Sampling "significant areas" is a problem, because there is no sample to
compare with, I wonder if there is a literature about it?
Thanks
Diana Martinez
LPP/ IIA/ UNAM
Mexico.
At 08:33 p.m. 01/04/03 -0500, scollins11 wrote:
>I would like to see archaeologists take samples not only from the
>"significant" areas, but also from control contexts as well. Some
>archaeologists want to know the function of a feature, so they will send
>sample(s) from the feature, but not from a context outside of the feature
>or its associated context. For instance, I have had an archaeologist send
>material from a hearth for analysis; the archaeologist wanted to say what
>plants had been burned in the hearth, but since I didn't have a background
>sample to compare the feature sample to, the report was strictly
>descriptive and not interpretive. I feel that it is nore worth the
>archaeologists' time and money to take at least one background sample, even
>if that means not sending as many "significant" samples; if you are going
>to send 8 samples, please let one be background/control!
>
>The moral of the story: in order to be able to say what something (like a
>feature) IS, I have to be able to compare it to something so that I can say
>what it IS NOT.
>
>Shawn K. Collins
>
>107 Swallow Hall
>Department of Anthropology
>University of Missouri-Columbia
>Columbia, Missouri 65211
|