The relationship between archaeological stratigraphy and artificial ground and its significance in the Anthropocene
Abstract
This paper investigates the relationship between archaeological stratigraphy (in archaeology) and artificial ground (in geology) and considers their wider application to the investigation and characterization of the Anthropocene. Evidence from two archaeological case studies is used to illuminate key points. The first case study examines stratigraphic sequences from beneath the city of Leicester, UK; the second looks at stratified deposits within the prehistoric settlement mound of Abu Hureyra, Syria. Earthworks, riverworks and cultivation soils are also considered. Archaeological and geological perspectives are combined to develop a unified view of anthropogenic deposits that cover large parts of the surface of the Earth.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
There are multiple practical stratigraphic criteria that can be used to identify deposits that post-date the mid-twentieth century.
“Hence, there are multiple practical stratigraphic criteria that can be used to identify deposits that post-date the mid-twentieth century, and this, on current evidence, we consider to be the optimal position for an Anthropocene boundary, even though it locally may lie unambiguously within deposits that are clearly of anthropogenic origin (Edgeworth, 2014).”
From When did the Anthropocene begin? A mid-twentieth century boundary level is stratigraphically optimal (2015) · cites this paper as Edgeworth, 2014
On current evidence, the mid-twentieth century is the optimal position for an Anthropocene boundary.
“Hence, there are multiple practical stratigraphic criteria that can be used to identify deposits that post-date the mid-twentieth century, and this, on current evidence, we consider to be the optimal position for an Anthropocene boundary, even though it locally may lie unambiguously within deposits that are clearly of anthropogenic origin (Edgeworth, 2014).”
From When did the Anthropocene begin? A mid-twentieth century boundary level is stratigraphically optimal (2015) · cites this paper as Edgeworth, 2014
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 68 · Cited by 61
- Authors
- Edgeworth, M.
- Affiliations
- University of Leicester (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Edgeworth, M.
- ORCID
- Edgeworth, M.
- Venue
- Geological Society, London, Special Publications
- Publisher
- Geological Society of London
- Published
- 2013-10-25
- Volume
- 395
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 91-108
- ISSN
- 0305-8719 (ISSN-L)
- 2041-4927
- OpenAlex
- W2078690154
- Cited by
- 61
- References
- 68
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 18 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 1
- FWCI
- 7.73
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Geological Society London Special Publications (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Soil Science › Soil and Environmental Studies
- Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Paleontology › Archaeology and ancient environmental studies
- Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Space and Planetary Science › Archaeological Research and Protection
- Keywords
- archaeological stratigraphy, artificial ground, Anthropocene, anthropogenic deposits, stratigraphic sequence, earthworks, Leicester, human-nature relationship
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
