onstrated, one must consider the aspects of integrity applicable to a resource. Integrity is defined in seven aspects of a resource; one or more may be applicable depending on the nature of the resource under eval- uation. These aspects are location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association (36 CFR 60.4; Savage and Pope 1998). If a resource does not possess integrity with respect to these aspects, it cannot adequately reflect or represent its associated historically significant context. Therefore, it cannot be eligible for the NRHP. To be considered eligible under Criteria A and B, a resource must retain its essential physical characteristics that were present during the event(s) with which it is associated. Un- der Criterion C, a resource must retain enough of its physical characteristics to reflect the style, type, etc., or work of the artisan that it represents. Typically, the most applicable criterion for eval- uating archaeological properties is Criterion D. For a site to be considered eligible for the NRHP under Criterion D, it must possess information bearing on an important research question (Savage and Pope 1998:21). Important research questions commonly involve testing new or former hypotheses regarding important topics in the natural sciences and/or ad- dressing important aspects of the cultural chronol- ogy of a region. This information must be evaluated within the framework of an historic context; that is, the researcher must be able to address how the in- formation contained within the resource is likely to affect current understanding of a particular time period. If an archaeological resource is considered sig- nificant, it must also retain integrity. The integrity of an archaeological site is commonly related to the aspects of location, design, materials, workmanship, and association. For a property to be considered eligible for the NRHP, it must retain many of these aspects. While disturbed sites can still be eligible if their undisturbed portions contain significant in- formation potential, sites that have lost their strati- graphic context due to land alteration are commonly considered to have lost integrity of location (Savage and Pope 1998:23-49). Archaeological resources identified during this survey have been evaluated within local and regional prehistoric and historic contexts. These evaluations are balanced though application of Glassow’s (1977)
attributes in order to provide assessment of the po- tential of the resource to address regional research issues. That is, a site’s potential to contribute to local or regional research will determine that site’s NRHP eligibility. A site’s potential to provide data was evaluated explicitly as research potential beyond the present archaeological resources survey project. For example, every site with culturally or temporally diagnostic material has the potential to contribute to the reconstruction of settlement patterns through time. However, in many cases, this potential can be realized through recognition and detailed docu- mentation at the survey level of investigation. In Brockington’s laboratory, artifacts from the field are washed by laboratory technicians in small plastic tubs filled with warm water using hand sieves and toothbrushes. After washing, artifacts are allowed to air dry on a tray. Friable artifacts, artifacts with sooting, or artifacts to be used for chemical dating are dry brushed. Provenience numbers are assigned to each ex- cavation bag within a site based on Brockington’s unique proveniencing scheme. Provenience 1 desig- nates general surface collections. Numbers after the decimal point designate subsequent surface collec- tions or trenches. Proveniences 2 to 200 designate shovel tests. Controlled surface collections and 50 by 50 cm units are also designated by this provenience range. Proveniences 201 to 400 designate 1 by 1 m or 1 by 2 m units done for testing purposes. Prove- niences 401 to 600 designate excavation units (1 by 2 m, 2 by 2 m, or larger). Provenience numbers over 600 designate features. For all provenience numbers except 1, the numbers after the decimal point desig- nate levels. Provenience X.0 is a surface collection at a shovel test or unit. X .1 designates level one, and X.2 designates level two; for example, 401.2 is Excavation Unit 401, Level 2. Flotation samples are designated by a 01 added after the level. As a result, 601.401 is the flotation material from Fea- ture 601, Level 4. Within each provenience, artifacts are sorted by criteria such as material class, manufacture method, object form, and decoration. Each group of arti- 4.7 Laboratory Methods of Investigation
23
Made with FlippingBook - Online Brochure Maker