Mary C. Beaudry's Scratching the Surface: Seven Seasons at the Spencer-Peirce-Little Farm and Susan G. Gibson's Archaeological Resource Study, Roger Williams National Memorial were analyzed in form as a site report. There is a main difference between the two site reports- it appears that Beaudry's is more of a historical commentary and Gibson's is more methodical in reacting to the excavation of similar sites. The sites are of similar geographical regions, Beaudry's is located in Newbury, Massachusetts and Gibson's is located in Providence, Rhode Island. 
   Beaudry's report first analyzes the history of the previous owners of the land, including a chart of who inherited the land as well as when. This extensive list is important if it also determines the affects of the landowners and their actions on the land. However, this is far from what the list provides. She really just uses most of her information from historical contexts, rather than from the actual land.
   It appears that Beaudry would dig at various sites, including the farmyard, the flower garden, the wood house, the kitchen dooryard, etc. This digging did not enhance her knowledge of the region, rather it allowed her to confirm her historical findings. The history of the land could be found in various sources, and therefore it seems that her archaeological research is futile if she could prove her discoveries in histories.
   Gibson's thorough site excavation report proved more useful in style. She did not depend on historical content for her findings, rather she gave a background of the site and justified her findings without the use of previous knowledge in the subject. Gibson reported various aspects of the site, including the paleoenvironmental change and of known prehistoric sites. This to me is more thorough and scientific than relying on historical evidence for an entire archaeological process rather than confirming or reitering original beliefs about a certain geographical location.
  All in all, I believe that Gibson's more methodical approach to a site report is more appropriate for the John Brown House's excavation. It should be as scientific (and therefore more evidence based- rather than histories that were written by a man who might have wanted something to prove) as possible, rather than based mostly on old records. Though both site reports included pictures, I would have to agree that this is a great decision on both parties. Thus, something of a more scientific site report seems more legitimate and appropriate than a historically based paper.