HISTARCH Archives

HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY

HISTARCH@COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Rob Burrett <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 14 Oct 2004 13:47:48 +0200
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (31 lines)
Or as I have found with early colonial sites here in Zimbabwe, it was often
simple laziness (human nature) on the part of both owner-resident or their
locally recruited servants - no inclement weather here, no lack of open
areas near the settlements, no lack of existing dumps, the material is
simply domestic while there is nothing hidden in its nature with meanings
for the indigenous peoples.  Neither of these situations carries the
implications of the word concealment.

Rob Burrett
University of Zimbabwe
Harare

----- Original Message -----
From: "Ron May" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2004 7:46 PM
Subject: Re: sub-floor deposits


> I would not think broken bottles, ceramics, and food bone would qualify as
a
> concealment. Perhaps they were deposited during inclement weather and it
was
> just warmer to dump the stuff in the cellar than hike out in the bitter
cold.
> Or, how about someone living temporarily in the cellar... a bad boy
perhaps?
>
> Ron May
> Legacy 106, Inc.

ATOM RSS1 RSS2