Overview
Introduction
“The best way to show the development of buildings, roads and yards is by a diagram, where the three-dimensional phases of sites are drawn two-dimensionally as framed blocks of land use. The purpose of such a diagram is to show the life spans for different kinds of land use: such as for instance to the east there were two successive alterations within a building, while to the west, one open area was in use continuously and unaltered. Land use diagrams can be drawn at any level of interpretation, for groups as well as for phases” Hammer (2002, Section 3.6).
Archaeological Land Use in this case then, refers to the identification and interpretation of different activities, functions, or purposes associated with specific areas within an archaeological site (see Steane 1993). It involves using and synthesising the stratigraphic sequence (as visualized in the Harris Matrix) to understand how humans utilised and modified the land in different ways over time, providing insights into past societal practices and spatial organisation. Land use analysis then, is then a ‘spatio-chronological’ mode of analytical grouping that enables the reconstruction of past landscapes and the identification of patterns, transitions, and relationships between different forms of land use across a site. In this sense it is different from ‘lower order’ primary subgrouping and grouping and is designed to associate these groups into area or site wide activities (or inactivity). In this sense it helps archaeologists understand the dynamic nature of human occupation and how people interacted with their environment in the past.
Significant features like a cesspit, well or oven will have been given group numbers. At this stage in the post-ex process, these groups will be allocated to different land uses (e.g. ‘Oven Group 9’ will be put into land use ‘Building 1’). A single land use entity (e.g. building, road, open area) can exist across several phases of use, however (e.g. spanning medieval to 16th century)’. While stratigraphic integrity is essential, flexibility can be considered to ensure a clear narrative and identification of key features within the land use groups. Examples demonstrating this approach can be found in the published Middle Saxon London land use diagram (REF to add + Illustration). It is important to note that further insights and discussion on this matter can be provided by experts in the field.
As such, the process of defining ‘land use’ and its resulting outputs (specifically the land use sequence diagram and land use plans) are not applied to all sites, being most often deployed on complex urban stratigraphic sequences. Westman and Shepherd (1992, 441-2) make an explicit connection between defining land use and the creation of a “narrative synthesis” of the site through time. They note that the Land Use Diagram “can show the passage of time realistically, if necessary, but can show spatial relationships only schematically” and that ‘plans show spatial relationships more realistically” even if they only resemble “slices cut horizontally across the Land Use Diagram” (ibid.). This suggests that the Land Use Diagram should be viewed in context with other related elements, showing how time-related groups are arranged by space.
It should be noted that the classic formal DUA-MoLA style ‘Land Use Diagrams’ advocated by the likes of Westman and Shepherd (1992), Steane (1993) or Roskams (2001) are not necessarily common practice. But most large sites will include some form of synthesis (probably narrative) which takes into account some discussion of land use. How those land uses are defined may be more or less formalised depending on organisational or project practice. Land use documentation, then (especially any written text), can serve as the foundation for a chronological narrative and may facilitate sharing of knowledge about a complex site with specialists and project collaborators. While there may be some overlap with the more fine-grained stratigraphic narrative, this text has often been considered (particularly in the DUA/MoLA school) as being the essential building blocks for creating a comprehensive narrative or archive report.
The utility of traditional archaeological land use diagrams increases with the complexity of stratigraphic or spatial data. For instance, when dealing with a multi-period site where numerous phases of human activity have overlapped and affected the landscape over time, creating a detailed visual representation can be beneficial. A land use diagram can help simplify and visually present this layered history, making it easier to understand the sequence of events and their spatial relationship.
Similarly, when the spatial complexity of the site increases, as in the case of extensive urban excavations with multiple trenches, structures, and artefact concentrations, land use diagrams can help in visualising the distribution of findings across the site. This is especially true if these findings have varying relationships to each other in time and space. By providing a simplified bird’s-eye view, these diagrams can help archaeologists understand the broader pattern of the site’s use.
In an urban scenario, the layout of trenches would greatly impact the utility of a land use diagram. For example, if trenches are aligned along existing or past street grids, or are focused around specific structures, a land use diagram can help visualise the relationship between the archaeological findings and the urban topography. It can highlight zones of different activities (residential, industrial, etc.) and show how these zones relate to each other and to the site’s overall layout.
Moreover, land use diagrams can provide a valuable tool for public engagement in urban archaeology. They can help non-specialists visualise and understand the site’s past, enhancing the sense of local history and place.
Digital approaches to land use and the impact of GIS
Digitalisation of onsite and offsite operations including the uptake of Geographic Information Systems (GIS) to manage spatial data from excavations have greatly transformed post-excavation analysis in archaeology, but they haven’t completely eliminated the need for traditional archaeological land use diagrams. Instead, they have provided a more sophisticated and dynamic tool for creating and interpreting these diagrams.
GIS allows for the spatial analysis and visual representation of archaeological data in a more detailed and interactive manner. It enables the overlaying of various types of information such as topography, vegetation, hydrology, and archaeological findings on the same map. This kind of layered analysis provides a more comprehensive understanding of past land use patterns.
The flexibility and adaptability of GIS make it an effective tool for modelling different scenarios, thus aiding in the interpretation of archaeological data in ways that static diagrams can’t match. For instance, GIS can help identify areas of potential archaeological significance that need further investigation or preservation, which can be crucial in planning and development contexts.
However, traditional archaeological land use diagrams still hold value. They provide a tangible, simplified overview of findings, which can be helpful for public presentations, educational purposes, or initial analysis stages. Moreover, not all archaeological projects may have access to the resources or expertise needed to employ GIS.
Methods
Hammer (2002, Section 3.5) probably offers the best overview of the mechanical production of classic DUA MoLA style land use diagrams. As noted above she also suggests that they may not be necessary on less complex sites consisting of only one trench, where groups and land use codes can be coded together as part of one interpretative level. However, projects with large multi-trench sites with long stratigraphic sequences may prefer to establish group sequences for each trench separately and then link across excavation areas applying land use codes as a separate step. However, it should be noted that it is vitally important for any project that the methodology used is clearly articulated, together with definitions for the terminology. The following section draws upon Hammer’s approach but seeks to update and optimise the method for the construction of land use as a diagrammatic or as a narrative tool.
Stratigraphic Grouping and Land Use.
The process begins with the grouping of the stratigraphic sequence, where multiple groups can correspond to a single type of land use. The creation of group sequence diagrams for all areas under analysis should follow this process incorporating their suggested group date ranges. These diagrams are especially valuable as they allow for visual cross-referencing across different layers and areas of the site.
The MOLA-Headland Guidance for A14 Stratigraphic Analysis (MOLA Headland Infrastructure 2020) states: “Where features form part of more than one land-use, you must decide the primary function / land-use […]. If it does have more than one function, this can be discussed in the text“.
Central to the process is group discussion and the compilation of summaries, perhaps supported by groups plans, to establish a clear holistic understanding of the data. These discussions should be inclusive, incorporating various viewpoints to create a comprehensive understanding of the stratigraphic data. Additionally, integrating specialist reports or database lists that provide evidence of dating, small finds, and samples can greatly enhance the detail and depth of analysis.
Defining and Coding Land Use Types.
The next step involves linking these groups into specific types of land use, starting from the bottom of each sequence. It is useful for the process to begin by following the longest strand of group sequences while integrating shorter strands, structures and grouped features are essentially combined into buildings and open areas and broadly contemporary land use events (see list in resources below). For efficient referencing, each land use type should be assigned a unique, project-wide code, adhering to a standardised coding system defined by the overarching project or organisation. This code should be used for cross-referencing plans, databases, the land use diagram, and the report. Hammer (2002, Section 3.5) suggests that ‘Open Areas; demand special attention due to their varying nature. These are often defined by a stratigraphic soil horizon or surface, containing various features of use. That said, an open area can continue with numerous new soil horizons over several centuries without necessitating a new code allocation. The allocated code need only change if the open area changes its function (e.g. from farming to quarrying) or else stops being an open area altogether. Hammer (ibid.) also suggests that each type of land use may also have its own ‘processual’ interpretation, summarising the processes of groups within a land use item, providing valuable insights into the use of different spaces over time.
The Forum on Information Standards in Heritage (FISH) has established a list of standardized vocabularies including the ‘FISH Thesaurus of Monument Types’ that is incorporated in national and regional Historic Environment Records, is used for indexing site types in OASIS records and archives of investigations, and has been used for describing settlement and landscape scale archaeological features on several major infrastructure projects.
Example Terminology: Land Use List
| Land Use Term | Prefix | Definition |
| Cemetery | C | Spatial grouping of more than 3 burials and any burial-related features (e.g. pyre-sites) |
| Field-system | F | Arrangement of ditches away from the core settlement that appear to be for agricultural or pastoral use (can include areas of bedding trenches) |
| Enclosure | E | Arrangement of ditches and/or fence-lines definitely forming an enclosure, typically within or in proximity to the core settlement. Note that enclosures may be sub-divided but the sub-enclosures do not need individual land use numbers in Oracle |
| Linear boundary | LB | A major linear ditch alignment that is a defining element of the settlement or landscape and not exclusively part of an enclosure or singular field system. NB Do not use term boundary for smaller sections of ditch whichcan be left as ditch group numbers (e.g. Ditch group 14.6) |
| Road/trackway | R | Linear feature defined by parallel ditches or a defined routeway (Holloway, metalled surface etc.) designed for movement of traffic. |
| Monument | M | A feature such as a henge, ring-ditch etc. that may be quite long-lasting (i.e. in use over more than one period/sub-period) |
| Palaeochannel | P | A relict stream or river channel marks the old course of a stream. A network of interconnecting palaeochannels would form one palaeochannel ‘land use’. |
Recommended Outputs
Please note that the formats mentioned are examples, and the actual output formats can vary depending on project requirements and preferences.
| Output Category | Description | Example Output Format |
| Land Use Plan (Analogue/Digital) | Visual representation of land usage over a certain period or phase. | Hand-drawn or digital plan (e.g. .jpg, .pdf, .dxf or .dwg) |
| Land Use Diagram (Analogue/Digital) | Diagrammatic representation illustrating specific aspects or sequences of land use. | Diagram or graphic representation (e.g. .jpg , .dxf, .dwg or .svg) |
| Land Use Diagram Layout Considerations: -Orientation Decision: The orientation (portrait or landscape) of the land use diagram is determined based on the content and space requirements, ensuring optimal presentation. -Alignment with Phase Plans: Maintaining consistency, the land use diagram is aligned with the phase plans, allowing for easy comparison and understanding of the spatial relationships. -Consistent Positioning of Land Use Items: By placing the land use items in the same positions as on the plan, recognition and comprehension of the spatial relationships are enhanced. | ||
| GIS Plots or Layer Files (Digital) | Geospatial files capturing the spatial representation of land use and its attributes. | GIS files including data tables, shapefiles, and spatial raster data Metadata (e.g. .csv, .shp, .kml, .gdb, .gml, .geojson, .geotiff), or vector graphics format (e.g. .dxf, .dwg or svg) |
| Land Use Text (Digital) | Detailed textual information or description related to land use, its phases, or features. | Word document or text file (e.g. .docx or .txt) |
| Recommended Text Contents: -Summary of Each Land Use: Each land use is concisely described, highlighting its characteristics and key features, providing an overview of its significance within the site. -Component Groups/Subgroups Description: Detailed descriptions of the component groups and subgroups within each land use are provided, offering specific information on their attributes and associations Relationship of Land Use Text to Stratigraphic Narrative: -Identification of Cross-over with Stratigraphic Narrative: Connections and overlaps between the land use analysis and the stratigraphic narrative are identified, ensuring a comprehensive understanding of the site’s development and the integration of both elements. -Land Use Text as Building Blocks for Narrative/Archive Report: The land use text serves as foundational elements for constructing a comprehensive narrative or archive report, integrating information from various sources to present a cohesive and detailed account of the site’s history. | ||
It is important to note that some elements can exist in both analogue and digital formats, depending on the specific project requirements (example file types above are for digital formats only).
Additional Considerations:
- Variation in Archive Report Expectations: Recognizing the differing expectations of curators regarding content and format, flexibility in report preparation is essential to meet specific requirements.
- Post-excavation Assessment Focus on Research Aims and Outputs: Further analyses, including stratigraphic work, are directed towards elements of the site that align with the research aims and desired project outputs, ensuring efficient use of resources.
Header Image Credits: left to right – CC BY-NC 2.0 Wessex Archaeology JCB at work https://www.flickr.com/photos/wessexarchaeology/53473409949/. CC BY 4.0 Wessex Archaeology (2024) Digital Archive for Hornsea Offshore Wind Farm Project One (HOW01) 2015-2019 https://doi.org/10.5284/1116860. Example of a Land Use diagram from “Roman and Later London Excavations at 60-63 Fenchurch Street”. With Thanks to Tom Wells at Wessex Archaeology.