Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-75dct Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-10T13:21:20.889Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Relationship of Bog Stratigraphy to Climatic Change and Archaeology

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 May 2014

H. Godwin
H. Godwin
Affiliation:
Botany School, Cambridge
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

As a botanical field investigator for many years past interested in bogs and fens I have often had occasion to notice that these areas appeal very differently to different persons: to some I fear they do not appeal at all, and I fancy that many an archaeologist at heart prefers the dry chalk trench to the soaking black peat face. There are, however, such great advantages to be gained from the study of peat and lake-deposits in relation to archaeology that archaeologists increasingly realise the need for much fuller knowledge of the inherent character and properties of these deposits. Since such deposits are formed by the accumulation of plant-remains under water-logged conditions, and thus incorporate the remains of past generations of aquatic plant communities, it is evident that we shall need to consider the peat beds from the standpoint of the plant-ecologist already familiar with corresponding communities as they grow and form peat at the present day. It is therefore chiefly as an ecologist that I have sought to understand the problems offered by peat stratigraphy, and it is as such that I hope to convey something of the problems they concern.

Type
Research Article
Information
Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society , Volume 12 , 1946 , pp. 1 - 11
Copyright
Copyright © The Prehistoric Society 1946

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

BIBLIOGRAPHY

SirFox, C. and Hyde, H. A. (1939). ‘A Second Cauldron and an Iron Sword from the Llyn Fawr Hoard, Rhigos, Glamorganshire,’ Ant. J., XIX: 4, p. 369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Godwin, H. (1940a). ‘Studies of the Post-glacial history of British vegetation. III Fenland Pollen Diagrams,’ Phil. Trans. R. S., 230, B 570, p. 239.Google Scholar
Godwin, H. (1940b). ‘Pollen Analysis and Forest-History of England and Wales,’ New Phytol. XXXIX: 4 p. 370.Google Scholar
Godwin, H. (1941). ‘Studies of the Post-glacial history of British Vegetation VI. Correlation in the Somerset Levels,’ New Phytol. XL: 2, p. 108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Godwin, H. and Mitchell, G. F. (1938). ‘Stratigraphy and Development of two Raised Bogs near Tregaron, Cardiganshire,’ New Phytol. XXXVII: 5, p. 425.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Granlund, E. (1932). ‘De Svenska Högmossarnas Geologi,’ Sverig. Geol. Unders. 26. Ser C., No. 373.Google Scholar
Hardy, E. M. (1939). ‘Studies of the Post-glacial History of British Vegetation V. The Shropshire and Flint Maelor mosses,’ New Phytol. XXXVIII: 4, p. 364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jonas, Fr. (1936). ‘Das Grenzhorizontproblem,’ Beih. Bot. Centralbl. LIV. B.Google Scholar
Mitchell, G. F. (1945). ‘The relative ages of archaeological objects recently found in bogs in Ireland,’ Proc. Roy. Irish Acad. Sect. C, 1, p. 1.Google Scholar
Nilsson, T. (1935). ‘Die pollenanalytische Zonengliederung der spät- und postglacialen Bildungen Schonens,’ Medd. Lunds Geol.-Min. Inst. No. 61.Google Scholar
Von Post, L. (1944). ‘Pollenstatiska perspektiv på Jordens Klimathistoria,’ Ymer, 2. (Medd. Stockholms Hogskolans Geol. Inst. No. 64)Google Scholar