Page 234 - Manual for Activities directed at the Underwater Cultural Heritage

 © Archivo IAPH –
CAS. Measurements and documentation of a 19th century wreck at Camposoto, Cádiz, Spain
hardbound notebooks and written in pencil rather than ink, for readability after having been left out in the rain or splash-water, used to be the norm. The entries are both the basis and a check for analysis. As they also contain notes on weather conditions and sea state, headaches, emotions and seasickness, they provide a useful background to assess the accuracy and reliability of the observations made on a particular day. No archaeologist is infallible. Keeping such field notes in the project-archive is not a sign of weakness or doubt concerning one’s final analysis or interpretation. In fact, it is a sign of professional strength. The simple method, in- cluding notebook and pencil, is still useful today, especially in small operations with small teams, or in operations involving much improvisation. Generally, however, ‘current professional standards of archaeo- logical documentation’ include a formalized system of registering data and observations. Standardized forms have become the norm. There will be a range of these forms in a larger operation. Each form will contain information on a particular aspect. Some are oriented to control the operation, others are meant for description of the drawings, photographs, or measurements that have been collected, still others will be designed for the documentation of specific types of features in a standardized way.
Documentation can hardly be thorough enough. This is especially true for the documentation of onsite observations. Many archaeological observations,
233
9
Documentation