Abstract:
Humans use and occupy the space dimension on different scales. In the past, it varied
from open-air campsites to complex constructions. Within the varied range of space
utilization, some had used natural space without causing any alterations to signify their
cognitive dimensions, whilst in most instances there is serious violation of his
environment. Due to this behavioural complexity of the use of space, today we are faced
with a wide range of problems in archaeology in the identification and interpretation of
archaeological sites.
Identification and interpretation of archaeological sites embody three major problems.
The first problem exemplifies the understanding of the functional aspect of sites. There
are sites which reflect different functions during different periods. Some sites are multifunctional
and belonging to a single period of time. Determination of function of an
archaeological site for identification is a complicated exercise and most of the time it
remains incomplete. The second problem signifies the site formation process. A site can
be transformed through a number of human activities. Notable among them are
ploughing and tilling in agricultural societies. Long-term ploughing and tilling may cause
a considerable disturbance to the archaeological content of a given site. Most crucial are
the complete disappearance of surface indicators and splitting of single assemblages
into formation of a number of widely scattered ‘artefact patches’ through these
processes. The third problem is the degree of influence by the archaeologist’s own
idiosyncrasy about his definition of what is an archaeological site.
This paper discusses the relevance of considering the cultural context of a given society
to define its human spatial behaviour of the past and to quantify the degree of
intervention through the post occupational interventions to the site content.
