|
Study
Group for Roman Pottery (SGRP) SGRP Homepage
A
Research Strategy and Updated Agenda for the Study of Roman Pottery in Britain
These webpages are designed to be viewed
with the screen resolution set at 800 x 600
and text size at normal. HOW
TO
Research Framework
and Strategy Questionnaire
| NB
THE INFORMATION PROVIDED WILL BE ANONYMOUS |
Please circle, mark or tick some answers where appropriate
Section 1: Your background and experience
1.1 Personal information
1.1.1) How long have you been working
with Roman Pottery (cumulative experience):
a) up to 1 year,
b) 1-2 years,
c) 2-5 years,
d) more than 5 years (please
specify)
1.1.2) Are you working with ceramics:
a) in a professional capacity,
b) in an amateur capacity,
c) as a student (specify
level)
d) other (please
specify)
1.1.3) Do you work:
a) for a commercial Unit
b) freelance
c) at a museum
d) at a university or college
e) unpaid
f) other (please
specify)
1.1.4) Do you work on pottery
full-time or do you have another role as well. Please specify any other role.
a) full-time
b) part-time
c) other roles:
1.1.5) How many hours a week do you
work on Roman pottery.
a) 1-10
b) 11-20
c) 21-30
d) 31-40
e) 40+
f) other
1.1.6) Do you work on other pottery
and/or finds.
(Please specify and give
approximate proportion of time spent on each).
a) Prehistoric pottery
b) Medieval or post-medieval
pottery
c) Building materials
d) Clay pipes
e) Other finds (specify)
1.1.7) Do you specialise in one or
more period? (specify).
a) Prehistoric pottery
b) Roman pottery
c) Medieval pottery
d) Post-medieval pottery
1.1.8) How long have you been in your
present position?
a) up to 1 year,
b) 1-2 years,
c) 2-5 years,
d) more than 5 years (please
specify)
1.1.9) What geographic area does your
knowledge of ceramics cover:
a) town, (please
specify),
b) county, (please
specify),
c) region, (please
specify),
d) more than one
region (please specify),
e) plus continental
pottery, (please specify),
f) other (please
specify)
1.1.10) How often do you find
yourself working on pottery from an area for which your knowledge is limited
- occasionally
- regularly
- not at all
1.1.11) Do you have competence to
report on specialist wares (please specify).
a) amphorae
b) mortaria
c) samian
d) other wares (please specify)
1.1.12) Are you consulted as a
specialist (please specify areas and who by).
For:
By:
1.1.13) Do you have a particular area
of interest in Roman pottery (please specify within category):
Geographic
Site type
Ware type
Form type
Scientific analysis
Other (please specify)
1.1.14) Do you have other related
skills:
a) drawing
b) photography
c) small finds
d) coins
f) statistics
g) thin sectioning
h) residue analysis
i) computing
j) other (please specify)
1.1.15) What is your present income (gross
per year), or rate charged.
(If part-time on pottery, make this
clear).
a) £15-20,000
b) £20 -25,000
c) £25,000+
d) £100-150 per day
e) £150-200 per day
f) £200-250 per day
g) £250+ per day
1.1.16) Do you expect to be still
involved with Roman pottery in 5 years time:
a) yes
b) no
1.1.17) Do you have any experience
applying for grant funding for research:
a) no
b) EH
c) AHRC
d) NERC
e) local societies(please specify)
f) other (please specify)
1.2 Sites and reports
1.2.1) How many sites have you worked
on.
(in the last 5 years if possible,
otherwise as many years as feasible – give number of years)
a) 1-5
b) 6-10
c) 11-15
d) 16-20
e) 21+ (please
specify)
1.2.2) What site assemblages have you
worked on:
a) cremation cemeteries
b) inhumation cemeteries
c) rural settlements
d) villas
e) small towns
f) large towns/ coloniae
g) forts
h) military sites
i) vici
j) temple sites
k) industrial sites
l) kilns
m) wrecks
n) other
1.2.3) How many of the sites worked
on have been taken to assessment stage only.
a) all
b) most
c) some
d) none
1.2.4) How many of these assessment
reports have been/ will be published in any form (inc website)
a) all
b) most
c) some
d) none
1.2.5) How many have been/ will be
deposited with the relevant HER
a) all
b) most
c) some
d) none
1.2.6) How many warranted more study
than you were able to carry out.
-
a) all
b) most
c) some
d) none
1.2.7) Why did they warrant
more study
a) local significance
b) regional significance
c) national significance
d) good group(s)
e) good sequence/dating
f) new fabrics
g) new forms
h) first group from site/area
i) kiln group
j) other
1.2.8) How many of the sites worked
on have progressed/will progress to analysis.
a) all
b) most
c) some
d) none
1. 2.9) Where have these analysed
sites been, or will be, published.
a) local journal
b) national journal
c) specialist journal
d) monograph
e) internet
f) other
1.2.10) Do you have any personal
backlog of unpublished Roman pottery sites or research. Give details.
a) 0
b) 1-3
c) 4-6
d) 6+ (specify if
possible)
1.2.11) Assess them in terms of
significance
a) local significance
b) regional significance
c) national significance
d) good group(s)
e) good sequence/dating
f) new fabrics
g) new forms
h) first group from site/area
i) kiln group
j) other
Section 2: Methodology
2.1 Recording
2.1.1) Do you generally
use/follow the SGRP guidelines for recording for assessment and analysis (Darling
in JRPS 11; SGRP.org.uk), i.e. three potential stages
comprising:
Primary site data for pottery: prepared during or immediately after
an excavation, specifically to aid the excavation process.
Ceramic archive: basic ceramic data recorded post-excavation,
usually covering all contexts irrespective of stratigraphic or ceramic
value.
Research Archive : the ceramic archive upgraded with further
detail and quantification where necessary.
a) yes
b) no
2.1.2) What variations do you use, e.g. recording weight,
EVEs or other at ceramic archive stage (guidelines recommend sherd count,
with weight and EVEs usually forming part of the research archive). (please
specify reasons)
a) for primary site data
b) for ceramic archive
c) for research archive
2.1.3 Are there any other attributes which you think should be
recorded as standard
(please specify)
2.1.4 Do you have any concerns over current quantification methodologies
a) no
b) yes (what are they)
2.1.5) How often do you use characterisation techniques (e.g. thin
sectioning, NAA) for:
a) the entire type series,
b) major traditions,
c) specific sites,
d) other ( please specify)
2.1.6) Do you ever use residue analysis (please
specify when)
2.1.7 Do you ever have assistance for the processing of the
pottery, in the production of the final report and archives?
a) volunteers/local
non-professionals
b) work experience
c) apprentice
d) other specialists
e) project manager
f) other (please specify)
2.1.8 Is the production of a published type series ever part of your
programme?
a) yes
b) no
2.1.9) Have you worked on any kiln
assemblages in the past 5 years (give details) (see section 4.2 for further
questions on kilns)
a) yes
b) no
2.2 Reference collections
2.2.1) Is there a fabric and form type series for your area? If yes, is it
specific to:
a) a site
b) a town or group of sites,
c) a county,
d) a region
e) a ware
2.2.2) Where is it housed
is there access:
- physically
- on-line
2.2.3) What is the scope of the reference collection:
a) local wares
b) local kiln products
c) national Romano-British wares
d) imported wares
2.2.4) Does the reference collection comprise fabrics only or forms as
well?
a) fabric only
b) fabric and form
2.2.5) Is it actively curated and updated and, if so, by whom
2.2.6) If there is more than one type series within your area are they all
correlated?
a) yes, there is more than one type series
b) no, there is only one type series
c) the different types series are correlated
d) additional comments if needed
2.2.7) Of the sites worked on recently (see 1.2.1), how many had a fabric
and form type series that you could use:
a) physically
1) most
2) some
3) none
b) on-line
1) most
2) some
3) none
2.2.8) Are any of the fabric type series you use underpinned by fabric
analysis ( specify).
a. yes, if so how many?
b. no
2.2.9) Where there is no existing fabric and form type series, do you
routinely establish one. ( State if this is
based on an in-house fabric and form type series)
a) yes
b) no
2.2.10) Does this fabric and form type series draw on/cross-reference other
existing fabric and form type series?, eg NRFRC (Tomber and Dore 1998),
Oxfordshire (Young 1977).
a) no
b) yes (please specify)
2.2.11) Do you use the same common names as your colleagues
in adjoining regions.
a) yes
b) no
2.3 Specialists
2.3.1) What specialists are routinely consulted:
a) amphorae
b) mortaria
c) samian
d) scientific
e) other
2.3.2) Is all the relevant material given to the appropriate specialist?
a) no
b) yes
1) for the site
2) for particular contexts
2.3.3) If you have been selective, on what basis have you decided what
material to submit for a specialist report?
a) by context
b) by site phase
c) on ceramic criteria (i.e. completeness, rarity, etc)
2.3.4) Do you carry out any processing on behalf of the specialist:
a) quantification
b) dividing into fabrics and or vessel nos
c) illustration
d) stamp rubbing
2.3.5) Have you ever been unable to get access to a relevant specialist and
why
2.4 Equipment and facilities
2.4.1) What facilities are available to you during processing and
publication:
a) a binocular microscope,
b) computer with wordprocessing, database software, etc
c) scales (manual or computer-linked)
d) adequate working area
e) internet access
f) a microfiche reader,
g) scientific equipment for eg fabric analysis ( specify)
h) a library – in house/local
i) a draughtsperson,
j) a photographer,
k) archives officer
l) editor
m) other (please
specify)
2.4.2) What additional facilities would you like/should be made available
Section 3: Liaison, Project and Research Design, Research Framework
3.1 Consultation and liaison
3.1.1) Are you consulted when a project design/written scheme of
investigation likely to involve Roman pottery is being written.
a) yes
b) no
3.1.2) How do you calculate estimates for:
a) Tenders
1) day rate
2) rate per box
3) ball-park figure
4) what someone else decides
5) sum available
6) other ( please specify)
b) Site level
1) day rate
2) rate per box
3) ball-park figure
4) what someone else decides
5) sum available
6) other (please specify)
c) Assessment level (Ceramic archive)
1) day rate
2) rate per box
3) ball-park figure
4) what someone else decides
5) sum available
6) other (please specify)
d) Analysis level (Research Archive)
1) day rate
2) rate per box
3) ball-park figure
4) what someone else decides
5) sum available
6) other (please specify)
3.1.3) Do you routinely discuss the site with the
excavator:
a) at tender stage
b) before fieldwork
c) during fieldwork
d) before processing
e) during processing?
f) rarely
g) never
3.1.4) Do you usually receive adequate information about the site and its
phasing?
a) no
b) yes
1) before processing
2) during processing?
3.1.5) Are you able to work closely with other pottery, finds etc
specialists involved in the project?
a) yes
b) no
c) if yes, whom
3.2 Research Designs and Frameworks
3.2.1) Do you normally work with reference to:
a) a site specific research design,
b) a local research design,
c) a regional research design,
d) the SGRP research framework and agenda
e) regional research framework
e) other (please specify)
Please give details.
Section 4: Level of analysis
4.1 General
4.1.1) What criteria do you use for selecting which material should be
fully analysed.
a) stratigraphic association
b) refining site dating
c) ceramic critera (e.g. homogeneity of pottery)
d) dating gaps for the region
e) cost
f) other ( please specify)
4.1.2) How do you decide on the form of the analysis and publication i.e.
by group, type-series etc.
a) stratigraphic association
b) refining site dating
c) ceramic critera (e.g. homogeneity of pottery)
d) dating gaps for the region
e) cost
f) other ( please specify)
4. 1.3) How do you decide which pottery should be illustrated?
a) stratigraphic association
b) refining site dating
c) ceramic critera (e.g. homogeneity of pottery)
d) dating gaps for the region
e) cost
f) other ( please specify)
4. 1.4) If adjacent sites produce similar assemblages of
material, do you have a policy to avoid duplication?
a) yes
b) no
4.2 Kilns
4.2.1) If you have worked on a kiln assemblage did you adopt a different
processing methodology for these (please
specify).
4.2.2) Did you produce:
- a fabric series
- a form series
4.2.3) Did you publish as a:
- fabric/form series
- groups
- both
4.2.4) Was it the first kiln to be excavated in your region
or sub-region or was it an addition to a known kiln complex?
a) addition to known complex
b) first in broad region
c) first in sub-region
4.2.5) Were you able to research parallels and distribution:
- locally
- regionally
- nationally
4.2.6) Did you consult
a) gazetteer from Swan’s (1984) Pottery Kilns of Roman Britain
b) your local HER
c) local amateurs with access to unpublished material
Section 5: Publication strategy and policy:
5.1) Do(es) the organization(s) you work for routinely seek to:
a) publish in local journal (can be as a note)
b) publish in national journal (can be as a note)
c) publish as monograph
d) publish on website
e) deposit with relevant HER
5.2) Is there an editorial policy for ceramics. What does it cover:
a) editorial house style
b) house content style
1)full finds report published
2)ceramic evidence integrated into report
3)other (please specify)
c) drawing conventions
d) table conventions
e) other ( please specify)
5.3) Do you always outline the following in a report:
a) your aims and objectives,
b) your methods,
c) your constraints,
d) other ( please specify)
5.4) Are the results of your ceramic research integrated adequately with:
a) the archaeological story for the site
b) the archaeological story for the region
c) the archaeological story for the province
d) other finds research
e) historical research
5.5) How is the material integrated into an overall
narrative:
a) reported on in isolation
b) part of a wider study for region
c) part of a wider study for town
d) other ( please
specify)
5.6) Is each new site treated separately, or is it seen as contributing to,
and linking into, an overall urban or regional picture?
a) reported on in isolation
b) part of a wider study for region
c) part of a wider study for town
d) other ( please
specify)
5.7) Of the reports recently completed (see 1.2.1) how many were published:
a) complete in multiple hard copy,
b) combination of multiple hard
copy/fiche,
c) grey literature
d) internet
e) other (please specify)
5.8) What interval was there between completion of report and publication:
(tick longest and shortest)
a) 6 months,
b) 1 year,
c) 2 years,
d) more than 2 years
5.9) What control do you have over the final shape of the pottery report?
a) complete
b) some
c) none
Expand if you wish:
5.10) How important is it to you personally that your work is published?
a) very
b) moderately
c) not at all
5.11) Do you make use of the JRPS Bibliography.
a) yes
b) no
c) yes, initially when starting work in a new region
Section 6: Education and training
6.1) How did you learn your skills?
a) degree course
b) evening courses
c) professional training courses through EH, IFA or other
body
d) conferences
e) self taught on-the-job
c) apprenticed on-the-job
6.2) Do you communicate with other pottery specialists
through, and how often (weekly, monthly, yearly)
a) telephone
b) e-mail
c) regional
meetings,
d) national
meetings,
e) informal
meetings,
f) other (please
specify)
6.3) Are you involved in any ‘outreach’ such as:
a) informal
meetings for amateurs/professionals,
b) evening classes
for amateurs/professionals,
c)
lectures/workshops for amateurs/professionals,
d) summer schools
for amateurs/professionals,
e) popular
journalism for amateurs/professionals,
f) other (please
specify)
6.4) Have you/do you receive any training in:
- ceramic-based topics
- communication and presentation
skills, lecturing
- project management
6.5 Have you ever considered doing one of the MA or MSc courses offered in
ceramic studies?
a) yes
b) no
c) haven’t because of cost, time lost from work, other reasons
Section 7: Constraints
7.1) What are the major constraints to work on Roman pottery:
(Try to rank)
-
Time
-
Money
-
In-house
facilities
-
Access
to reference collections
-
Access
to reports/libraries/databases
-
Access
to museums
-
Scientific
support
-
Access
to colleagues
-
Attitude
of employer
-
Attitude
of field director/staff
-
Poor
site recording
-
Understanding
of requirements
-
Other
Section 8: Towards a wider perspective and the future
8.1) What published/unpublished reports (in the last 10 years) that you
have has access to have been most significant and useful
(please specify which reports and why).
8.2) Please list what you consider has/have been the most significant and
useful development(s) over the last 10 years in terms of, for example :
kiln excavation or publication
fabrics
typo-chronological studies
functional or social studies
specialist pottery
study of deposits of particular date where gaps/uncertainty exist
scientific analysis
corpora
backlog publication
alternative publication
new technology
8.3) Are you aware of any on-going work on significant pottery
assemblages regionally or nationally that is likely to be finished/published
in the next 5 years.
a) no
b) yes (please specify)
8.4) What ceramic research projects
would most benefit your local area or your region and why? (please expand
wherever possible). Examples might be:
kiln excavation or publication
study of deposits of particular date where gaps/uncertainty exist
scientific analysis of certain types
backlog publications
entering data from old sites
corpora
compilation of grey literature reports
assessment of museum collections
overview from existing published or grey literature
8.5) What aspect of ceramics would you work on, and why, if you were
allowed
(aspects that you may like to include are listed in 8.2)
a) 6 months
b) 1 year
c) 2 years
8.6) What do you think are the most important gaps in our knowledge of
Roman pottery in Britain? Reponses may include broad thematic issues, such as
the use of ceramics for functional, economic or social interpretation;
chronological applications or more generally the use of ceramics in
archaeology. Indications of general problems as well as problems in your
specific field or area of local knowledge will be helpful.
8.7) Looking at the SGRP Research Agenda generally or specifically for the
areas you work in do you feel any of the objectives have been adequately
addressed since its publication in 1997/2003. Please give region and details.
8.8) What objectives still need to be addressed?
8.9) Are there any new objectives you would add to the list?
8.10) Do you have any thoughts on what aspect(s) should be a priority over
the next 5 years.
8.11) Are you interested in collaborative research that
crosses traditional chronological boundaries:
a) yes
b) no
8.12) Do you have a local University with whom collaborative research could
be undertaken?
a) no
b) yes
If so, would you be interested?
a) no
b) yes
8.13) Have you ever been contacted by a local College or University with
students looking for suitable research degrees at either undergraduate or
postgraduate level?
a) no
b) yes
8.14) Have you ever been contacted by a local School looking for work
experience students?
a) no
b) yes
8.15) At what stage/level should training in pottery be made available:
a) BA degree course
b) advanced degree course
c) evening courses
d) professional training courses through EH, IFA or other
body (please specify)
e) conferences targeted at aspects of training (please
specify)
f) NVQ
Return to
Introduction
Return to Homepage
The Group would welcome
comments upon its WebPages and any information that may be useful to Group
members
and those interested in aspects of pottery of the Roman period. Please
send details to
|