-----Original Message-----
From: Dan Mouer <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Thursday, June 18, 1998 8:54 AM
Subject: Re: Unstratified sites
 
 
>Edward B. Jelks wrote:
>
>> [snip]
>
 
>... So what determines how likely i
>t is
>something will move downward, or how far downward? Well, clearly, size and
shape
>count. Small, long narrow flakes, for instance, would more readily be moved
than
>would large flat ones. But the other variable of significance would be
time. The
>longer something sat around, the greater the probability it would get moved
down
>ward.
>Likewise, the amount it would move downward would be dependent, in part, on
time
>.
>
>Whatever other factors enter into the statistics, it is probably true that
older
>objects are more likely to have moved further down in a stable deposit due
to
>bioturbation (or cryo- ot other types of turbation).
>
 
We did some experiments with object movements in plowzones and the most
obvious factor frequently ignored in such discussions (can't see the forest,
etc.) is the degree of disturbance/movement of the matrix itself. The size
and extent of the disturbance of the surrounding matrix has a significant
effect on the distance and direction of different types of object buried
within it. For instance, relatively larger objects tend to move up in
heavily plow disturbed deposits over periods of time versus smaller objects.
And very small objects tend to cycle within a small spatial volume. Shaking
a box or screen full of dirt containing different sized stones illustrates
some of these same observations.
 
Natural forces may be far less spectacular in their effects on
archaeological deposits, especially the deeper they become buried below the
surface where most of the seasonal and weathering action takes place. But
the application of general plowzone movement analysis would seem to have
some value. However, I think that the deeper an object is buried relative to
the surface and the seasonal weathering actions, the less of an effect these
forces will have on the movement of objects, which appears to be
counter-intuitive to the notion that time has a increasing influence on the
total movement of a buried object!
 
Cheers,
 
--Lenny__