I'm afraid that I would have to disagree with David on this one.  Walls
are capable of being archaeological features whether they are above or
below ground.  If you have the records of exactly where they have been
found then you can treat them as archaeological objects.  And of course
like finds in any archaeological feature they can help date the wall in
which they were found.

However I don't think it matters too much which collection they are in
provided they remain associated with the information about how and where
they were discovered.

Trevor Reynolds
Collections Registrar
English Heritage 3 Bunhill Row, London EC1Y 8YZ
postal address English Heritage 1 Waterhouse Square, 138 Holborn, London
EC1N 2ST

-----Original Message-----
From: Museum discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
Behalf Of David Harvey
Sent: 14 August 2006 19:22
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Objects found within walls

Gretchen,

It ultimately depends on how you wish to use these arifacts. In my
opinion they aren't archaeological because they are above-ground and
are not identified with a specific strata or feature - which is
ultimately the basis for archaeological datam. They are closer to a
history or decorative arts type collection but also are unique and
pristine because they were deposited within walls and did not have a
longer subsequent history or provenance. And they are intimately
associated with architecture but do not comprise architectural
fragments.

=========================================================
Important Subscriber Information:

The Museum-L FAQ file is located at http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . You may obtain detailed information about the listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "help" (without the quotes).

If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "Signoff Museum-L" (without the quotes).