Hello All,
Yes, there is differential preservation of wood species depending on the conditions of the fire. I see this difference reflected in the charcoal residue in my wood stove as well as family campfires. Regarding burned bone, I see small fragments of burned bone from inland open sites dating as far back as 6000 BP in New England where we have very acidic soils. The bone comes from features identified as hearths, fire
pits and also other unidentified feature types as well as just scattered throughout a site with no particular context. I have identified many calcined mammal, bird, fish, snake, and turtle bone from many sites in southern New England, which is my main research area. Unburned bone in this geographic area usually comes from sites of the historic period (500 BP), from prehistoric coastal or inland shell middens, or
from sites with unusual soil conditions. Peter makes a good point about burning rubbish - if you have camping experience where wild scavengers live, you must be careful to burn anything such as bones and other food residue to discourage animals coming into your campsite.
Tonya Largy
[log in to unmask] wrote:
> Susan et al:
>
> Good point. I spent some time with the Seri Indians of Northwest Mexico on the Gulf of California. One of the fuels they frequently use is ironwood (Olneya sp.) which burns slow and hot. I was always amazed at the very small amount of ash left after an ironwood fire burned down. No charcoal at all, and very, very little ash. So yes, I think even the type of wood available affects the appearence of firepits.
>
> Rich
|