archeology.

[funkymoped]

why do archeolagists have to dig to find the past ?
its something ive thought about but cant work out. even recent history is buried below ground.
i cant understand the reason why the deeper you dig, the further you go back in time..

not wanting to sound like some sort of twot, but would like factual answers please, not guesses.

:-) :-)

[Clanad]

Have you ever lost a ring or somesuch on your lawn, only to have it appear when you were digging for something just a few inches under the surface. This is common with those who enjoy using metal detectors. Well, if your ring could disappear under the surface in just a shor time, think what would happen if it were not discovered for a century or more. Thing is, especially when excavating human habitations, such as cave, groups come in, use the cave, move on and another group shows up sometime later. The second group builds their fire pits and perhaps even bury there dead on top of the preceding groups remains... Therefore the deeper one digs, the older the material...

[f03nix]

Also it's the metiorical effect on the geology in any local geographical study area that will play a significant role in determining the depth of any particular substrate and the era to which it would purpotedly relate.When I am dead it is my sincere wish that people passing by will stick their dicks in my rotting carcass and sing the birdie song by the tweets.

[what..the?]

The layers you mention are called 'Stratigraphy' and they are layers of materials soil, rock, human/animal remains etc that have built up over time.

You ask why history is underground - this is due to weathering and erosion which is the displacement of soil, mud, rock by natural forces such as wind, rain, ice, gravity and living organisms (bio-erosion). This free flowing material will naturally settle in areas and build up over time. Plus settlements and areas of human habitation would naturally increase the material depositation for reasons of fire building, shelters/structures, human waste and other food/material waste. Even in early pre-history they would produce alot of waste which they would often tip into trenchs etc which would add to the overall number and thickness of layers - stratigraphy. Areas chosen as a settlement site would have ease of access to raw building materials, food and water and for that reason old settlements will be reused time after time adding to the history to result in stratigraphy which is older the lower down you dig - the deepest remains you find were the first people to live on that site.

[brachiopod]

Have you ever seen archeologists digging in the air?

This is not a flippant answer. To make a geological analogy, there are areas of net deposition and areas of net erosion.

Where ther is a net build up of deposits, animals etc. can be buried and possibly form fossils. Hence palaeontologists will look in these areas. Similarly, where the landscape is being worn away - there is no chance for fossils to form, and hence palaeontologists looking for the equivalent fossils would not bother looking in what was an an erosional surface at the time.

You could argue that, almost by definition, archaeology is the examination of human artifacts that have been preserved by burial. Since if they remained on the surface they would simply not be there.

Howard Carter discovered the tomb of Tutankhamun intact because it was buried and forgotten. Tombs of more important kings, or those that remained above the shifting sands were robbed and looted eons ago.

If it remains visible, it won't be there for long!

[saxy_jag]

Archaeology isn't always buried. The past is all around you if you look properly. The layout and architecture of my house and garden tell me plenty about family life in the 1930s.