One point to bear in mind when indexing evidence: there is not a direct
one-to-one correlation between a given monument type and a particular
evidence term. An obvious point perhaps but worth bearing in mind.
So for example with a quarry the evidence could be one of a number of
terms. If its existence is only known from e.g. a map or references to
it in property deeds then the evidence would be 'Documentary evidence'.
If there is a bump in the ground which you think might be a quarry (or
could be an backfilled artificial lake or a bomb crater) then the
evidence for 'quarry' (and the other site type terms) would be
'conjectural evidence'. If it has been spotted from the air but there
are no surface remains (or they haven't been checked) then it might be
cropmark etc etc.
The point is you index what you have in each case. If it was possible to
say that a quarry was always evidence = 'earthwork', then we wouldn't
need to record it at all.
Data Standards Unit
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Nick Boldrini [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: 05 October 2004 12:11
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Evidence Thesaurus
> Hello Folks
> when indexing a quarry against an evidence type, what would people use
> for its physical remains? Its not quite a modified surface, enhanced
> natural feature, or earthwork. Any ideas? TIme for a new term - Human
> ALtered area? Or something?
> Assuming any of you think about such things...
> best wishes
> Nick Boldrini
> Historic Environment Record Officer
> Heritage Section
> Countryside Service
> North Yorkshire County Council
> Direct Dial (01609) 532331
> North Yorkshire County Council has the right
> and does inspect E-Government mails sent
> from and to its computer system.
> This E-mail and any attachments may contain information that is
> confidential or privileged, and is intended solely for the use of the
> named recipient. If you are not the intended recipient, please be
> that any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken is
> prohibited and may be unlawful.
> Any opinions expressed are those of the author and not necessarily the
> view of the Council.
> North Yorkshire County Council.