Research Strategy for the Study of Roman Pottery – 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

a) occasionally

b) regularly

c) 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:

a) physically

b) 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:

  1. a fabric series

 

  • a form series

4.2.3) Did you publish as a:

  1. 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:

  1. 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:

  1. 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)

  1. Time

  2. Money

  3. In-house
    facilities

  4. Access
    to reference collections

  5. Access
    to reports/libraries/databases

  6. Access
    to museums

  7. Scientific
    support

  8. Access
    to colleagues

  9. Attitude
    of employer

  10. Attitude
    of field director/staff

  11. Poor
    site recording

  12. Understanding
    of requirements

  13. 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

 

%d bloggers like this: