Artifacts & Excavation

Okay, so in the twisted little world of Maria, blogging is something you get to do for fun! I've been neglecting weekly posts in lieu of real homework other assignments, simply because I've been depriving myself of anything I consider pure fun while I'm overwhelmed with a dayjob + 13 units. Today's email from Charles served to remind me that, hello, posting to this blog constitutes part of my grade. So here we go!

Following are some photos from Saturday before last, the day that we had a visit from Ruben Mendoza, and the day we got to start opening up Real Excavation Pits. Mr. Mendoza gave us a presentation on artifacts that might be found in areas similar to ours. He also talked with much excitement about his Mission Solstice Survey project. It sounded pretty cool, so I looked him up online. Here's his Academia.com webpage; it's got a bio and some links to his papers and books: http://csumb.academia.edu/RubenMendoza

Here's Ruben showing us one of the many artifacts he brought along with him. The one he's holding up is a rounded tile game piece or bottle stopper. Gotta keep the bugs and dust outta that wine!

After Mr. Mendoza's presentation, we got back down to work. I was in a crew with Melissa, Elizabeth and Amber, and our task was to mark the official 5m x 1m boundaries of Trench 1 (T1). We did a fancy thing involving two measuring tapes (thanks for the loan, Hiro!) in order to get precise boundary measurements on account of the slope of the hill. The fancy thing is called triangulation, and I feel very lucky that my grade isn't dependent upon explaining it to you. Here's Melissa and Elizabeth wrapping pink cord around the metal stakes, once all of our boundary points were measured out.

And here's T1, all marked up and ready to go!

We found quite a few surface artifacts when we were clearing the area of grass and detritus before measuring out the boundaries. We piled them up to include with the other artifacts found in the 0 - 10 cm level. Some folks might just see a big pile o' rocks, but we students over at DSCQHR are Smart and see pieces of red tile, molded glass, and fired brick fragments.

Here is a photograph of a badass pickax, just because I really like it.

Later in the afternoon, we were joined by Stephen, Jamie and Kristen. We had more people digging than screening, so I wandered back down to the gardening shed to see if there were any more 1/4" screens. There weren't any of the large screens left, but I found this darling, single-person screen. It's made out of an old desk drawer! This was my view for the rest of the afternoon:



It felt pretty awesome to be starting in on the for-reals excavation pits (and trench!). I was pretty pooped by the end of the day, and didn't get a photo of T1 after we started digging, which is a shame. It looked very different after just a few hours: quite a big dent in the earth whereas in the morning it was just another indistinguishable part of the hill. It looks like we're switching pits/trenches every week; I'm looking forward to hearing about what else there is to be found in it!

DSCQHR - Working Hypothesis

Sanborn Map of DSQHR dated 1897. Note location of Josephinum Orphanage and, to the immediate east, the kitchen and boys dormitory. The field to the east is the western edge of the DSCQHR excavation site.

DSCQHR Working Hypothesis:

I will be modifying this post during the course of the week with other materials but would like to advance a working hypothesis for our very interesting site along the following lines and we can see how well it holds up:

The DSCQHR artifact assemblage deposition results from preparing macadam or tarmac access road to the pumphouse and well.

On May 14th, 2001, at Trench 1A (the 1m by 5m), our team excavated the remains of a possible macadam or tarmac path of an as yet undetermined width at approximately the 10cm to 20cm level. This macadam or tarmac structure appears composed of broken stone mixed with asphaltic cement. Immediately below the approximate 10cm level of this macadam layer is what appears to be a foundation layer of compressed broken stone. Both the layer of broken stone and the layer of macadam evidence signs of having been subjected to heavy pressure, perhaps a steamroller. Our team also excavated a large piece of terracotta drainage tile as well as a possible piece of interlocking concrete curb block.

This macadam road structure is perhaps the most important feature excavated at the site to date for its presence offers a means by which a hypothesis may be advanced that explains the deposition of the assemblages we have collected so far.

The entire site at the 80m and 90m transects appears to have been leveled prior to the macadam or tarmac path construction with fill. This fill contains a significant amount of assemblage, highly fragmented and disarticulated. At first glance this fill contains artifacts datable anywhere along a range of say 1830 (for the glass trade beads) to the early twentieth century (carnival glass fragments); however, given significant number of cut nails unearthed, one may tentatively conclude that a major source for the deposition of this assemblage occurred between 1883 and 1906 (the date of the construction of the main seminary building that was to become the DSCQHR convent complex and the San Francisco Earthquake of 1906).

Photograph of artifacts found in test pit 1A, 04/30/2011,DSCQHR, level 20-30cm.

There is a large amount of white slipware with white paste that, given its sturdy utilitarian profile, suggests use in an institutional setting befitting an orphanage or school kitchen. This white slipware may be found bioturbated as surface scatter from the 0m transect through the 90m transect. Coarse red fired brick fragments are to be found in large quantities. It is known that construction materials employed at the DSCQHR complex utilized large numbers of such brick. This fill layer contains artifacts consistent with, but not necessarily exclusive to, a dormitory or kitchen building destroyed by earthquake and (or) fire circa 1906).

Detail of Sanborn map dated 1897 showing layout of Linda Vista Winery (McIver property) located to the immediate east of the DSCQHR site. The McIver mansion was destroyed by fire in Nov. 1898.

A secondary but important note should be made of the following event that occurred to the immediate east of the DSQHR site in 1895, the burning of the McIvor Mansion at the Linda Vista winery, the San Francisco Call reported the incident as follows:

Linda Vista Razed by a Conflageration
Beautiful McIver dwelling at Mission San Jose Burned with Its Contents

Mission San Jose, Nov. 8. – Linda Vista. The beautiful home of C. C. McIver was totally destroyed by fire at 8 o’clock this morning entailing a loss of $50,000, covered by $25,000 insurance. Heavy wind was blowing in nothing could be done to save the structure, although there was a good water supply. Efforts were made to save the costly furniture, but little could be rescued.

The fire started on the roof from sparks from the chimney. Mr. McIver is a wealthy winemaker of this vicinity, and his home was the finest in this end of the county. Linda Vista has been noted for its hospitality. (Source: San Francisco Call, Nov. 8th, 1898)

Many of the artifacts unearthed so far evidence signs of exposure to heat. There are several sherds of glass that appear to have metal oxide residue deposited across both obverse and reverse surfaces. Although the artifacts so far unearthed do not demonstrate a provenance from the high-end of the social scale, admixture of materials from the McIver fire should perhaps be kept in mind.

The Barber Asphalt company was one of the largest asphalt companies in the Western United States during the late 19th and early 20th century. Barber Asphalt Company largely utilized asphalt mined near Santa Barbara. It turns out that California developed a world-class asphalt product that competed favorably against materials mined in Trinidad and Bermuda (more on this later). Note the presence of concrete curb blocks, crushed rock, and asphalt road surface. The composition of the asphalt at the DSCQHR site is a bit different but utilizes similar principals on a smaller scale.

Summary: the assemblages so far recovered from the DSCQHR site suggest that an area running from north to south at the 80m and 90m transects was leveled using fill dirt containing artifacts from (a.) most likely DSCQHR convent debris resulting from the 1906 earthquake, (b.) artifacts possibly resulting from debris of the McIver Mansion fire of 1898, or (c.) fill dirt containing artifacts from both the 1906 and 1898 events. It has not yet been determined where these respective debris were originally deposited prior to use along the 80m and 90m transects. Their location at the present excavation site is in all likelihood a secondary deposition related to construction of the well access road.

The fill containing the 1898-1906 horizon materials served to provide a level grade necessary to receive the crushed rock foundation and the superposed macadam or tarmac road surface. The purpose of this road surface was to provide access for drilling and maintaining the well, pumphouse, and irrigation system envisioned for the agricultural operation of the DSCQHR orchard and farm assets in the first half of the 20th century.

The type of asphalt system utilized at the DSQHR site began to fall out of favor with civil engineers for use in main public roads about 1911. Its presence on a private access road, however, could have continued into the 1920s.

Any theories about artifacts?

Hey guys, now that we've been collecting artifacts from our site for a few weeks now does anyone have any ideas about what they tell us about our site? So far we've collected a lot of glass shards, brick, tile, nails and assorted odds and ends. Anyone have a guess beyond a Fransiscan trash heap?

Christy Rocks

Lots of awesome things happened today over at good old CU2, 
and I'll be posting about them later.

But really... doesn't this kind of just say it all? :D

Day 5 On-Site

This week was awesome. I had a gung ho team and we worked hard all day--augur in the morning, excavation unit in the afternoon. We got a lot done and had fun doing it. Thanks to Tung for showing Vanessa, Sandra and I how to augur down near the site datum. Vanessa documented dirt samples with the Munsell guide, while Sandra worked the augur and I screened the dirt. At 20cm below, we switched duties but quickly found that the augur wouldn't dig. After spending the rest of the morning inventing new ways to augur and sweating it out, we had only dug 1cm deeper (total of 21cm, rather than 60cm as originally planned). I wish we had a photo! Professor Hartley brought out the steel probe and corer in a last attempt to find something near the augur pit, but no luck. The corer was already bent so we didn't try using it. The steel probe got into the earth with Andrew's help, but Brenna concluded that there wasn't much to be found here. Professor Hartley agreed, so we opened our excavation unit uphill with the rest of the class.



Thanks to crew chief Brenna for teaching Sandra and I how to start an excavation unit (CU4) and keeping us to the scientific methods of archeology. After measuring and staking the 1 x 2 meter unit with pink string, and using the Pythagoream Theorem to ensure 90 degree angles, the team began the real physical work of leveling the unit. Since the unit is on a slight slope, the higher dirt needs to be scraped, removed, and screened. The dried earth added challenges and extra steps, which will likely be compounded as the weeks go on. Around 1600 a 3 x 6cm light orange pottery sherd (not unlike the artifacts shown during Dr. Mendoza's lecture) was discovered in the southwest corner of our unit. Using a plumbob, line level, and tape measure we plotted the artifact, then bagged it.



It would be a good experience to rotate to different units, but there is also experience to be had in staying with the same unit for the entire process. I would like to work in the same unit from start to finish. Of course it is up to the Prof, but for the sake of discussion... What do you guys think?

Description of the Artifacts

Hey guys!

Last week Jamie, Stephen, and I worked together to organize the artifacts we had collected so far, we cataloged them in a list by test pit/auger so here it is!

Description of artifacts:

Test pit # 1 4/23/11

0-30cm bs:

Ceramic, red brick material, burnt bone

Test pit # 1 4/30/11

0-20 cm bs:

Brick, cement, bone

20-30 cm bs: glass bead, charcoal, nails, screw, ceramic-ware

Test pit #2A

0-20cm bs: bone, brick, tile

Test pit #2B

0-10cm bs: rodent dentary, bone fragments, diagnostic bone, glass, historical nail, brick

Test pit #3A

0-20cm bs: tile, red brick, possible bone, wood

20-30cm bs: bone, brick, glass

Test pit #3B

0-10cm bs: glass (amber and clear colored), greenish glass shards, red brick, white material

10-22 cm bs: glass shards, bone bits, cement, burned ceramic, wood, seeds, tile, possible mortar, tile with dark band in the middle, burned bone

22-30cm bs: small metal binding or clamp

27 cm bs: large brick piece

Test pit #4

0-10cm bs: earthenware, ceramics, seeds, tile, cement, igneous rock, historical nail

10-20cm bs- bone, seed, brick, ceramic

20-30cm bs: nails, ceramic/earthenware, glass, brick, tile, metallic corroded material

Test pit #5

0-10cm bs: nail, cement, brick, bone shard (non-diagnostic)

10-20cm bs: bone frags, rock with scratch in it, burnt rock, tile, glass, brick, nails

20-30 cm bs: tile fragments, brick, glass, charcoal, bone

Test pit #6

0-10cm bs: brick, possible mortar, wood shards

10-20cm bs: mortar, tile, wood

Test pit #7

0-30cm bs: brick, ceramic, tile shard

Test pit #8

0-15 cm bs: 2 white outside rim ceramic sherds with blue center, possible porcelain brick, tile, processed metal, imprinted?

15-30 cm bs: brick, mortar

Test pit # 9

0-10cm bs: brick, mortar, blue glass bead, non-human rib, 2 pottery sherds, tile shard, glass

10-20 cm bs: possible obsidian flake, brick, tile, glass (milky pearlish color), bone

Test pit #10

20-30 cm bs: 2 clumps of possible mortar

Test pit #11

0-10 cm bs: mortar, brick, frags, wire hook

10-20cm bs: charcoal, tile

20-30 cm bs: pos. mortar, charcoal, brick, tile

AC #1

Surface- earthenware with floral pattern

AC #2

0-25cm bs: seeds

Auger #3

Possible coal, brick with dark band in cross section

Auger #5 0-80 cm bs

Bag 1 0-20cm: brick, pottery

20-40cm: black material, charcoal, nail, wood

40-60cm: light colored stone, metal, brick, wood

60-80cm: nail, black rock

Auger #6

0-25cm: brick, cement

25-50cm: seeds

50-75cm: seeds

Transit & Stadia Rod Info

Hi Friends,

I don't know if anyone else has a hard time keeping the information on how to use and read transits and stadia rods in their heads, but I sure do! I did a bunch of research, and thought I'd post my results here.

A Nice Tutorial on the Using and Reading the Transit

I found it surprisingly difficult to find information on "How To Read A Stadia Rod". I think it might be because there are so many different styles of stadia rods, and they all have different measurement markings. The info I have here isn't specific to the 3 Meter Stadia Rod we've been using, but I found it helpful. I hope you do too!

How To Read A Stadia Rod, Including Info on the Stadia Constant

If anyone else has info they'd like to share on these two instruments, I hope you'll feel free to post it here! Goodness knows I can use all the help I can get.  :)