ***
**** *** *** ***
**** *** ** *** ***
* ****
***
*** *** ** *** ***
Trampling Mesofaunal
bioturbation
Microstructure Excremental
Decay effects pedofeatures
Spherical
Organic fungal Mesofaunal Insect Earthworm
staining spores Cracks bioturbation cast granule
*** *
*** **** *
** ***
****
*** *** ****
**** ** ** ****
***** ****
**** **
**** **
*** ****
** **
****
****
****
** **
*** * ****
*** **** *
**** *** ****
* *****
**** **** ***
**** * ** *****
Key for frequency: ***** = >20%; **** = 10-20%; *** = 5-10%;
** = 2-5%; * = <2%
