HISTARCH Archives

HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY

HISTARCH@COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

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

Print Reply
Sender:
HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY <[log in to unmask]>
X-To:
Date:
Fri, 24 Aug 2007 14:20:22 +0200
Reply-To:
HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
MIME-Version:
1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding:
quoted-printable
Content-Type:
text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
From:
geoff carver <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (4 lines)
usual apologies for x-posting, but i'm trying to guage how much influence schiffer might have had on the discipline, and how stratigraphy is now perceived...
do people generally/systematically record evidence of possible disturbance (roots, frost, rodent/worm holes, etc.; and if so, how?), or just make a note in the site diary, or just discard anything that's "obviously" intrusive (modern coins, etc.), or... what do they do?
does anybody still "assume" that "artifacts contained within a given stratum are more or less contemporary"?

ATOM RSS1 RSS2