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

被浪费的伦敦：从罗马时代到现在的垃圾和回收

• 批准号: 2607734
• 金额: --
• 依托单位: Birkbeck, University of London
• 依托单位国家: 英国
• 项目类别: Studentship
• 财政年份: 2021
• 资助国家: 英国
• 起止时间: 2021 至 无数据
• 项目状态: 未结题
• 来源: https://gtr.ukri.org/projects?ref=studentship-2607734
• 关键词: Wasted; London; Rubbish; recycling; Romans

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).

该项目范围广泛，我建议通过时间的深度保留一个广泛的研究框架，以了解城市不断变化的物理和社会景观的影响。然而，这将与具体的案例研究和更深入的分析特定类别的发现。我的建议考虑了四个主要的研究领域，以提供研究的深度，公众参与/宣传的适当性，以及我认为最有价值的考古档案管理领域。- 对研究区域内的遗址进行整理/地理信息系统绘图，提供考古学家归类为废物的沉积物的位置和发现信息。这将为伦敦考古地层学中废物沉积物的存在提供详细的时间记录。这项工作可能有助于识别研究中心内的错误分类/遗漏存款。然后可以考虑在LAARC进行案头研究和再分析。我们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。- 对考古学家认为是废物的沉积物进行比较分析，可能对理解我们当代对考古记录的构建及其解释非常有用。- 考虑到埋藏因素对废物考古记录的潜在影响，分析这些数据。什么是代表，什么不是代表。为什么？为什么？这将是基于案头的，但也涉及随机抽样的部分考古档案2.建立在传记的伦敦生活项目（2004年）和方法学中使用的历史景观/海景表征（Steyne，2013）我想探索种族，阶级，以及在每个案例研究地点和每个研究区域内的职业，以便广泛地了解这是否会影响在一段时间内被视为废物的内容。受Owens et al（2010）方法的启发，采取类似的广泛社会历史和景观视角可能有助于澄清为什么东西被沉积，并阐明对废物的态度变化。这些案例研究地点将从研究区域的地点和沉积物的广泛概述中确定。LAARC将参考现场记录重新检查案例研究现场沉积物。3.在废物（垃圾学）研究的基础上，并受Hill（2016）工作的影响，我想详细介绍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取样和重新检查。个案研究地点的选择将以不同矿床中这种物质的数量和质量为基础，并将确定取样矿床的数量。查看诸如此类的特定类别的发现也将使我能够开始创建案例研究，以宣传和公众参与档案，并鼓励思考回收和一次性文化的价值。我发现这种“寻找具体”的方法是吸引和激励公众参与的最有力的方式。类别：陶瓷废料、动物骨头和角、不寻常/独特的发现4.随着考古材料储存压力的不断增加，我想开始利用这项研究来建立一个更好的、更激进的方法来合理化沉积前后的考古沉积物。这将包括考虑现行司法部抽样战略和口译做法的适当性。我想加强现有的框架/指南，用于考古骨骼的采样和保留（Baker & Worley 2019）。