Thanks for the responses so far.  My landlord happens
to be a geologist, when I take the rent over I'll ask
him!

I don't think it's a natural layer.  At the first site
we found a single 20 cm layer of lime under 40 cm of
brick rubble, approx 60 cmbs.  There were two other
units within a 3 m radius, neither displayed this
layer.  The site is an early nineteenth century
seminary where we know they made their own bricks and
mortar on site.  In the second site I mentioned, the
layer was cut off by a pipe trench, so I'm not sure
about the boundaries.  There was no brick rubble at
the second site, just 20 cm of mottled silt clay.  I
have looked up lime kilns and it is nothing that
substantial, just a 20 cm thick layer of lime granules
with no artifacts or other materials included in the
stratum.

Does anyone have experience with mortar processing
sites?  I hadn't considered a floor.  The layer was
not very level, giving different profiles for each
wall.  Thanks for the suggestions so far!

Sarah

--- [log in to unmask] wrote:
> Hi all,
>
>      I agree with having a geologist look at it,
> most of them are quite good at determining if
> something is natural or cultural.
>      If it is sitting on top of the subsoil (clay I
> presume, since we have clay most everywhere here in
> Ky)it is probably not natural.  You can find
> decomposing limestone that shallow, but it will be
> above the real limestone bedrock.
>     Before you call in the geologist:  Have you
> determined its boundaries? What are the horizontal
> dimensions? is it one layer of rock or multiple,
> overlapping etc?  I have seen square or rectangular
> chimney bases intact sub-plowzone that are
> constructed of dry-laid limestone.  They have ranged
> in size from 5 ft to 10 ft in diameter.  Anything
> larger than that could be a pavement or floor of
> some sort?  I found the floor of a blacksmith shop
> once that included a limestone pavement and
> foundation for the forge (it also included a
> "herringbone" patterned brick floor adjacent to it).
>
> Jeannine Kreinbrink
>
>
> > Are you sure this isn't marl - i.e., entirely
> natural? Have a geologist
> > look at it to be sure.
> >
> > Maureen Basedow, Ph.d
> > Greensboro, NC
> >
> > Sarah Miller wrote:
> >
> > >Fellow Histarchies,
> > >
> > >Recently on an early nineteenth-century site in
> > >Kentucky we found a 20 cm thick layer of
> granular,
> > >almost fried looking limestone.  It chips off the
> sub
> > >easily at 47 cm below the surface.  Historically,
> we
> > >know they made bricks and processed mortar on the
> > >site.  A few weeks and a county later, I saw a
> similar
> > >layer on a mid-nineteenth-century farm residence.
>  No
> > >artifacts were found in either layer.
> > >
> > >My question is- has anyone else seen this in
> relation
> > >to mortar processing or other activities?  From
> the
> > >Histarch archives I have a reference for Harley
> > >McKee's Intro to Early American Masonry...  Any
> > >examples from archaeological contexts would be
> most
> > >helpful.
> > >
> > >Thanks!
> > >
> > >Sarah
> > >
> > >[log in to unmask]
> > >Kentucky Archaeological Survey
> > >Lexington, KY
> > >
> >
> >__________________________________________________
> > >Do You Yahoo!?
> > >Sign up for SBC Yahoo! Dial - First Month Free
> > >http://sbc.yahoo.com
> > >
> >


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Autos - Get free new car price quotes
http://autos.yahoo.com