The Pits: A Methodological Analysis of Artefacts from the Commonwealth Centre Site

Abstract

During the excavation of the site, five pits were uncovered. These were used during the nineteenth century as receptacles for all manner of waste, including human, domestic and industrial substances (Dunstan 1985:156). Although a history of the site has now been compiled, at the time of the excavation it was not known when the pits may have been in use. It has remained for their contents to reveal this information. The site itself has a complex stratigraphy which has developed over the last 140 years. The analysis of these features may help to build up an independent picture of the spatial and temporal sequence of events at the site. I am aware that there are other ways to analyse material culture; for example aspects that relate to social and economic issues. However, at the time of defining this thesis topic questions that time were deemed more important because of the lack of chronology. The aim of my thesis is to use a selection of material culture items to test the validity of seriating a set of nineteenth century features in an archaeological context. It is because of a variety of material contained in the 'cess' pits, I have selected four major artefact categories which lend themselves more readily to dating - 1. Domestic Ceramics. 2. Bottle Glass. 3. Clay Tobacco Pipes. 4. Coins. have an added advantage. The vast range of documentary and resource material which can assist in the identification and dating of the artifacts. This is discussed in Chapter 4. Although a large amount of reference material was used for this purpose, it was ideally as a means to an end - the testing of archaeological methodologies. This is outlined in Chapter 5 with the emphasis being on South's Mean Ceramic Date formula and the use of a terminus ante quem non . It was not until much later in the year that access was available to the historical data. This was compiled by Justin M'Carthy and David Bannear and their assistants. They provided me with the initial occupation dates for the building lots in which the pits were found. This information had provided an opportunity to discuss the results not only on their own merits, but against an historical framework as well. This is contained in Chapter 6. History and archaeology present two different types of evidence, and ultimately, one should not be expected to validate the other (Ferguson 197). However, it does raise a particularly important question, How far should history be used in the definition, explanation and interpretation of an archaeological site? David Clarke immortalised the phrase, Archaeology, is archaeology, is archaeology..., within this discipline (Clarke l968:13). Theoretically, he is correct, but one should not ignore the fact that history can provide important information which may be closely connected to the results. It should however, be used carefully within it's own perspective. In any archaeological excavation the method used to analyse the artifacts should be geared toward approaching the particular research questions related to the site. At the same time, the nature of the site can dictate types of questions and problems which need to be resolved. In effect this is what has guided my approach to the analysis of the artifacts at the Commonwealth Centre Site.