(see also main text sections 5.6, section 6.15, section 6.21, section 7.6 and section 7.7)
The published report of an archaeological
project should always contain the following information:
- the research objectives as expressed
in the project design and the updated project design
where applicable
- circumstances and organisation of the
work and the date at which it was undertaken
- identity of the
individuals/organisation by whom the work was undertaken
- summary account of the results of the
project
- summary of the contents of the project
archive, where it is housed and how it may be consulted
Reports of fieldwork projects should
additionally give:
- the national grid reference (suitably
abbreviated if publication of the exact site location is
not in the general interest or if it is necessary to
restrict public access)
- the parish
When writing up the results of a project
consideration should be given to the following:
- the report should appropriately
reflect the importance of the results of the project and
deal adequately with the site's social, political, and
historical context
- the interpretation of the site should
be justified by the evidence presented. Ambiguities in
the data base should be discussed, and where more than
one interpretation is possible the alternatives should be
presented (at least in summary)
- the report should present information
about what was found in a well balanced logical,
accessible, and structured way. It should be immediately
intelligible to and usable by those who know nothing
about the site.
- the extent to which the objectives of
the project have been fulfilled should be discussed
including a critical assessment of the methodologies
employed.
- the report should be written clearly
and concisely, and should make appropriate, consistent,
and economical use of other methods of data presentation
for example tables, plans or photographs (it is important
to consult the publication editor if innovative
presentation methods are necessary, as publication costs
may be increased)
- specialist reports and their
supporting data should be carefully chosen and given
their proper value. Specialist contributors must be
involved in or informed of editorial decisions affecting
the presentation of their work in print
- all the constituent parts (text,
figures, photos, and specialist reports) should
cross-refer adequately. Readers should be able to find
their way around the report without difficulty
- attention should be drawn to areas of
future study potential which it has not been possible to
explore fully within the limits of the agreed project
design
Consideration will have been given to
producing figures and typescript to any notes for authors
supplied by the publishing body. As part of the process of
producing the report draft consideration must be given to the
following:
- word processing must be competently
done and output checked by the contributor responsible
for the original work. This is especially important as
much work can be saved by accuracy at this stage
particularly as typesetting from disc is used
increasingly to produce archaeological reports and
accuracy avoids extra re-keying and correction stages.
- good quality clear prints of half
tones and colour negatives for colour plate should be
selected at an early stage in the preparation of the
report draft as they must be available to the editor with
the rest of the report draft.
- the presentation of the drawings and
tables should also be discussed and agreed at an early
stage in report preparation and the art work must be
available to the editor at the same time as the report
draft.
- figure, table, and photograph captions
should also be drafted at an early stage, and should in
general be supplied as text to be typeset, not as
Letraset or stencil lettered directly onto the figure
artwork.
- the bibliography should be complete,
checked, integrate all contributor's bibliographic
contributions, observe BSI, and use conventions
compatible with the house style of the publishing body.
- errors are the responsibility of the
authors and should, so far as possible, be identified and
rectified before final editorial processes begin.
- text supplied to the editors should
incorporate all revision necessary as a consequence of
internal and external refereeing. It must be established
with the publishing body at an early stage in the
production process what their refereeing requirements are
as these may differ from those of the sponsors, and
incompatibility is best anticipated and resolved at an
early stage.
- it is more cost effective to agree on
format and presentation of material with editors at an
early stage. Alteration of report presentation during the
editorial process is uneconomical and leads to production
delay.
- In-house editing by the project team
can save time, but should only be done after consultation
with the publishing body and must take due consideration
of the style and format of the published report if it is
not to waste time and resources
- indexing is a specialist skill, best
done by a trained professional. Where required they
cannot be produced until the report is at page proof
stage, and are generally commissioned by the publisher.
Special requirements, or a wish to be involved, should be
discussed at an early stage in the editorial processes
© English Heritage 1991
Web Design: ©
Digital Archaeological
Reports
Last updated: Thu Oct 8 1998