Huggett 2007 geomorf

@ Def longitudinal profile
The longitudinal profile or long profile of a river is the gradient [lereng] of its water-surface line from source to mouth (Huggett 2007:228)

Streams with discharge [membebaskan, melepaskan, keluar] increasing downstream [hilir] have concave long profiles. This is because the drag [menyeret] force of flowing water depends on the product of channel gradient and water depth. Depth increases with increasing discharge [debit] and so [dsb], in moving downstream, a progressively lower gradient [lereng] is sufficient to transport the bed load. Many river long profiles are not smoothly concave but contain flatter & steeper sections. The steeper sections which start at knickpoints, may result from outcrops of hard rock, the action of local tectonick movements, sudden change in discharge, or critical stages in valley development such as active headward erosion [erosi ke hulu]. The long profile of the river Rhine in Germany is shown in Fig 9.4. Notice that the river is 1,236km long & falls about 3km from source to mouth, so the vertical distance [tinggi] from source to mouth is just 0.24% of the length ~~~ most long profiles are difficult to interpret solely in terms of fluvial process, esp in the case of big rivers, which are normally old rivers with lenghty histories, unique tectonic & other events in which may have influenced their development ~~ (Huggett 2007:228)

@ Def baselevel
Baselevel is the lowest elevation to which downcutting by a stream is possible. The ultimate baselevel for any stream is the water body into which it flows –sea, lake or in case of some enclosed basins, playa or salt lake [p.234]. Main channels also prevent further downcutting by tributaries and so provide a baselevel. Local baselevels arise from bands of resistant rock, dams of woody debris, beaver ponds & human-made dams, weir [bendung] and so on (Huggett 2007:228)

[29jan14R lab mikropal]
#A river system can be considered as a network in which nodes(stream tips & stream junctions: pertemuan 2 jln, persimpangan jln, tikungan) are joined by links (streams/aliran) [penghubung].

#Stream segments or links are the basic units of stream networks [p.229]

#Stream order is used to denote [menunjukan] the hierarchical relationship between stream segments & allows drainage basins to be classified according to size.
#Stream order is a basic property of stream networks because it relates to the relative discharge [keluarx, pelepasan]of a channel segment.
#Several stream-ordering systems exist, the most commonly used being those devised [merancang] by Arthur N. Strahler & by Ronald L. Shreve (Fig 9.5).

#a stream segment with no tributaries that flows from the stream source is denoted [menunjukan] as a first-order segment. A second order segment is created by joining two first-order segments, a third-order segment by joining two second order segments, and so on. There is no increase in
order when a segment of one order is joined by another of a lower order. Strahler’s system takes no account of distance & all fourth-order basins are considered as similar [mirip]

#defines the magnitude [ukuran, tingkat, besarx] of a channel segment as the total number of tributaries that feed [memberi makanan, menyuapkan] it. Stream magnitude is closely related to the proportion of the total basin area contributing runoff [limpasan], & so it provides a good estimate of relative stream discharge for small river systems [p.230]

[30jan14K vbm]
Fig 5.17 shows the major types of drainage [aliran] pattern & their relationship to structural controle
1] Dendritic drainage has a spreading, tree-like pattern w/ an irregular branching of tributaries in many directions & at almost any angle. It occurs mostly on horizontal & uniformly resistant strata& unconsolidated sediments & on homogeneous igneous rocks where there are no structural controls.Pinnate [menyirip] drainage, which is associated with very steep slopes, is a special dendritic pattern wherein the tributaries are more or less parallel and join the main stream at acute [tajam]angles [p.136]

2] Parallel drainage displays regularly spaced & more or less parallel main streams w/ tributaries joining at acute [tajam] angles. Parallel dip streams dominate the pattern. It develops where strata are uniformly resistant and the regional slope is marked, or where there is strong structural control exerted [menggunakan, diberikan] by a series of closely [rapat] spaced faults, monoclines, or isoclines [p.136]

3] Trellis drainage has a dominant drainage direction w/ a secondary direction parallel to it, so that primary tributaries join main streams at right angles & secondary tributaries run parallel to the main streams. It is associated w/ alternating [selang-seling] bands of hard and soft dipping or folded beds or recently deposited & aligned glacial debris. Fold mountains tend to have trellis drainage patterns. An example is the AppalachianMountains, USA, where alternating weak and strong strata have been truncated [terpotong] by stream erosion [p.136]

4] Radial drainage has streams flowing outwards [keluar] in all directions from a central elevated [tinggi, yg ditinggikan] tract [sistim]. It is found on topographic domes, such as volcanic cones & other sorts of isolated conical hills. On a large scale, radial drainage networks form on rifted [dibelah] continental margins over mantle plumes [jambul], which create lithospheric domes (Cox 1989; Kent 1991). A postulated [mendalilkan] Deccan plume beneath India caused the growth of a topographic dome, the eastern half of which is now gone (Figure 5.18a). Most of the rivers rise close to the west coast & drain eastwards into the Bay of Bengal, except those in the north, which drain north-eastwards into the Ganges, & a few that flow westwards or south-westwards (possibly along failed rift arms). Mantle plumes beneath southern Brazil & southern Africa would account [menjelaskan, menerangkan, menyebabkan] for many features of the drainage patterns in those regions (Fig 5.18b–c) [p.136]

5] Centrifugal drainage is similar to radial & occurs where, for example, gutters [selokan, saluran] develop on the insides [bg dlm] of meander loops [putaran, kelokan] on the tidal mudflats of coastal north-west Queensland, Australia [p.138]

6] Centripetal drainage has all streams flowing towards the lowest central point in a basin floor. It occurs in calderas, craters, dolines, and tectonic basins. A large area of internal drainage lies on the central Tibetan Plateau [p.138]

7] Distributary drainage typifies rivers debouching [keluar dr sela gunung ke tempat yg terbuka] from narrow mountain gorges [ngarai, jurang] & running over plains or valleys, particularly during occasional floods when they overtop [melampaui] their banks. Many deltas display a similar pattern of drainage (p. 341) [p.138]

8] Rectangular drainage displays a perpendicular net-work of streams with tributaries & main streams joining at right angles. It is less regular [kurang teratur] than trellis drainage, & is controlled by joints & faults. Rectangular drainage is common along the Norwegian coast & in portions of the Adirondack Mountains,USA. Angulate drainage is a variant [variasi] of rectangular drainage & occurs where joints or faults join each other at acute or obtuse[tumpul] angles rather than at right angles [p.138]

9] Annular drainage has main streams arranged in a circular pattern w/ subsidiary [cabang] streams lying at right angles to them. It evolves in a breached [menerobos] or dissected [memotong] dome or basin in which erosion exposes concentrically arranged hard and soft bands of rock. An example is found in theWoolhopeDome inHereford andWorcester, England [p.138]

@DIVERTED [mengalihkan, membelokan] RIVER
#Glacial ice, uplifted fault blocks, gentle folding, & lava flows may all cause major river diversions. Glacial ice is the most common agent of river diversions [pengaliham, penyimpangan] p.138]

1293 [31jan14J vbm gong xi]
#For example, authors use a multiplicity [keserbaragaman, jml besar] of landscape references that differentially emphasize natural (e.g., ecological, geomorphological, & hydrological) & cultural (e.g., technological, organizational & cosmological) aspects of the human environment [p.158]

#The wide variability among archaeological uses of landscape at first glance raises the question whether the word retains [memelihara, menguasai] noteworthy [penting, patut diperhatikan]meaning in archaeological practice. That is, has landscape simply become a synonym for natural environment or settlement pattern (e.g., see discussion by Whittlesey, 1997, p. 19)? Researchers expecting a singular [tunggal] landscape concept might construe [menafsirkan, menguraikan] the terminological imprecision [ketdktepatan] & the multiplicity [keserbaragaman] of approaches as symptomatic [yg merup gejala/tanda] of a lack of clear theoretical grounding [pengajaran ttg dsr s/] [p.158]

#~~~ it is not surprising that landscape concepts in geography & other social sciences have a multiplicity [keserbaragaman] of meanings that fall variously along the nature–culture continuum [rangkaian kesatuan] (e.g., see Cosgrove, 1985; Hart, 1995; Jackson, 1984;
Roberts, 1987; Stilgoe, 1982; Thompson, 1995b) [p.158]
# ~~~ is the fundamental nature of the relationship(s) between people & the spaces they occupy [p.158]
#We view the rapid growth in the use of landscape concepts over the past decade [selama 10th terakhir] as symptomatic [yg merup gejala/tanda] of significant change in popular archaeological thinking about landscapes [p.158]

paradigm=kerangka berpikir
contemporary= pd masa kini, dewasa ini
subsumed=menggolongkan, memasukan
backdrop=latar blk
against= terhadap, unt, pada
forefront= bg terdepan
attraction= daya tarik
underlying= pokok, utama
vocal= yg berhub dg suara, yg suka mengeluarkan pendpt
implicitly= tdk langsung
by virtue of= berdasarkan atas
coherent= jelas, msk akal, berhubungan, bersangkutpaut
inappropriate=tdk pantas
ongoing=terus menerus
nature= sifat, watak
compendium= ringkasan, ikhtisar

settlement ecology, ritual landscape, ethnic landscape
1285 [31jan14J vbm gong xi ]
#As an archaelogist I am usually primarily interested in placing an ancient settlement into its tographical context. A lasting contribution to this exercise has been the formulation in 1970 of the concept of Site Catchment Analysis (Vita-Finzi & Higgs, 1970) [p.5]
1286 [3-2-14Sn vbm]
#In archaeology geomorphic principles & analysis are helpful in site interpretation [p.425]

#The Solverson site is a prehistoric Prairie du Chien (PdC) chert quarry site located in the Driftless Area of southwestern Wisconsin, east of the town of Viroqua (Fig 1).The site lies on a west facing slope of an upland ridge approximately 1180ft above sea level at a 7.5% slope. The area is now a grassy pasture with a few patches of oak trees nearby.Cook Creek valley is directly to the north connecting the Kickapoo River system to the east & the Bad Axe River system to the West. Bedrock geology in the area of the site consists of outcroppings of weathered St. Peters sandstone capping Shakopee formation dolomite bedrock, part of the Prairie du Chien group (Martin 1965; Klawiter 2001).Both formations are Lower Ordovician in age (Klawiter 2001) [p.425]


#Archaeological quarry sites are known throughout southwestern Wisconsin. These sites have been utilized by prehistoric peoples for the exploitation of raw materials used in stone tool production [p.425-426]

#The Bass site is of importance to this study because of its similarities to the Solverson site. Both sites are located on upland ridges in the Driftless area less than one hundred miles apart & at both sites prehistoric peoples were exploiting raw material from the same geologic formation [p.426]

#~~~ a geomorphological survey was completed during the fall of 2000. Two soil columns were removed [mengangkat] from the east (upslope) walls of both units [p.426]

#Soil particle size analysis was performed [melakukan, mengerjakan] & located a probable prehistoric surface at approximately 20-25cm below ground surface (cmbgs). This was marked by a sudden change in soil texture by the increase in clay percentage & a decrease in sand & silt percentages. Also, a sudden increase in artifact concentrations at this same depth found by the 2000 MVAC survey correlates w/ the evidence of human occupation [p.426]

#The methods used in this project involved systematic field research, laboratory sorting & analysis of all material recovered, & a literature review of similar sites & other quarry sites [p.426-427]

[4-2-14Sl vbm]
#Soil descriptions follow standardized USDA soil nomenclature (Soil Survey Staff 1993). The north wall profile & soil profile description are shown in Fig 2 & Tab 1 [p.427]

#The size grading was accomplished [mengerjakan] in an attempt to show the possible vertical displacement [pemindahan] of lithic material based on size differentiation within the matrix of the site after use ceased [berhenti,berakhir] & caused by the effects of pedoturbation. After size grading all size grades were sorted into cultural material & material that displayed no cultural attributes [sifat, ciri, perlengkapan]. This was discerned [melihat, memahami] based upon the presence of culturally derived [yg berasal] lithic production flakes, cores &/or bifaces attributes (Andrefsky 1998; Callahan 1979). The attributes used were the presence/absence of a bulb of percussion &/or compression rings, a visible striking platform, identifiable ventral or dorsal flake surfaces, identifiable flake terminations, & any macroscopically visible edging. This material is considered to be culturally utilized & was separated & counted separately from the material that displayed none of the above-mentioned attributes [p.427]

#The results of this project are divided into two sections, 1) results of the archaeological fieldwork & 2) results of the geomorphological fieldwork [p.428]

#The presence of an E horizon strongly supports the hypothesis that this site has never been plowed. An E horizon forms when organic material is leached from the A horizon by water (Birkeland 1984). The E horizon is lighter in color because of this leaching [meluluhkan, hancur mejd kecil2] [p.429]

#The geomorphological results concern [mengenai] site forming processes & disturbance [gangguan] processes.
In the unit there was significant disturbance to the ground due to bioturbation. A large root extended [membentang, sampai, menjangkau] almost completely across the unit at a nearly north-south axis [p.429]

hold= memiliki, menyimpan
in order to piece together= dlm rangka mengumpulkan
extent= luasx
removal= pembuangan, pemindahan
consistence= kepadatan
sticky= lengket
friable= gembur, rapuh lekas pecah
loam= tnh liat
diffuse= membaur (v), tersebar (ks)
blocky= gumpal
pedoturbation= the disturbance of soils, & by implication any cultural material they contain, by physical, chemical, or biological agents. In the long term such disturbance will result in homogenization of the main elements of the soil profile. See also bioturbation.
bisect= membelah, membg 2
integrity= mutu, sifat yg utuh
displace= menggantikan, memindahkan

[27-2-14K lab mikropal]@PENGGUNAAN AYAKAN
All lithic material was washed & sorted by size grading (Ahler 1986; Andrefsky 1998). Size grading was done using a series of nested screens [ayakan] through which all material was sifted [diayak]. Screen sizes (in mm) of 6.3, 9.52, 12.5, 16.0, 25.0, 31.7, &63.5 were used to size grade the material into seven size grades (in mm); >63.5, 63.5-31.7, 31.7-25.0, 25.0-16.0, 16.0-12.5, 12.5-9.52, 9.52-6.3.(p.427)

[27-2-14K lab mikropal]@GUNA DATA SIZE GRADING
The size grading was accomplished [mengerjakan, menyelesaikan] in an attempt to show [dlm upaya u/ menunjukan] the possible vertical displacement [pemindahan]of lithic material based on size differentiation [proses pembedaan] within the matrix of the site after use ceased [berhenti, berakhir] & caused by the effects of pedoturbation (p.427)

[27-2-14K lab mikropal]@CIRI BENDA BUDAYA
The attributes [ciri, sifat] used were the presence/absence of a bulb of percussion &/or compression rings, a visible [nampak] striking [menyolok] platform [pelantar, tangga ber-para2],
identifiable ventral or dorsal flake surfaces, identifiable flake terminations [batasan], & any macroscopically visible edging [tepi, bingkai]. This material is considered to be culturally utilized & was separated & counted separately from the material that displayed none of the above-mentioned
attributes (p.427)

[27-2-14K lab mikropal]@DEF LAP BUDAYA
In addition to the archeological field survey, a geomorphological survey was completed during the fall of 2000. Two soil columns were removedfrom the east (upslope) walls of both units. Soil particle size analysis was performed & located a probable prehistoric surface at approximately 20-25cm below ground surface (CMBGS). This was marked by a sudden change in soil texture by the increase in clay percentage & a decrease in sand &
silt percentages. Also, a sudden increase in artifact concentrations at this same depth found by the 2000 MVAC (Mississippi Valley Archaeo Center) survey correlates w/ the evidence of human occupation. The second purpose of the 2001 investigation was to learn more about the geomorphology of the site specifically site formation & disturbance [kekacauan,
gangguan] processes (p.426)

[27-2-14K lab mikropal]@HSL STUDI GEOMORF
Excavation ceased [berhenti] on the west half at 45cmbgs.
The geomorphological results concern site forming processes & disturbance [kekacauan] processes. In the unit there was significant disturbance to the ground due to bioturbation. A large root extended almost completely across the unit at a nearly
north-south axis. This occurred from Level 2 to Level 4 (10-20 cmbgs) & may have affected the context of the immediate surroundings [ling sekitarx].Other smaller roots were present at other depths also. This would affect site integrity [mutu, sifat] by displacing [menggantikan] contents of the unit in a path of least resistance effectively moving them from in situ context. Also, much of the chert is frost [membekukan] fractured. Frost fracturing destroys chert by putting stress on it in as shearing manner. This is evidenced by the size grade analysis. Not many pieces were found in the larger sizes (Tabs 2&3). This may be due to the shattering [yg menghancurkan] effect of frost breaking
down larger pieces into smaller ones. The combination of these two disturbance processes was taken into account while excavation was taking place & will be discussed further in thediscussion section [p.429]


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s