Category: Student Blog

In this post, Joel takes you through one of the student exercises of digging a Stage 3 test unit. — Kate

On May 14th, 2018 I started my first archaeological stage 3 test unit at Trent University’s Archaeology site (Nassau Mills research site BcGn-23). This first test unit was strategically located through the use of a ground penetrating radar whereas through the GPR we located a area where there high possibility of archaeological significance. In this area we, as a team, dug roughly 9 test units among this area. Specifically this stage 3 test unit of mine and my partners proved to be quite the challenge, as it turned into a 1mx1mx1m cube of a unit without ever excavating deep enough to find the natural soil. The test unit started off like any basic test unit where it was simple matter of digging, context detection, and recording of context changes. This all changed when we began to hit a fill layer from early Trent university construction.

Early on in Trent University history the faculty bulldozed and landscaped the area around the corner of Nassau Mills Rd and Water St intersection and continued inwards towards what is now the Blackburn building. This bulldozing and landscaping resulted in a mixmash of cultural material from the 1960’s which included a very dense layer of solid asphalt from the previous road that linked earlier residences along the Trent bank to Water St. Upon finding this layer of asphalt myself and my partner Anthony began to struggle with the digging as it required extensive use of the mattock/pickaxe to remove this dense 60s fill from the contexts. This dense gravel and asphalt fill took the majority of a day to excavate properly, and throughout this dense context there wasn’t a single artifact found. Once we made it through this dense context we were sadly at the end of day.

Two days later May 16th we came back with high hopes of completing this test unit within a matter of a few of hours, sadly we were proven wrong. We were proven wrong because our unit proved to be a seemingly never ending jumble of contexts and transitions which made it much more complicated then your average test unit. Towards the end of the day we continually were tricked into the idea that we had hit natural soil, but we would make it down and find a small chunk of brick or terracotta and have to go another 10cm deeper, this happened until we made it down to 103cm deep. At this point we ended up stopping due to lack of materiel evidence and lack of time to continue excavation of the whole depth of the unit.

In order to finish the site we then had to draw the stratigraphic layers accurately to describe the contexts which we had removed, this was in my perspective the most enjoyable part of my first test as it as it involved a rest from all of the digging. Overall my first test unit was a great learning experience on how to properly excavate test units and accurately record contexts, and I am sure that I will remember that asphalt layer for years to come.

— Joel Tucker

Caedda has some great observations about teamwork and how fieldwork is a collective practice. — Kate

With the field school coming to a close, I have been thinking about some of the things that we have learned over this month.  Out of the many practical skills we have learned and the knowledge we have gained, realizing just how important simply working well together is on a dig, was one of the coolest things I learned through the field school.

Most work places try to promote the idea of teamwork. They run seminars and host office events to try to create some resemblance of a community. And getting along in a workplace is important regardless of the job, but I have never worked in a place where these elements are so vital as they are during a dig.

This became evident right at the beginning. Our first day in the field we were learning the skill of traverse mapping. Personally, I was as nervous as I could have been. But after instructions were given out, we were left to figure it all out. This was the first time I realized that none of us would have figured it out as quickly as we did if we hadn’t done it as a team. Some people understood the math (not me J), some people understood the whole concept, some were natural leaders, and others helped along the way. These maps were a headache, but we managed after we began building on the strengths of the people around us.

Once we began digging, we fell into a rhythm, digging together, learning to screen and looking for artifacts together, getting excited when someone found something, and most importantly- sweating together. Seriously, nothing bonds people more that digging in the dirt in unbearable heat together.

It was really cool to look around the site and see everything working like a machine. People would help each other seamlessly, we would share tools, share ideas, and work around each other like a dance (cheesy yes, but with all the stumps and rocks it really was a dance to move around the site).  James and Kate made sure that we rotated work stations and groups so that we all learned to work with each other and so by the end we all had the same experiences that we could share.

Another major stepping stone in our path to community, was our daily log routines. Every day we filled out a daily log which detailed everything we worked on and notes for tomorrow. But Kate also informed us that we should have details of what others were doing that day. Our breaks would begin with everyone asking and discussing what they were working on, what cool things they had found, or how frustrated they were with their context. This was wonderful because it helped us all to have a full picture of what each of us were working on and to stay connected and informed.

Without the community and teamwork that we had, our site would not have functioned as smooth or efficiently as it did.

On a more personal level, teamwork and community was vital as well. Digging alongside someone for hours on end would be hellish if you weren’t able to get along in some way. When you are digging, or cleaning artifacts together, there is really nothing else you can do but talk. And after a while, being able to reach a point where simply working alongside each other in companionable silence was great. We didn’t all have to be best friends, but learning to work together, to be cordial and considerate, was so important.

While thinking about how great the community was on our site, I remembered a story one of my first year TA’s told us, about a dig she worked on for a few years. She said that one year, a person was working on the dig and could not work well with the rest of the crew. She wasn’t unskilled or bad at the job, but she was simply not a team player and for that reason she was not hired again the next season.  Even Kate, when asked, told us about having to work alongside people who were less than agreeable and how hard that can make archaeological field work.

Honestly this work is hard, physically and mentally, and trekking across an island, moving giant rocks, or setting up confusing equipment would be brutal without the camaraderie and support from a team that functions smoothly.  Or as Sarah is fond of saying, “Teamwork makes the dream work!”

— Caedda Ballantyne

Here’s Anthony’s impressions of our visit to Big Island. — Kate

On May 23 and May 24 the Field School undertook an out-trip to Big Island. Big Island, also known as Boyd Island or Chiminis. The first day was quite chaotic. The group was split between two different marinas creating a logistical issue for ferrying everyone to the island. James patiently took us all in three trips meaning we started later then usual. Once we all arrived on the island and gathered ourselves we began preparations for a full-group transect survey. We intended to walk in straight lines across the entire 3km expanse of the island. This quickly became difficult due to differences in instruments, dense terrain and overall confusion. Quickly the group became fragmented and the survey was compromised. After much confusion, and a long time waiting in the centre of the island for stragglers, we decided to call it a day and head back to the boat landing.

Day two was much more productive and fulfilling. After only two ferry trips to Big Island instead of three, we hiked up to the centre of the island with mapping equipment such as total stations and theodolites. These were used to map out the positions of the many cairns (rock piles) and white pine stumps in the central island alvar area. About two thirds of our group stayed in this area for the day, mapping out the multiple features. My group consisted of myself, Emma, Raine, Danny and Nick. We completed the transect survey where Kate had left off, on the 900 easting, at 10 metre intervals. The five of us hiked through some extremely dense brush. I cannot begin to describe the types of plants and foliage we managed to get through but it was thick, sharp and a strange dusty pollen was constantly in the air. While staying as straight as possible in our transects we would record any cultural materials, namely large pine stumps.

These stumps are the remains of massive trees that were logged over 100 years ago and thus culturally significant. It was fascinating how the current forest on the island is actually quite new as most of the island was previously logged and then used for ranch land. The stumps were a glimpse into the historic landscape. It was fascinating to me how much an area can change in a relatively short time. The island is now protected by the Kawartha Land Trust and thus has been left to become wild again. Our small group finally reached the northern end of the island and after lunch and a refreshing dip we began to search for the rumoured remains of an old house. We did not have much time however, and had to abandon our search to complete our transect survey. We once again hiked through incredibly thick forest finding virtually nothing except stumps and cairns. Some of these cairns were located in such thick parts of forest that it was hard to believe they were put their by some rancher a century earlier. They seemed much older then that, which led us to believe that Ancient Aliens had to be responsible. All joking aside, it was actually mind-boggling to try and imagine the original landscape of the island. All that remains of the prior island industry are a few stumps, multiple rock piles and some clearings, where its assumed cattle grazing took place.

We eventually managed to bushwhack our way back to the rest of the group. They had a successful day mapping out the cairns in their area. However, countless other cairns exist on the island, and it could take weeks to properly map out each individual cairn, let alone find them all.

Overall, Big Island was a ton of fun and super interesting. I’ve never taken a boat to school for any other class I’ve had so that was thrilling in itself. It was also a great experience to get out in nature and apply skills we’ve learned on site or in the classroom.

Being outdoors and exploring new areas is one of the reasons I’m interested in pursuing archaeology, so needless to say I really enjoyed myself on the island. Especially on day two where we actually managed to document a fair amount of information. I would love to one day return to Big Island and simply enjoy its tranquility and relative isolation. As the Field School winds down I find myself reflecting on the time we’ve had together. No doubt the Big Island out-trip will definitely be one of the most memorable aspects of a very memorable month! As a non-Trent student I can say I’ve more then enjoyed my time at Trent University and hope to return one day very soon.
— Anthony Miller

Mary has some facts about Peterborough to share in her blog post. — Kate

The site our field school has been excavating is so conveniently on the south of the Trent Campus, that most people wouldn’t realize that back when the house was built, this site was considered pretty close to nowhere. At that time it was built, Peterborough itself would have been a fairly young community, though the city does have a some interesting history from the 1800s and even earlier. Here are four facts about the early city of Peterborough and its history in industry!

1) Peterborough’s location was chosen because of war.

The first European settlers arrived in what would become Peterborough on 1818. A larger group ended up following in 1925. Prior to these waves of settlers, the area was well known among Indigenous populations, especially those of the Mohawk and Ojibway tribes. At that time, the region would have been known as Nogojiwanong, the place where rapids end. The specific area appears to have originally been relatively unpopulated, and was probably chosen because the War of 1812 encouraged people to settle on waterways, simply to block off American invasions. Whatever the reason, a city soon began to form. The Europeans later named where they were living after the city of Peterborough in England. Early European immigrants were almost never creative when it came to naming cities, it seems.

2) Peterborough was considered Ontario’s best lumber producer

By 1870, Peterborough was known as being the greatest producer of lumber in all of Ontario. By the point in time, the Red Mill built by Charles Perry was up and running and most of the surrounding land was well on its way to being clear cut. The house being excavated by the field school was likely inhabited by someone who worked in the mills at this time. There was a budding clump of buildings were many mill workers and needed trades and facilities for them at this time too, all associated with the running saw mill.

3) Peterborough has a place in Canada’s history of electricity

If you were to look into the history of electricity in Canada, you’d see a lot of developments dating to the 1890s and early 1900s, and often you’d come back to Niagara Falls. As it turns out, Niagara Falls generating electricity occurred well after electricity had been brought to Peterborough. At one point in time, Peterborough was known as ‘the electric city’ because it was the first Canadian city to have electric street lights. This early development occurred because the Trent-Sevren waterway easily opened the way for generating hydro electric power.

4) Along with lumber exports, Peterborough made a lot of canoes

If anyone ever plans to go to Peterborough for a trip, or lives in the area, they’ve probably heard of the Canadian Canoe Museum. One might then wonder, perhaps, why canoes get their own museum. As it turns out, making them was quite a business in the area! While the Peterborough Canoe Company wasn’t founded until 1893, making canoes began in the 1850s. A factory was later built on of the same location as the Adam Scott mill had been. If one takes a look even further forward in time, it turns out a by the 1930s a quarter of Canada’s boat making industry was located in Peterborough. Peterborough may only be ever known for a few different professions, but when it does get known, it really does go all out!

— Mary Williams

Here’s Danny’s post tying together some of the things he learned during the field school and potential avenues to pursue in the future. — Kate

When asked why I pursued archaeology drawing maps is not the first thing I would normally think to answer, but after about a month of experience in the 2018 Nassau Mills field school I have truly begun to appreciate the practice of map making.

It is important to understand that the excavation of a site, in turn, destroys a site. More significantly excavation can destroy context. Every artifact possesses context. Context refers to where an artifact was found in relation to the layout of the site and in relation to other artifacts. Let’s say archaeologists find 1960’s material in a layer made up of rubble and 1850’s material in a layer of sandy soil. Without context this information, despite being accurate and true, is not very useful. The relationship between the two separate layers tells you much more than the layers themselves. But at the end of the day all the artifacts are sitting in the lab because of course the first layer had to be removed to gain access to the second so how can we preserve these relationships? Mapping of course!

Every time a context is determined it is recorded and mapped before being excavated. There are many methods of doing this including using a total station, triangulation, baseline measuring, etc. At first this felt tedious but after Brooke and I completed an aerial map of context 19 and I went to submit it, Prof. Connolly showed me dozens and dozens of maps and contexts forms that had been previously completed for operation area 1. It was then that I understood the importance of mapping. In one folder he possessed a plethora of information such as construction methods, occupation, chronological order of construction, material densities, cultural depth, etc. the list truly goes on and on. It was clear to me that while artifacts tell you much about who were there, understanding their contexts tells about what they did.

Mapping becomes even more necessary when conducting landscape archaeology. When trying to understand a bigger picture about a site such as land use, trade routes, movement, etc. maps allow us to see patterns that would otherwise be impossible to see.

I gained an appreciation for landscape archaeology on Big Island when the team mapped out 40 Cairns and we were able to see their positions on a Google map of the island. I realized how much one could learn from spatial patterns such as why and how they were they made. We can learn so much without ever getting our trowels dirty.

I’m excited for the future of archaeology because of the advancements in mapping technology. Technologies like photogrammetry or VR site recreations will help us gain more information about sites as well as preserve that knowledge and make it easily accessible.

The 2018 field school has allowed me to get my hands dirty but I think the most important thing I have learned is what makes an archaeologist an archaeologist. That is the ability to make sense of it all and to preserve that information. The best part is these skills are highly transferable to many occupations. It is something I appreciate now and something I can see myself doing. Now when I’m asked why I pursue archaeology I tell them because I’m piecing together the story of humanity and then I ask them if they want to see my maps!

— Daniel Kavanagh

For every day in the field excavating, you can estimate about 3 days in the lab to deal with the material recovered…Stephanie shines a light on some of the more hidden aspects of archaeology. — Kate

Throughout the 2018 field school we have been steadily accumulating artifacts from the days we have been on the Nassau Mill site, BcGn-23. By Thursday May 17, we had finished collecting most of this year’s artifacts [ Although a big whack just came in on the 28th! — Kate ]  and have over 6000 artifacts from 12 new contexts plus the previous 34 contexts of which we continued excavating about 15 of these.

When you think archaeology, I would assume you picture Indiana Jones or Lara Croft, people whose main job is in the field gathering artifacts and avoiding explosions. And while these media perfectly show the destruction of sites that comes from archaeology, though in a slightly different manner, these media do not show what takes the most time and is one of the larger parts of archaeological work…Lab work!

I know I’ve enthralled you in what I’m about to describe to you, but it is not dull like you may have been led to believe. Lab work consists of cleaning artifacts, letting them dry, cataloguing, recording the information in a database, and finally storing or displaying the artifacts. This is the time when artifacts are categorized, identified, and historically placed to date the site. This part is not shown in media; and the real-world issues come from those last two processes. This issue is called backlogging; and occurs when artifacts are either not recorded or left without a proper storage facility. This has become an increasing problem in the discipline and in particular North American archaeology.

Recording and storage or displaying artifacts is a problem not just faced in general North American archaeology but also on our site. Last year’s field school had numerous artifacts, over 12000, that were not all recorded by the end of the course and had to be continuously recorded by volunteers during the fall semester. Even during this year’s first lab day we were recording catalogued artifacts from last year’s final excavation days, and we may not have everything recorded digitally by the end of this year’s field school.

It is not yet clear on how to tackle backlogging issues besides working through the artifacts, but then the issue of new sites and their artifacts becoming backlogged and so on becomes the main problem. It seems like a never-ending process that will keep people in the labs forever, but it also gives archaeologists jobs that are not directly out in the field. That may sound strange to you…“an archaeologist that doesn’t work in the field?!” But if we look at it percentage wise with field work and excavation being around let’s say 30%, that still leaves 70% of archaeological work left to do. That is lab work and writing papers and articles about the site to give to in some cases both the public and other archaeologists interested in the site and what it tells us.

Therefore, hearing that I am partial to lab work and don’t fancy myself an outdoorsman doesn’t mean I would be less of an archaeologist, what it means is I have a different part to play in an archaeological excavation that is no more or less important than those out on site digging up the past.

When I think of Lab days, I think of inside jokes, insane laughter, and soundtrack music played in the background. It sounds silly but honestly our lab days are some of my best memories, as it holds a day when everyone is together, and laughter is never short; and that may be the one thing I miss the most when June rolls around.

–Stephanie Hudson

Here’s Brooke’s account of our whirlwind interlude on Big Island. — Kate

This last week our field school took a trip down to Pigeon Lake to work at Big Island for a couple of days. Big Island, also known as Boyd or Chiminis island is the largest undeveloped  island in southern Ontario. The island has been used by Indigenous people for thousands of years, and is still of cultural value to the Curve Lake First Nations. The ecologically diverse island contains a variety of unique wildlife and ecosystems, such as coniferous forests, alvars, open fields, wetlands, and open maple forests. Big Island was originally in Curve Lake’s possession, before being sold by an Indian agent to the Boyd family in the late 19th century. Boyd used the island first for its lumber and later farmed. Since then, its ownership has been transferred to various private owners, before being donated to the Kawartha Land Trust in 2015.

Going to Big Island was a nice break from our usual site at the Trent campus, and it was a great experience, highlighting some of the lesser known aspects of archaeology that precede excavations. Although it was crazy hot, and there was a lot of poison ivy, it was fun working at and exploring the island, and there were lots of great instagrammable moments!

This blog post from Charlotte gives some good insight into the experience of doing archaeology, and how persistence and care pays off! — Kate

Archaeology is hard work. I realized this within the first few days at the site, when we began shovelling piles of dirt, scraping rocks out of units, and carrying buckets of that dirt and rock around the site. There have been days when the shovel seems to be continually bouncing off rocks and getting stuck on roots, and sometimes the unit being excavated does not seem to be getting any deeper no matter how many buckets of dirt we take out of it. This is not to mention all the work of mapping the site and locations within the site (which is a breeze for people with good math skills but can be a nightmare for those, like myself, who don’t like math and haven’t practiced it since high school). All in all, it is exhausting work.

However, the rewards for this work are great. For me, it was an extraordinary experience when my group was able to find several pieces of a ceramic maker’s mark and fit them back together into one piece. It was so exciting to be able to find those pieces scattered in the dirt and put them back together in their original form. It made me feel like I was piecing history back together, a history that no one else knew about because we were uncovering it for the first time.

Though the work is not always that exciting and we can spend all day digging and by the end find that we did not uncover anything new, when we process the artifacts in the lab we are able to see all the interesting bits and pieces others have uncovered throughout the week. Seeing the artifacts displayed in the lab shows how much we really are uncovering from the site, even when it does not feel like it or when I don’t personally find the artifacts. For me, this makes the work exciting. Being able to help uncover, even in a small way, the history of this site is a great experience, and I am excited to be a part of it.

— Charlotte Clemens

Here’s a post from Jodie recounting her lab day experience. — Kate

Due to the surprise rain this Tuesday morning we came to the Archaeology Center and began to clean the artifacts accumulated from the previous week. Myself and a few others cleaned the artifacts from context 20.1, 18, and 14.

The process of cleaning the artifacts from this site is very simple as the artifacts are stable and won’t fall apart as they are placed in water.

We fill basins with lukewarm water and place an artifact into the water and once it is wet we use a toothbrush to clean off the dirt. Once clean, we place the artifacts onto trays so they can dry overnight.

In all of these contexts there were a lot of bone and context 14 was all bone with a small amount of glass and ceramic.

This was exciting because the other two times we did artifact washing there was a lot of metal, so it was fun to interact with something new. I also really enjoy trying to identify what type of bone is present and what animal it is from.

It’s funny when someone picks up a pig tooth because at some angles a tooth can look similar to a human tooth.

There were a lot of cow and pig in the context 14 box which made it fun to try and guess which bone came from what animal.

There were 3 mandibles that still had teeth in them and one had a tooth that came out but fits perfectly back into the cavity.

There were also 2 boar tusks which was really cool to see, at first it was hard to identify what it was but once I cleaned the dirt off of the tusk it was easier to see what it was.

There was also a very small mandible that I at first thought was a claw but then realised that it had small teeth further back, we were informed that it was a small rodent and that it was most likely a mouse jaw.

Overall, my favourite faunal find from the site would have to be the squirrel skull that was found in the basement of context 14, its really small and sort of cute.

— Jodie Leach