Overview

Geoarchaeology’s history Geoarchaeology: aims, scale and focus The landscape building blocks and the Toolkit of Geoarchaeology Soils, paleosols, anthrosols Slope and Aeolian processes Alluvial processes Open air sites Lakes and Coasts Glaciation processes Coastal archaeology Caves and rock-shelters Landscape engineering Characterising landscapes: sediments and soils ‘Remote-sensing’ sediments and soils Human impact on the landscape ‘Ground-truthing’ sediments and soils

Assessment Strategy

-threshold -Third Class1. There will be sufficient knowledge to make some comment on the historical context and/or some historiographic context of the source, but it will be limited and patchy. There may be factual inaccuracies. 2. A limited explanation of the nature of the source, such as authorship, provenance, audience, and other material pertinent to the source’s interpretation, but critical reflection will be lacking. 3. No engagement with the specifics of the source, but rather a generalised answer about the wider document or the themes it deals with. A tendency towards paraphrasing. May misunderstand the text. 4. Shows some awareness of the wider significance of the source, but with little critical refection.5. The writing will generally be grammatical, but may lack the sophistication of vocabulary or construction. In places the writing may lack clarity and felicity of expression. Top 3rd (D+, 48) will have a solid framework for discussion and exhibit all of the above criteria, those in the lower bands (D, 45, D- 42) may have variable degrees of most of the above elements, may miss out important key debates, have patchy coverage, or be disorganised and poorly expressed. Pass at 38: will have many of the qualities of D- but will be less detailed, may have poor organisation, may lack basic knowledge, be particularly poorly written, may have few or no references, may lack a bibliographyFail (below 38) (F1, F2, F3 etc)A failed assessment will in varying degrees:1. Show little or no knowledge of the historic or historiographic context of the passage and may misinterpret the nature of the source.2. Fail to discuss the nature of the source, such as authorship, provenance, audience, and other material pertinent to the source’s interpretation. 3. No engagement with the specifics of the source and tendency towards irrelevance.4. Fail to identify the source’s wider significance. 5. The author’s meaning will be obscured due to clumsy expression and misuse of vocabulary.

-good -Upper Second class1. Demonstrates a clear familiarity with the historical and historiographic context of the source, and relates this to the contents of the source. Knowledge is extensive, though might be uneven in places. 2. Comments on nature, authorship, and other material pertinent to the source’s context, and draws out significance of this for interpretation of source. At the lower end of this markband, implications may not be fully developed. 3. Engages intelligently with the specifics of the source to analyse language and/or meaning. At the lower end of this markband, ideas may not be fully developed. 4. Relates the source to the wider themes of the course with reference to the source’s wider significance. In the higher range of this mark band, answers will make reference to other contemporary or historiographical sources.5. The writing will be clear and generally accurate, and will demonstrate an appreciation of the technical and advanced vocabulary used by historians. Ideas will be presented clearly.Note: The upper band (B+, 68) in this class will demonstrate a more detailed nuanced interpretation than lower 2i (B-, 62), the lower grades will have most of the above qualities in varying degrees.

-excellent -First class 1. Demonstrates an excellent knowledge of the historical and historiographic context of the source. Understands the significance of that context and demonstrates such understanding by relating it to the contents of the source in a clear and compelling way.2. Clear and original analysis of the nature of source, such as authorship, provenance, audience, date, and other material pertinent to the source’s interpretation. 3. Relates the source to the wider themes of the course in an independent and original way. Makes pertinent and striking comparisons with other contemporary or historiographical sources.4. A compelling analysis of language and/or meaning that engages closely with the specific source.5. The writing will be clear, fluent, and accurate. The range of vocabulary and linguistic idioms will be appropriate to the issues discussed. Ideas will be presented concisely and clearly.Marks in the upper first (80 +, A, A*) will demonstrate the above qualities to an exceptional degree, or may show an outstanding grasp of the historiography, or the source provenance, or will be original and particularly well expressed. Marks at 74 (A-) may show many of the above characteristics but may not comprehensively cover all areas.

-another level-Lower Second class1. Demonstrates knowledge of the source’s historical and historiographic context but without linking this to the specific contents of the source under consideration. There may be some inaccuracy, but basic knowledge will be sound. 2. Some discussion of the nature of source, such as authorship, provenance, audience, and other material pertinent to the source’s interpretation, but critical reflection will largely be lacking. 3. Some attempt to engage with the specifics of the source, but this may be a largely generalised answer about the document or the themes it deals with. May tend towards paraphrasing rather than analysis. May contain some misunderstandings.4. Briefly touches on the wider significance of the source but may contain irrelevance or misunderstanding. 5. The writing will be sufficiently accurate to convey the writer's meaning clearly, but it may lack fluency and command of the kinds of scholarly idioms used by professional historians. Expression might be clumsy in places. Top 2ii (C+, 58) will have a solid framework for discussion and exhibit all of the above criteria, those in the lower bands (C, 55, C- 52) may have variable degrees of most of the above elements.

Learning Outcomes

• Critical understanding of archaeological evidence within the broader matrix of the landscape.

• Demonstrate advanced skills of observation and critical reflection on academic topics related to the earth sciences

• Demonstrate detailed knowledge of common techniques for soil and sediment recording and analysis

• Provide critical understanding of how the study of soils and sediment studies contributes to archaeological problem solving both on-site and in the reconstruction of past environments.

• Understanding of geo-archaeological approaches to the study of site formation processes, and inferences about past depositional environments.