Mississippi Administrative Code › Title 16 - History, Humanities and Arts › Part 3 - Historic Preservation Division › Chapter 12 - Mississippi Standards and Guidelines for Archaeological Investigations › Rule 16-3-12.6.6 - Phase II Testing and Evaluation

Current through June 25, 2024
Phase II projects involve the testing of previously
				  identified archaeological sites for their eligibility to the National Register
				  of Historic Places (NRHP). This level of investigation may include controlled
				  surface collections, intensive shovel testing, test units, strip blocks, and
				  other appropriate methods for the determination of the extent and nature of
				  archaeological deposits at the site or sites. Again, due to the highly variable
				  nature of each site, this office will not issue a set of general specifications
				  for number of test units or other requirements. The end result of a Phase II
				  project should include, at a minimum, recommendations concerning the
				  eligibility of the site to the NRHP, and firm identification of site boundaries
				  within the project APE. If the site is recommended eligible by the consultant,
				  Phase II investigations should yield recommendations for potential
				  modifications of the project that might avoid impact to the site. Phase II
				  testing reports
SHOULD NOT
include proposed data recovery plans
				  and research designs. In accordance with 36 CFR 800, data recovery excavation
				  is an ADVERSE EFFECT to historic properties. All avenues of avoidance must be
				  exhausted prior to consideration of Phase III data recovery excavation.
Goals of Investigation
Phase II investigation evaluates the National Register
				  significance of the site through more extensive excavation, which samples and
				  characterizes archaeological deposits. The investigation provides an
				  understanding of the horizontal structure and its stratigraphy including
				  artifact and feature distribution; indicates the site's physical integrity,
				  noting any areas of disturbance; establishes the period(s) of occupation,
				  function, cultural affiliation, and associated contexts; and more closely
				  defines the horizontal and vertical boundaries of the site within the APE. More
				  precise boundary definition may be particularly important in some locations as
				  design examines alternatives to avoid the site. The investigation determines if
				  the site can address significant questions associated with the associated
				  contexts. It provides sufficient data to prepare a Phase III research design
				  addressing those questions. Sufficient comparative research is necessary to
				  determine the site's importance in relation to others of its period, cultural
				  affiliation, function, and region.
Depending on site content, an individual qualified under 36
				  CFR 61 as a prehistoric or historic archaeologist will direct field
				  investigation, research and data analysis, and report preparation. In Phase II,
				  other consulting professionals may also be needed, for example
				  geomorphologists, industrial archaeologists, and faunal specialist, etc. The
				  principal investigator directs all phases of investigation and is present
				  during field testing sufficiently to ensure appropriate field investigation
				  strategies are properly completed, field records including mapping and
				  stratigraphic sections are adequate, sampling is performed appropriately, and
				  artifacts are properly labeled and transported. Field analyses and
				  interpretation of strata and features and their relationship with associated
				  remains are performed by the principal investigator as the investigations
				  proceed. The proposal for Phase II investigations includes a discussion of the
				  necessary professional input and will be submitted and approved by MDAH prior
				  to the initiation of fieldwork.
Environmental Research
The site specific research of Phase II may require
				  additional environmental research to explore the research potential of the
				  site. For example, Phase II investigations may require a discussion of the
				  environmental context contemporary with the site's occupations. Include an
				  environmental context for the site drawn from previous and ongoing research.
Background Research
During Phase II, background research for both prehistoric
				  and historic period sites provides a well-developed cultural contexts defined
				  by theme, period, and physiographic region. In the Phase II level-of-effort
				  research should focus on comparative investigations of known periods of
				  occupation, parallel resource utilization, and similar site type in this area.
				  Such research examines the ways in which the subject site fits into the
				  contemporary regional site distribution and/or environmental and resource
				  needs. The goal of such research is to understand the components of the subject
				  site and address site significance.
Thus, such research defines the site type, its role, and
				  associated cultural context. Examination of previous work at known sites of a
				  similar type within the region establishes the data types and site structure
				  that may be anticipated at the site under examination. The context may provide
				  an understanding of the ways in which the site may have related to others of
				  the same period and cultural association. Knowledge of the context and site
				  type provides the background or comparative overview for interpretation of
				  findings at the subject site and allows the researcher to identify areas
				  needing further investigation within each context and frame potential research
				  questions. It thus permits evaluation of site significance by establishing the
				  major research questions that the site can address. Comparative research also
				  establishes the rarity of the site type, the representativeness of the subject
				  site, and the level of integrity of similar sites.
Site-specific and contextual/site type research involving
				  both prehistoric and historical archaeological site investigation includes
				  intensive interviews with local informants and state and regional authorities
				  in the area of research and region. It involves a review of published and
				  unpublished site reports at MDAH and other repositories in the state (e.g.
				  University collections) that examine relevant contexts, site types, and
				  specific aspects of the site to permit its evaluation. For example, such topics
				  may relate to specific artifact types and other forms of data that may be
				  characteristic of the subject site type, building or structure forms, diet,
				  settlement distribution by land form, etc. Particularly for sites related to
				  prehistoric occupation, locate and assess the importance of artifact
				  collections related to the site and comparative collections related to the site
				  type and/or specific artifact types and materials of particular interest at the
				  site. The former is needed to more fully understand the contents of the site
				  and the later contributes to the comparative analysis and is examined at this
				  phase to frame research questions and prepare a research design if needed.
When examining historical archaeological sites and
				  associated aboveground remains, also complete sufficient research specific to
				  the site and its immediate community and delineate the relevant context(s) and
				  site types to establish site significance. Again, examine relevant
				  archaeological reports, MDAH files, and other professional sources that deal
				  with the site type and its context(s). Locate comparable archaeological sites
				  and standing buildings and structures and their remains that relate to the site
				  type in the region to understand materials, construction techniques, size and
				  form, technology, design, and functions common to the site type. Field
				  examination of comparable standing properties in the locale in Phase II or III
				  may address issues excluded from available records. If not completed, finish
				  the examination of relevant property records and plats, death and marriage
				  records, census data, directories, local newspapers, building permits, town
				  records, institutional records, and similar records in town, city, and state
				  repositories. While much of this research should precede field investigations,
				  Phase II investigations can frequently point to additional areas of research
				  and ways of analyzing materials either in this phase or in Phase III. Such
				  research is an interactive process.
Thus, this broader study for both prehistoric and historic
				  sites determines the existing level of knowledge about the site type and its
				  context(s), the known levels of integrity of comparable sites within the site
				  type and the existence of comparative collections, and the capacity of the site
				  to investigate significant questions.
Field Investigations
Investigations in Phase II examine the portion of the site
				  within the APE, clearly defining site boundaries within and immediately
				  adjacent this area. These investigations must be sufficient to determine
				  whether the site is eligible for the National Register, or if the portion being
				  tested contributes to the site's eligibility. If significant, the effort must
				  also determine if the nature of the data are of such importance that the site
				  should be preserved for future investigations. If data recovery is appropriate,
				  then the Phase II data must be sufficient to permit the preparation of research
				  questions specific to the site type and each context it represents that are
				  addressed through data recovery. Phase II testing also considers whether the
				  most significant portion of the site extends outside the APE and would not be
				  impacted according to the existing design. This effort may or may not be
				  concluded with further testing outside the APE. Such extensions of
				  investigations should be discussed both with MDAH, the lead federal
				  agency/agencies, consulting federally-recognized Tribes, and other
				  participating parties. If this testing cannot be completed under the current
				  proposal, then the principal investigator will need to consult MDAH for an
				  amendment.
Phase II investigations open larger, more contiguous areas
				  of the site to define the nature and integrity of the archaeological deposits,
				  test and analyze selected features, and locate others found during research.
				  Investigations are sufficient to document the significance of the site. Phase
				  II testing usually involves a combination of close interval shovel testing with
				  1-X-1 m or larger excavation units, potentially extended by other forms of
				  testing such as remote sensing. The placement of units depends on the nature
				  and distribution of deposits. Shovel-testing at 5-m (16.4 ft.) intervals across
				  the site area more closely defines the locations of artifact clustering and
				  overall distribution, feature distribution, and previously approximated
				  boundaries and delineates the stratigraphy across the site. The hand excavation
				  of 1-X-1 units and 1-X-2 or more meter trenches investigates the range of
				  artifact types, numbers, and proportion of types, samples features, and defines
				  the stratigraphy. It examines vertical site boundaries and site structure.
				  While systematic arrays of shovel tests play an important role in locating
				  features and defining stratigraphy at the location of artifact finds, it may
				  not sufficiently characterize features, adequately document complex
				  stratigraphy, or place them in relation to visible remains as the larger units
				  do. The increased artifact sampling through both approaches permits more
				  accurate site characterization including delineation of site components.
Units are excavated in 10 cm arbitrary levels within their
				  strata by troweling or shovel-skimming. Dirt is screened through one-quarter
				  inch mesh and one-eighth inch mesh in features or areas of high artifact
				  concentrations, particularly with small artifacts such as micro-flakes or
				  beads. Separate artifacts by level within their respective unit unless
				  features, cultural deposits, and/or scatters require piece-plotting. Units are
				  excavated into sterile soils. Complete any feature excavation with trowels.
				  Depending on the size and artifact density of features, define, sample, and
				  excavate features sufficiently to identify and characterize them and provide
				  support for Phase III recovery. Their selection is judgmental, based on
				  previous experience with the site type and the features' potential to define
				  eligibility and develop questions to be tested in a potential Phase III.
				  Controlled use of mechanical removal of soil may also be necessary in areas of
				  fill. The depth and soil characteristics of the fill are previously identified,
				  and it is known that the sacrificed layers lack archaeological deposits of
				  National Register significance. If historic artifacts are not retained, then
				  state the reason for their disposal, for example, they existed in areas of
				  clear modern deposition. Both vertical and horizontal controls are maintained.
				  Document all excavation units, providing profiles of at least one wall, plans
				  of artifact concentrations and features and profiles, and photographic
				  coverage. Collect soil, carbon, and other samples appropriate to understanding
				  the site type and context.
Phase II investigations at historic period sites can
				  encounter stratigraphic challenges, a large variety of features, and dense
				  artifact deposits, and often possess associations with standing buildings,
				  structures, and ruins, circumstances, with some notable exceptions, not usually
				  found at prehistoric sites. The excavation strategy is often affected by these
				  factors as well as information provided from historical research. Phase II at
				  least partially defines the extent of foundation and other walls and their
				  relationship to each other and to the surrounding strata; gain a sense of the
				  interior strata and their associated deposits in building foundations; and
				  begin to address the nature of the surrounding landscape or setting to
				  understand the extent and complexity of the site. Sheet middens, as well as
				  discrete trash deposits, should be examined in relationship to the physical and
				  historical context in which they are located. Phase II field investigations at
				  historic sites should sample sheet middens, excavated in 10 cm levels within
				  strata, particularly in relationship to the buildings and their openings. This
				  stratigraphic control is intended to identify the existence of chronological
				  layering of deposits.
Functionally and temporally-related aboveground components
				  of historical archaeological sites may enhance an understanding of the overall
				  property. For buildings, structures, and their extant remains that contextually
				  relate to site deposits, include the following data: date of construction,
				  relevant history of ownership, location on a project maps, photographic views
				  of all elevations, setting, and temporal and/or functional association. Also
				  develop a relatively detailed description including the structural system and
				  exterior cladding materials; the way in which these materials were processed
				  and the techniques of construction; a sketch of the building form with exterior
				  measurements; number of stories; roof shape; orientation of front elevation to
				  roof gable; location, size, and material of the chimneys; exterior building
				  measurements; window and door placement and symmetry to the walls; decorative
				  detailing; relationship to and identification of related buildings, structures,
				  and landscape elements; relationship to buried components and to any associated
				  visible machinery or power source as may be the case with an industrial or
				  agricultural building; and interpretation of function if possible. Depending on
				  the extent of buildings and building remains, the principal investigator may
				  need to include an architectural historian versed in the region's architectural
				  styles, building materials, and building techniques for the investigation.
				  Because the focus of the study is likely to be the analysis of the floor plan,
				  room/building functions, and the relationships between buildings and landscape
				  features and archaeological remains, as well as the building's decorative
				  detailing, which may be quite limited, a background in vernacular architecture
				  may be needed.
Historic sites can possess deep, rich, temporally
				  homogeneous middens, as well as deep, recent fill. In these instances,
				  excavation by stratigraphic levels greater than 10 cm may expedite excavation
				  without sacrificing significant vertical control. Excavation by stratigraphic
				  level may also be necessary in areas of intricate stratigraphy. Carefully
				  document the use of and reason for this method. As explained above, sheet
				  middens are tested in 10 cm levels within strata. This excavation strategy
				  carefully documents the extent of each stratum and its interrelationship with
				  other strata, features, building remains, and artifact deposition. The approach
				  can enhance the understanding the horizontal distribution of features,
				  structural remains, sheet middens, and other deposits in relation to each other
				  and standing buildings and landscapes within the same stratum. This horizontal
				  analysis of site stratigraphy is often critical to the identification of
				  remains of each time period represented at the site.
Data Analysis
As research proceeds, it is understood that the direction of
				  data analysis may alter because of unanticipated data. By this stage of study,
				  it is incumbent on the principal investigator to pursue the data analysis that
				  best reflects the data and the context(s) to which the resources relate even
				  though such an analysis may deviate from his/her general research interests.
				  Another course would sacrifice increasingly scarce, nonrenewable resources.
In Phase II, analyze the site's vertical and horizontal
				  structure, including the soil stratigraphy across the site and the relationship
				  of the strata to site components and their associated structural remains,
				  features, and artifacts. Complete the basic counts of artifact categories by
				  strata and horizontal division, for example by grid unit and/or feature,
				  permitting the identification of artifact concentrations within them to
				  understand the ways in which the site was used. Examine diagnostic artifacts to
				  verify cultural affiliations and date site components. Conduct the radiometric
				  dating of prehistoric components as well as the preliminary examination of
				  faunal remains, shells, and seeds retrieved during excavation and through
				  flotation. And integrate environmental and documentary data with the results
				  from the analysis of the field data. The inclusion of catalogue sheets alone
				  fails to provide the analytical information required to understand the basic
				  vertical and horizontal distribution of artifacts across the site. The
				  distributional data derived from artifact counts should be summarized in table
				  format and illustrated on site maps, if possible.
The intent of the data analysis is to address two issues:
				  the level of site integrity and whether the data and associated features will
				  augment the understanding of the one or more contexts to which the site relates
				  as well as the development of the site itself. To address the first issue, the
				  field investigations and analyses need to indicate whether materials associated
				  with each component are or can be separate from the others and whether the
				  horizontal distribution of features and artifacts potentially reflect variation
				  in uses or time period of occupation across the site or later disturbance. It
				  is also important to establish the integrity of the site relative to others
				  through which the same questions may be addressed. The second issue examines
				  whether the investigation of artifacts and their associated strata and features
				  address such significant questions ranging from the structural characterization
				  of the site type, the understanding of early building form, the use of
				  technology, and commercial relationships to questions about diet, social
				  status, and the roles of household members. Integrate site-specific and context
				  data and applicable interpretations drawn in Phase I with the results of Phase
				  II investigations. Reanalysis of these initial data in light of Phase II
				  findings may be necessary. All artifacts returned to the laboratory are
				  cataloged, and the catalogue is placed in the report's appendix.