Wasted London: Rubbish and recycling from the Romans to the Present

该项目涉及面很广，我建议保留一个广泛的研究框架，通过时间的深度来了解城市不断变化的自然和社会景观的影响。然而，这将与具体的案例研究和对特定类别的发现进行更深入的分析相结合。我的建议考虑了四个主要研究领域，以提供研究的深度、公众参与/宣传的适宜性，以及我认为最值得继续进行的考古档案管理领域。1.废物是如何处理的，随着时间的推移，它被存放在哪里？-研究区域内遗址的整理/地理信息系统地图，给出地点，并找到被考古学家归类为废物的沉积物的信息。这将随着时间的推移提供伦敦考古地层中存在的废物沉积物的详细记录。-这项工作可能有助于识别遗址内分类错误的/遗漏的沉积物。然后可以考虑在LAARC进行基于案头的研究和重新分析。我们能否/是否能够准确地区分废物？-然后将这些数据与社会历史数据进行比较，以确认或质疑已知的历史信息，例如河流的使用和废物清除的出现，例如维多利亚时代的清洁工。-对被考古学家视为废物的沉积物进行比较分析，对于理解我们当代对考古记录的构建及其解释可能非常有用。-分析这一数据，考虑到割裂因素对废物考古记录的潜在影响。什么是代表，什么是没有代表。为什么？这将是基于案头的，但也包括对部分考古档案的随机抽样2.基于伦敦生活传记项目(2004)和历史景观/海景表征所使用的方法(Steyne，2013)，我想探索个别案例研究地点和每个研究区域内的种族、阶级和职业，以便广泛地了解这是否会影响到被认为是随着时间的推移而被认为是浪费的东西。受Owens等人(2010)方法的启发，采取同样广泛的社会、历史和景观视角，可能有助于澄清为什么会有东西被存放，并阐明人们对废物态度的变化。这些案例研究地点将从研究区域遗址和沉积物的广泛概览中确定。3.在废物(垃圾学)研究的基础上，并受希尔(2016)工作的影响，我想详细研究3类废物。将根据第一部分的结果及其与研究的具体相关性，对这些材料进行抽样和重新检查。案例研究地点的选择将以不同矿藏中这种材料的数量和质量为基础，并将确定抽样矿藏的数量。观察这样的特定类别的发现也将使我能够开始创建案例研究，以倡导和公众参与档案，并鼓励对回收和一次性文化的价值进行思考。我发现这种‘找到具体的’方法是参与和激励公众参与的最有力的方式。分类：陶瓷废料、动物骨骼和角、不寻常/独特的发现4.随着考古材料的储存压力越来越大，我想开始利用这项研究，建立一种更好、更激进的方法，使沉积前和沉积后的考古沉积物合理化。这将包括考虑目前的翻车鱼抽样战略和解释做法的适当性。我想要加强现有的考古骨骼采样和保留框架/指南(Baker&Worley 2019)。

The project has a wide-ranging scope and I propose to retain a broad research framework through the depth of time in order to understand the impact of the changing physical and social landscape of the city. However, this will be intersected with specific case studies and deeper analysis of specific classes of finds. My proposal considers four main areas of research to provide both the depth of study, appropriateness for public engagement /advocacy and what I consider to be the most worthwhile areas for archaeological archive management going forwards.1.How was waste treated and where was it deposited through time? -Collation/ GIS mapping of the sites within the study area giving locality and find information of deposits categorised as waste by archaeologists. This will provide a detailed record through time of the presence of waste deposits in the archaeological stratigraphy of London.-This work may enable identification of miscategorised/missed deposits within the sites. These could then be considered for desk based research and re-analysis at the LAARC. Can/have we accurately distinguished waste?-This data would then be compared with social historical data to enable confirmation or questioning of 'known' historical information, such as the use of the river and the advent of waste removal e.g. Victorian Dustmen. -Comparative analysis of deposits considered as waste by archaeologists, could be very useful in understanding our contemporary construction of the archaeological record and its interpretation. -Analysis of this data considering the potential impact of taphonomic factors to the archaeological record of waste. What is and what isn't represented. Why? This would be desk based but also involve random sampling of parts of the archaeological archive2.Building on the biographies of London Life Project (2004) and the methodologies used in historic landscape/ seascape characterisation (Steyne, 2013) I'd like to explore ethnicities, class, and occupation within individual case study sites and in each of the study zones in order to broadly see whether this influences what is considered waste across time. Inspired by the approach taken in Owens et al (2010) taking a similarly broad social historical and landscape perspective may help to clarify why things were deposited and elucidate changing attitudes to waste.These case study sites will be determined from the broad overview of the sites and depositions in the study area. The case study site deposits will be re-examined at the LAARC with reference to field notes.3.Building on studies of waste (garbology) and influenced by the work of Hill (2016) I would like to look in detail at 3 categories of waste in detail. This material will be sampled and re-examined dependent on the results of part one and their specific relevance to the study. Selection of case study sites would be based on the quantities and qualities of this material represented within different deposits and would determine the number of deposits sampled. Looking at specific classes of finds such as this will also enable me to begin to create case studies for advocacy and public engagement with the archive and to encourage thinking around the value of recycling and throwaway culture. I have found this 'find specific' approach to be the strongest way of engaging and inspiring public engagement. Categories: Ceramic Waste, Animal Bone and Horn, Unusual/Unique Finds4.With ever increasing pressure on storage of archaeological material I would like to begin to use this research to build towards a better more radical approach to the rationalisation of archaeological deposits both pre and post deposition. This would include consideration of the appropriateness of current MoLA sampling strategies and interpretation practice. I would like to sharpen existing frameworks/guidance for sampling and retention of archaeological bone (Baker & Worley 2019).