Jeff,
Yes I'm afraid so. I am currently researching the archaeology of
waterpower in the Nene Valley, Northamptonshire - (UK). I find
increasingly that whilst continuity between the current sites and much
earlier periods can often be argued from documentary sources this is
not always present in the archaeological record. This may be due to many
instances of rebuilding which may position the site in slightly different
locations within the same general area. Or simpley because modern
reconstruction/ repairs may often effectively remove much of the earlier
evidence. The dredging/ cleaning of mill ponds and leats will erase much
of the archaeological evidence that may have helped define the extent of
continuity.
Cheers,
Steve
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Steve Dobson Tel: +44 01904 433953
Experimental Officer Fax: +44 01904 433902
Department of Archaeology Email: [log in to unmask]
The King's Manor
University of York
York, YO1 2EP, UK
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
On Mon, 31 Aug 1998 [log in to unmask] wrote:
> While researching the history of an ironworking complex that operated from
> the 1630's until the early 20th century. It became increasingly apparant
> that an anomaly existed within the archaweological record.
>
> One of the ponds associated with the site can be shown by cartographic
> evidence to be pre-1750, however, the material recovered from this pond is
> exclusively of a 19th century or later date.
>
> Fortunately, the site is well documented so the lack of pre-19th century
> material can be accounted for by major work on the pond that took place
> last century (for which some evidence exists).
>
> Has anyone come across similar problems elsewhere?
>
>
> Jeff Morris
>
>
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|